Policy Review Create-A-Pokemon Policy Review

[tennisace]

This was recently brought up in the Art poll: When SHOULD the art poll go? There are many different places it could go, and all affect the project in a large way.

Concept/Types THEN Art THEN Process:
This is how it would work, you choose the type, open the art thread, and give the artists about two weeks to submit the art. Then, the art poll is held. Movepool, Ability, Stats, and other things are based solely on the art, concept and type. This brings up time constraints for artists, but avoids the current problem that we have, the stats don't match the art that's winning. Here, stats conform to art.

Concept, Types..., Stats, ART, Process:
This is what we have now. It works because the artists have plenty of time to make and change submissions to conform with polls, except right at the end. This is where the artists got burned this time, because everyone thought it was going to be physically based, but it turned out special. Here, art somewhat conforms to stats.

Everything then art last:
Artists would have plenty of time to make their drawings. However, they would have to constantly revise them in order to keep up with the polls. This brings up a problem with the spriters, they won't have enough time. In this way, art conforms to stats.

Discuss.

 

[Dane]

Art First:
There are two big problems with this form. First is that the artists have about one day to make anything. That isn't enough to really get much done, considering they have to think up a concept, draw it, and color it (let's face it, nowadays an uncolored image won't win). They have even less time if the polls go the way this one did, where dragon was winning for a while and then ground had a come from behind victory.

The second problem is that we take this from a competitive aspect into a more "fanboy" aspect. The art shouldn't decide the bulk of what's left on the Pokemon. Not only that, but there's no guarantee that it even will. There will still be a lot of people who look at each step by itself rather than as a piece of the whole product.

If artists are given time to remove the drawback of the first problem, it just raises a new problem of the process being delayed. Not only is it delayed, it's delayed almost right off the bat.

Stats First:
This is the best option, as it allows the most free reign. It gives artists time to make their submissions, and gets the non-specific parts of the process out of the way. While stats and art influence each other, they aren't entirely dependant on each other.

Art Last:
This is even worse than the first option. This means the art has to depend on the movepool and abilities we give it. The sheer number of possibilities for moves and abilities would remove 99% of art submissions. It's much better to just grant flavor through moves (see Revenankh) than to just throw random moves at it and hope it sticks.

 

[Absolution]

What if Stats and Art were done at the same time? Vote to get the top 3-5 designs or whatever, and then let people propose different spreads for each of them. People then vote for their favorite design/stat combination.

At least then they could relate to each other more, and not have random stats that don't fit specific designs.

Look at this current Pokemon. Different stat finalists worked better for different designs. And instead of letting them fit, we're picking our favorite stat spread and our favorite design, whether they mesh or not. And the way the polls are going, it doesn't look like they will.

 

[tennisace]

Interesting concept, but the chaos of running two polls at once offsets whatever gain this would have.

 

[Absolution]

It's not really at the same time, technically. It'd be more back and forth.

1.) Art Submission Thread and Stat Suggestion Thread
2.) Preliminary Art Poll to get down to the Top 3-5
3.) Stat Proposal Thread for the Top 3-5, with the leader assigning people (1, 2, 3+, I dunno) to each of the top designs at the end, when they've selected the best people
4.) Stat and Art Poll, with the top designs and their respective stats being voted on together.

 

[latinoheat]

Art should never go at the beginning because then "flavour" dictates what is supposed to be a competitive project. The problem is your opening the Art thread way too early, your opening it at the same time as stats discussion begins. Then with like every project artists are too eager and submit their designs before stat spreads are voted on and because they have put so much effort into them it is only right they submit their concept and then because of that we get a lot of submissions which were designed before stats were even known.

Stat spread should be discussed and finalized before an art thread is even discussed or opened.

 

[X_Presumptuous]

I think the benefit from Absolution's idea is that the "Flavour r useless!!1" people can rest easily and vote entirely on the spread without worrying about it not "meshing" with the art.

I also have a suggestion, although I'm not sure how well it would be received as it involves "going back": we could have what we have now, with a stuff-art-movepool process, but make a movepool poll before AND after the art. One as a preliminary "mini-movepool" so we know what we want the Pokémon to do competitively and so we know what art will fit what we want the closest. Then we could go back and "touch up" things that might not fit well enough or perhaps even add new competitive options now available with the chosen artwork. After fleshing the options out with flavour moves, we would have our complete movepool.
As an afterthought, to give the spriters a little more time, the spriting should begin with the second movepool thread.

