Several different Gods have already tried messing with Kratos head. I've pointed that out in several other threads. It doesn't work well on him if at all. It just pisses him off more. A featless pokemon like Beeyehem aint gonna cut it.
Kratos pimp smacks Regigigas into the rest of his team and they go down like pins to a bowling ball. Tremendous stomp. WTF is wrong with you moo.
Originally posted by TheAuraAngel
In Kingdom Hearts, Jiminy Cricket keeps a journal of all the incidents in the game complete with character bios. Such bios includes the cartoons or movies that the Disney characters appeared in. I don't ask the game to prove that Aladdin appeared in a Disney film made in 1992 but the journal is still correct even if the game doesn't provide proof. Or when the journal says that I killed half of Organization XIII before the start of the series. I don't remember that in the first game but I still take it for a fact and it is a fact.Case in point, there is no reason to question the Pokedex unless you simply do not want to believe that what it says is true. Which is the same case with Jiminy's journal. Both channel the words of god and are expected to be taken at face value without question. Ones that make a fallacy are the only exceptions and Machamps does not.
Oh and as far as using the anime goes:
1. Moo already dismissed it in the OP.
2. In the Video Games Versus forum, why would we care about the anime?
3. The anime contradicts itself a hell of a lot more than the games could ever. It is actually a very unreliable source.
What you are describing me are events that occured in past stances, and at some point in the story. I see no reason to question that. But you are in fact comparing a journal of past events to something that does not inform about any events at all. And characters bios. The Pokedex never tells you about the story of Ash Ketchum, for instance. The Pokedex has nothing of this. Just statements about characteristics that the Pokemons may possess, but they aren't written accurately, nor they are backed up with anything. Machamp tossing people over the horizon is a no limits fallacy because it insinuates that such can happen without limits. Moving mountains is vague/unrelated and throwing 100 punches in a second can be hyperbole. It's the same as saying: ''Hey, dude! That guy is so strong that can make you fly with a punch!''.
As for the Anime I know it's banned in this section of the forum. I never said it wasn't contradictory, every story has inconsistencies to some degree. But my point is that we can see what Pokemons are capable of, how they performs in battles, how they move, etc. It is just an example of: Vague statements will never equal visuals. That's it.
Originally posted by GrieverSquall
What you are describing me are events that occured in past stances, and at some point in the story. I see no reason to question that. But you are in fact comparing a journal of past events to something that does not inform about any events at all. And characters bios. The Pokedex never tells you about the story of Ash Ketchum, for instance. The Pokedex has nothing of this. Just statements about characteristics that the Pokemons may possess, but they aren't written accurately, nor they are backed up with anything. Machamp tossing people over the horizon is a no limits fallacy because it insinuates that such can happen without limits. Moving mountains is vague/unrelated and throwing 100 punches in a second can be hyperbole. It's the same as saying: ''Hey, dude! That guy is so strong that can make you fly with a punch!''.As for the Anime I know it's banned in this section of the forum. I never said it wasn't contradictory, every story has inconsistencies to some degree. But my point is that we can see what Pokemons are capable of, how they performs in battles, how they move, etc. It is just an example of: Vague statements will never equal visuals. That's it.
That is in part due to the fundamental difference between a Journal and a scientific encyclopedia. The Pokedex records information based on tests that presumably happened offscreen. It is stupid but hey, I didn't make the game. And yeah, the games probably wouldn't talk about Ash, considering they were made before Ash but I digress.
Like I said, the only reason anyone should not use the Pokedex is when it makes a flawed statement like Charizard being able to melt anything. Otherwise, the only reason to question it is because you don't want to believe it. What anyone wants to believe is none of my concerns. Oh and all of you need to stop talking about hyperbole. It really amounts to "Shit, I don't want to accept that feat so I'm gonna call hyperbole. Never mind the fact that I've defended several characters who have done equally insane shit in their own games."
Which, this obviously doesn't apply to just you Griever, pretty much everyone on here. Just expressing meh feelings is all.
