What Exactly is Wrong With Muk, Voltorb or Magneton?

[Derbel McDillet]

I feel like in the Gen Wars fights people like to point to some Gen 1 designs with the take that they're not all winners, the common targets are Muk, Voltorb and Magneton and Seel to a lesser degree.

But it's also case of, you're saying what it is, but not saying why it's bad. As opposed to calling something ugly, busy and overdesigned. That's feedback you can actually do something with.

Sludge with eyes. Purple sludge isn't some generic common thing we all see that they just put eyes on, the light and dark purple shade is clever, it has a designed shape with arms and then you throw it on a face that could've looked like anything else and gone horribly wrong. But the point is if you Google sludge you're not getting anything that resembles Grimer or Muk.
Voltorb is a mimic (an RPG staple) and an ingenious one that works in and out of universe. I don't think any have been as effective as Voltorb.
Magneton is three Magnemites put together and it looks cooler for it. Magnemite is just a magnet, but is it's entire center body design? How many eyes do we give it?

Why the downplay on making real life objects anthropomorphic.

This isn't even a defense for it, but I'm open to hearing the criticism, I just feel like for something that comes up so often, shouldn't the critique be better?

 

[L Thammy]

I'd just like to point out that Muk is a standard Hedorah-like.

 

[Kain]

Muk is beautiful and I won't hear any slander

 

[Lihwem]

But the point is if you Google sludge you're not getting anything that resembles Grimer or Muk.

Click to shrink...

As someone not used to English Pokémon names, I totally read that as Grimes and Musk

 

[Lumination]

I'm a fan of Muk, Voltorb, Magneton, Chandelure, etc.

I find them a tier above stuff like Seel because they have some style or personality (Dewgong is better about this).

I think I don't like Garbodor because it's more "haha poison = stinky stuff" without the extra logical step of Muk or Weezing.

 

[septentrion2]

Every Gen1 Pokemon is a beautiful treasure.

edit: except that original Jynx design. forgot about that. 😬

 

[KezayJS1]

I'm actually a big fan of Magneton as far as electric types go. Sure, it looks like three Magnemite stuck together but... shut up! Your butt stinks!

 

[MikeBreezy92]

It's usually an ineffective dig at folks criticizing later Gen (5 if we're going by these guys) designs as lazy which is also a bad argument because Pokemon can be whatever. Folks just don't know how to argue why they don't like things.

Also Muk is a dope design.

 

[Deleted member 36578]

There are only two gen 1 Pokemon that I DESPISE. One I know a ton of other people hate, the other for some reason people like and I find disgusting.
Jynx and Mr Mime. Fuck those gross designs. And why the fuck are they sandwiched around my personal favorite Pokemon Scyther in the pokedex??? It always pissed me off on my pokedex poster. I'm still mad decades later.

 

[Ravelle]

Grimer and Muk are my boys.

Also Voltorb and Electrode are twice the size of a basketball, they're not really good as a mimic.

Stunfisk however are way better at being a pokeball stuck in sand.

 

[Stavo]

"Objects but pokémon" is a common criticism for Pokémon in general, not exclusive to Gen 1 designs.
For instance, I've never seen anyone criticize Klefki for being overdesigned/busy, but rather because it's just a keyring, or how Vanillite is an ice cream cone with eyes. Similarly, Voltorb/Electrode are just pokéballs, Muk is just sludge and Magneton is just three Magnemite stuck together, Chandelure is just a chandelier, so on and so forth.

 

[Bishop89]

I like them all so 🤷🏻‍♂️

 

[Spinluck]

I think they're fine. Maybe a tad of that is nostalgia but the gen 1 designs are just so iconic to me.

 

[Ailanthium]

I think those Pokemon are great for what they are, especially Voltorb, but I do think this particular argument needs to be understood as a response to complaints about newer gens (by which I actually mean Gen 5, which is hardly "new" at this point) having "object" Pokemon that some fans call "lazy" or "boring" despite the fact that many Gen 1 Pokemon were even simpler design-wise. The Trubbish and Vanillite lines are hit especially hard with that criticism, which is unfortunate because I think those particular Pokemon work really well for what they are (especially Trubbish, which is a hilarious Pokemon to include in the NYC-inspired region).

