It is currently Wed Aug 27, 2014 8:30 pm



Reply to topic  [ 6 posts ] 
 Digimon 
Author Message
Lite Four
Lite Four
User avatar

Joined: Sun May 29, 2005 6:21 pm
Posts: 3471
In my opinion Bisharp looks exactly like a Digimon, can't you see where I'm coming from here?!

No, this thread isn't about Digimon or comparing it to Pokemon. It's about what I've read in our old "talkback" comments on the main site. I remember when Diamond & Pearl were about to come out, so many people thought it was appropriate to accuse Gamefreak of making new Pokemon resemble Digimon. I can't really figure this out. Why does Rufflet look like a Digimon? Or Bisharp? Or Monferno?

I have thought about it, long and hard. Pokemon is "Pocket Monsters" and Digimon is "Digital Monsters." So what is the criteria for each franchise? If a Pokemon is any bigger than three inches is it considered a Digimon because it can't fit in your pocket? Well, what if the Pokemon are digital? Like what if they're in a video game, are they Digimon now? Lets look at some examples. I don't really have anything to say, so
Image

Hawkmon, Yolei's Digimon.

Image

Rufflet, the normal/flying pre evolution of Braviary.

Please explain this to me, I'd love to know where so many fans get this idea.

_________________
Image


Wed Jun 01, 2011 11:05 am
Profile WWW
THE POWER IS ON!
User avatar

Joined: Wed Aug 04, 2004 3:29 am
Posts: 1556
Location: Purple Ranger
My honest opinion regarding why Pokemon fans keep repeating this (even though I mostly DISAGREE with it) is due to the art style. Kanto and Johto had designs that were very simple and more natural, and the vast majority of them were created by Satoshi Tajiri and Ken Sugimori, so they all seem stylistically similar in their simplicity. Digimon has a lot more designs that are wacky, colorful, abstract and combine multiple animals into one monster with lots of little design frills.

Well, after Johto, a LOT more people contributed to the design process for Pokemon games, leading to many more stylized designs in the last three games that are more on par with Digimon's. I can sort of see why, say, Blaziken was accused of "looking like a Digimon" when it was first revealed- stylistically, it doesn't look too similar to the Pokemon from Kanto and Johto. But Pokemon fans have really run the idea into the ground over the past decade with every new Pokemon apparently looking like a Digimon.

_________________


Wed Jun 01, 2011 11:10 am
Profile
Pokemon Master
Pokemon Master
User avatar

Joined: Mon May 03, 2010 5:43 pm
Posts: 1312
To me, the biggest difference between Pokemon and Digimon (as far as I can remember from the shows) is that Digimon talk, have motives, and can generally think for themselves. In contrast, Pokemon (or most of them) seem like they're supposed to be more of an equivalent of animals. Additionally, Digimon aren't supposed to exist in the same world as humans; in the show, it was always one or the other crossing over to meet each other, whereas in Pokemon, Pokemon and humans have coexisted for a long time.

Art-wise, I see a lot more two-legged Digimon than four-legged. Even Digimon like Guilmon walk on two legs, despite being based on a dinosaur or something. So, if a Pokemon is bipedal and looks like it's supposed to resemble something that isn't, maybe it's more likely to be called Digimon-like.

But Frost's explanation is better at explaining why fans compare the two constantly.

_________________
Image


Last edited by rex09 on Wed Jun 01, 2011 11:29 am, edited 1 time in total.



Wed Jun 01, 2011 11:18 am
Profile
Lite Four
Lite Four
User avatar

Joined: Sun May 29, 2005 6:21 pm
Posts: 3471
I like your explanation, it was really well thought out and I can see what you mean after comparing Pokemon like Lanturn and Whiscash. It's kinda sad that people can't accept evolution of art style without having to make stupid comparisons.

I want to hear from our members though, the ones who actually believed Pokemon like Dialga and Monferno were Digimon-like when Diamond & Pearl info was being reported. What other Pokemon did you compare to Digimon and why?

_________________
Image


Wed Jun 01, 2011 11:21 am
Profile WWW
Gym Leader
Gym Leader
User avatar

Joined: Thu Feb 17, 2005 11:04 am
Posts: 1320
Location: Sky Tower
Frost wrote:
My honest opinion regarding why Pokemon fans keep repeating this (even though I mostly DISAGREE with it) is due to the art style. Kanto and Johto had designs that were very simple and more natural, and the vast majority of them were created by Satoshi Tajiri and Ken Sugimori, so they all seem stylistically similar in their simplicity. Digimon has a lot more designs that are wacky, colorful, abstract and combine multiple animals into one monster with lots of little design frills.