As a summary: concept --> typing --> stats --> "mini-movepool" --> art --> full movepool/spriting --> etc.

 

[DougJustDoug]

There is way too much attention being placed on art. This is a competitive pokemon project, not an art project.

I know art is sexy and interesting to the casual fan lurking on this project, but art has almost NOTHING to do with a competitive pokemon. I'm an artist so it may sound weird to hear this from me -- but I really don't care what the pokemon looks like. The color and flavor and coolness of the sprite has absolutely NO impact on whether the pokemon is viable in the OU metagame. In fact many people play with our pokemon on the server and use the "Question Mark" sprite that comes by default!

Stats have a lot to do with a competitive pokemon. I very much think that stats should be influenced by role and typing -- art is irrelevant.

I could develop a wonderful OU pokemon and never make a sprite. However, where's the fun in that? All of us are fans of the game, and I don't think we could bear to make a pokemon that looks like Hippowdon, but has the typing, stats, and movepool of Infernape. Technically, there's no problem with it. It still battles the same. But, that's an affront to our general pokemon-playing sensibilities. We will always make some attempt to have good art that is consistent with the competitive aspects of the pokemon. But, let's not get too carried away with it. Don't put the cart before the horse.

Why is it that people won't bother to figure out the difference between BST and BSR, but --- they will dissect the subtle nuances of Daddy Longlegs ability to walk effectively, or will itemize the visual requirements for Smog Imp to use Spikes?

I just don't get it....

Trust me, I spend hours and hours working on art submissions. I care about art A LOT. However, I acknowledge that art is a non-competitive aspect of a pokemon. I see no reason to fit the creation process around the art. Instead we should fit the art in wherever it is most convenient. If, in the end, the art is somewhat inconsistent with certain other aspects of the pokemon -- what does it matter competitively? It doesn't.

And, by the way, there are MANY pokemon sprites in the real game that have gross inconsistencies with stats, moves, and typing. So, what's the big deal if that occasionally happens with CAP pokemon too?

 

[Absolution]

I also have a suggestion, although I'm not sure how well it would be received as it involves "going back": we could have what we have now, with a stuff-art-movepool process, but make a movepool poll before AND after the art. One as a preliminary "mini-movepool" so we know what we want the Pokémon to do competitively and so we know what art will fit what we want the closest. Then we could go back and "touch up" things that might not fit well enough or perhaps even add new competitive options now available with the chosen artwork. After fleshing the options out with flavour moves, we would have our complete movepool.
As an afterthought, to give the spriters a little more time, the spriting should begin with the second movepool thread.

As a summary: concept --> typing --> stats --> "mini-movepool" --> art --> full movepool/spriting --> etc.

That's essentially what we've done this time, isn't it? I mean, we started this Pokemon with target attacks that we wanted it to use. We've still gotten art that doesn't fully support most of them. I guess we'll have to see if the community as a whole has the restraint to only give it the appropriate attacks based on the art, or whether the "flavor is useless" mindset wins out.

Trust me, I spend hours and hours working on art submissions. I care about art A LOT. However, I acknowledge that art is a non-competitive aspect of a pokemon. I see no reason to fit the creation process around the art. Instead we should fit the art in wherever it is most convenient. If, in the end, the art is somewhat inconsistent with certain other aspects of the pokemon -- what does it matter competitively? It doesn't.

And, by the way, there are MANY pokemon sprites in the real game that have gross inconsistencies with stats, moves, and typing. So, what's the big deal if that occasionally happens with CAP pokemon too?

I just don't understand that mindset. I would think we'd want this to be as good as possible. Sure the stats and the movepool matter infinitely more at the end of the day. The Pokemon's image doesn't change how its going to battle at all. But shouldn't we be trying our best to make it fit realistically? Why can't it be both logical and competitive?

I just know that I respect a creation and the process behind its conception a lot more if all of its aspects mesh properly. This project is already the joke of the community, I just don't see why we wouldn't try to use every aspect of the process to make it as respectable as possible. "Sure we making up Pokemon is fanboyish, but look how much effort we put into every step of its creation!" We can analyze stat percentages all day, but the second someone posts logical reasoning and research behind image patterns and how they correlate to the moves its deemed less important in a Pokemon creation project?

Like I said, I just don't understand that.

