Honestly I find the elemental monkeys to be outright forgettable if not for their gimmick. Outside of that, nothing about them stands out. They all have the exact same stat distribution, all of which are average at best, and the same (non-hidden) ability. Maybe if they had higher stats (or at least a different distribution) and different abilities amongst themselves, it wouldn't be so bad. Hell, I even think the concept behind them is kinda neat, but unfortunately, none of their designs really grab me. Since they are the way they are, I just couldn't care less about them.
-
Welcome to Smogon! Take a moment to read the Introduction to Smogon for a run-down on everything Smogon, and make sure you take some time to read the global rules.
-
Congrats to the winners of the 2023 Smog Awards!
Unpopular opinions
- Thread starter antemortem
- Start date
I actually love them. I've used them in both Black (Simisear) and Y (Simisage) and they've been good team members.
I actually like them ! But they were too rare in the wild ...
It wasn't too bad in X and Y. I encountered all three before I left not-Viridian Forest the first time (I only needed Simisage since I had Fenniken and I was going to get Squirtle).
Ah yes, they were more common in X&Y, but in B&W, you had to be lucky to find the three of them in Pinwheel Forest (Minus the one from the gift)
I've provided evidence to back up my claim that dark is synonymous with evil. You click the blue words, and then scroll down to number 10. :D
I can do it again, from more sources, if you like?
The evil type is real, and the dark type is real, because they are the same thing. It means the same thing. :D
If they weren't related, then why localise evil to dark? Why not just make it the butterfly type, if it wasn't going to make sense? :D
The light type is a stupid idea, but it comes from the idea of light overcoming darkness, itself a metaphor for good beating evil.
They'd probably call it the good type, in Japan. :D
Also a cannon is a large gun. I don't have any on my head.
In French, it's also Darkness (Ténèbres), but it's more the Ghost type who is more "dark" for me. But I can't think a alternative name for Dark type ... Dirty type is bad
Ok, even though I agree with the the above posts, I do think it would be a wise idea to be done with the topic.
And on the note of the elemental monkeys, it really bugs me for some reason that simipour looks like it's a female regardless of gender. And, to a lesser degree, the other two always look like males. Other Pokemon like machamp, gardevoir, mr. mime, etc. never really bugged me, but for whatever reason these three do. Maybe it's because they're not based off of something that is blatantly or typically one gender.
And on the note of the elemental monkeys, it really bugs me for some reason that simipour looks like it's a female regardless of gender. And, to a lesser degree, the other two always look like males. Other Pokemon like machamp, gardevoir, mr. mime, etc. never really bugged me, but for whatever reason these three do. Maybe it's because they're not based off of something that is blatantly or typically one gender.
I think you have your idea backwards. We shouldn't be looking at synonymous for "dark", we should be looking at the synonymous for "evil"; which does include "dark". It's an important distinction as they aren't exactly the same thing; the Dark-type's basis is more on the concept of them being "evil" than beings of darkness. Yes, there are exceptions, but they're special cases and it can be justified with "dark" being a synonym (thus a proper localized name, I would probably also have chose it since it also encompasses those exceptions). Fighting and Psychic are the light counterparts to Dark (Fairy if iffy, Fairy seems to have two sides of it (modern day idea of a fairy and then the ye olde fey) with one using their mystical powers for good and the other using it to simply outdo a fellow malevolent force which is normal by comparison).
My gender nitpicks: Rufflet family being all male, Braixen & Delphox being 1:7 male, Sylveon being 1:7 male, Misreavus family being 1:1 male, Gardevoir being 1:1 male, being Lopunny 1:1 male, Diggersby being 1:1 female, Gothita family small chance being male, Vullaby family being all female, & Flabebe all female.
Obviously "dark" has that (figurative) meaning. The Dark type has nothing to do with *actual darkness*, so it has nothing to do with a Light type that's defined by using *actual light*. If a Light type were defined in figurative moral terms, it wouldn't have anything to do with actual light, just as the Dark type has nothing to do with actual darkness. If someone wanted to introduce such a type, I guess that's fine. I can't really imagine how they would coherently develop 'mons and moves for it though.
I don't understand why people get so upset when a Pokémon looks like a certain gender in their mind, but isn't always. For starters, I don't really care what gender my Pokémon are unless I have a really good nickname that is gender specific (I really want to name my Rowlet "Minerva"). Secondly, you are honestly putting your specific perspective on gender onto creatures that aren't human.
To illustrate my point:
Male Peafowl
Female Peafowl
What is feminine to us does not have to be feminine to them.
Though I do feel kinda annoyed for those single-gender species with no actual counterpart.
Tauros has Miltank and Braviary has Mandibuzz.
Tauros-Miltank is ok, but Braviary-Mandibuzz... not at all...
They are counter parts, not actual breeding tools.
Realistically they are unable to breed without ditto and got no eggmoves.
Well, the only reason is that they are version exclusive birds on the same route, levels, etc. in the generation of their introduction, but opposite genders.
I really hate to reignite the dark vs evil debate buut if evil is a reference to a scrappy fighting style and not associated with "Darkness" and "Death" etc, why are pawniard and bisharp dark types when they are literally knights and why is yveltal the dark type with its association with death and destruction and not ghost?
Pawniard and Bisharp are like sneaker, weavile and cacturne, restless pack predators that exhaust their prey through dirty deeds or by ganging upon then.
No idea behind the design choices of Yvetal, all I know and care is about stab dark aura boosted foul play and sucker punch to be honest, the life absorbing attack is actually a flying type move while it relies on foul fighting on its full dark type movepool.
Yvetal is a weird mon with a weird life cycle, seriously his life draining move is freaking flying type not dark type...
Wasn't part of Pawniard's thing the fact that they gang up on the targets (which can be seen as pretty evil)? And Yveltal kills things in order to extend its own lifespan in such a blatant way people might call it evil.
I fail to see where Pawniard and Bisharp have a design based on knights. They are chess pieces, but neither of them is a knight.
However, I won't deny of Yveltal fitting more for Ghost than Dark, but then again, so does Darkrai.
Sneasel/Weavile are based on the kamaitachi, weasel yokai that have sickles for claws and do in fact gang up on people to attack them. This is where their dark typing comes from. It could also be a reference to the fact that kamaitachi are sometimes said to work for evil gods. Cacturne is based off a scarecrow, so that one's obvious.
It's pretty much what you said, but I think their specific influence is cool. :3
I always saw the portrayed in Anime, and I know they always appear in groups of at least 3, but they are among the few youkai I never really went deep researching, I went for dex entries and their signature move is to literally gang up a pokemon with beat up.