Lord_Brand

Once I have the notoriety to get an interview with them, I just might. Though I'm not really the journalist type. More likely I'd gain the information while collabing with them on a project. Would that necessarily be a bad thing? Now that you mention it, I am intrigued by the thought of what new types they could have added in Gens III, IV, V, VII, and VIII. Light could have been a good one for Sun and Moon since both are luminaries and Necrozma is themed on light as a scientific phenomenon. But honestly, new types are so exciting that it's not something I'd do every generation, in order to make it more exciting when new types do show up (and to keep from there being a mandatory new type or two every generation to avoid complexity creep; see, I care about this stuff too!). I do believe however that if a new type does show up, they should show it off with one of the Starters. Gen II missed a big opportunity to work Dark and Steel into the starter lineup, as did Gen VI with Fairy (why wasn't Delphox Fire/Fairy type instead of Fire/Psychic?). That being said, in whatever generation I'd introduce my types, I'd make sure one of the Starters has it by their third stage. For example, my Wood-type would probably be coupled with the Grass starter, making it a Grass/Wood type (ouch, double Bug and Fire weaknesses). My Beast type, created for my Greece-inspired Theos region, would probably be paired with Grass or Fire. My Light type would probably be paired with the Fire starter. Mage could be any one of them. But the laws of copyright would mean that they aren't allowed to use things I came up with unless they have my permission to do so. On the other hand, they do have ways of gauging player interest; if enough players asked for a Wood-type, no doubt they'd hear those requests and look at implementing such a type. But the difference is that it's a whole vocal community of fans asking for such a thing, as opposed to just one guy. Incidentally, "Earth" was my proposed name for a Rock/Ground composite type. Of course, I haven't forgotten how that idea fared. Funny thing is, certain kinds of steel are in fact rustproof. So I get why Steel isn't weak to Water, per se. Neutral works fine there.