As far as the anime goes, it is contradictory of itself far too much for me to ever consider it reliable. 3D Pokemon games like Stadium are actually more reliable than that. It is worth noting that the Pokedex is considered more canon than any other source that isn't Word of God. Obvious reasons have already been explained.
Originally posted by TheAuraAngel
That is in part due to the fundamental difference between a Journal and a scientific encyclopedia. The Pokedex records information based on tests that presumably happened offscreen. It is stupid but hey, I didn't make the game. And yeah, the games probably wouldn't talk about Ash, considering they were made before Ash but I digress.Like I said, the only reason anyone should not use the Pokedex is when it makes a flawed statement like Charizard being able to melt anything. Otherwise, the only reason to question it is because you don't want to believe it. What anyone wants to believe is none of my concerns. Oh and all of you need to stop talking about hyperbole. It really amounts to "Shit, I don't want to accept that feat so I'm gonna call hyperbole. Never mind the fact that I've defended several characters who have done equally insane shit in their own games."
Which, this obviously doesn't apply to just you Griever, pretty much everyone on here. Just expressing meh feelings is all.
As far as the anime goes, it is contradictory of itself far too much for me to ever consider it reliable. 3D Pokemon games like Stadium are actually more reliable than that. It is worth noting that the Pokedex is considered more canon than any other source that isn't Word of God. Obvious reasons have already been explained.
You're making a bunch of assumptions here. From where did you get the idea that the Pokedex possess information based on tests and things that happened off-screen? You want to pass an ''off-screen'' event as evidence, but that's nothing more than just a mere ''maybe''. And there are games that were made after Ash, I played Platinum. And yeah, Charizard can melt anything and Machamp can toss anyone, right? It's the same, dude. Both has no limit. It's not like I don't want to ''believe'' it, the issue are the content of the statements. Let's be honest here, you can't back up most of the things what the Pokedex says, unless using something from the Anime. Admit it. And just because the games were made before the Anime doesn't mean the Anime is not a reliable source. You're misinterpreting things here. The Anime also has a Pokedex, a more reliable one if you ask me.
And yeah, you're right, I don't want to accept the ''feat''. But I gave enough reasons to not do so. I respect your opinion but we cannot debate about something we don't even see. Again, Burning thought gave more than good reasons already. Vague statements will never equal visuals.
Also your: ''It's either that or the Pokedex is magically able to scan stuff and make statements without actually testing anything.'' It's a false dichotomy. You're ignoring other available options.
Which is possible, they have access to it afterall and it updates based on what they use it for:
In order to accomplish Professor Oak's goal of a complete database of information on every Pokémon, the Pokédex is designed to find and record data on each Pokémon the trainer meets. Pokémon are added to the Pokédex simply by encountering them in battle (or a few special exceptions in Gen IV, such as seeing a picture), but detailed entries are not recorded until the player catches the Pokémon or acquires it in a trade
It records data on pokemon a trainer meets. How it does this seems ambigious, and what it bases it on we dont know. The actual source is different as well. Seems to me, that based on the evidence (the fact theres folk lore included) is that it simply uses belief as a source of its evidence.
I speculate it has some connection to something alike to the internet and if you find a creature that matches what someone else believes they have seen, or what they have claimed from it is added to the dex regardless of whether it may be correct or not, hence folklore/hyperbole. I have yet to see anything of real tests, and factual lore seems to be common sense rather than calculation.
To conclude, I think its more than fair to point out the Pokedex is too ambigious of a source to use for evidence. Its almost like an in-game wikipedia, it being in-game making it even worse than wikipedia itself because at least we "know" wikipedia has some standards and control in what is put on it.
Originally posted by Nephthys
Or the kids write it.Why would the professors want you to record all the pokemon if the entries already exist? And if they don't exist before you record their data, how come their instantly available? And if it just scans them, then why is there so much folk lore in the entires?
You're asking me how the Pokedex works when I've already made it clear that I don't know nor do I actually care. I have two suggestions and your free to take the pick between the two.