 

[MattB]

It's more so for the people that want to bring up an ice cream comb as lazy or something of the likes. It's not that they don't like them it's the fact that there has been simple design pokemon since gen 1.

 

[Tacitus]

 

[L Thammy]

Yeah, I think there's a lot of discourse around Pokemon where someone goes in not liking designs and comes up with a nonsense reason why they're worse, and so the people who like it reply by pointing out why that nonsense reason could be applied to any other Pokemon, and then other people just walk into that conversation and see a bunch of nonsense flying around and wonder what the hell anyone's talking about.

 

[Doskoi Panda]

Criticisms of those designs are usually invoked ironically to turn criticisms about 'modern Pokémon designs' around on those making them.
Like, they come hand in hand so often that I'm surprised you even have to ask the question, considering it's less about whether those designs are bad (they're not) and more about highlighting perceived double standards as an argumentative gotcha. I'm not saying it's justified behavior, mind you. But that's where it stems from. People be like 'objectmon? Zero creativity' and then someone else be like, 'um Voltorb'? Just the usual "people are shit at criticizing things and talking to each other amicably about those things"

 

[ClickyCal']

Nothing is wrong with them, just as the same as nothing is wrong with Garbodor, Vanilluxe, etc. All great Pokemon. But also did I just timetravel to 2011?

 

[Raysoul]

These criticisms usually pop up when genwunners bash newer Pokemon designs, like calling them lazy or boring.

 

[Richietto]

Nothing at all. I think they are simply used originally in response to genwunners criticizing Gen 5 for the immaculate Garbodor and Vanilluxe lines. Muk, Magnemite, and Voltorb are great. They're all pocket MONSTERS. Not animals. MONSTERS. All valid, and in the case of the 5 mentioned in my post, all rad!

 

[Lotus]

It's mainly to point out that people are hypocrites for dissing other designs (namely Gen 5) but having no issue with Gen 1 or other early Pokemon designs that do the same shit

People with common sense already know Pokemon designs can be all sorts of shit, including being based on inanimate objects

 

[DeadeyeNull]

Only issue I ever had was with muk not having more going on as an evolution of grimer. I Like the design more than grimer over all but it just needs a little something extra imo. magneton is great, magnets stick together and that's the point of it's design. Voltorb and electrode are great as Pokemon's take on a mimic. The regional designs for muk, Voltorb, and electrode are also great

 

[diablogg]

Nothing is worth with Muk

 

[Belphegor]

Their design might be simple but they are still better than stuff like Garbador and those ugly elemental monkeys

 

[Joe]

I think it's generally understood to be a rebuttal. Not "Muk is bad" but "If you think Garbodor is bad for just being living garbage, why are you okay with Muk?"
A lot of Gen V mons like the Klink and Vanillish lines got a lot of criticism for their designs as just objects, and the Voltorb and Magnemite lines are a rebuttal saying "It's always been like that."
But, because of the way that context gets lost as conversations travel around the internet, the more complex argument gets reduced to "Muk and Voltorb suck!"

 

[Ara63]

Magneton's problem is that it's in the same generation as Dugtrio (and to a lesser extent Dodrio and Weezing), so it's easy to go "look at all these mons that are three copies of the pre-evo, lazy gen 1" even though it makes perfect sense that that's how the magnet Pokémon would evolve.

 

[CBZ]

I always loved Magneton's design and was a fan of the Vanillish line for similar reasons. But as far as I know, design wise, no real issues. Pokemon designs can be based off all sorts of different items.

 

[Dogui]

The same happens with all other gens lol The only difference is that modern gen pokes are typically criticized first and ugly gen 1 stuff works as response.

Also, gen 1 has a lot more questionable designs than that. Exxegcute is a bunch of eggs that evolve into a palm tree or something. Magmar is just a...dunno, fire thing. And Jynx...yeah, do you really want someone to make a detailed comment on Jynx's design?