 

[DougJustDoug]

I just don't understand that mindset. I would think we'd want this to be as good as possible. Sure the stats and the movepool matter infinitely more at the end of the day. The Pokemon's image doesn't change how its going to battle at all. But shouldn't we be trying our best to make it fit realistically? Why can't it be both logical and competitive?

I just know that I respect a creation and the process behind its conception a lot more if all of its aspects mesh properly. This project is already the joke of the community, I just don't see why we wouldn't try to use every aspect of the process to make it as respectable as possible. "Sure we making up Pokemon is fanboyish, but look how much effort we put into every step of its creation!" We can analyze stat percentages all day, but the second someone posts logical reasoning and research behind image patterns and how they correlate to the moves its deemed less important in a Pokemon creation project?

Like I said, I just don't understand that.

Fakdex projects based on cool drawings are a dime a dozen. The defining characteristic of the CAP project, is that we follow a detailed community construction process to build pokemon to be PLAYED in the competitive metagame. We don't build pokemon to be admired in Smeargle's Studio, to be collected as shiny little keepsakes, or to be traded with friends -- they are competitive metagame battling tools. We are exploring the competitive metagame by building and playing new pokemon creations.

This project veers into fanboy oblivion when someone proposes outlandish moves and abilities OR when they propose we make a "Pikablu" and post a nifty hand-drawn picture of a cute little blue electric mouse. Both of those proposals have no competitive value whatsoever.

Yes, the art fits in with the entire pokemon package. I love it. I'm obsessive about it. I've spent untold hours on my CAP art submissions. Take at look at the massive wall-of-text I wrote describing the backstory for my latest desert serpent design. I'm a full-fledged card-carrying pokemon art fanboy, no doubt about it.

But, this project is not just about art. Recent posting activity and discussion trends have me concerned about the way this forum is trending. We have an avalanche of posts, votes, and page views in the art thread. We can barely get people to read the OP in the Offensive/Defensive Bias thread. Few people take the time to investigate when we are defining a basic competitive bias of the pokemon, but they'll all lend a hand when it comes to proposing a million new tail designs for the Smog Imp. Do you see any sort of problem with that? I do.

Then when something like the voted Physical/Special Bias confilicts with the overall flavor of a really kewl multi-handed Daddy Longlegs drawing -- well stop the presses! Let's restructure the entire CAP process! Cause we can't be having our precious artwork impinged by competitive minutia like "Does this thing hit Physical or Special"? Let's spend lots of time on important stuff like attack animations and shiny coloring schemes. Effective use of HP EV's for defense? Who gives a shit, X-Act? Wrap up that damn BSR poll, we are facing a major crisis in the art thread -- we can't determine whether Elagune's naga looks better in brown or purple!

[ end sarcasm ]

I am very proud of the art that comes out of the CAP project. People visit the CAP server just to look at our amazing sprites. The artists and and spriters on the CAP project are some of the best in all of Pokemon fandom. And it shows in the jaw-dropping designs we have for our creations. Like I said, I am probably one of the biggest most obsessive art geeks on this entire project. But, I also keep in mind that art has very little to do with the competitive build of our pokemon. If we lose, or merely fail to emphasize, the competitive analysis goal of this project -- that is when we justify the criticism leveled at this project. Art is all well and good -- but let's keep it in the proper perspective to the main goal.

 

[Absolution]

I just think that art is a valid and important part of the process. And going with the attitude that it ultimately doesn't matter not only devalues the art itself, but the entire program. "Hey look at that sweet ass picture! It has nothing to do with the stats and the movepool and the type we're looking at, but hey, it's pretty damn cool so we'll go with that one" sounds a lot more fanboyish to me than putting some minor effort into trying to get everything to synch up a litte better. The designs and sprites are the face of this project. It's what people see and react to first. Of course the stats, movepool, ability, etc. are the substance behind this whole thing. I just think the picture is what ties it all together. Otherwise, like you said, you're just playing with a concept, a "?" instead of a Pokemon.

But hey, maybe I'm biased. I'm an Advertising major. First impressions and appearance are important to me. How many votes have been given to designs, not just in this project, but in all of them, to designs that have littleto do with any part of the rest of the CaP Pokemon's already voted on structure, but just damn looked cool? Because they visually sold themselves, everything else be damned. That's the power of an image.

If you had a problem with the activity around the Smog Imp design, I wish you would've PMed me privately and told me about it. I would've cut it off and stopped listening to everyone. I just assumed that, hey, since this is a community project, then why not let the community participate. Not everyone can draw. But they can have an opinion, and I was willing to work with everyone to make the design represent what the community wanted from it. I was under the impression that was the point.

