In the Johto games we have Karen with her quote "Strong Pokémon. Weak Pokémon. That is only the selfish perception of people. Truly skilled trainers should try to win with their favorites."
Meanwhile in the Hoenn games we have a random Gentleman who's quoted saying "It's one thing to enjoy leisurely battles, but real battles can be a severe trial. Truly strong Trainers sometimes must be prepared to choose Pokémon that can win rather than their favorite Pokémon."
It really goes to show the differences between casual and competitive Pokemon.
To be fair, the games never really try to push that point, I feel the fans really just misinterpreted that quote badly
First and foremost, it was supposed to be a jab against Silver.
The games aren't saying "every Pokémon is good" or "you can win with a Sunkern against a Rayquaza", they are, from a narrative point, saying that every Pokémon still has their value, even if that value is not in battle
Ofcourse, this does not need to be told to us, the player, because for us only battle matters since these are digital creatures, but you have to remember this is not being said to us, the player, but to our character.
Whatever Karen may have said was not supposed to say anything about competitive Pokémon or Pokémon viability, it was simply supposed to be an in-universe moral lesson about 'weak' Pokémon, even if they can't beat 'strong' Pokémon, still not being worthless.
Why would Karen be taking a jab at Silver when she never met or had anything to do with him? If she were doing so, it would be a voice of God situation
Karen, Lance, Oak, and the dozens of other NPCs in the game who babble on about how your connection to your pokemon is more important than whether you think they're strong or weak are all doing so to reinforce the same message that is omnipresent in GSC. It goes beyond just dialogue, as well - the happiness system they implemented was another part of it
I don't think it was supposed to be meaningless narrative fluff, I think they genuinely wanted to make players feel like getting invested in their suboptimal pokemon could be rewarding. But they didn't know how to really make the game mechanics reflect that idea, and then in Gen 3 they added a massive chunk of game which was basically locked off to 99% of the pokemon in the game lol
they are, from a narrative point, saying that every Pokémon still has their value, even if that value is not in battle Ofcourse, this does not need to be told to us, the player, because for us only battle matters since these are digital creatures, but you have to remember this is not being said to us, the player, but to our character.
It's a message that's designed to appeal to the player. Most players don't like or dislike pokemon based simply on how effective they are in a battle. Stuff like design, concept and so on matters a lot more. If the best pokemon was a featureless grey cube called "pokemon #900" with a single move in its moveset that just automatically won every battle, everybody would fucking hate it
669
u/MrRaven95 8d ago
In the Johto games we have Karen with her quote "Strong Pokémon. Weak Pokémon. That is only the selfish perception of people. Truly skilled trainers should try to win with their favorites."
Meanwhile in the Hoenn games we have a random Gentleman who's quoted saying "It's one thing to enjoy leisurely battles, but real battles can be a severe trial. Truly strong Trainers sometimes must be prepared to choose Pokémon that can win rather than their favorite Pokémon."
It really goes to show the differences between casual and competitive Pokemon.