Every gen has a lot of ugly shit in general. I don't think i need to explain why i would never have a Muk in my team.

 

[super-famicom]

What Exactly is Wrong With Muk, Voltorb or Magneton?

Absolutely nothing.

 

[ClickyCal']

This thread feels like a time machine, omg.

 

[mrmickfran]

People like to use them as ammo to counter gen 1 for some reason.

"It's just a thing" no shit, they're all "things"

 

[King Alamat]

Gen 1 had a seal named Seel.

 

[Richietto]

Magneton's problem is that it's in the same generation as Dugtrio (and to a lesser extent Dodrio and Weezing), so it's easy to go "look at all these mons that are three copies of the pre-evo, lazy gen 1" even though it makes perfect sense that that's how the magnet Pokémon would evolve.

Click to shrink...

Yeh always felt Magneton as an evolution was a cool idea. That being said Magnezone was the coolest thing they could have done to spice up an otherwise boring evolution.

 

[LimeTime]

There's nothing wrong with them, just like there's nothing wrong with Trubbish, or Klefki.

 

[Derbel McDillet]

I think it's generally understood to be a rebuttal. Not "Muk is bad" but "If you think Garbodor is bad for just being living garbage, why are you okay with Muk?"
A lot of Gen V mons like the Klink and Vanillish lines got a lot of criticism for their designs as just objects, and the Voltorb and Magnemite lines are a rebuttal saying "It's always been like that."
But, because of the way that context gets lost as conversations travel around the internet, the more complex argument gets reduced to "Muk and Voltorb suck!"

Click to shrink...

As someone that's been harsh on Gen 5, I think part of the problem is that, some of those new mons feel like derivatives on old ones that already had their variants in between.

Like standalone there's not much wrong with Throh and Sawk on paper (though personally I'm more critical of the Pokemon born with clothes on), but when I see them it's like, the new Hitmonlee and Hitmonchan, but less interesting so I don't think about them.

The same happens with all other gens lol The only difference is that modern gen pokes are typically criticized first and ugly gen 1 stuff works as response.

Also, gen 1 has a lot more questionable designs than that. Exxegcute is a bunch of eggs that evolve into a palm tree or something. Magmar is just a...dunno, fire thing. And Jynx...yeah, do you really want someone to make a detailed comment on Jynx's design?

Every gen has a lot of ugly shit in general. I don't think i need to explain why i would never have a Muk in my team.

Click to shrink...

I mean the comment would help. Exegcute, Exegcutor, Magmar, you're just saying what they are, not what's wrong with them. Questionable because ... People can actually explain why they don't like Jynx while understanding what they were going for.

Reading this, I don't know what your problem is with Muk because you're not really saying anything.

 

[Crashman]

Its been pointed out that the real reason they are brought up is a counter argument to criticisms about newer Pokemon designs, generally the object based Pokemon.

I will say though that Grimmer to Muk is a bit lazy in terms of design. Magnemite to Magneton makes sense, they're magnets so they would stick together. Voltorb and Electrode are mimics so that also makes a fair amount of sense. Grimmer to Muk is just sludge to a bigger pile of sludge.

 

[Kouriozan]

Hey now, Muk is a beauty of nature and won't accept anything saying otherwise <3

 

[EndlessSummer]

All three are fine.

 

[Yoshimitsu126]

There is no bad Pokemon design

 

[Derbel McDillet]

Its been pointed out that the real reason they are brought up is a counter argument to criticisms about newer Pokemon designs, generally the object based Pokemon.

I will say though that Grimmer to Muk is a bit lazy in terms of design. Magnemite to Magneton makes sense, they're magnets so they would stick together. Voltorb and Electrode are mimics so that also makes a fair amount of sense. Grimmer to Muk is just sludge to a bigger pile of sludge.

Click to shrink...

But what does actual sludge look like in comparison to Grimer and Muk for it to be lazy.

 

[Joe]

As someone that's been harsh on Gen 5, I think part of the problem is that, some of those new mons feel like derivatives on old ones that already had their variants in between.