I don't think anyone here who has voted, posted, or participated in anyway thinks lesser of the stat discussions or any other poll that actively competitively matters. But as for the art thread getting more posts, well, you should've expect as much. Not everyone is X-Act or any of the others. Hell, I'm sure many people here wish they knew this game as well as some of these awesome posters do. But they don't. Not yet. They're trying, I'm sure, but they're not there yet. I, myself, lurked around here six months before I registered, and forever and a half before I posted my first RMT. I'll vote and listen and read every post I can in those other threads, but I'll only argue something if I feel like I have a valid, founded point. I don't feel like I have the experience to propose stats. Smogon is well known as a place where you don't just jump in and let your mouth flap. The Art thread is the place where the average poster can be a part of this. Isn't that where you want them anyway? I would've thought it was ideal to have all the people who's battle experience is shit distracted by shiny things in the Art thread, while the guys that know the game inside and out discuss stat distribution and the rest.

Look, I didn't mean to set you off. Tennis mentioned in another thread that he was going to ask whether or not the Art Poll was happening at the right time, I figured that I'd throw my two cents in because I didn't think it was being utilized to its full potential. I've never argued that art should be more important than stats, or be the starting point of the project, or anything else. I've just been trying to say that with all the work that goes in to every aspect of these CaP creations, it's a shame to wrap them up in a box that doesn't quite fit.

 

[DougJustDoug]

If you had a problem with the activity around the Smog Imp design, I wish you would've PMed me privately and told me about it. I would've cut it off and stopped listening to everyone. I just assumed that, hey, since this is a community project, then why not let the community participate. Not everyone can draw. But they can have an opinion, and I was willing to work with everyone to make the design represent what the community wanted from it. I was under the impression that was the point.

You misunderstood my sarcastic ranting. I actually complimented you on your handling of Smog Imp. Here's the post. I really enjoyed seeing Smog Imp develop. Your art was one of many (mine included) that I used as an example during that extended burst of sarcasm. Please forgive me. I really like Smog Imp and I liked the way you handled it.

Look, I didn't mean to set you off. Tennis mentioned in another thread that he was going to ask whether or not the Art Poll was happening at the right time, I figured that I'd throw my two cents in because I didn't think it was being utilized to its full potential. I've never argued that art should be more important than stats, or be the starting point of the project, or anything else. I've just been trying to say that with all the work that goes in to every aspect of these CaP creations, it's a shame to wrap them up in a box that doesn't quite fit.

Yeah, I guess I got a little too bitchy there. I didn't really mean it to come off that harsh. I tried to emphasize that I'm a giddy fan of cool art. I think the ranting overshadowed that.

I think you are spot-on with your read on the situation. I agree that we should try to strike a balance of all aspects of the pokemon. But, there are certain inherent problems with the CAP process that cannot be avoided.

The main issue with the CAP project is that we follow a "waterfall model" of construction (Google it). That means that we execute a series of sequential steps, and do not revisit past completed steps. Ideally, we would follow a "spiral model" that allows all steps to be cycled through multiple times, each time revising and fine-tuning until the creation is complete. For a community project like this, the waterfall model is the only approach that can be executed in an organized way. Unfortunately, the waterfall model can be a real problem when later steps reveal problems with earlier completed steps. We have come to accept these difficulties as "unavoidable".

I'm not saying there is no room for improvement. But, regardless of what sequence we follow, there will be problems. I would rather have those problems be exposed in a non-competitive aspect of the pokemon (like art), rather than have a problematic competitive aspect (like unusable stats).

For the record, I think all the art on this pokemon is great. I don't know why so many people are bitching about the art not having the right "flavor", etc. I think every design in the top 10 would have been wonderful for our pokemon. Maybe that's another reason that I'm not eager to switch up the process. IMO, the process worked very well for generating multiple fantastic choices of art design.

 

[Time Mage]

I think Doug said most everything I could say about the subject, but let me add one more thing.

Now, there are complaints about art not fitting the stats. Before, or in other CAPs, there have been complaints about the stats not fitting the type(s) or the ability not fitting the design, or the moves not fitting the spread or the design, etc.

