Part 5 was an interesting listen as someone who consistently followed the Pokemon anime for years, because there Pokemon could have whole character arcs like a human character would (and not just the ones that could verbally communicate like Meowth or Mewtwo,) them being basically sentient is like a core part of the world to me, they are animals that can display human personalities, that's what Pokemon is. And I mean even disregarding the anime the natures and characteristics introduced in the 3rd and 4th gens of the games respectively are pretty undeniably human based, you can have a bird that's "sassy" by nature and "thoroughly cunning".
A really good litmus test for me is "If I saw a group of 5 of these pokemon in a group, would they look like members of the same species or clones?" Older pokemon were limited in their design complexity and so we had to fill in the gaps with our imagination. If i see two psyducks next to each other, my brain registers that they only look identical because the stylized design smooths out small differences between them. When i see two cinderaces, the design is so detail-dense that its hard to imagine them as anything but clones
I don't necessarily think a pokemon being more of "character" than a "species" is ALWAYS bad, but I think it should be reserved for legendaries and very rare pokemon
@@mikeCD62 Agreed. Its perfectly fine for Mewtwo or Meloetta to have an obvious personality, but when every member of the Cinderace species just _happens_ to be a football/soccer player, it starts to feel kinda strange.
@@thekirbyguy4576 I singled out Cinderace because it was the first one to come to mind and its also one of the more notorious examples. What do you expect me to do? List out every possible Pokemon that has some kind of job or personality attached to them?
@@lasercraft32 I mean, my point is clear, even though old gens also had humanoid Pokemon with personalities attached to them, there's a narrative of this being a predominantly newer gen thing, even though it isn't, presumably due to nothing more than bias.
What I think is that abstracts thoughts, emotions or sapience doesn't bother me in Pokemon at all. They still can feel like monsters, aliens, faerie-like beings that while way more above just animals, still thinking and acting in not exactly human way. What bothers me is when they are those very specific social simmilarities coupled with awareness. It makes whole Pokemon concept go straight up in the territory of the uncanney valley when you take into the account how they ACTUALLY operate withing the society (captured in balls, weaponized etc.) vs how they are presented.
You pretty much hit the nail on the head. I don't mind that humanoid Pokemon exist. Some of my favorite Pokemon are humanoid, like Gardevoir, Gallade, Lilligant, Decidueye, and Hatterene (no not for _that_ reason you sicko), but a lot of them take it _too far._ Especially when it comes to starter Pokemon. When picking a tiny little kitten as your pet, you shouldn't need to worry about it evolving into a humanoid furry that looks like its thinking intrusive thoughts about you. imo, if you're gonna have humanoid Pokemon, the _entire_ evolution line should be humanoid. It should start humanoid and end humanoid... NOT go from an animal on all-fours to a flipping human in a fur suit.
I would not call anthropomorphism a problem in pokemon. To say that a magical animal has too many human qualities is oxymoronic as humans themselves are animals in no way shape or form "unnatural". Also when you take into consideration some of the pokemon types, it makes sense they would display self awareness. Fairies and Dragons are often depicted as fully sapient, Fighting types literally practice martial arts, being Psychic 100% requires complex emotions, and even Dark type is called Evil in Japan. These are intelligent beings with a sense of morality. Pokemon go well beyond what animals are and in lore, choose who they partner with. So any of them having human-like qualities is all natural.
