>Gen 6/6.5 vs Gen 7 arguments are still going on
Can we seriously stop this?
We all know in the deepest part of our brain that this really is is Gen 7, right?
I mean, there's little to no evidence supporting Sun and Moon being Gen 6 or Gen 6.5, so is this all just shitposters?
Because I can't begin to grasp how retarded someone would have to be to honestly think this isn't Gen 7.
C'mon, let's stop this pointless bickering and talk about what you want the games to be like instead of complaining about what Generation it is.
I don't get the concept of a half generation to be honest
There's barely any evidence supporting either claim at this point, even though it's most likely Gen 7.
There's no way to know for sure until Gamefreak outright say something, or releases details of the game.
>>25572246
Because of people that were hoping for Pokemon Z are in denial
![QrzSuLN[1].png](https://i.imgur.com/9j7rEfc.png "QrzSuLN[1].png")
>>25572224
>I mean, there's little to no evidence supporting Sun and Moon being Gen 6 or Gen 6.5,
>>25572224
Kirlia's head thing isn't even hair, how can an eye stick through it, you don't even have the "it's bangs!" excuse.
>>25572246
If Sun and Moon were set in another part of Kalos, like BW2 started in an alternate Unova city, started you off with Chespin/Froakie/Fennekin, and were still on the 3DS, I could see it being called half a generation. Most of those things are just features of BW2, which people call Gen 5.5.
If Magearna and the hummingbird are just South Kalos Pokemon in a new Kalos game, why call it Gen 7?
>>25572295
>Baseless assumptions, and shit that could have just been scrapped content
Ok.
>>25572320
With a name like "sun and moon" anyone would think it's a gen 7 game and not a gen 6 or 6.5 game
>>25572295
I still don't like the "only 70 new Pokemon" thing as any kind of point. It's specifically 72 new Pokemon because there are 28 new megas. Exactly 100, just like Gen 2. GF probably counts Megas as new Pokemon.
>>25572320
I don't think people call BW2 Gen 5.5
Just sequels.
If S/M were to be X/Y sequels with new Pokemon, they'd just be sequels with new Pokemon, not half a gen.
>>25572331
And yet Gen 7 fags are the ones assuming that the content is scrapped just because it fits neatly into their little headcanon.
Both sides are making "baseless assumptions" if we're following your logic.
>>25572353
>GF probably counts Megas as new Pokemon.
And yet Gen 7 fags argue Sun/Moon is a new generation just because it has new Pokemon. And ORAS has new megas, which some people think should count as new Pokemon. So is ORAS gen 7?
>>25572358
Almost every game in the series has some sort of scrapped content.
The sole reason of these games being called "Sun and Moon" means they're a next generation.
There's not saying this Gen won't take things from Gen 6 either, but that's doesn't mean it won't be a new Gen.
>>25572352
GF's been on the course of breaking norms ever since BW. Remember Grey? Or the remakes in the Gen 5 engine?
We have literally no information, which is what's making this so annoying. Just names barely means anything until we actually have information. What if the starters were actually the Gen 6 ones and the region was just Kalos? Would you call that Gen 7?
>>25572399
>Almost every game in the series has some sort of scrapped content.
A very small amount of scrapped content that doesn't compare to a Pokemon with different stats and a signature move, two signature moves, and item given to the player.
There is more used content than unused content. So I'd rather assume the content is going to be used. It's as simple as that.
>>25572357
People call BW2 Gen 5.5/5.2 all the time since they can't call them third versions anymore.
>If S/M were to be X/Y sequels with new Pokemon, they'd just be sequels with new Pokemon, not half a gen.
In other words, not Gen 7. Just a half step between Gen 6 and 7. That's what Gen 6.5 fags adopted as calling this phenomenon if they're just sequels with new Pokemon rather than an entirely new game.
>>25572431
It could still be used in Gen 7, nothing says it has to be Gen 6 for those moves and items to be used.
X/Y had no third version or sequels. Which is weird because that's the best way to fix things if there are problems, not just rush to the next gen.
>>25572376
Mega pokemon aren't new pokemon.. if they were, they'd have their own pokedex number... it's just a new form a pokemon takes during battle... nothing more, nothing less...
Jfc people here are retarded as fuck.. so desperate for 6.5 that it literally makes them retarded...
>>25572481
>nothing says it has to be Gen 6 for those moves and items to be used.
The fact that they put it in the fucking games in the first place. They don't waste time making animations, stats, models, moves for shit that isn't going to be used. They plan it out ahead of time. And very rarely is this content unused.
>>25572542
Read the post I was replying to.
>Gen 7 Deniers
Don't worry, next month we'll get info about SM, surely then 6.5fags will be convinced they were wrong.
>>25572568
So, like, they could just put it in the next game?
Again, nothing says they can't just take that content and put it into Gen 7, so you're not really disproving my point.
>>25572416
If the game was a completely different story with an entirely new roster of Pokemon, as well as a region that WASN'T present within the previous games if it is indeed 'Southern Kalos'? Not to mention new box legendaries and everything? Potentially even a few new/modified mechanics or changes in various things?
Yes, yes one could call it a new generation even if they did, for some odd reason, used the same starters.
>>25572621
You forgot "incompatibility with XY/ORAS". That's the most important one.
>>25572620
>So, like, they could just put it in the next game?
If they wanted to do that they wouldn't waste time developing it for XYORAS.
>Again, nothing says they can't just take that content and put it into Gen 7
Again, they very rarely make content that goes unused, so you're not really disproving my point.