Well, after Johto, a LOT more people contributed to the design process for Pokemon games, leading to many more stylized designs in the last three games that are more on par with Digimon's. I can sort of see why, say, Blaziken was accused of "looking like a Digimon" when it was first revealed- stylistically, it doesn't look too similar to the Pokemon from Kanto and Johto. But Pokemon fans have really run the idea into the ground over the past decade with every new Pokemon apparently looking like a Digimon.


rex09 wrote:
To me, the biggest difference between Pokemon and Digimon (as far as I can remember from the shows) is that Digimon talk, have motives, and can generally think for themselves. In contrast, Pokemon (or most of them) seem like they're supposed to be more of an equivalent of animals. Additionally, Digimon aren't supposed to exist in the same world as humans; in the show, it was always one or the other crossing over to meet each other, whereas in Pokemon, Pokemon and humans have coexisted for a long time.


I have to agree with both Frost and rex09. The natural vs material and simple vs complex arguments are what essentially tell the two apart.

The first Pokemon that came out looked a lot more natural and simple than the detailed toys we see now. Still, the Pokestyle seems to be settling in; at first, if a Pokemon had way too many "appendages" or had a very complex design, I'd call it a "Digimon" or "Yu-Gi-Oh!mon" for fun. Nowadays, though, either I'm getting used to these new Pokemon or they are becoming stylistically similar to each other, because despite their biological gadgets and whatnot, I just can't compare them to Digimon.

Digimon have way too many details and way too many clothing and weapons, or are just too abstract, as Frost pointed out. While some Pokemon are also like that (or try to be like that), the Sugimori style makes it seem like these external things are parts of their bodies, like they are naturally there, instead of feeling like they were "equipped" with those things, like some Digimon (especially their final forms) do. Also, Digimon, even the cutest/smallest ones, have a heck of a brute/realistic/actually monstrous design, while Pokemon, even the weirdest/most brutal ones, feel adorable, like you can have them as plushies to sleep with. For example, I'd totally own a pet Cobalion, but would never have an Agumon near me.

While some Digimon may look like a mess of a design, and that there are over a thousand of them, this transitioning of style never happened, like it did with Pokemon. Digimon first appeared heavily accessorized/crazy, and they still are heavily accessorized/crazy. It was different with the Pokemon team, who are, apparently, only now coming to terms with how they want their monsters to look: toyish.

Nowadays, when I feel a Pokemon just doesn't seem like it fits in (despite Sugimori's best attempts at making it so, with his infamous artwork), I don't call it a Digimon; I just call it weird, like Bisharp (actually, I call Bisharp "Jason"). I guess not even the best art style can save an awkward base design.

_________________
Image


Sun Jun 19, 2011 12:21 pm
Profile
Dragon Tamer
Dragon Tamer
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jul 30, 2010 6:36 am
Posts: 124
Location: Indonesia (the biggest archipelago)
Quote:
Digimon have way too many details and way too many clothing and weapons, or are just too abstract, as Frost pointed out. While some Pokemon are also like that (or try to be like that), the Sugimori style makes it seem like these external things are parts of their bodies, like they are naturally there, instead of feeling like they were "equipped" with those things, like some Digimon (especially their final forms) do. Also, Digimon, even the cutest/smallest ones, have a heck of a brute/realistic/actually monstrous design, while Pokemon, even the weirdest/most brutal ones, feel adorable, like you can have them as plushies to sleep with. For example, I'd totally own a pet Cobalion, but would never have an Agumon near me.


This^
I absolutely agree with that one.
Pokemon is a real life animal with a bit tweaks and looks cuter then the real life counterpart, when Digimon, filled with armors, weapons and such things, make them look messy(although it's cool xD).

Pokemon also can be make a cuter 'style', like I saw a Reshiram and Zekrom plushie, looks much cuter, not like their real 'faces'. When digimon... I can only get along with very very cute one, like Botamon.

And, the most important part, Pokemon and humans were already get along since the 'world' made, when Digimon only interacted with 'the chosen' kids.
And Digimon has very complicated evolutionary lines, from like
Hawkmon -> Aquilamon
Hawkmon -> Evolving via many Digi-Eggs
And like....
Digimon A evolves to Digimon B, and can evolves to Digimon C, and both B and C can evolves further into the same digimon, Digimon D. So like that.

_________________
----------------------------------------------------


Mon Jun 27, 2011 9:16 pm
Profile
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Reply to topic   [ 6 posts ] 

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
Designed by STSoftware for PTF.