What makes them clones: All three of their evolutionary families function as Fire-Type starter Pokémon who eventually gain a secondary Fighting-Type in their second stage form, all of them gaining a Fighting-Type physical attack upon evolution. Coincidentally, the secondary types of Dedenne, Togedemaru, and Morpeko all match the types that were added in games after Generation 1.Įxample #2: The Fire/Fighting Starters (Gens 3 through 5) Every clone in this category since Emolga's debut has also been a dual-type Pokémon. What makes them clones: These single-stage Electric-Type Pokémon are all inspired by various rodent animals and yield some form of cheek pattern much like Pikachu and Pichu.
#Volbeat still counting clone hero free
I'll see you guys in the discussion! Feel free to use my examples as a sort of format for you own posts if you'd like.Įxample #1: The Pikachu Clones (Specifically the ones from Gen 3 onward) Remember as always to have fun and be nice to others in. fandom vocabulary (notably the three different kinds of clones), I don't think there's anything else to go over with this introduction, so I'll get the discussion started with some well-known examples in the Pokémon community. I would ask about your opinions on how these kinds of Pokémon could stand out more from their original versions, but I'm willing to bet that falls too much against OI's rules about wishlisting, so let's just save ourselves the trouble and say that wishlisting for anything is off limits in this thread.Īside from maybe some more Smash Bros. These are the kinds of things I wanted to discuss in this thread. In the above example, I would consider Timburr's evolution line to be a clone (or I guess a set of clones) of those of Machop's evolution line.
For example, Pokémon Black & White introducing a Pokémon like, say, Timburr for example, in a regional PokéDex that only has newer Unova Pokémon in it is a completely valid design choice, as it would introduce those players to a Pokémon who is very similar in style and raising to Kanto's resident Machop family. While I still stick to that opinion, I do not think this is inherently bad for the consumers who buy the games, as a lot of this reused and/or returning content or features may not have been available to newer players otherwise. In a few other threads in the past, I've even gone as far as to state my controversial opinion that the Sinnoh games stole a ton of stuff from Hoenn and tried to write it off as new. In a contrast to some of my opinions regarding Super Smash Bros., I do not think that Game Freak and all those other companies reusing ideas for future Generations to fill up space is a bad thing. Now, before I continue, I would like to make something clear. Sometimes repeated content will even appear within the same game. In the Smash titles and other games, we see the same kind of treatment with some of the games' characters from one entry to another. See, the reason I'm making this thread is because I've wanted to try creating a list of all of the "original" Pokémon we've seen so far in the franchise- that is to say, Pokémon whose ideas, concepts, et cetera, aren't directly stolen from Pokémon similar to the so-called parent or parents. games, another favorite Nintendo franchise of mine, to explain some of the things I wanted to talk about. For all intents and purposes, I'll be referring to some of the terminology from the Super Smash Bros. Have you ever stopped to notice that some Pokémon are just a little bit too similar to other Pokémon? Dare I say, reused concepts levels of similar? In other game fandoms, we see words like "clones" and "copies" being tossed around a lot with this kind of thing. I've been thinking about something a lot lately when taking my everyday stroll through these threads.
0 kommentar(er)
