(1) Supposed 'X' and 'Y' Insider Information [5/11]
- Thread starter Water Pokémon Master
- Start date
- Status
evilpacman said:
lol.
I'm not trolling I just REALLY think there should not be a fairy type.
Just because people do not agree with you does not mean they are trolling. There are many people in the world, each have their own opinion
Tam said:
Psychic is associated with the mind and not magic. This is why Meditite/Cham are part Psychic. While Psychic abilities are typically thought of as magic, its really more of a manipulation of objects and such using your mind. Also, it makes total sense to think of Psychic as representing the mind when you consider its weaknesses - Dark, Ghost and Bug - which all represent fears.
Fairy type might limit a Pokemon species just as much as Bug, Ghost and Dragon. I dont see how that is much different. What you described for each of those 3 types are just characteristics. You can be big, scaly and strong and not be a Dragon. To be a Dragon type you must, well, be a dragon. Same goes for Ghost; must be as spirit or some sort of undead or possessed entity. For bug, you didnt really explain that one well. You pretty much claimed that Bug type is justified because there are man types of bugs, but in reality, you cant be Bug type without being a bug.
Fairy type fits in Pokemon just as any of the "creature" types fit. Also, we should note that our Western view of fairies sees them as girly and weak, while that might not be the case in other cultures.
Reggie McGigas said:
Just a question, why are you so against Fairy type?
Lets have a hypothetical situation:
-Fairy has been around since Gen.1 and we all know and love the type
-A new Eeveelution is revealed which has a draconic look, but fits no type
-We get inside information that it will be a new Dragon type
-Dragon will be resistant to Electric, Fire, Water and Grass, and be weak to Ice and Dragon.
if this hypothetical situation was true, what would your opinions on the 'new Dragon type' be?
Because hating Fairy type because it isn't an element, and more of a species definition, yet at the same time being a Dragon type fan, is kinda hypocritical.
Reggie McGigas said:
WPM is not "this guy", he got (supposedly) insider information. I'll do it anyway.
Fairy Type 7/10
It seems really probable. Maybe you don't want it but it is likely to happen with Sylveon's type being hidden and it is the most credible new type. 0/10 is more like what you want not what will happen
2 New forms 4/10
I don't want it but I don't believe it would happenif they would make it that way it would look like an X[7s]
Proffesor Name 7/10
Its not the name of a Tree I'm not surprised that they changed into a non-tree name as they changed the names into X and Y without the "version".
Final Starter evo 8/10
The types make absolute sense to me
Gym types 7/10
I agree that they're going to have those gyms but IDK if that would be the order specially with Fairy as second.
Dual-type attacks 6/10
I really see this ones coming and I'm not surprised that it happened.
Fighting in the air 8/10
We saw something like this in the anime back in Sinnoh so it isn't surprising that they wan't to add it. It will be fun and it will have its own meta
It seems really probable. Maybe you don't want it but it is likely to happen with Sylveon's type being hidden and it is the most credible new type. 0/10 is more like what you want not what will happen
2 New forms 4/10
I don't want it but I don't believe it would happen
Proffesor Name 7/10
Final Starter evo 8/10
The types make absolute sense to me
Gym types 7/10
I agree that they're going to have those gyms but IDK if that would be the order specially with Fairy as second.
Dual-type attacks 6/10
I really see this ones coming and I'm not surprised that it happened.
Fighting in the air 8/10
We saw something like this in the anime back in Sinnoh so it isn't surprising that they wan't to add it. It will be fun and it will have its own meta
I agree that Togekiss will get to OU right away. Its really good in UU and it now gets Fairy type. It will do really good against Garchomp and Flygon as it is immune to the STAB's of these 2 Pokemon.
Reggie McGigas said:evilpacman said:
lol.
I'm not trolling I just REALLY think there should not be a fairy type.
Just because people do not agree with you does not mean they are trolling. There are many people in the world, each have their own opinion
No, I dont agree with you, but you are acting sort of ignorant to the possibility of the type being real. You cant say it has a 0 percent chance of existing because you dont think it exists. The rumor strongly suggests that there is a new type and I feel like you are being blind to that because you dont want to accept the possibility.
P.DelSlayer said:
Well, Tam sums it up. See his comment. (Plus who says I'm a dragon fan)
evilpacman said:Reggie McGigas said:lol.
I'm not trolling I just REALLY think there should not be a fairy type.
