Poll: Should Eevee have been the mascot of Pokemon?

[Leemaster777]

So, yeah, we're gonna talk about this adorable little fucker right here:

Spoiler

Eevee has been around since the first generation of Pokemon, and with a total of 8 different evolutions, he still holds the record for most possible evolutions (even counting mega-evolutions).

And frankly... I feel like he epitomizes what Pokemon is about far better than Pikachu does. If you subtract his prominent role in the anime, Pikachu is an entirely unimpressive electric Pokemon, ONLY worth mentioning due to his odd Light Ball item. Eevee, on the other hand, is not only competitively viable (only 2 or 3 of his evolutions aren't very good), but also shows off a wide variety of evolution methods, and is just a cute as Pikachu.

So... should Eevee have been the mascot of the series? Do you think the series as a whole would have been as popular with Eevee as the frontrunner instead of Pikachu?

But, barring the historical "what-if" of the question, what about right now? Do you think Eevee would be a good mascot for Pokemon CURRENTLY instead of Pikachu?

 

[Vuliev]

If you subtract his prominent role in the anime,

That's the entire reason Ash's Pikachu is the mascot of Pokemon. If Ash had received an Eevee instead of Pikachu, Ash's Eevee would have been the mascot, along with the requisite three-foot plot armor and permanent deus ex machina. And Eevee would probably have been a fine mascot.

However, I do feel that Pikachu has an edge in mascot-ness just for not having an evolution with seven(?) paths. It becomes a lot easier to stick with a Pikachu by refusing to use a Thunderstone than sticking with a vanilla Eevee when Eevee's evolutions offer a ton of flexibility if you've started to build a roster and need to fill gaps (or want to center around a type that isn't Electric.) Since the whole "refusing the Thunderstone" bit is a large cornerstone of Pikachu's personality and character, as well as his relationship with Ash, I don't know that an Ash/Eevee pairing would have provided the engagement that the Ash/Pikachu dynamic has.

 

[theSovietConnection]

Hmm, well, your thread presents two really good questions to me, and I will try to answer both of them as best as I can.

Should Eevee have been the "mascot" of Pokemon over Pikachu? Yes, I believe on this issue Eevee would have been better over Pikachu, expecially since Pikachu's biggest claim to fame is the anime counterpart over the actually functioning Pokemon in the game releases. Eevee helps represent mroe of the Pokemon types in the game, along with also presenting an adorable mascot to help the game appeal to the younger market.

Now, as for the second question, which is the titualr "Should Eevee be the mascot of Pokemon?", I say no. I will admit that a lot of nostalgia taints my opinion on this, but if you were to go with any Pokemon to be the mascot of the series, I don't think you should go with any singular Pokemon. I believe that the series' mascots should be Charmander, Bulbasaur, and Squirtle. Given their roles as the three possible starters in the first generation of games, along with the fact that they more or less laid the foundation of what every generation would have for starter types, I think they are a little more iconic to the series.

That's my two cents, anyways.

 

[Leemaster777]

If you subtract his prominent role in the anime,

That's the entire reason Ash's Pikachu is the mascot of Pokemon. If Ash had received an Eevee instead of Pikachu, Ash's Eevee would have been the mascot, along with the requisite three-foot plot armor and permanent deus ex machina. And Eevee would probably have been a fine mascot.

However, I do feel that Pikachu has an edge in mascot-ness just for not having an evolution with seven(?) paths. It becomes a lot easier to stick with a Pikachu by refusing to use a Thunderstone than sticking with a vanilla Eevee when Eevee's evolutions offer a ton of flexibility if you've started to build a roster and need to fill gaps (or want to center around a type that isn't Electric.) Since the whole "refusing the Thunderstone" bit is a large cornerstone of Pikachu's personality and character, as well as his relationship with Ash, I don't know that an Ash/Eevee pairing would have provided the engagement that the Ash/Pikachu dynamic has.

But if you use that argument, then I have to use the logical counter-argument: Why are we STILL following Ash, the immortal 10-year-old and his level 100 Pikachu?

Frankly, I think Pokemon should have done what Digimon did, and have their characters be replaced every season. That way, we could actually have a Pokemon character who could be DEVELOPED each time, instead of Ash's constant struggles with mediocrity.

Not only that, but if Eevee is the one constant recurring factor of each season, then it'd actually be a surprise each time when it evolves into a different form.

 

[Genocidicles]

Yeah I guess so. Anything's better than that annoying rat pikachu. Pikachu ain't even that good of a mon.

 

[EeveeElectro]

Yes, yes I should.

On a serious note, I agree. Eevee epitomises Pokemon in a way, one Pokemon that can evolve into nearly every type?

I think they chose Pikachu as a gender neutral choice and a more eye catching option.

 

[GabeZhul]

Frankly, I think Pokemon should have done what Digimon did, and have their characters be replaced every season. That way, we could actually have a Pokemon character who could be DEVELOPED each time, instead of Ash's constant struggles with mediocrity.

Not only that, but if Eevee is the one constant recurring factor of each season, then it'd actually be a surprise each time when it evolves into a different form.

The manga version (well, one of the manga versions) did that. It's just that Ash and Pikachu became so iconic that the guys at the marketing department refused and still refuse to switch them out if fear of losing said icon. At this point they are less characters and more like corporate logos.