Like standalone there's not much wrong with Throh and Sawk on paper (though personally I'm more critical of the Pokemon born with clothes on), but when I see them it's like, the new Hitmonlee and Hitmonchan, but less interesting so I don't think about them.

Click to shrink...

Yeah, and I think that critique is totally fair. Unova really does feel like half the families were intentionally designed as derivative, with all the pros and cons that come with that.

 

[Dolce]

But it's also case of, you're saying what it is, but not saying why it's bad. As opposed to calling something ugly, busy and overdesigned. That's feedback you can actually do something with.

Click to shrink...

those aren't any better as criticisms, they're extremely vague and meaningless. IRL, something like a male peacock is extremely busy and eye-catching. but just calling its plumage busy doesn't really say anything.

in the end this is an argument without any satisfying outcome unless both parties are willing to give the other person's opinion weight. those who dislike have to understand the value in those who like, and those who like have to understand the value in those that dislike.

personally, out of the 1000 Pokemon, there aren't really any I dislike and none I hate. each design is unique and carries the weight of its specific designer, along with the work put into making them cohesive.

 

[ClickyCal']

People like to use them as ammo to counter gen 1 for some reason.

"It's just a thing" no shit, they're all "things"

Click to shrink...

I mean the reason should be pretty obvious. Genwunners peaked when gen 5 came out and the main criticisms were just saying how bad the designs, especially certain ones were. Plus would then get to "only gen 1 pokemon exist".

 

[Beedig]

We don't tolerate Muk slander around these parts.

 

[Dolce]

Plus would then get to "only gen 1 pokemon exist".

Click to shrink...

can I uhhhh get a uhhhh kanto sequel or uhhh remake in uhhhh HD open world. hold the other gens uhhh only the original 151.

 

[Roboraptor]

Yeah, and I think that critique is totally fair. Unova really does feel like half the families were intentionally designed as derivative, with all the pros and cons that come with that.

Click to shrink...

Which makes sense as it was like a soft reboot.

So they brought back stuff from Gen 1 with newer designs.

Which sucks, because it really hampered the opportunity for those Pokémon to have their own identity instead of "[Insert Gen 1 Pokémon] but worse"

 

[Dogui]

As someone that's been harsh on Gen 5, I think part of the problem is that, some of those new mons feel like derivatives on old ones that already had their variants in between.

Like standalone there's not much wrong with Throh and Sawk on paper (though personally I'm more critical of the Pokemon born with clothes on), but when I see them it's like, the new Hitmonlee and Hitmonchan, but less interesting so I don't think about them.


I mean the comment would help. Exegcute, Exegcutor, Magmar, you're just saying what they are, not what's wrong with them. Questionable because ... People can actually explain why they don't like Jynx while understanding what they were going for.

Reading this, I don't know what your problem is with Muk because you're not really saying anything.

Click to shrink...

Just for clarification, i wouldn't say i have a problem with Muk, i just find it to be boring and ugly. Don't think most of ugly pokémon designs are problematic in any way, if anything from the 3 pokés cited in the OP, i would say that the idea of Magneton being just 3 stacked Magnemites the laziest thing ever, but this applies to Dugtrio, Weezing and that ice cream evolution as well. Maybe not Dodrio because Doduo was the starting form with 2 heads already?

I don't think people actually explains why there's anything wrong with recent pokémon designs either. Jynx is an obvious pick because it's easy to explain what's wrong with it, meanwhile Garbodor is just ugly, there's nothing wrong with it in any way either.

Aside this obvious picks, what is wrong with any pokémon?

 

[Lotus]

We don't tolerate Muk slander around these parts.

Click to shrink...

Alolan Muk is cool at least

 

[Brawly Likes to Brawl]

People usually bring those designs up when someone is claiming that Pokemon designs were when they were limited to "simple animals" even though Gen 1 several, several of Pokemon that don't fit that mold. I personally do not have a problem with those designs, I just dislike the revisinoist history that tends to be invoked when arguments about Pokemon designs come up.