In order to be consistent, you know what we should do? I'll tell you: we should completely and totally ignore the main idea behind CAP (a collaborative project), and let ONE person decide it all. No, not even a group of experts, one person. That way, he can make it totally coherent, choose or make the arts he sees fit, etc. But also, that way, it will be CAP no more, but another of the many custom pokémon there is, however well designed it turns out.

CAP is a community project. And as such, the whole community is the responsible of making each project work, competitive wise and art wise. If there is a design you feel is not fitting with the stats, it's not a flaw in the project, because it will have been chosen by the majority. And in CAP, the majority rules. Eh, I could bitch about X-Act's spread not being chosen, and ending up with a stat spread with too much (special) attack for a support pokémon, in my opinion, but that's ONLY my opinion, which is clearly in a minority since Maniac's won. And what the hell, the current spread is very good, too.

So, to sum up: It is up to the community to decide which art is chosen. If the community choses an art you think doesn't fit with the stats... Well, tough luck, you are in a minority.

 

[latinoheat]

If art isn't important why is it always the one open the longest, you put it after stat spreads are finished then hopefully there are less complaints about it not fitting stats.

Then you give the art thread a shorter amount of time and stop being so lenient with it. All the competitive aspects have had strict deadlines, but the minute someone said they would have a design finished tomorrow the art threads supposed deadline was extended another day . This was after the project has already been open a long time if someone can't get their design finished in that time tough shit.

 

[DougJustDoug]

If art isn't important why is it always the one open the longest, you put it after stat spreads are finished then hopefully there are less complaints about it not fitting stats.

Then you give the art thread a shorter amount of time and stop being so lenient with it. All the competitive aspects have had strict deadlines, but the minute someone said they would have a design finished tomorrow the art threads supposed deadline was extended another day . This was after the project has already been open a long time if someone can't get their design finished in that time tough shit.

The art POLL is held after stats are complete. So, I don't see the problem. We choose art after we know the stats. And I'm sure people factor that into their designs and votes.

If you are proposing that the art SUBMISSION thread not be opened until after stats are complete, I don't want to moderate out all the poll-jumping art discussions that will happen in the meantime. There is NO WAY to control all the design talk early on in this project. People start discussing designs almost before the FIRST type poll is concluded. Do you honestly think we will be able to prevent all art discussion for SEVEN consecutive polls? You can't be serious.

If you are really advocating that -- then you are basically telling me to be a total hard-ass of a moderator. And BTW, if I do that -- I'm doing it across the board. Basically, I'll have to enforce rules harder. There are certain people on this project *cough*cough* with a tendency to flame, troll, and otherwise demonstrate less-than-friendly behavior *cough*cough* in this forum. Those people *cough*cough* would start catching A LOT MORE infractions, should I adopt a harsher moderation stance.

So, with that in mind, do you REALLY want to keep the art thread closed for that long and have me moderate the forum more strictly?

 

[latinoheat]

I think its worth a try, because the way the process if designed is basically telling people that Art is more important then everything else. If they care more about the art in what is competitive project then they can fuck off and make some fakedex elsewhere.

The problem is having the art thread before the stat threads are all completed.

People are always very eager with the art and because of this we are getting concepts and designs submitted way before stats have been finalized. Everyone puts so much effort into the designs that rightfully they don't want to get rid of them so there included anyway.
I think there was literally 3 people including yourself who waited till the stat spread was finished before submitting their design, i am shocked we don't get more complaints about designs not matching.

Yes most people factor in stats in their voting of design,

But i can guarantee that concept Art being submitted in the discussions before build polls and such, are also influencing what they are voting for in the much more important build and style polls.

The fact is this is a competitive project and the most focus is being put on something which has nothing to do with the whole competitive aspect, this is causing the Art to be the main influence in the project.

 

[tennisace]

Since art is over, I have a new suggestion that we could impliment for this CAP. With the last three, the movepool polls have been disorganized to say the least. I suggest handling them exactly like the stat spreads, with people constructing movepools with the decided attack and support moves with other filler moves, and the community voting on the people's movepools, instead of individual moves. It works with stats, it should work with movepool. Discuss.

 

[Sunday]

The main problem with that idea would be the subjectivity of "viable" moves, presuming we follow X-Acts thread on how to design a moveset for a Pokemon. When discussing this on Dougs we defined it as "Being on a set in the Smogon Analysis" (NOT "Other Options"), but obviously for this Pokemon there is no Analysis (yet), so it's once again completly subjective. People would be free to flaunt these restrictions by saying "I don't think Gravity would be viable on this Pokemon" or something of the sorts and in the end the people who flaunt these restrictions the most will have the best looking movesets, and would get the most votes. This is not something we want to be encouraging.