Just because people do not agree with you does not mean they are trolling. There are many people in the world, each have their own opinion
No, I dont agree with you, but you are acting sort of ignorant to the possibility of the type being real. You cant say it has a 0 percent chance of existing because you dont think it exists. The rumor strongly suggests that there is a new type and I feel like you are being blind to that because you dont want to accept the possibility.
Just hear me out
I don't really want a fairy type. (See tam's comment, it sums it up really good). Also if there was a fairy type they woulda added it earlier.
I might as well stop because you people will rage if anyone posts anything anti fairy and call it 'stupid' or 'hypocritical' or 'blind' because people have their own opinions and feel there doesnt need to be a fairy type. Calling people out for their opinions is kinda dumb in my opinion. Plus fairy isn't even confirmed so who knows what will happen?
Tam said:
That's a typical American conception of fairies, but actual fairy legends are much broader than that. Take, for example, the Dullahan:
Wikipedia said:
It's a fairy, but just look at that description. That's basically the exact opposite of Tinkerbell. There are other less-than-savory fairies, too, like the banshee or the changeling. And as a Pokémon type, it could be expanded out to similar concepts as well, such as elves or (if the rumor about Mawile is true) Japanese yōkai.
As for it being too similar to Psychic, I don't really think that's a concern. Fairy as a type seems to be more along the lines of creatures having innate magical abilities, whereas Psychic types are often things that shouldn't have special powers but have happened upon them or trained them up. They are similar to each other, but so are Ground and Rock, and those two coexist just fine.
Tam's doesn't cover anything. I believe its that you closed your mind because of the name. "Fairy" isn't a "Tinkerbell", its only in Western civilization. It fits perfectly and there are evil fairies and all types of fairies in other civilizations. It doesn't need to be small and magical, there are Nymphs (spirits of nature) and a lot of other spirits in the Greek and Roman civilization that fits into "Fairy" but aren't like Tinkerbell.
Psychic type is the control over objects not magical abilities.
@P The difference is that most kids like Dragons so they won't say no to it.
@Reggie Its because you gave a 0/10 because you don't like them. If it is possible, it has to get at least a 1/10.
Psychic type is the control over objects not magical abilities.
@P The difference is that most kids like Dragons so they won't say no to it.
@Reggie Its because you gave a 0/10 because you don't like them. If it is possible, it has to get at least a 1/10.
Why haven't they integrated the easy viewing of EVs and IVs? They are encouraging hacking for no reason.
Flygon2071 said:
Exactly... I think one should take a quick look at this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fairy ...to see that Fairy types are even less limited than Dragon and Bug types.
I think this might help change the mind of people who think fairies are little girly Tinkerbells.
Tam said:
Psychic is more of an approach, a skill, having a superior mind like Fighting has muscles and martial arts. Fairy are a magical kind of creature, just like Dragon, Ghost and Bug are different kinds of creatures that bring along enough special features to justify a type.
I can think of about 30 already existing pokemon which would fit the type, and they're not wearng pink bows.
It's already aired, and nothing of too much importance happened.
Ya'll seriously need to calm down with the Fairy type arguments. You're acting like it's already come out! I honestly believe that it will happen, but who knows! If someone doesn't like it then leave them be until the real storm hits.
I for one am looking forward to how GF handles the type. I do hope they extend the definition to include some really cool things themselves.
Fairy is like more of that really weird stuff that you can't quite explain with the mind (Psychic) or anything but it's just there and magical and dear lord this type is going to have a lot of gimmick moves I can tell.
Ya'll seriously need to calm down with the Fairy type arguments. You're acting like it's already come out! I honestly believe that it will happen, but who knows! If someone doesn't like it then leave them be until the real storm hits.
I for one am looking forward to how GF handles the type. I do hope they extend the definition to include some really cool things themselves.
Fairy is like more of that really weird stuff that you can't quite explain with the mind (Psychic) or anything but it's just there and magical and dear lord this type is going to have a lot of gimmick moves I can tell.
evilpacman said:
I just don't feel like it's particularly new, because a lot of what defines 'fairy' has already be done in Pokémon. I'm not saying it's necessarily much worse than Dragon, Bug or Ghost - maybe if it had come before certain other types, it would be more interesting. But at this stage I don't think it offers anything particularly new outside of the purely practical reason of balancing the types that are already there.
If they do make fairy Pokémon, I hope they are 'girly' (and not weak...). I'd love a strong, evidently 'feminine' type. It's not like fighting isn't predominantly a masculine type, most fighting Pokémon look like guys. I'd be peeved if they made fairy and then went out of their way to not make it 'girly'... girls can be strong too! I never thought of fairies as weak... maybe small and delicate, but powerful! Also, girls don't have to be more defensive than offensive, or those usual stereotypes... in lots of species females are stronger than males and whatnot. So it'd be cool to break those cliches if they do bring in fairy Pokémon, rather than reinforcing them.