On the other hand the idea about differently evolving Evees being the focus in a rotating cast sounds interesting. Or if they wanted to stick with the original formula, make Ash's Evee a mutant pokemon that only evolves temporarily (say, in a battle against a rock type it can evolve into a water type under duress, but then devolves and collapses right after the battle, making the trick restrictive). It would also give a better excuse why the local goldfish-poop gang wanted to repeatedly get Ash's starter by giving it an very unique ability instead of it just being a slightly more powerful Pikachu than usual.

 

[Madkipz]

That would make the series very vanilla. Eevee is the definition of a bland pokemon. It's attacks are lame and unthreatening to every variety of pokemon. At least Pikachu can sort of cheat its way to killing things.

 

[Leemaster777]

But if you use that argument, then I have to use the logical counter-argument: Why are we STILL following Ash, the immortal 10-year-old and his level 100 Pikachu?

That's not a logical counter argument.

There is one simple truth that counters the argument completely, and that is "Pokemon isn't aimed at you". The cartoons aren't aimed at you, the games aren't aimed at you and the manga isn't aimed at you.

Pokemon has always been aimed at young children, and none of the Pokemon media has changed to cater to a single audience as they grows up. The current cartoons are relevant to young children as much as the older cartoons are.

The reason that Pokemon never changes is because as long as there are 10 year old children in the world, there will always be a market for Pokemon. The reason Ash constantly resets after every region is because the cartoon is resetting so that young children can enter the series again.

Nintendo doesn't expect you to still follow Ash, Nintendo expects children who are just finding Pokemon for the first time to follow Ash.

Um, yeah, I get that the anime isn't aimed at me. I haven't actually WATCHED the anime in quite some time.

And I'm not sure how that "completely counters my argument". If anything, it seems like you AGREED with me that the anime just resets itself every season anyways. So... why do we need to still be following Ash then?

If it's just going to start from square one every season anyways, then why not introduce a new main character every season for us to follow, instead of staying with Ash? Kids starting out with Pokemon won't know about/care about ALL of Ash's travels, so what's the point in continuing the character if he's not going to develop?

Now, the ACTUAL counter-argument to my counter-argument is the fact that the DO introduce new characters for each season. Characters like May, Dawn, and most recently, Serena, ARE just starting out their journeys and DO actually develop over the course of their seasons.

So maybe I don't know what I'm talking about at all. *shrugs*

...I still think Eevee would be a better mascot than Pikachu, though.

 

[fenrizz]

No.
Even considering it is vile blasphemy.

Pikachu will do quite nicely, thank you very much!

 

[Redlin5_v1legacy]

But...

IT JUST WOULDN'T BE THE SAME!

 

[Mangod]

So, yeah, we're gonna talk about this adorable little fucker right here:

Eevee has been around since the first generation of Pokemon, and with a total of 8 different evolutions, he still holds the record for most possible evolutions (even counting mega-evolutions).

And frankly... I feel like he epitomizes what Pokemon is about far better than Pikachu does. If you subtract his prominent role in the anime, Pikachu is an entirely unimpressive electric Pokemon, ONLY worth mentioning due to his odd Light Ball item. Eevee, on the other hand, is not only competitively viable (only 2 or 3 of his evolutions aren't very good), but also shows off a wide variety of evolution methods, and is just a cute as Pikachu.

So... should Eevee have been the mascot of the series? Do you think the series as a whole would have been as popular with Eevee as the frontrunner instead of Pikachu?

First:

Second: Yes, I think that Eevee would be a better representative than Pikachu. Might be simply because I detest the anime so much though.

 

[Rolaoi]

Considering how prominent evolution is in the pokemon universe, I feel he would have made a better mascot. It's been there from the start and has been elaborated upon with nearly every new generation of pokemon games.

 

[Hero of Lime]

I would say no. Even though it's true Eevee does have the benefit of turning into many different forms to suit people, Eevee alone is kinda boring. Cute, and adorable yes, but everyone immediately wants to change it into something else the moment they get it. I don't think that's a good mark of a mascot.

Not saying I think Pikachu is much better, but it is an eye catcher, and it's cute too. I'm just glad it wasn't Clefairy like it was originally supposed to be, never cared much for its two forms.

 

[Aiddon_v1legacy]

I would say no. Even though it's true Eevee does have the benefit of turning into many different forms to suit people, Eevee alone is kinda boring. Cute, and adorable yes, but everyone immediately wants to change it into something else the moment they get it. I don't think that's a good mark of a mascot.

Not saying I think Pikachu is much better, but it is an eye catcher, and it's cute too. I'm just glad it wasn't Clefairy like it was originally supposed to be, never cared much for its two forms.

Indeed; the only time I've seen Eevee take a prominent role in the franchise was with Pokemon Conquest (seriously, Koei and Nintendo need to make a sequel to that already) in which it was the first Pokemon for the player character.

 

[JoJo]

I largely agree with what Hero of Lime said. Eevee is cute but it's a generic mammal, I don't think it would have the same instant recognition as Pikachu had with it's distinctive yellow and red colouring. Pikachu also has the advantage of being able to walk on two legs which helps him perform human-like actions, and his electric attacks make it easy to justify taking down large opponents many times his size, which would be harder with Eevee.

 

[Lieju]

I think they chose Pikachu as a gender neutral choice and a more eye catching option.

?
How is Pikachu more 'gender-neutral' than Eevee?
All I can think of is that you mean that Eevee is one of those Pokemon that have more males than females, but in the first gen you couldn't even tell if they were male or female.

In any case, Pikachu is more recognizable.
Eevee might represent what Pokemon are about more, but just seeing it doesn't communicate that idea at all.