Talk:Diamond, Pearl and what beyond?: Difference between revisions

Talk:Diamond, Pearl and what beyond? (view source)

Revision as of 15:21, 3 June 2007

372 bytes added , 3 June 2007

no edit summary

Superdoogles

1

edit

Revision as of 21:52, 26 May 2007 (view source) Vash Aurion (talk \| contribs) No edit summary ← Older edit		Revision as of 15:21, 3 June 2007 (view source) Superdoogles (talk \| contribs) No edit summary Newer edit →
Line 4:		Line 4:

	Diamond and Pearl does seem like an appropriate end to the main series, mostly due to the presence of Arceus. The legendaries have traditionally built up and up and up, but there isn't a real way to build past the Pokemon equivalent of god. That said, Pokemon is such a powerful franchise that it would be ridiculous for Nintendo to not continue it. It'll be interesting to see what happens.--[[User:Vash Aurion\|Vash Aurion]] 21:52, 26 May 2007 (UTC)		Diamond and Pearl does seem like an appropriate end to the main series, mostly due to the presence of Arceus. The legendaries have traditionally built up and up and up, but there isn't a real way to build past the Pokemon equivalent of god. That said, Pokemon is such a powerful franchise that it would be ridiculous for Nintendo to not continue it. It'll be interesting to see what happens.--[[User:Vash Aurion\|Vash Aurion]] 21:52, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

			Although there are still a few Pokemon I'd like to see (Steel Eevee, some other evolutions) they really can't keep going without watering it down. I ''really'' want a GSC remake and I'd love a sequel to the TCG video game based around the EX series. And like the guy above said, you can't really top Pokegod. - [[User:Superdoogles\|Superdoogles]] 15:21, 3 June 2007 (UTC)