Originally posted by GrieverSquall
You're making a bunch of assumptions here. From where did you get the idea that the Pokedex possess information based on tests and things that happened off-screen? You want to pass an ''off-screen'' event as evidence, but that's nothing more than just a mere ''maybe''. And there are games that were made after Ash, I played Platinum. And yeah, Charizard can melt anything and Machamp can toss anyone, right? It's the same, dude. Both has no limit. It's not like I don't want to ''believe'' it, the issue are the content of the statements. Let's be honest here, you can't back up most of the things what the Pokedex says, unless using something from the Anime. Admit it. And just because the games were made before the Anime doesn't mean the Anime is not a reliable source. You're misinterpreting things here. The Anime also has a Pokedex, a more reliable one if you ask me.And yeah, you're right, I don't want to accept the ''feat''. But I gave enough reasons to not do so. I respect your opinion but we cannot debate about something we don't even see. Again, Burning thought gave more than good reasons already. Vague statements will never equal visuals.
Also your: ''It's either that or the Pokedex is magically able to scan stuff and make statements without actually testing anything.'' It's a false dichotomy. You're ignoring other available options.
Because that explanation makes the most sense in context. And I promise you, Machamp can toss any of the humans in the Pokemon universe over the horizon. That isn't a fallacy, it is fact. And no, you're right. I can't prove anything in the Pokedex. I guess it's just absolutely ****ing ridiculous of me to think that something in the ****ing game knows what the **** it's talking about concerning creatures within that ****ing game. And no, the anime is not reliable. See Thunder Armor to know exactly what I mean.
And if you have alternatives to how the Pokedex works, I'm all ears.
Originally posted by TheAuraAngel
Because that explanation makes the most sense in context. And I promise you, Machamp can toss any of the humans in the Pokemon universe over the horizon. That isn't a fallacy, it is fact. And no, you're right. I can't prove anything in the Pokedex. [b]I guess it's just absolutely ****ing ridiculous of me to think that something in the ****ing game knows what the **** it's talking about concerning creatures within that ****ing game. And no, the anime is not reliable. See Thunder Armor to know exactly what I mean.And if you have alternatives to how the Pokedex works, I'm all ears. [/B]
I suggest you take a step back and relax, swearing will not convince them of your point. However, something does not have undeniable knowledge on something just because its in the game. Many characters can be fallible, therefore so can machines, objects and data unless it is proven they are undeniable. When you have no limit fallacies and basic hyperbole added in said data, its clear the Pokedex is not some sort of advanced scientific compendium that only speaks fact.
Nobody needs an alternative, they simply need a solid fact on how it works, or more importantly their opposition needs one to convince them of how it works.
however I do agree with:
Originally posted by RE: Blaxican
This is the video game section, not the anime section. The video games came before the anime. The video games are primary canon and the anime is secondary. The anime is not actually canon at all.Why has the discussion gone beyond this point?
Because in Games vs until the thread starter says otherwise only the game itself is canon and only the games evidence is relevent.
Here is my question: Why have pokedex entries if they are unrelaible?
The 'dex is there to give us information on the otherwise featless 'mons. Does it make sense? No, but the entire basis of pokemon really doesn't make sense. Really the 'dex is the only source of information we have on pokemon and people want to throw it out! Makes no sense.
To give a general idea on what a pokemon is. If I opened a survivial book and it has a picture of a bear and says "bears eat everything, beware" then I went on some forum and claimed a bear could eat steel or adamantium, I would be in error. Its the sort of general claim that puts its point across but does not have to be taken literally. That is an extreme example but any error can put scrutiny on what the dex says. Also, the Dex changes every version does it not? or every couple of versions, it does not always have the same entry? If so then a more recent version may have ret-conned previous information, because if its not the latest claim I would argue a creature being able to toss a mountain should certain always have this statement in the pokedex if its to be taken seriously.
If its the only source then that does not mean it can be used based on that solely, its not likely to convince anyone who wants cold hard facts/evidence.