Because I enjoy creating stuff? Because Types are one of the most interesting things you can add to Pokemon? According to you. Has anyone asked the developers about this? And even if they did, so what? The types mean different things for different people. Except that style is what makes the game fun and worth playing in the first place. You could strip away all the type names and just call them Type A, Type B, Type C, Type D, Type E, Type F, Type G, Type H, Type I, Type J, Type K, Type L, Type M, Type N, Type O, Type P, Type Q, and Type R, while keeping all the type interactions intact for the sake of mechanical balance - but at that point, why would anyone care? P/C-type means nothing, but Dragon/Flying sure does. Style is just as important as substance; the interior of a car determines how well it drives, but the exterior of a car determines who wants to drive it. To that end, I come up with types that I think would add a new creative element to the game that could thus excite players. The nitty-gritty of type interactions can be figured out for any type, but the type has to look fun to be worth adding. And when players see what the Wood-type offers, like cool boats, toys, etc. (thanks again, SP1M) not to mention concepts like defensive structures or an additional answer to Electric, they could be delighted by the unusual yet functional addition to the game. Wood can function on a multitude of levels beyond just the competitive scene. As I frequently had to bring up during my MtG days, the game does not begin and end with the competitive metagame. It's really easy to forget that if it's all you care about, but the hard truth is that there are many players who don't give a damn about the metagame; they just want to play Light-type angels and maybe Wood-type dragon boats, and have those types interact the way they expect them to. So, Dark, Steel, and Fairy all made the game worse by increasing the number of types? Or were their additions justified in your eyes because they served some kind of metagame purpose? I find it interesting that you seem to be assuming I'm completely unaware of the game's more nitty-gritty details because I happen to talk about the more fun and interesting flavor-based aspects. And yet I've sat down to figure out stat builds and movesets for Pokemon I've designed while keeping a multitude of factors in mind including the approximate level at which you'd find the Pokemon as well as the environment in which you'd find it, including what other kinds of Pokemon you might be expected to battle, just as I've sat down to figure out how best to optimize my mana curve within the colors I've chosen to play for the next FNM, or weighed the various cards I've pulled in drafts for prereleases, or considered a fair mana cost for cards I've designed for my own custom Magic sets. I get it. The honest truth is, I haven't been part of the Pokemon metagame, ever. I stopped actively playing the games after Sapphire, which was back when Wi-fi wasn't a thing and I had little to no reason to care about the metagame. If I got back into the games today, chances are I still wouldn't care a great deal about the metagame (as much because I would have to sacrifice the creative element that I've always enjoyed for the sake of doing so). I am aware that it exists, and I am aware that there are imbalances among the types due to radically asymmetric numbers of advantages, resistances, and weaknesses (as much because you guys made sure of that), but at the end of the day, my top priority is coming up with a fun new addition to the type chart that captures tropes people will care about, based on creative elements that I've identified within the series. Not every player will care if Fighting has six advantages instead of five, they just want to karate chop a dragon boat with their martial artist and have it deal the kind of damage they'd expect it to based on what's resonant about the type tropes. If you tell the player that Type A beats Type B and they're like "yeah, that make sense", mission accomplished. I'm sorry if my type idea doesn't fit into your ultra-mechanical metagame balance correction plan, but quite frankly, it wasn't designed to. It was designed to capture what being Wood-type means for Pokemon and their moves, and why it shouldn't just be mixed in with the Grass-type (any more than Rock should be with Ground, or Ice with Water). At the end of the day, it really doesn't matter. Game Freak isn't going to look at my topic and be like "Yeah, that's a good idea. We'll use it!" and mess up the metagame with a type that doesn't fit your standards. They legally can't. What's going to happen is that this topic will eventually die and I'll move on to some other creative spark that I decide to share to help pass what precious little time I have to spend between work days in my life. I was hoping to see some fun suggestions for Wood-type Pokemon and moves like what SH1M offered, and I at least got that much. If you want to see the metagame rebalanced in a manner that pleases you, why not make a topic about that? You and SP1M both seem to have a keener sense of the metagame than I do, so I'm sure you can hold some thought-provoking debates about how to best balance out the sheer number of offense and defense advantages Fighting and Steel currently have as well as how to mitigate Grass and Ice's defensive weaknesses. Maybe you'll come up with new types, maybe you'll rewrite the type charts. If a 31(soon to be 32)-year old ex-player can write up a topic about wooden Pokemon and moves as a hobby, you can come up with ideas for how to fix the metagame's flaws and how to make the next Pokemon generation more gratifying on a competitive level. Also, you never answered my question: If Rock and Ground were combined into one type like you said they should have been, how would they interact with other types? Rock beats Flying, Flying is immune to Ground. Ground beats Steel, Steel beats Rock. Ground beats and is immune to Electric, while Rock is mutually neutral to Electric. How do you reconcile that with your proposed "Rock and Ground" type?

That...doesn't explain it very well. Like, okay, you feel Wood needs to play some kind of "role" to justify its addition. You pointed to Fairy being a stronger answer against Dragons. But what about the first 15 types? When the game was first being made, what was their intended roles? How about when Dark and Steel were added in Gen II? To me, the entire crux of the type system is that each type represents a resonant concept that the developers want to use in an engaging combat system of advantages and disadvantages. The flavor of the types came first, and the mechanical, metagame aspects followed. I feel like you're only looking at one aspect of Pokemon types, here. In a series designed to entertain players on many different levels, there are far more purposes to consider than just "Does this help rebalance the metagame?" There's a flavor aspect that players enjoy. And each new type added to the chart can redefine the metagame thanks to the new advantages, weaknesses, resistances, and immunities they bring to the table. When designing the Wood type in the OP, I was considering ways to distinguish Wood from Grass while giving Wood its own identity as a type. To that end, I asked myself "What is wood commonly used for?" The the obvious answer to that of course was to build things. Thus, I give Wood an emphasis on building, like with the Barricade move which does something completely novel for the game, creating defensive structures that the opponent has to wear down. In terms of combat strategy, Wood is highly defensive in a manner different from Grass. Where Grass relies on status effects and life drain to wear the opponent down, Wood instead creates obstacles to soak up damage, uses status buffs to make itself stronger and tougher, and hits hard with physical attacks. Nowadays Grass is fairly balanced in physical and special stats, while Wood leans heavily towards the physical, similar to Dark (ironic, seeing as Dark was originally classed as a special type). The difference between Grass and Wood is like the difference between a druid and a carpenter or engineer. I should have mentioned that I'd also intend for Grass to be resistant to Light, if not outright immune to it. Incidentally that's another area where Grass and Wood could be differentiated, as Wood probably wouldn't have such a resistance to Light. The part about the other resistances is more of a side observation. At the end of the day, Wood was a suggestion I made because I realized it could have very different properties from Grass while still feeling related to it, and thus potentially open new swaths of design space. And as evidenced by SP1M's ideas, I'd say adding the Wood type would allow for some fun new designs.

