1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.
  2. Welcome to Lake Valor!
    Catch, train, and evolve Pokémon while you explore our community. Make friends, and grow your collection.

    Login or Sign Up

The True Number of Pokémon

Discussion in 'Pokémon General' started by phineas81707, Jan 6, 2016.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. phineas81707

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2014
    Posts:
    141
    PokéPoints:
    ₽54.8
    So, while sitting around writing my stories, I realised something. Most of the time, when we talk about Pokémon, we say that there are 721 of them (or 649, or 493, or however many there were at the time). But is that number really accurate? Do we really need to count the entire Bulbasaur line as 3 Pokémon, or would it be more accurate to count them as 1? I decided to do so (dealing with branched evolutions by counting both, such as counting both Poliwrath and Politoed), and eventually arrived at a rather surprising figure.

    384.

    Unless I made an error in my calculations, there are less fully-distinct Pokémon than there were Pokémon at all as of Generation III. Granted, this is still kind of a big number, but when you put it in perspective... there are quite a lot of Pokémon that are related directly through evolution. Heck, this number even includes all eight Eeveelutions as eight entries, rather than one... this is definitely an overestimation on the number of wholly distinct Pokémon out there.

    So what are your reactions? Surprised? I sure was.
     
  2. ✯Ho-OhLugia✯

    ✯Ho-OhLugia✯ Pokemon Masters

    Joined:
    Dec 12, 2014
    Posts:
    1,097
    PokéPoints:
    ₽132.0
    Wow, not including evolutions, that really is a low number if you compare it with the actual Pokédex number! But speaking of which, I assume that the Pokémon franchise has more different kinds of creatures than any other game you will find; hundreds being released at the same time. However, there probably are even MORE Pokémon, just as there are animals, that have not been mentioned in the games but are actually there in the Pokémon World!
     
    Stop hovering to collapse... Click to collapse... Hover to expand... Click to expand...
  3. phineas81707

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2014
    Posts:
    141
    PokéPoints:
    ₽54.8
    Yeah... Looking at the number with the Pokédex number in mind, I found it stupidly small. And then I realised that Pokémon's one of the more ambitious games of it's type, and not many other Mons series really stretch to the hundreds that Pokémon has, even when evolutions are considered.

    I'm hoping that Pokémon gets to continue. I've been having odd, indescribable vibes that Gen VI might be the last, but I'm hoping I'm wrong about that one. At least so we can potentially see dolphin and true wolf Pokémon.
     
  4. Absolute Zero

    Absolute Zero The second seal

    Jeff
    (Spinarak)
    Level 19
    Joined:
    Mar 17, 2015
    Posts:
    2,184
    PokéPoints:
    ₽2,869.8
    I was about to ask that Eevee situation, whether or not you counted branch evos. Even then, there are other situations like Nidoran male and female, and potentially even Tauros and Miltank are maybe the same species other than a larger gender difference than most. And then if you extend it to Kangaskhan and Marowak too... it's going to be a high number even if you trim it down with every conceivable looseness of the term "Pokémon species" too.

    The number seems high to me, but then if you consider there's probably an average of 2 stages per evo family (including when you balance out the 8-stage Eevees and other 3+ species groups with all the 1-stage legendaries), the upper 300 range sounds right.

    And @[member="phineas81707"] , I doubt this is the final generation. They're making too much money off Pokémon to stop any time soon, and they're still starting things like Pokken and Pokémon Go. That's not something you do when you're running out of ideas or when you want to go on a farewell tour with the band. They're sticking around, I can guarantee.
     
    Stop hovering to collapse... Click to collapse... Hover to expand... Click to expand...
  5. DIO

    DIO KONO DIO DA!

    Legendary Egg
    (Groudon Egg)
    Level 12
    Joined:
    Sep 14, 2014
    Posts:
    5,836
    PokéPoints:
    ₽239.2
    Just over half the number of total Pokémon, huh? Seems like a reasonable amount to me.

    Just out of curiosity, did you include the Carbink -> Diancie "evolution?" While Carbink doesn't technically evolve into Diancie, a Diancie is, I believe, a mutated Carbink. So I'm not really sure how that works, at least in terms of your math.
     
    Stop hovering to collapse... Click to collapse... Hover to expand... Click to expand...
    Absolute Zero likes this.
  6. Megarai111

    Megarai111 Elizabeth 3rd

    Joined:
    Dec 23, 2014
    Posts:
    1,853
    PokéPoints:
    ₽41.6
    That is pretty surprising to see. I agree with Ho-OhLugia though that there will certainly be more species in the Pokémon world than we know right now (ha ha, that sounds like I believe Pokémon really exist, oops), but still...
    I mean, that could be the entire animal race population of a small country.
    ..then again, that last thought I just mentioned reminded me of what phineas81707 said as well: Pokémon is one of the most ambitious games around. The fact that they've created so many creatures is quite impressive indeed.
     
    Stop hovering to collapse... Click to collapse... Hover to expand... Click to expand...
  7. phineas81707

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2014
    Posts:
    141
    PokéPoints:
    ₽54.8
    First, a disclaimer: in the course of the following tests, I realised that the original number actually missed one Pokémon: Lanturn. This was because of the method I used, and nothing to do with Lanturn at all, but it bears mentioning. The head post has been modified to accompany this fact.

    For a more detailed look at this number, I looked into the new evolutionary families introduced by generation.
    Kanto, which purports 151 Pokémon, has 81 unique Pokémon.
    Johto, which purports 100 Pokémon, adds 57 uniques- total is now 138.
    Hoenn, which purports 135 Pokémon, adds 76 uniques- total is now 214.
    Sinnoh, which purports 107 Pokémon, adds 54 uniques- total is now 268.
    Unova, which purports 156 Pokémon, adds 82 uniques- total is now 350.
    Kalos, which purports 72 Pokémon, adds 34 uniques- total is now 384.

    Nothing of the above is really new- the phenomenon of more Pokémon being added in odd generations and less in evens is rather common. Honestly, dissecting the numbers like this not only casts a new angle on the inflation (intended), but also shows that, despite being smaller than we expected, the cast of Pokémon is still really damn huge: Most Fire Emblem games have somewhere in the 40s as an upper range on playable units, and the only Mon series I can think off that comes close to challenging Pokémon's lead is Digimon. And I don't know enough about that series to know if the figure in the thousands is inflated like Pokémon's or not.

    To answer another question, Gengar's Grin, Carbink and Diancie are counted separately. The basic idea of this number is "how many individual Pokémon would you need to completely fill out the National Dex?" Since you can't get a Diancie out of a Carbink in game, they are separate.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page