What new type combination do you most want to see in the inevitable next generation of Pokemon?

Hmm.  Well, I’ve always wished there were a Grass/Dragon Pokémon, double-weakness to Ice be damned (hey, Dragonite and Salamence can live with it), just because I love Grass-types.  Not sure where I would go with this; one thought I had just as I was writing this is that you could combine the whole ‘hoarding’ thing that Western dragons have with the idea of a seed bank – so you have a great big Dragon Pokémon whose life’s work is to collect seeds of different rare plants.  Because he stores them all over his body, random flowers and vines and things tend to burst out from little cracks between his scales.  Maybe give him a spore-breath attack that does damage and has a chance to cause paralysis, sleep or poison.

In relation to the last question I asked you: Are there any dinosaurs or other prehistoric fauna you’d like to see as Pokemon in the future?

Have actually been asked this same question before but there’s no harm in thinking of some more…

My favourite dinosaur as a kid was Parasaurolophus (not exactly a traditional choice, I know, but to each his own), but I’m not immediately sure what you could do with her.  Parasaurolophus’ schtick is her long hollow crest, the function of which is a recurring topic of debate among palaeontologists, though it seems likely that it had something to do with communication, since the cavities in the horn are connected to the dinosaur’s nasal passages and could have produced a sonorous booming call at will.  Sonic powers aren’t exactly unique in Pokémon, though.  Maybe instead you could run with one of the more famous of the older, discredited hypotheses – that the crest was a snorkel – and make it amphibious or aquatic, but not actually a Water-type?  Sort of a Grass/Ground (or maybe just Ground with Water Absorb or something) swampy kind of creature, that submerges itself for hours at a time to hide from predators.

I leave you with a quote from the Wikipedia page on Parasaurolophus:
“One unusual suggestion, made by creationist Duane Gish, is that the crest housed chemical glands that allowed it to throw jets of chemical "fire” at enemies, similar to the modern-day bombardier beetle,“ so in fairness we can probably give the damn thing whatever powers we like.

See also this glorious image from one of Gish’s books directed at a younger audience.  I especially love the way the other dinosaur flails helplessly.

What do you major in and any interest in careers so far?

I’m a postgraduate student in classical studies (i.e. Greek and Roman things), specialising in archaeology – so, basically, the point of that would be to become an archaeologist, ideally with a lecturing position at a university (preferably an English-speaking one).  Jobs like that are in short supply relative to the number of applicants, though.  I might end up as a contract archaeologist, or doing something completely different – a lot of humanities PhDs wind up dying in a gutter because they can’t contemplate the idea of leaving academia, but if you can get over yourself long enough to apply for something else, there are actually a fair few jobs where a degree like that looks pretty impressive – high school teachers get a much higher starting salary if they come to the job with a PhD, for instance (and since I have a science degree as well there are probably several subjects I could teach at a high school level).

I don’t intend to say I know the process of creating new Pokemon goes in the company, but for the sake of argument lets say that the illustrators design their Pokemon family and hand it to the series’ overseer or project leader… Now lets say in a parallel universe, you were the overseer but your views on the Pokemon world are identical to how they are now… In all honesty, are there Gen 1 Pokemon that when brought to you, you would tell the illustrators to change it or scrap it?

Eh… that’s complicated.  A couple of people have asked me similar questions before, and my usual position is as follows: on the one hand, I certainly do think that a number of first-generation Pokémon are, shall we say, not great.  Many of them are quite straightforward adaptations of comparatively unremarkable real animals; I’ve never thought much, for instance, of Rattata and Raticate, Spearow and Fearow, Sandshrew and Sandslash, Krabby and Kingler, Goldeen and Seaking, or Seel and Dewgong (although personally I have an unaccountable soft spot for the last two).  On the other hand, I also maintain that the first-generation Pokémon can’t necessarily be judged by the same standard as their successors, because they were created in a vacuum, as it were, by a comparatively much less experienced design team.  Context matters, and the circumstances and aims of the project would have been very different.  So… I am divided on this question.

Will you be doing what you did for Black and White and determining which Pokemon should exist or not? Because that was a great series and I’d like you to revisit something like that for this generation.

I think I’m supposed to.  Like, I think a lot of people expect me to – doing this for Black and White was the reason I started this blog in the first place, after all, back on Blogspot three years ago.

After I finish the playthrough of X and Y, I want to do a few general entries on stuff like mechanical changes and the introduction of the Fairy-type (probably also a character analysis of whoever the Champion is, to go with that other old series – of course, that would make Iris the only Champion I haven’t done, which would be annoying; maybe I should do an entry for her as well), and I need to do a review of Origins as well, which I think will probably take about two entries.  After that, I suppose reviewing all of the new sixth-generation Pokémon will be a good chunk of the rest of my year.  I’m not sure I want to keep the old “I hereby affirm/deny this Pokémon’s right to exist” catchphrase, because I worry that it tends to detract from the fact that, for almost all Pokémon I review, I have both good and bad things to say about them, but I’ll need to think about that some more.