 

[Deck Knight]

The process is fine as it is. Quite frankly there's almost no way to make anything remotely original looking not fit whatever stats we develop except in extreme and obvious cases like Retro Orange's Mole/Rhino and Sangularia's Armadillo which never screamed 100+ Base Speed. The Spider is awkward to imagine but nothing prevents it from having, say, awesome jumping ability given it has 8 "pistons" to provide upward thrust with.

Physical/Special is almost impossible to tell unless features are unambiguous. Hariyama is a huge pokemon with massive hands, so you expect it to beat your face in with physical attacks. Alakazam is a frail mustachioud cat0beast with giant spoons. I'm not expecting it to star on Smackdown.

Look at Arbok vs. Seviper. Arbok has crap special and decent speed while Seviper's hits 100 SA and has crap speed Both are poisonous serpents.

How it is that Shuckle has more defense than Steelix also puzzles me, but that is beside the point.

Art Discussion should stay put right where it is after type. Art is an, well... art. It takes time, patience, and a lot of thought, as well as well honed skilled in computer and paper mediums. Having Revenank is pretty cool, looking badass while doing it is a major plus >)>

 

[Not Scicky]

As a kid who's spent his life drawing, and almost failed the last 3 grades because of it, I say art goes second to last, last would be the ability...

 

[DougJustDoug]

Since art is over, I have a new suggestion that we could impliment for this CAP. With the last three, the movepool polls have been disorganized to say the least. I suggest handling them exactly like the stat spreads, with people constructing movepools with the decided attack and support moves with other filler moves, and the community voting on the people's movepools, instead of individual moves. It works with stats, it should work with movepool. Discuss.

Tennis, you should have been following the process thread when we completely reworked how movepool will be discussed and voted. If you want to catch up, just read the Process Guide sticky. How about we give it try, and then discuss if it improves the movepool process or not.

BTW Sunday, since this pokemon is focused on utility, you may want to do the Non-Attack movepool first. In general, I think we should follow the process guide as written (Attack movepool first, then Non-Attacks). But, this pokemon seems to warrant a changeup in the order. Just a suggestion. It's your call on which one should go first.

 

[Elevator Music]

Why shouldn't art be important in creating the movepool for this pokemon? I would go as far to say that it should even try to be consistant with the stats, although I wouldn't want to overwhelm some of you with my insidious thinking...

Why shouldn't we try and be uhh.... consistant and uhh... I don't know, logical? And before anyone tries pulling that "Well Togekiss gets Focus Punch, etc." garbage, does that really give us an excuse to do that? I'm not sure why we wouldn't use Game Freak for role models while making a pokemon, but shouldn't we try and make good pokemon all around, flavor included? I certainly don't see why we shouldn't. It'll net us a lot less crap than we're getting now, I can assure you that (I'm talking from a feedback perspective, not the actual quality of the pokemon...)

Doug, I will ask you this to get it from your perspective. You say you got a lot of crap when Syclant was given 121 speed and people complained? Why give them room to complain about something else like "Oh why did we give this pokemon Tail Whip, it has no tail, that's dumb olol"?

Why are we continually pushing our limits with this project? Please, someone tell me this? Why are we giving a walking spider hand thingy base 90 Special attack and +100 speed (though there is nothing wrong with Cartoon's design, it is in fact very nice)? Actually, I think I know the answer. The community as a whole isn't focusing on the polls as a combined thing, rather on a poll to poll basis. They either don't realize they are doing something like this or do not care. How else could the "unavoidables" in this project happen?

Continuing on that, I would say that the majority clearly does not care. This is from a)My opinion that Smogon users are not stupid, and b)My assumption that most people that actually vote in this project do realize that these polls aren't really separate and should influence each other (oh my, I'm speaking crazy talk again, someone shut me up before I start a revolution >_>). Before I start to seriously ponder why people wouldn't care, I'll go out on a hunch and jump get back to the Togekiss example. The precedent for carelessness has already been set by the game makers. Naturally, for the pokemon to do everything we want it to do this "careless territory" will be wandered into. Am I the only one that finds that alarming? I really can't be, can I? Is it really necessary for these pokemon to be made so half-hazardly? I don't think so. In fact, I say that we need to be more careful. I'm not saying we can't be lenient, that would be bad. But can we try not to go out of our way and push the flavor of these pokemon off a cliff?