I can see where you’re coming from, and you’re right it makes sense for certain types. I don’t think anthropomorphism as a whole is a problem, but more so the way it’s implemented in certain designs. I do think it’s overdone in many cases that’s just my personal taste but I respect your opinion & appreciate you checking out my video :)
I’m so thankful for this video, finally fully spelling out this issue And for me, it’s the combination of the anthropomorphic designs and the changing to more “cartoony” designs which really started seeing prominence in Gen 5 and onward Obvious they are all cartoony in a sense, but Death Note and Fairy Odd Parents are both cartoons technically, yet they have very different styles Look at mons like Rhyhorn, Pidgey, Nidoran, Scyther, then look at Snivy, the former feel like anime “realism” and the latter feels like it could be in Peppa the Pig But my biggest problem with all of this is how extremely prevalent these issues are in the STARTER pokemon They are so crucial in setting the tone for the generation, when I see the evolved forms and it’s Intelleon and Scorbunny, I’ll never be able to take the games seriously and they’ll have a very hard time escaping the goofy vibe they set for themselves The first 4 generations had really good starters all around, sure they had their share of bad designs in the overall dex, but it was easier for me to overlook because they weren’t really prevalent, they weren’t center stage The starters are super important in that regard, and they’ve been fumbling heavy ever since Gen 5
Totally! That wasn’t what I was making the vid about so I didn’t get into that issue but Pokémon’s proportions have definitely strayed away from realism and that bugs me too. Really so many aspects of design started changing in Gen 5 it’s wild lol. Maybe i should do a vid about that haha. Thanks for the comment!
I feel like you nailed it with the reason this part of character design is important at the end, Immersion. It's harder to believe this are magical animals/monsters when they look so mundanely human. To me the issue fell on if their more human traits were common or not, so jynx stood out as humanoid but I didn't mind it as much compared to sawk. Also great video, you supported your opinions clearly and went in depth the without making it overbearing or unnecessarily long.
I do not agree with this video, for the simple reason that Pokèmon are not pets. You say that it feels weird because you're catching an emo teen, but even catching a dog feels weird, but "Pokèmon" is the shortening of "Pocket Monsters", monsters that you catch and put in your pocket, so having weirdly human design isn't bad and doesn't suspend your disbelief because they're not pets, they're monsters
It always felt to me more of a knock to the monsters aspect when it resembled something lifelike, let alone something of a social comment. I can handle folklore inspired designs or very magical ones like a stone brought to life or a mammal that has a lightning bolt tail. But overall while you can see a Pokémon as something strictly not a pet, some still resemble pets and act like them. Some still resemble humans and act to specific human cliques. That’s a far cry from the monsters lurking in a cave or dungeon I would imagine adding to a fantasy team building game. Zubat was not brought up in the video, but it’s a great monster bat with subtle vampire nods. It doesn’t do the funky heart stamp thing like Swoobat. Noivern is rocking a speaker thing, yes bats have sonar, but it’s specifically evolved to resemble a human invention. In lore we’d have to say speakers were designed because of Noivern like how Foongus inspired the Pokeball.
@@runningoncylinders3829 I mean, that's the charm isn't it? the term monster can stretch so far, to the point where you have stuff like woobat, but also zubat, and also incineroar but also, idk, sudowoodo. it's imaginative and i really like that
@@LC_Redcube I mean that’s a good rebuttal for sure. It’s limitless as I find a lot of the same situation for Monsters in Yugioh. One of my favorite movie monsters is literally a human woman named Susan. So the concept really lands on powerful and otherworldly yet still feels at home with the ordinary and familiar given the leniency of being anything autonomous.
About the snivy design. In real life we have the praying mantis which, besides its name and design I dont think is actually praying. Snivy's line can very much fit in this category. What I find annoying af is the actual anthropomorphization they do with each and every pokemon in the anime and the game's stories. Every pokemon is a totally sentiend being (unless the plot wouldnt want them to be for convenience) and more so with each game Good video overall tho
Well to be fair pokemon has never said they were animals. The are pocket monsters. The fact they are monsters allows them to be a bit more flexible with their design. If someone who is playing pokemon thinks they are animals that's your way of thinking not the developers.
