Too many rarities...
Do you think 493 pokemon are enough?
Started by
Guest_game wiz
, Mar 09 2007 12:55 AM
437 replies to this topic
#127
Guest_nit3r0ad
Guest_nit3r0ad
-
- Guest
Posted 04 June 2007 - 07:01 AM
more...and they should stop at 500 pokemon..
#128
Guest_gigaman2002
Guest_gigaman2002
-
- Guest
Posted 04 June 2007 - 10:29 AM
i think should have more
#129
Guest_Sam 78
Guest_Sam 78
-
- Guest
Posted 04 June 2007 - 10:30 AM
I think that we should have 500 pokemons.
#130
Guest_deon123
Guest_deon123
-
- Guest
Posted 04 June 2007 - 10:47 AM
i think 300 should be enough as u will waste ur money(in pokemon)by buyin lots and lots of balls to catch lots and lots of pokemon.therefore,i think 300 should be sufficient.
#131
Guest_forgotten_qlutd
Guest_forgotten_qlutd
-
- Guest
Posted 04 June 2007 - 11:36 AM
so many,i want it less
#132
Guest_Dark_Chaos92
Guest_Dark_Chaos92
-
- Guest
Posted 04 June 2007 - 12:08 PM
At first the 150 original pokemon were really cool... then came along the next generation (totodile cyndaquil chikorita and etc) and they were good but not exactly like the first 150, then came 3rd generation (Ruby Sapphire Emerald) and I found them a bit weird looking... and lately was the diamond and pearl pokemon, 4th Generation and I must say that they are just freakishly weird. I must say the first two generations were cool. If they are going to make more, they should focus more on the appearances because the DP pokemon are umm...... yeah..... I personally think the more the merrier but i hope the more the cooler too
#133
Guest_kicer_james
Guest_kicer_james
-
- Guest
Posted 04 June 2007 - 12:10 PM
yaah.. they're too many..hehe..and they're even harder to catch when they're many..
#134
Guest_pika124
Guest_pika124
-
- Guest
Posted 04 June 2007 - 12:34 PM
I think they should lower the pokemonI cant remember their names for the new pokemons lol
#135
Guest_Sanity
Guest_Sanity
-
- Guest
Posted 04 June 2007 - 02:12 PM
I used to be able to remember all original 151 pokemon. Back then, it was possible to 'Gotta catch em all'. The first and second generation of pokemon did look like pokemon. But they all started looking weird after the third generation onwards. I think they should have less pokemon. Stick with the original 251 if possible.
#137
Guest_SleepiLee
Guest_SleepiLee
-
- Guest
Posted 05 June 2007 - 02:18 AM
386 pokemons are more than enough. I believe any more new ones will start to become a bore.
#138
Guest_Nemodo_Destro
Guest_Nemodo_Destro
-
- Guest
Posted 05 June 2007 - 03:09 AM
I agree that if they're going to create a new setting they need to put new pokemon in that area. But with it they gotta keep the new pokemon as new feeling as the original 150. Which is no easy task. If they run out of new and good ideas... then they should stop then.
#139
Guest_Zyxl
Guest_Zyxl
-
- Guest
Posted 05 June 2007 - 03:20 AM
they should add like 5 more at a time now, because they're just ruining it if they make 100s more... the original 150 were great, then the next group was pretty cool (because of the under evolutions (like magby)) but they should know when to stop.... I don't want the games to be horrible 
#140
Guest_nguyende
Guest_nguyende
-
- Guest
Posted 05 June 2007 - 03:20 AM
I think 386 Pokémon are fine, and if they were to add more (which they have on Diamond/Pearl, I just haven't played them yet) I wouldn't mind... They should stop once they run out of ideas though, otherwise they woud be going overboard, and possibly lose some Pokémon fans out there.
Edited by nguyende, 05 June 2007 - 03:22 AM.
#141
Guest_murderscene800
Guest_murderscene800
-
- Guest
Posted 05 June 2007 - 03:21 AM
i just wonder where they all come from..like how do people NOT explore different areas, and if these legendary ones are so powerful, wouldnt other people know about them? from older games?
#142
Guest_vickssuperfalcons
Guest_vickssuperfalcons
-
- Guest
Posted 05 June 2007 - 03:32 AM
well i would definitely like to see much more pokemon, but i think that as they make more, they get more desperate so the ideas they come up with start to suck a bit, eventually all the good ideas will be gone and they start coming up with crappy ones (like in diamond a pearl: drifblim...its a blimp....who would have thought they would make a pokemon of that, or mime jr.? come on mr.mine was ok as it was, or how bout spiritomb? come on you have admit that was kinda desperate) and as they make new pokemon, the newer ones tend to look a lot more different complicated than the original ones. But still i want to see more pokemon and it would be great if they kept it simple
#143
Guest_Sain Of Caelin
Guest_Sain Of Caelin
-
- Guest
Posted 05 June 2007 - 04:21 AM
They should switch out some old ones, keep some new ones, add more. Then end with 350.
#144
Guest_droople
Guest_droople
-
- Guest
Posted 05 June 2007 - 04:30 AM
More time needed to collect all the pokemon if there are more than 386 pokemon in the game. Actually, I think 100 or 200 is already enough.
#146
Guest_acassad
Guest_acassad
-
- Guest
Posted 06 June 2007 - 12:23 AM
That is a fairly good number you have proposed, but I would suggest putting more common pokemonand fewer legendaries...they seem to be proliferating. I would also like to see an evolutionary chain longerthen 3 stages...perhaps 5?
#147
Guest_DCR_Sean
Guest_DCR_Sean
-
- Guest
Posted 06 June 2007 - 08:00 AM
Gotta catch them all. Right. Every last one of them.
#148
Guest_eichi-kun
Guest_eichi-kun
-
- Guest
Posted 06 June 2007 - 08:16 AM
I think we just need only six pokemon each type, train them until they can reach best level.Have many pokemon is sucks!!!
#149
Guest_Oggy123456
Guest_Oggy123456
-
- Guest
Posted 06 June 2007 - 08:35 AM
i dont care how many there are, but i trhink more should do it
#150
Guest_MRegidijus
Guest_MRegidijus
-
- Guest
Posted 06 June 2007 - 08:37 AM
I think its enoughI think they should have stopped at 386. The new ones are kinda stupid. =/