So then, the more important detail is what types resist or are immune to Fighting and Steel. Objectively, Steel is safer than Fighting as no type is immune to Steel. But then there are cases where you'd prefer to use Fighting over Steel, like a Rock/Steel-type or any Pokemon that's part Fire, Water, or Electric and isn't Flying, Bug, Psychic, Fairy, or Ghost. In the case of a Wood-type, you could have, say, a Wood/Ghost type where Steel will shine over Fighting, but then a Wood/Water type like those you suggested earlier would definitely favor Fighting over Steel. I mean, sure, on an objective level it's more important for Steel to be SE against Wood than Fighting, but to me it makes sense that both would be SE for similar reasons as Rock and Ice. Honestly, if I'm going to drop any of Fighting's existing advantages, it's going to be Ice, as Ice has plenty of weaknesses thanks to Rock, Steel, and Fire. I'm not sure why they made Ice weak to Fighting as well. Also, I just realized Fire should be resistant to Fighting as well. And Psychic should perhaps be resistant to Fire and Ice due to the classic "mind over matter" tropes of walking on hot coals and meditating under ice-cold waterfalls. There are ways one could balance that out, like giving some Grass-types an ability akin to Sturdy or Wonder Guard that might be broken on "better" types or type combinations. I also would intend for Grass itself to be SE against my proposed Light type due to Grass absorbing light and turning it into energy via photosynthesis, so ideally it would have that extra advantage to help balance things out. Similar to why Grass beats Water, you know? Okay then. What is each type's role in the system?

Octopath Traveler is where I'd have liked to see Final Fantasy go. What's funny is how it feels like one of those "spiritual successor" games that a fan would create a la 20XX or Rogue Heroes, but it was made by Square themselves. Primrose is my favorite of the eight heroes, hands down.