Because of the collection aspect of the franchise and most Pokemon looking like natural animals, it's understandable that the more heavily anthropomorphized ones are off putting to so many people, they're not my favourites either, but I don't think you should just skirt past Machoke and Hitmonchan when criticizing newer gens. Like at least one COULD make the argument that Raboot's clothes are just very specifically shaped fur (maybe it evolved that way to blend among human children, that could theoretically happen even irl), but there's basically zero chance Choke's belt is natural and Chan's skirt is at least as bad or worse as Raboot to me in terms of what seems feasible for an animal. And since these Mons are a part of the original line-up of Pokemon they are by definition core examples of what a Pokemon can be. Like it or not human like Mons have always been there and always will, and in gen 4 they even attempted to justify it in lore a bit, those human like ones likely have actual human ancestry. But regardless I think this is a solid video on the topic, good research and discussion about the specifics of anthropomorphism.
i like that you included examples throughout the series! Gen 2 obviously shifted the art design into more cartoon-ish pokemon, but I will always respect the designs of gen 1 that fused animal with human so seamlessly. love the alakazam and machamp line!
My go-to example of the anthropomorphism i dislike in pokemon is incineroar. I can only really picture it having one personality, which is great for legendaries, but not so much when you can have multiples out there in the wild. I like that fuecoco is just a little dude that could theoretically have any number of temperments This is shown really well in grovile, who much of the fanbase will remember for its mystery dungeon appearance. There its sly but overall a good individual. You can easily have a different interpretation with a different grovile though and many likely did before the game characterized that specific one. Incineroar on the other hand basically speaks for itself imo. All its other appearances seem to agree and theres very little out there changing how i view the character
I discussed this with my brother but yeah I dislike when a starter is assigned that sort of role. I should be able to imagine multiple of them with different personalities and, another one that seems overlooked *genders*. Most starters are about at a ratio of 5 to 1 for males to females..... Including Fennekin and Popplio who then go onto evolve into these unambiguously female forms. I don't understand why we have to assign such a thing to them.
Main problem is people treating them just like basic "animals" when they are meant to be "monsters". hell a famous dex entry in pokemon I like to reference is one of kadabra where sometimes especially powerful psychics would just one day wake up as one. I never got whole" pokemon are just like animals" even with the straight up animal pokemon I always view them as "a fox like monster" etc.
Also weird as fuck quxaly line is the only one u call out when sprigatio also take the humanoid with personally thing as raboot to cinderace (my favorite mid stage starter so how dare you slander it lol) granted out of the 3 it's the worst IMO final evo n...
This is why I struggle to see why people think bringing back the national dex is a good idea. Clearly there are some Pokémon that shouldn’t exist to a lot of people and there are some that had potential but got screwed over. I like drizzile and Inteleon. I agree with their problems but I think the concept can work. I think it can still have James Bond elements but make them more subtle. Not all animals are the same, Inteleon could be a lizard that has adapted to be somewhat spy-like but not be too on the nose.
I dont really see pokemon as pets, They've always been described as monsters which allows them to do more with the designs. But I do see your point in how some pokemon look pretty weird in the wild. I propose an interesting idea: What if some of the more human looking pokemon do not appear in nature, but more specific areas, like man made locations or places that are bizarre and fantastical? You can broaden the context of "Nature" very easily with this kind of perspective. Because it feels like its an argument being used only on the surface level of "Forest".
Lucario looks more like a character on its own game than norma (not-Mega) Lopunny. And both of them are more animalistic than Jinx, Hitmonchan, & Incineroar.
Maybe it's the anime influence that makes me less bothered by it, but Pokemon have always came off as significantly more intelligent than real world animals and even the Pokedex seems to confirm that too, assuming it's remotely accurate and not just written by kids who just fill it in with whatever they came up with. So when I see a design that is especially human, I take it more as humans being a really strong factor in evolution. In the real world, we've seen how in some animals, apparently those who live in more urban areas are better at problem solving than animals that live in more rural areas. So you have raccoons in cities that adapt to open up trash cans, even those that humans have "secured" and rural ones that simply don't understand. So it doesn't surprise me that creatures that often live near humans who not only keep them as pets, but even worship them in some cases would quickly evolve traits that appeal to humanity's kinda huge ego by looking like them. I mean humans can't imagine aliens without making them kinda human. If my life was made easier by attracting some human who wants me as a cute pet, I'd start humanizing ASAP too.