I’m sorry to ask when you said you were busy, but please take your time. What do you think of Pokemon contests? I, personally, am an avid fan of Contests, and was quite disappointed when Game Freak decided to trash the whole idea after the fourth generation…

Don’t be sorry; I live for you (you, plural – not you personally; don’t take this the wrong way, since I’m sure you’re a lovely person, but we haven’t met or even battled yet and how are you supposed to win over my heart if you haven’t won over my trusty team of sla- er, Pokémon friends?).

Anyway.

The thing about contests is that they’re a side show.  They make for a neat mini-game, and they’re a cool way for Pokémon who aren’t so good at battles to take the spotlight (of course, Pokémon who are also good at battles can kick ass and take names in contests as well, but at least the playing field is more level).  They also emphasise one of the points that the franchise likes to make but spends little time on – partnerships between people and Pokémon take many and diverse forms.  The trouble is that the game doesn’t really give you any reason to take part in contests.  There’s no story, and there are no rewards (no, ribbons are not a reward).  Give contests a storyline, so that I have a reason to care about making my Pokémon pretty, and I’ll jump right back in!  Otherwise… meh?

A youtuber named ProtoMario made a video called “Do Pokeballs brainwash pokemon true.” They talk about pokeballs being tied to the trainer. My problem with this theory is that like Stockholm syndrome, pokemon’s ability to choose isn’t acknowledged. It’s a fallacy in my opinion. Let alone using the anime, which makes it obvious they are not. Game allows some liberties I could understand. But anyway I really wonder if most game theorists honestly think critically reexamine their own theories.

Okay, let’s watch this thing…

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sE6Xs0zWfq0&list=PLRhGZdZiftIdHMA2zWL1DqOSYNO4npnoh&index=65

Okay, that… just…

…most of the evidence this video presents goes against the thesis it’s arguing!  ”Pokémon sometimes disobey their trainers’ orders, therefore captured Pokémon are brainwashed”?  Good grief!  I would go through this point-by-point but I honestly don’t think it’s worth it; they assume the conclusion they’re supposed to be arguing, and then interpret the evidence in the light of what they already believe.  Any child can do that.

I read the worst pokemon list that you wrote… A LONG time ago. Remember Kricketune and Perish Song? Apparently you aren’t the only trainer that hates Kricketune– A trainer in pokemon centers around Sinnoh that you can battle every now and then uses Kricketune as his party– Just Kricketune. As soon as the battle starts, he uses Perish Song, killing his only pokemon in three turns. I’m of the belief that the only reason he battles is to faint his dumb pokemon.

Death is too good for Kricketune and his moustache.

I saw a few recent questions about some of the “god” (well, your thoughts on them), and I thought I’d pick your mind on one of the ones that has baffled me since I first saw it: Giratina. Dialga is time, Palkia is space, and Giratina is… Antimatter? I mean, I know what antimatter is (to an extent, I mean, even scientists are trying to figure that one out), but what exactly is Giratina’s function? What is the “Reverse World”? What do you think would happen if he no longer existed?

The way Giratina is described in Diamond and Pearl always had me thinking of it as a death god figure, kind of like Hades in Greek mythology – dark and terrifying, but not actually evil, and in fact vital to the maintenance of cosmic order.  The way Platinum portrays it (mostly in Cynthia’s speculation) seems to be saying that Giratina basically maintains the Distortion World as a ‘photo negative’ of the real world that can be used to restore any damage done to it on a cosmic level, which is why Cyrus’ attempts to take apart reality in Platinum fail.  If memory serves, the game uses the analogy of DNA, which has a similar system going on (errors can be detected because the two strands no longer match up right).  As for what would happen if the Distortion World no longer existed… well, I think that’s asking the wrong question.  Logically, it would be possible to use the ‘real’ world to repair or rebuild the Distortion World in just the same way.  The only way to destroy one would be to take apart both at the same time (as Cyrus attempts to do).

Basically, Giratina is kind of important for maintaining the stability of reality, as the caretaker of the Distortion World.  The Pokédex says that it was “banished for its violence” but I actually don’t think that’s true, because Arceus (presumably) has given it a vital role in the cosmology of the Pokémon universe.  Of course, as frightening as Giratina is, it makes sense that humans who encountered it might get the wrong idea about its nature and powers, hence the whole ‘death god’ thing.