Does it break the game if Fighting has six advantages? Or Grass having six weaknesses? Or Fighting and Steel sharing three advantages? Does that approach "Gen 1 Psychic-type" levels of broken? There was a time when Fighting was only SE against three types, same as Fire, while Ground was SE against four (Gen 1, granted, but still). If we look at adding new types to the game, it stands to reason that over time the number of advantages will grow. My Beast Type would give Steel an extra SE as well, which in combination with my proposed SE against Grass and Dragon would give it eight SEs (Rock, Ice, Beast, Wood, Grass, Ice, Dragon, Fairy). But then Steel is also highly weak to the popular Fighting, Ground, and Fire types, and it's resisted by Fire, Water, and Electric. All this combined would make Steel a highly interactive type with plenty of neutral interactions left over. They've also taken away SEs before; maybe Fighting could lose its SE against Normal to make room for Wood? Granted, in my ideal Pokemon system, the Normal type as we know it wouldn't really exist; the Beast type would cover the more animalistic aspects while the non-animalistic moves and concepts could be given to other types or receive new types of their own. I do acknowledge the value of a "neutral" type, but in practice Normal isn't really truly Neutral as it's weak to Fighting and shares a mutual immunity to Ghost (though I'm starting to debate the necessity of type immunity in Pokemon as a whole, as certain spinoffs have eschewed it in favor of a simple "SE-Neutral-NVE" hierarchy), not to mention is resisted by Rock and Steel. I just don't see a need to apply an arbitrary number to a particular type. There are ways you can balance out high levels of advantages or weaknesses, like how Rock/Steel types got Sturdy to mitigate the fact they're weak to two of the game's best offense types. If a given type's number of interactions really does become too great, they could theoretically "split" that type into two different but related types. Maybe Fighting for example could split off into a "hero" or "warrior" type that inherits the advantage against Dark-types while leaving Fighting with the advantages against Rock, Ice, and Steel (and maybe Wood :P ). Light could also take over as the primary Dark-type counter (and yes, I'm aware that the Dark-type doesn't refer to literal darkness but rather "evil" or underhandedness, which Fighting is supposed to counter by merit of being honorable; the honor aspect could transfer to Hero, Warrior, or Light while Fighting itself focuses on pure martial prowess). Some types don't have enough interactions, like Ice and Dragon. I'm all for those types gaining more interactions accordingly. Like, maybe Dragon can SE something besides itself? My Beast type would be one good candidate, as dragons are often shown preying upon sheep and other livestock. Heck, you could make an argument in favor of Dragon being SE against Normal, since dragons often terrorize common villagers and other folk who would be considered examples of the Normal-type (not to mention currently Normal-type Pokemon such as Wooloo). Likewise, I've long thought Ice should SE Water, not be resisted by it. My brother has suggested that Ice become SE against Electric, for ice is apparently a good insulator against electricity. For that matter, I think they could restore Poison's SE against Bugs; poison is a common weapon against bugs in real life, both by humans and by bugs themselves. You can also make cases for Poison beating Flying and Water, as creatures in those habitats are highly vulnerable to pollution. Heck, given how the dragon-like Orochi was intoxicated by Susanoo, you could even make an argument that Poison should be effective against Dragon! That many advantages would greatly swell Poison's role in the metagame, beyond what its SE against Fairy already does for it. It really makes no sense that Poison is only SE against two types. On the flip side, I think I would remove Steel's resistances to Psychic and Ice. Psychics are often shown to be capable of bending spoons and such, so I'd make them neutral in the same way Ghost is. Ice can pose a threat to metal pipes by causing them to burst, and metal is highly receptive to changes in temperature. I'd also suggest giving Steel a weakness to Electric, since most types of metal are highly electroconductive (that's the logic we're using for Electric > Water, right?). That should help counterbalance the extra SE I'd give Steel. Why can a type not be added just because it seems like a cool thing to add? Mega Evolutions and Dynamaxing weren't fixes to the metagame, but they were still justified as being the cool new thing their generations were doing. Shoot, most every type exists in order to capture some kind of resonant trope for the sake of an RPG with an engaging rock-paper-scissors dynamic. I don't see how Wood or any other new type takes away from that. How would this theoretical Rock-and-Ground-combined type interact with other types? Super effective against Flying, or ineffective against it? SE against Ice and Steel, or weak to them? SE and immune to Electric, or neutral both ways? It's not as though Rock and Ground are interchangeable with one another, each plays different roles.

I mean, if they're strong and tough enough to break rock and metal with their hands, chances are wooden splinters are of little concern to them. :P I for one feel Steel could do with an advantage against Grass and Dragon. The former is self-explanatory; what do we use to trim the hedges or mow the lawn? The latter is based on stories of knights battling and slaying dragons. That would be two advantages Steel has that Fighting doesn't. Not a bad idea. When suggesting a new type, first thing I do after coming up with the type interactions is to look for existing Pokemon and moves that can reasonably fit into that type, like I did with Beast, Mage, and Light. Funnily enough, I did consider making Needle Arm Wood, but seeing as that's Cacnea and Cacturn's signature move and they don't feel especially Wooden, I'd opt not to. Hmm, a dragon boat for a Scandinavian region, maybe? Loving the toy idea! I'm mostly thinking of how certain kinds of plants can parasitize trees, as well as how fungi (currently associated with the Grass-type) can grow on trees and logs.