I can't really see a fundamental difference between Hitmonchan and Sawh/Throh Or Machamp and Incineroar. Yeah, the latter is sassy and has an ego. Like a wrestler? Sure. But also *like a cat*. If a cat had the increased dexterity that Incineroar's bodyshape does, they would totally act like that when they weren't sleeping. My metric for where the anthropomorphism is a problem is whether it would look out of place eating food from a bowl on the floor.
This has been something that has been bothering me since I first started enjoying pokemon. How weirdly anthro some are. To me it just feels icky. I have no problem with furrys and stuff like that, but it feels different when Pokemon is about you an your "animal" companions. That you order around and make fight for you and bathe, and feed. It's fine when its a little puppy pokemon or something, but with say; Scorbunny. It feels wrong. Like that's not a pokemon, that's someone's fursona. It has a hobby. He plays soccer. It looks like a dude in a mascot outfit. there are tons like that where it stops feeling like a fantastical creature with some anthropromorphic qualities and just starts to feel like an actually guy. The newer generations are doing it alot more, but its been around since atleast gen 3.
yeah,I am glad I’m not the only who’s being weirded out by the fact that was an wild fantasy creature(that have nothing to do with human life)evolving into an f*cking original character (that have EVERYTHING RELATED TO HUMAN LIFE!!),not only it was offputting/iffy asf when you compared to its previous evolution,but also insulting as well!..(just look at the poor starters😭!!!)
This is one of those videos, where I spent hours thinking about the subject, before I even start watching the video. And my thoughts are simple, I don't care about the anthropomorphism, they don't feel out of place where compared to rest of the designs. What I dislike about Pokemon design is that they don't feel like part of the world, because their existence has no impact on the world in general (at least in games). And while early on it was easy to ignore, and you could justify it with technological limitations, but the bar of what is expected of the world building in games has gone up over time, and the world building of Pokemon doesn't feel like it has progressed since the first gen. In fact if anything it regressed since that, as it made sense back then, as (to my understanding) the mons were supposed to be something new that appeared recently, but once that was retconned between gen 2 and 3. In my personal opinion the world building is in some serious need for the games to deconstruct it, or at very least address stuff related to the fact that Pokemon seem to be simultaneously treated like powerful animals, that make for good pets, and sapient beings; which creates a lot of questions. But sadly it looks like the franchise is locked in a goal to keep it kid friendly, to a point where it feels sanitized, which only leads to even more questions being unanswered. Okay, I think that I mostly emptied my brain, let's hope that I can now watch and finish the video without having to stop every 5 minutes to think for an hour.
The only thing I disagree with is hitmonchan, it's too much too But it was super interesting And yeah, incineroar is not a good pokémon on that front, but it makes it a great smash fighter
Good video. There's no problem, just nostalgia in my opinion. Pokémon for me has never been magical animals, like, many of them are more clever than humans and then there's Arceus and all the humans/Pokémon "doing things" together.,
Say I don’t want to sound rude but aren’t pokemon RPG monsters and mimics are a thing it make all the sense that some pokemon start to mimic human like Jynx they are monsters not pet
the pokemon that irk me honestly start with the emboar line. it immediately became bipedal in a way unlike things like grumpig. I am irked by rillaboom, honestly. it's proportions are not gorilla enough to me, any pokemon with clothes pisses me off and yes that does include hitmonchan. why does a pokemon have boxing gloves? literally no fingers. ofc, the other starters for gen9 are awful, gen 9 as well, aside from the fire aligator. and mr mime, that one is shit. I'm not that bothered by salazzle, aside from the bikini pattern on her, I think it sells the idea of an emotionally abusive woman rather well. I'm a bit bothered by the armour guys from gen9, I like the idea of a cursed set of armour and all that, but it'd be nicer if it was something like hattarene, where you can see that the body is hidden inside and the external part is something being "puppetered" by the pokemon.
It's so creepy that everyone says lopunny is intentionally sexualized... No dude it's a weird looking rabbit monster absolutely nothing about it is attractive or suggestive. If you feel that's what they're trying to do is because you're a furry