Getting to the point, (yes, for anyone who tl;dr'd this, you can start reading again), I just want people to be aware that the pokemon, along with all future pokemon, should mesh flavor and non flavor wise. The arguments that an art design doesn't look like it could have [number base stat] or [move] is not flawed, in fact it is what makes the pokemon a decent pokemon from an flavor perspective (we more or less do this with Ability, why should everything else be different?). We should not go with our fanboy instinct and ignore this to make the pokemon everything we want it to be and more. We need to compromise what the pokemon can do with what we want it to do and not puch it as far as we can.

Yay. This post was kinda back and forth, mainly me getting my thoughts down, but enjoy. (?) I'm interested yet nervous to see the "this project becomes too flavor based" arguments that may arise now. >_>

EDIT- Interesting post to be my 200th.

 

[DougJustDoug]

EM, your post hits at the very heart of the "Create A Pokemon Catch-22" which is simply stated:

We are supposedly creating "good pokemon". But, we can never create "good pokemon".

In your post, you are asking "Why can't we create good pokemon?" Time Mage answered this earlier, but I'll restate it...

There is no way a community of THOUSANDS of people, in a fully democratic process, can create a "good pokemon". Because a truly "good pokemon" will be cohesive and consistent and effective and cool and balanced and well... everything! That ain't gonna happen with hundreds of cooks in the kitchen. In fact, the only way that can happen is if one brilliant person, or perhaps a very small, very tight-knit team of brilliant people go off in a room and make a great pokemon.

Even if you could form a small team, do you think every pokemon created would be good? Hell no. Just look at the pokedex and you'll see what I mean. I have no idea how Gamefreak makes pokemon, but I doubt they poll thousands of people for each aspect. I bet they have teams or individuals that make them. I'm sure those people work very hard to make good pokemon. What are the results? Well out of almost 500 such creations, the vast majority of them suck. At least by my reckoning they do. But, then again, I know people that get a hard-on at the very mention of Farfetch'd -- so who am I to judge?

My point is this -- large democracies are horrible at producing efficient, effective results. Just look at the U.S. tax code if you need a little reminder of the efficiency of the "greatest democracy in the world". Design-by-committee is a common synonym for "shitty" or "poorly designed".

The CAP project is a democratic project and always will be. As such, we will always be designing-by-committee -- a VERY large committee, at that. The CAP server has roughly 15,000 unique non-alt accounts. If even a fraction of those people discuss and vote in the CAP forum -- that's a HUGE fucking committee of people. Do you think there is any conceivable way to get that many people "on the same page"? Absolutely positively not. No way. Never.

So, let's face facts here. It's a monumental achievement that we can string together a series of polls that yields anything remotely usable in the first place. That's why the CAP Mission Statement specifically states:

Despite the project's name, the goal is not to create Pokémon. The Pokémon that come out of the project are simply a by-product of the community construction process. The process is the goal -- with all the discussions and discoveries that go along with it. Like they say, "Life is about the journey, not the destination."

We have almost no way to guarantee that we will create good pokemon. But, I do think we can have a fun time creating them. That's why I focus on the discussion, not the outcome of the vote. That's why I focus on what we learn, not the tools we make to learn it. The only thing we can successfully do as a community -- is to BE A COMMUNITY. If that is our goal, then we can call ourselves "successful" all the time! If we set our goal to create wonderful, cohesive pokemon -- then we should give up now. Because we will fail almost every time.

So, to bring this back to the art -- art is so inherently subjective, it is ridiculous to attempt to reason through it. You can't debate art. You sure as hell can't PLAYTEST art on the CAP server. How can you determine if the art is "successfull" or not? How can you judge if the art "makes sense"? I'll tell you how. You poll a bunch of people and the majority wins. Guess what? That's exactly what we do.

Do you think moving the art in the process is going to make the art "make more sense"? No it won't. Look at this last poll. We have a stat spread that is defensive as hell. What design did we choose? A pokemon that looks like it is made of toothpicks. It won BY A LANDSLIDE. I can come up with a million reasons that design "doesn't make sense". Are any of my reasons "right"? No, they aren't. Because the vast majority of this community PROVED those reasons are wrong. They proved it with the only tangible proof that can be given for art -- majority preference.