By that logic, Grass should be weak to Electric as well, even more justifiably since the moisture in soft green vegetation would make them more conductive. But I think the Pokemon games are operating off of resonance more than reality, like with Water being weak to Electric. Though in that case Steel really ought to be SE against Grass, and maybe Ice against Water. I'm open to making Wood resistant to Electric rather than outright immune to it. That seems to be the direction Wood is heading towards: resisting Electricity as opposed to outright no-selling it. The reason I have Fighting as a weakness is because of the whole "break planks of wood with your bare hands" martial arts trope. I mean, if Fighting can beat Ice, Rock, and Steel, why not also Wood? I've considered those. Thing is, Nuzleaf and Shiftry do have leafy green foliage on them, so I'm torn as to whether they should be Grass or Wood-type. Even Phantump and Trevenant are a tricky call for the same reason. But my intent is that wood is the firm dry counterpart to soft moist Grass, so I guess anything involving hard-shelled seeds could also qualify. As for a special Wood-type attack, well Grass has had leaf-based special attacks like Magical Leaf before, so maybe a special Wood attack could involve something akin to magic, like my Oaken Staff move. That's a neat idea! I could see other "living boat" Pokemon that are Wood/Water too. Maybe a Dragon/Wood Pokemon based on a viking longboat? How about a Wood/Rock or Wood/Steel Pokemon based on a catapult? Something just occurred to me: how should Grass and Wood interact with each other? Could Grass be super effective against Wood in the same way Ground is to Rock? And what about Poison? Also, a funny thing to think about: Where Ground and Rock are both physical types, and Water and Ice are both special types, Wood and Grass would be split between the two, with Wood being a physical type and Grass a special type.

Lightning is also hotter than the surface of the sun and produces a great deal of explosive force. Powerlines ignite trees through sparks, similar to lighting a campfire. Wood doesn't conduct electric currents, however, which is presumably how most Electric-type attacks deal damage. (Fun fact: pure, distilled water also doesn't conduct electricty. The minerals in water are what's actually electroconductive.) What would you recommend as Wood's interactions?

I know what you're thinking: "Wood is just Grass!" But that's like saying "Rock is just Ground!" or "Ice is just Water!" Conceptually, Wood and Grass would be related types in much the same vein as Rock and Ground or Water and Ice. But like those types, Wood's interactions with other types could be radically different from its counterpart Grass. After all, Grass generally conveys soft and moist leaves, vines, petals, and fruit, while wood is hard, firm, and dry. If you had a Pokemon based on a wooden object or structure, could it really be called Grass-type? Here are the type interactions I have in mind for Wood: Super effective against: Ground, Electric Resisted by: Rock, Steel, Wood Resistant to: Ground, Wood, Electric Weak to: Fighting, Bug, Steel, Fire As for existing Pokemon and moves that could become Wood-type: Pokemon: Phantump and Trevenant (Ghost/Wood), Grookey, Thwackey, and Rillaboom (Grass/Wood), Hisuian Voltorb and Electrode (Electric/Wood) Moves: Wood Hammer, Branch Poke I even have some new move ideas:

I would probably tie the branching evolutions to specific items. Stuff like Knight's Armor or a Dragon Spear. Existing hold items like Metal Coat and Dragon Fang could work too.

Incidentally, Torterra's second type also made it more susceptible to Water, helping balance that out a bit. I'm mostly looking at each Starter's primary type, though. I'd try to add more "physical" types like Rock and Flying, since Grass, Fire, and Water are all "special" types. Rock and Ground could be combined together in one starter (dual-type Starters aren't completely out of the question as Bulbasaur and Rowlet demonstrate). But it's really the kind of thing one might be expected to play around with from generation to generation. For example, if they do a China-themed region, I could see a quintet of Ground, Steel, Water, Grass, and Fire to reference the Chinese elements (Earth, Metal, Water, Wood, and Fire), though they'd need to update Steel so that it beats Grass (which it should in my opinion anyway, we use metal trimmers, axes, and saws to cut wood and plants all the time). They could also mix Rock with Ground in that scenario, as they together represent the concept of an "Earth" element. I could see a future generation make use of Fire, Ice, and Electric starters, to reference the popularity of that elemental trio in RPGs. They might want to mix in secondary types to help provide some kind of dynamic between the trio, though. Some options that come to mind: Fire/Rock, Ice/Water, and Electric/Flying Fire/Ground, Ice/Water, and Electric/Steel Fire/Dark, Ice/Psychic, Electric/Fighting For another thematic trio, how about a Fighter/Mage/Thief ensemble? Fighting or Steel could play the role of Fighter, Dark is the obvious candidate for the Thief (there's even a Dark-type move called Thief!), and ideally they'd introduce a proper Mage type for the Mage starter (but failing that, they'd probably use Psychic and/or Fairy). Another way they could innovate on Starters is by introducing branching evolution paths. There are numerous configurations they could use, but these would be the four most straightforward choices using the minimal number of branches: This could work with the standard Grass/Fire/Water trio, or could be mixed with other trios like the Fighter/Mage/Thief trio I suggested prior. A really novel twist could be a Normal-type starter that first changes type and then adds a second type; instead of choosing from one of three fixed-type Pokemon, you get one specific starter that can become basically any two types you want. This would be an excellent place to explore the "branching class evolution" concept. But if I may reference lenticular's point for the opposite stance, any change they make needs to be conscious with the idea that "hey, this would be pretty cool and fun", just as with anything they keep the same.

