Should there be more cross-gen evolutions or baby pokemon in gen 7?
probably not
maybe mega
>more baby pokemon
Get that crap out of my sight.
>>25770249
I hope gen7 will have at least 3 of every evolution gimmick.
>Cross-gen evo
Maybe, some are good, and some mons could use them. It'll never happen because of eviolite but heh.
>Baby pokémon
HELL NO
>>25770249
>more baby pokemon to make sense of some lines (Tropius, Stantler and Tauros from eggs? really?)
>more cross-gen evos to boost older pokemon
>>25770249
Yes. Objectively speaking, there have been more good cross-gen evolutions than bad (or at least reviled) ones. Even if you dislike a cross-gen evolution for "ruining" your bro, that still opens up Eviolite usage, so it's not a total loss. This is my perspective (note: I'm not making any personal judgments on any of these Pokemon, this is just what I've seen):
Typically Well-Liked, or at least Inoffensive:
>Crobat
>Bellossom
>Politoed
>Slowking
>Steelix
>Hitmontop
>Kingdra
>Scizor
>Blissey
>Espeon, Umbreon, Leafeon, Glaceon, Sylveon
>Porygon2, Porygon Z
>Togekiss
>Yanmega
>Gliscor
>Weavile
>Mamoswine
>Roserade
>Froslass
Somewhat Contentious:
>Tangrowth
>Honchkrow
>Mismagius
>Gallade
>Dusknoir
>Magnezone
>Electivire
Often Reviled:
>Lickilicky
>Rhyperior
>Magmortar
>Ambipom
>Probopass
Baby Pokemon, on the other hand, can fuck right off. The only one that was even really necessary was Tyrogue so that the three-way evolution between the Hitmons could be facilitated.
>Baby pokemon
Only if what they are there for is overhauled. Let them learn egg and/or tutor moves in the baby form or something to make them worthwhile.
>Cross Gen
Yes please. Especially if it means more than just Eevee. Some pokemon need it. I would be happy with a few new branched evolutions off existing stages too, to be honest.
>>25770249
>evolutions
yes
>baby pokemon
no
3 of my top 6 mons are crossgen evos, so I can imagine there's more potential there
baby Pokemon are literally nothing but an extra breeding step, so fuck that. Riolu is cute, though
>>25770249
>Should there be more cross-gen evolutions
Should there be? Yes but there won't be. Thanks Mega cancer
>babby
no
>>25770249
Both. And baby pokemon are fine as long as their existance is justified or they are well implemented / designed.
>More Baby Pokemon
Yes to both. The only problem with babymons is that you have to evolve them before you can use them for breeding. /vp/ just hates anything that isn't great for competitive even thought a lot of people on here will either play showdown, then bitch about Smogon's rules and bans or they'll inject what they use so they don't have to worry about evolving babymons to breed them anyway.
>>25771436
>The only problem with babymons is that you have to evolve them before you can use them for breeding
No the biggest problem is that they're ultimately pointless
If you could catch more of them in the wild it would make more sense. Lots of them would be good early route mons that could be made available far earlier than their evolved form would usually be.
>>25770249
>More Baby Pokémon
Stop
There's nothing wrong with pre-evolutions, there is something wrong with creating Pokémon that are intentionally gimped and making the player jump through hoops to both acquire and make them useful.
Many single or dual-stage Pokémon that are already powerful (that is to say, not needing a proper evolution) such as Tauros, Miltank, Heracross, and Pinsir, would be easier to use in-game by having a lesser version that the player can obtain earlier in gameplay.
Of course, the issue with Baby Pokémon in gameplay is that they generally have shitty gimmick evolutions and are weak as shit until they evolve. This creates situations where the player can be stuck with a useless party member for much longer than they should be, or situations where the player can get a much more powerful Pokémon than the should at some time in the game. The worst example of this was in BW2 where it's possible with a little effort to get a Lucario before your first badge, due to Riolu evolving based on Friendship.
tl;dr Evolutions should be streamlined but Baby Pokémon as a concept should be dropped entirely
>>25770249
>Should there be more cross-gen evolutions or baby pokemon in gen 7?
Should be but I don't know, if there will be any.