We need to continue to focus on the aspects of this pokemon that can be reasoned, analyzed, debated, and discussed. And at the end of that process, we do something that NO OTHER fakemon project does -- we PLAY IT. For real. Against real people, in real battles. That's where we "prove" all the theory and conjecture during the creation process. The stuff that doesn't work becomes an educational stepping stone for future creations.

Can we prove our art? No we can't. Why should we remove Tail Glow from Syclant? Because now that we've seen the sprite, we just don't think it "makes sense" that an ice cube stuck up a bug's ass can glow? No. We should remove it because it's too fucking powerful in competitive play.

I'm a big fan of art. And I would love it if we could create beautiful, cohesive, competitive OU pokemon with all sorts of subtle nuances and creative flourishes. But that just isn't going to happen at the end of a process that is basically hundreds of people arguing and voting a couple dozen times in a row. The best I can hope for, is that each one of those arguments is organized and educational, and each of those votes is conducted fairly.

That is the essence of the CAP project. The pokemon we create are just the tools to make the process happen.

 

[Elevator Music]

The first part of your post is basically declaration that a large group of people can't get things done right. This is true if they're dumb. A group of smart, free thinking people should be able to reason out a smart choice and compromise what they want and what makes logical sense on the pokemon (aka we couldn't give a pokemon with roots in the ground something like Levitate). Operative word in that sentence is should. Sadly, it appears to me that a lot of the majority does not have their head on. My views from my previous post have flipped, instead of pretending that everyone here can be on the same page like you said, I though they didn't care. It can't be because they don't care. I refuse to accept that people couldn't want a good result, that's impossible to me. Who would participate in a project like this if they didn't care? I just don't understand.

Going back to your mechanic and driver analogy after reading the mission statement (I hope you realize next to nobody reads this. I've read parts of it but never the whole thing until this morning), I think the difference you outline in this post is it's not one mechanic making the car, it's hundred or thousands. I think I get it know, though I'm probably wrong. Are you saying that because so many people are working on that one car and all want it to be exactly how they want it, it will never be exactly what they want (and more than likely not "good")?

I had this little toy my brother and I used to play with when we were little. It had slots for the head of a robot, the torso, the legs, and the feet. There were a bunch of pieces for each slot. When all the peices were in, you could put a paper on top and shade it and it would imprint on the paper. My brother and I could never agree on which ones we wanted until we were like 7, and up until that point the robots on the paper always came out strange, because they were only half of what each of us wanted. Now if there were a bunch more of us (say, the two of us, and about 500 other kids), we would never have been able to make one that worked. Is that kinda what you mean? That a large group of people will never be able to effectively compromise? That comes as a harsh reality to me (something we all wish we could escape on the internet probably), the fact that everybody can't always win. My naivette strikes again (more the fact I didn't think that reality applied here than that I didn't know it). Yay.

So.... now what? We just sit back and do the clicky polls like before, pretending this never happened? There's _nothing_ we can do about this, or is it not really an issue? Your second part hints at what to do, but I still don't quite get it.

---this has nothing to do with the rest of my post---
And I have a question. In your earlier post, you mentioned something about a Waterfall model and a Spiral model. You say we run as a Waterfall model. Doesn't that kind of squash any plans for revision we have? Maybe that's just me thinking I'd rather revise something once we "finish" it rather than when we "finish" x number of them, but it would make sense to do it after we finish the pokemon and playtest it, but that's another debate for another time.

 

[Deck Knight]

The CAP project is a democratic project and always will be. As such, we will always be designing-by-committee -- a VERY large committee, at that. The CAP server has roughly 15,000 unique non-alt accounts. If even a fraction of those people discuss and vote in the CAP forum -- that's a HUGE fucking committee of people. Do you think there is any conceivable way to get that many people "on the same page"? Absolutely positively not. No way. Never.

So, let's face facts here. It's a monumental achievement that we can string together a series of polls that yields anything remotely usable in the first place. That's why the CAP Mission Statement specifically states:

To be fair Doug, what we generally have is a committee of about 20 well known, competent, regular contributors and about 300 regular voters. Essentially, every time we vote it isn't really a free-for-all as much as a battle of two or three well thought out, well argued ideas. The only exception, ironically, is art, and even then usually the best or most coherent design wins (unless the most f'ing amazing art wins, like in Pyroak's case >_>). Don't blame me, I voted for Zantimonius >_>.

I'm quite proud of our process, we breed quality control (or at least attempt to) into every phase of the project. I should know, I'm basically our resident killjoy >_>.