Too many Legendaries?

[Dagoth Ur]

I personally think that there are too many Legendaries in Pokemon. Let's go down the list of legendary Pokemon and their roles:

1) Moltres (bird of fire)
2) Articuno (bird of ice)
3) Zapdos (bird of lightning)
4) Mewtwo (psychic alien/mutant)
5) Mew
6) Suicune (wolf of north wind)
7) Entei (lion of fire)
8) Raikou (tiger of lightning)
9) Celebi (forest spirit)
10) Lugia (guardian of ocean currents)
11) Ho-oh (phoenix)
12) Regirock (tomb guardian)
13) Registeel (tomb guardian)
14) Regice (tomb guardian)
15) Latias
16) Latios
17) Kyogre (builder of sea)
18) Groudon (builder of land)
19) Rayquaza (dragon of the sky)
20) Jirachi (the miracle Pokemon)
21) Deoxys (alien/mutant)

Honestly, I feel that 21 is already more than enough. So, is there anybody who agrees that enough is enough, or do people want even more Legendaries?

 

[brandon™]

I don't think they've gone too far. At least they're different in some way, like Mew's ability to learn any tm. I do think some are too generic though, like the Regi's and Latias/Latios. That's too much like the legendary dogs, and the Lati@s arent really that great of legendaries. I don't think they should make anymore, or they won't be so special.

 

[Jaycia]

I think that legendaries are ok, I think they have to have some for each new land. And by the way, you forgot Unown...if you consider Unown legendary. They appear too much in the games to be legendary, I guess but in the movies they make them appear legendary.

 

[Shiksa ♥]

I think the problem with legendaries is redundacy. There was no way that three Regi's were necessary, and things like that. If they come up with more creative ones, I welcome them.

And isn't Jiraachi more officially the "wish" Pokémon...?

 

[Iveechan]

I dislike legends. You can't even use them most of the time because they're frequently banned from normal teams.

 

[bell02+]

My theory is if they make a new set of games, then a new set of legendaries could be needed. *nods*

 

[Iveechan]

But the thing is that they seriously overdid it with the legends in the newer games.

 

[Transfinite]

Well, look at it this way. How many legendary creatures do we have in the real world? If you ask me, Pokemon doesn't have NEARLY as many.

And Mewtwo's not legendary, Mewtwo's a lab freak.

 

[Blackjack Gabbiani]

In gameplay he's considered a legendary.

 

[Dratini927]

Well, 21 is a lot...If you have only 40 Pokemon. But there are 386 Pokemon total, and 21 of 386 is a really low number. I don't even think that there are a lot at all. When you start to see about 100 legendaries, then you have too many.

I do agree that the Fire Red and Leaf Green really overdid it with the legendaties. You can get just about ever one in there. But they may have done that just so you can get them on the new series of games. But they may have been able to make new games if they spread the legendaries out.

But so far, there are not that many legendaries in these games.

 

[BenRG]

Enough!

While I would like to see a Grass/Flying-type legendary bird, I think that they have over-used the Legendary Pokémon concept in the games. They are clearly running out of ideas, as is shown by the three "Regis" in Ruby and Sapphire.

The need to create a 'gimmick' for the next game shouldn't make them drown the poor thing in ill-thought-out, pointless 'god-Pokémon'.

 

[TRF-chan]

It doesn't really bother me, except for having to go through all that trouble to get the three Regi's so I can complete my Pokédex when I find them fugly and useless - they should have just been regular Pokémon. Maybe there'd be a pre-evo, and depending on which stone/item you used on them, they would evovle according, like Eevee.

As long as they don't pull out more Regi-things, I'm fine with more legendaries.

 

[evkl]

21 out of 386. Less than 6%. Eleven out of every two hundred isn't that bad of a number for legendaries...

 

[Trainer-c]

Every Pokemon game needs legendarys. Since one of the main goals in the Pokemon games is to catch all Pokemon.

 

[Mikeachu]

I wouldn't say so much that there are too many legendaries as I would say there are too many legendaries in Ru/Sa! There's Groudon & Kyogre and there's the Regis and Latios & Latias and 3 other, unconnected legends!

 

[Andrew]

I'd say there are too many. Darn Legendaries, next thing we'll have a Legendary for your Lunchbox "This Pokemon protects your food from any misfortunes, and keeps your salad roll from getting soggy! ^^"

Quite frankly, some of them are atrocious, and need to be culled, hopefully, next time, they won't go as overboard.

Besides, aren't there more legendaries, than Dragons, which kind of makes Dragons probably the most rare type?

 

[FalconriderX]

I really do think that there are too many legendary pokemon. I mean, four was an exceptable amount in the first games! Are they really that LEGENDARY if there are a lot of them?

 

[Hyper Togepi]

generation 1: 4 +1 secret
generation 2: 5 +1 secret
generation 3: 8 +2 secrets

If this pattern continues:
Generation 4: 10 +3 secrets (plus the other 17 old ones and 4 secrets make... 27 and 7 secrets... no one wants to catch that many legendaries...)

Coming soon: Legandary Housepets!

 

[FireEmblemPride]

I'm fine with more legendaries, otherwise we wouldn't have very many Pokemon movies!

 

[bell02+]

I doubt they are going to make 10 legendaries for the next games.

but in a porportional sense there are less legendaries:

5/150= 3 1/3%
11/250= 4.4%
17/386= 4.04% a little less

I don't think there are too much, I hope they do make more for the next game because the stories behind them usually are intresting.