I remember that time when it was rumored that Gen IV was going to have a Fighting/Psychic/Dark starter trio. Then Chesnaught, Delphox, and Greninja happened in Gen VI. I just think Grass/Fire/Water works well because of the association with primary additive colors. Yeah, they could do other trios like Rock/Ground/Ice, but those wouldn't feel as balanced thematically. That said, I do enjoy when they add secondary types into the Starters by their third stage, that can be a good opportunity to explore secondary type cycles. I feel it would be a bad idea to include any types with an immunity to another starter's type in the starter cycle. The "supereffective-resisted-weakness" cycle creates a sense of balance among the Starters, and gives each a fighting chance against the others. Disrupting that balance would convey that one of the Starters is inherently superior to the others. Different numbers of starters is an interesting notion, but I think they want to take care not to overwhelm new players with options. The more options you present the player with from the get-go, the harder it will be to make a decision. 3 offers variety while also giving the devs a chance to show off the concept of type advantages. That said, if you want to raise the number of starting choices, 4-6 could work, but I wouldn't go any higher than that. If you were designing such a cycle, what types would you pick?

That could work for older generations (Hey, folks, remember Pokemon Red and Blue? Well say hello to Pokemon Purple!) but new Generations won't be able to use that binary reference. At least, it won't be as effective. It'd just make fans try to guess what the versions would have been. A regional name is the most straightforward option, but when the remakes come, what then? I liked how the version remakes append a new word onto the original, like Fire Red, Heart Gold, Alpha Sapphire, and so forth. Makes guessing the next pair of remakes fun. What would you add on to Pokemon: Kalos in lieu of, say, Pokemon Radiant X and Pokemon Umbrose Y? At this point, I think the concept of Pokemon versions is so well entrenched in the series' identity that a lot of players would miss it if they tried to remove it. I know I would. It'd be like making a Pokemon game without Grass, Fire, and Water-type starters, or without a villain Team. It'd be like making a new Mega Man game with only six Robot Masters.

I like having different versions, myself, just because I like themes. If versions weren't a thing, what would you call each generation's games?

I am curious to know how they choose the types for the Gyms in each generation. I assume they have a rule that they can't repeat the exact same type combinations between generations, as that would be boring. However, if they implemented my idea of a Gym for each Type in future generations, that'd stop being an issue. The issue then would be coming up with the best possible idea for a given type's Gym, which would entail looking at that gen's main gimmicks and setting theme. For example, maybe one generation has a sport theme to it, so the Ice-type Gym is themed around ice skating. Then the next generation is focused on science, so the Ice Gym has a chemistry theme where you cool liquids. That being said, I wouldn't assume their ninth and tenth best ideas are automatically worse than their first eight. After all, they had to come up with ideas for ten gyms in SWSH, so we're simply getting their ten best ideas. Having more Gyms simply means rising to the challenge of coming up with more good ideas. This all said, I get where you're coming from regarding the emphasis on shared quality experiences. I also understand where SP1M stands in wanting the different versions to stand apart more. The hard truth is, Pokemon has multiple different markets to appeal to, including social fans like you as well as collector fans who want a reason to buy both versions (like SP1M, I'm guessing?). Pokemon's appeal is multifaceted like that.

To me, any version differences should come down to things that would reward you for connecting to the other version, like version-exclusive Pokemon that evolve when traded. Or different evolutions based on which version the Pokemon evolves in.