The dragon fan thing wasn't aimed at anyone in particular, just to anyone who liked Dragons and hated Fairy type.Reggie McGigas said:
But saying Fairy type is too specific, with any species based types you could immediately say that. If Dragon type was revealed now, I'd assume we'd only see mons based on European Dragons, Eastern Dragons and other stereotypical Dragons, and sure as hell would never think Altaria would be a Dragon type.
I'm hoping that as well as being about pink cutesy Pokemon, the Fairy type would include trolls, imps, goblins etc, as well as taking inspiration from Faeries in folklore (evil beings who would go as far as killing a human to get a laugh), with a Fairy/Dark type looking like the typical cutesy Fairy, but in reality would be the most evil being ever.
And at the end of the day, GameFreak won't pay attention to one fan who doesn't like a change they're making. If they want to introduce a Fairy type, they will, even if one fan hates the idea.
Reggie McGigas said:
I am hearing (reading?) you out. The problem is you are not acknowledging it as a possibility. Your opinion is justified that you dont like or want the type. But that doesnt make it any less useful or real. If they can make it work with the type chart, then there is really no reason to argue that it doesnt fit in with the types. Its already been explained numerous times why it has as much as a place in the Pokemon world as Dragon, Bug or Ghost type. Lastly, I think the argument that they would have done it already is poor. They could have done it doesnt translate to they would have done it. As far as I know, they have planned this for a while, but wanted to work things out just right so that it would fit nicely.
I think a fairy type fits very well supernatural types like Ghost or Dragon. They all refer to a class of mythical creatures.
I see how some of you argue that fairy-like abilities are already covered by Psychic and Normal, but I think a Fairy type could indeed complement the existing types beyond a more balanced type chart.
Think of fairies as sprites rather than overly cute pixies. They could fill a role of counterparts of the Ghost type. On the one hand you would have the concept of supernatural beings like shadows, poltergeists, demons or haunted objects and on the other hand you would have the concept of spirits that live in close touch with nature like fairies (of course), nymphs/mermaids (Fairy/Water), sylphs (Fairy/Flying), forest spirits (Fairy/Grass) and so on.
I really hope that a fairy type, if real, is not reserved for little pink things that can use some kind of magic. That would be such a waste, as the type has more potential as you would expect at first glance. Let me assure that I was always sceptical towards those new type debates that spring up prior to the release of each new generation, but this Fairy type thing seems more plausible than any other fan discussion on a new type before
I see how some of you argue that fairy-like abilities are already covered by Psychic and Normal, but I think a Fairy type could indeed complement the existing types beyond a more balanced type chart.
Think of fairies as sprites rather than overly cute pixies. They could fill a role of counterparts of the Ghost type. On the one hand you would have the concept of supernatural beings like shadows, poltergeists, demons or haunted objects and on the other hand you would have the concept of spirits that live in close touch with nature like fairies (of course), nymphs/mermaids (Fairy/Water), sylphs (Fairy/Flying), forest spirits (Fairy/Grass) and so on.
I really hope that a fairy type, if real, is not reserved for little pink things that can use some kind of magic. That would be such a waste, as the type has more potential as you would expect at first glance. Let me assure that I was always sceptical towards those new type debates that spring up prior to the release of each new generation, but this Fairy type thing seems more plausible than any other fan discussion on a new type before
DorianBlack said:
While that's quite cool, and does expand the definition of 'fairy', it's almost too broad- for example, the Banshee would be a much more fitting ghost than a fairy, and we wouldn't need a fairy type to cover it. Also, I'm Irish but in most of the Irish mythology and folklore I'm familiar with, fairies are still predominantly Tinkerbell-esque... so it's not an exclusively American conception, I'm fairly certain most Irish people would view fairies similarly. Still, I'm sure there are other conceptions of fairies that are more popular and more diverse in other parts of the world.
evilpacman said:
Well most of the 'faries' you guys want to be are in gens 1 and 2 (blissey, clefairy, togepi, granbull), so it would make more sense to implement it there.
Also on p.delslayer's role reverse of dragon/fairy types
what would happen to dragonite, dragonair, and bagon (Which rhymes with dragon for crying out loud)?
I'm just not going to post my opinion anymore as it seems the fairy fans will rage. I just don't think there should be a fairy type.
- Status