Why aren't all pokemon equally competitively viable? Why did Game Freak give such shit stats to some fully evolved pokemon and pokemon without evolutions?
Now I get that even if they all had good stats, there would still be tiers of how strong each pokemon is and overall the fundamental format of the pokemon metagame wouldn't change that much, my question is why Game Freak intentionally designed some pokemon to be simply outclassed garbage like Farfetchd.
>>26264536
Pokémon wasn't originally designed to be a competitive game series. The whole point of Pokémon is that, like in the real world, some creatures are far stronger than others. If every Pokémon was equally strong, it would ruin the immersion.
Pokemon are designed for in-game purposes. Early game bugs are supposed to be quick boosts that are just as quickly replaced. Pseudos are supposed to be endgame bosses as well as rewards for your perseverance. Farfetch'd is a joke Pokemon. And so on.
did you just forget how RPG progression works?
why should a Pokemon you can get near the start of the game be as good as something you can use at the end of the game?
>>26264536
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e31OSVZF77w
>in nature, all animals are equally strong, there are no animals at the top of the food chain
The original series isn't a fighting game. Go back to Pokken.
>>26264657
>extra credits
stop right there friend
>>26264732
I didn't know there was a problem with this one specific web show that almost never gets referenced on 4chan at all in any sort of positive or negative light and has an episode that neatly explains away OP's question.
I don't mean to seem like a child who hasn't mastered the ability to feed itself, but would you mind explaining what the problem is with this single web series?
>>26264536
I don't know and Pokémon is not a competitive game.
It's about collecting supernatural creatures known as Pokémon.
>>26264536
>"Everything HAS to be competitvely viable!"
>"There aren't supposed to be any pokemon that can be used for other types of fun!"