If they had a completely different set of Gym leaders per version, then you could rep 16 of the 18 types right there. However, they might want two of the Gym leaders to stay the same to leave 4 types for the Elite Four. For example: Gym Leaders Normal Grass Flying/Bug Rock/Ground Water/Ice Fairy/Ghost Poison/Dark Fire/Electric Elite Four Fighting Psychic Steel Dragon Though version-specific Elite Four are an interesting prospect as well. Shoot, why not go one step further beyond and have a different Champion for each version? You've got me thinking about how a future Pokemon game could revolutionize the League model: What if, instead of just eight specific Gyms that you have to clear to enter the Championship, there are more than eight Gyms of which you only need to clear eight in order to challenge the Elite Four? Of course there's a reward for clearing every Gym as well. Of course, Galar didn't have an Elite Four, either; instead, all qualifying participants enter a tournament to decide who is Champion. During that tournament, you can rematch Gym Leaders you'd battled earlier in the game. The participants include you, Hop, Marnie, Bede, Opal, Milo, Nessa, Kabu, Alister/Bea, Melony/Gordy, Pierce, Raihan, So, this new model I'm suggesting could adapt that. Get 8 of the 18 Badges and you can enter the Championship Tournament. No Elite Four, just a tournament including you, your rival, your friendly rival, 18 Gym leaders, the Champion, and plenty of other Trainers besides. For an even number of 1v1 battles, you'd need a 32-Trainer roster like this: That would result in five battles for you, taking the place of the traditional Elite Four and Champion battles from past Generations. Extra Trainers A-J could be anyone: friends in the vein of Wally, Cheryl, Riley, Buck, Mira, Marley, Cheren, Bianca, Shauna, Tierno, Trevor, Lillie, and Marnie, (possibly reformed) Team members, visitors from other regions, etc. If they introduce new Types, they could also add extra Gym Leaders for those types to help fill up that list. If they want to keep the default tournament roster to local participants, they could add a World League Tournament for challengers from other regions, including protagonists, rivals, Gym Leaders, Elite Four, and Champions.

Galar is said to have Gym Leaders for all 18 types, and we see 10 of them.

I think Chill Penguin might be the first boss I ever beat in a video game. He was certainly the first Mega Man boss I ever beat. I also rember fighting the Criosphinx in Chrono Cross. Took forever, but with the yellow plate I was able to defeat it and get the Sunglasses. Given the game's message about respecting life, you'd think they'd give you the better reward for solving its riddles and letting it live, though.

You're right, I forgot that YouTube themselves disabled dislikes in general because they want to play opinion police. I hope YouTube falls and gets replaced by something better. Companies can spend a small portion of their billions to start their own independent video websites. That said, I wouldn't be surprised if Nintendo was among the companies who put YouTube up to the dislike hiding in the first place. Somebody asked them to hide the dislikes.

As if hiding the dislike counts wasn't insecure enough, Nintendo's gone one step further and hidden their comments so now they don't have to worry about their feelings getting hurt by all the fans criticizing their crappy business practices as of late either. Nintendo's pretty much sticking their fingers in their ears and going "La la la NOT LISTENING". As a longtime Nintendo fan, I'm frankly quite embarrassed. Nintendo was the one first party I was still willing to support, but that's going to change if they keep this up. I really hope Furukawa gets ousted and we get someone more of Iwata's caliber in the big seat soon. I was reminded that the hidden dislikes are YouTube's doing, not Nintendo's, and it was pointed out that Nintendo may not have hidden comments on their own videos. This could just be YouTube playing opinion police again.

An interesting theory I've seen pitched around is that the two versions are themed after infrared and ultraviolet light. Another proposed theme is apple and grape. I still suspect that my bro might be on to something with the logo textures.

I remember battling Demise in Skyward Sword and losing the first few times. I finally got fed up with him and started attacking more aggressively, perfect guarding his every attack and rushing in with my own attacks whenever possible. Son of a gun actually knelt at one point. When I delivered the final, lightning-charged blow, it felt so good. I also had a similar experience with Mr. Sandman, except I never lost to him in the actual match. I learned to hook him in the gut whenever possible, and purposefully baited his attack to dodge them. Though not really a boss fight per se, I recently had another "berserk" moment where the green E.M.M.I. got me one times too many, so I just bull rushed through the section firing madly, ran into the E.M.M.I., parried its killing blow, and ran past it to safety. Sometime, fortune really does favor the bold.

Hmm, maybe that's why Scarlet's title has an Arabic look. Dare I hope to see some belly dancers? Particularly as Trainers? I wonder if we'll see any new types?