Trapinch evolves into Charizard??

[SmearglePaints]

I saw this thread posted on PC about Trapinch being the original starter that evolved into Charizard, and was wondering what anyone thought of that?

It's strange, but the guy does show pictures that are a striking comparison and brings up interviews or something.

 

[Our Wasted Years]

-_- Trainpich>Vibrava>Flygon
Charmander>Charmeleon>Charizard

IS THAT SO HARD TO FATHOM?!?!

 

[Seiken]

Not going to believe it unless I see some obscure Sugimori sketches of it and its original intent.

Not to mention a whole lot of other differences that could debunk the whole thing.

 

[Dewgong Reign]

I always thought Venonat evloved into Butterfree, and Dragonai->Gyrados->Lapras.

-_-'

 

[Scarlet Devil]

.... ._.


no

 

[SmearglePaints]

Funny how nearly everyone over there gives it the benefit of the doubt and considers it, while everyone here wont give it a chance.

I dunno... He's not saying Trapinch does evolve into Charizard, just that Trapinch was at one time intended to be the the pre-evolution of Charizard. Whether this means Trapinch was the original Fire starter, or they were just an ordinary Fire line can't be said.

Maybe is someone finds that supposed interview we could get more?

 

[The Outrage]

=O

charizard had a much larger jaw! this is as definitive proof as arcanine being originally having moltres' spot in the bird trio cuz its fire and its called legendary.

Oh yeah, let's completely ignore the fact that his evolution shows the progression of an Antlion and completely believe him when all he has going for him is "I've heard that Trapinch was originally intended to be the pre-evolution for Charizard, but was scrapped and not introduced until the third generation, and Charizard was slightly redesigned and became the final Fire starter."

Heard from where? I've heard a lot of stuff too >_>

 

[pikachu200]

I find the Trapinch evolution chain odd just the Trapinch evolving to Vibrava it's just strange from orange to green with levitation

 

[Shinx3000]

-_- Trainpich>Vibrava>Flygon
Charmander>Charmeleon>Charizard

IS THAT SO HARD TO FATHOM?!?!

We know this, duh. What we are saying is that Trapinch is origiinally supposed to be what charmander is now, the first in the evo line of charizard. Trapinch has the colors of a fire type afterall, but I guess it was scrapped because its not cute, charmader is cute, even if charmeleon isn't. So if trapinch was really supposed to be the Fire srarter of Gen I, would that mean there would be a different looking charmeleon then too, since it resembles a stronger charmander?

Oh yeah, let's completely ignore the fact that his evolution shows the progression of an Antlion and completely believe him when all he has going for him is "I've heard that Trapinch was originally intended to be the pre-evolution for Charizard, but was scrapped and not introduced until the third generation, and Charizard was slightly redesigned and became the final Fire starter."

Is that really so hard to believe? Besides trapinch is based on an antlion by looks, not by what it does. And they could have redesigned charizard slightly. Have you seen what a few of the original art for Gen III pokemon looked like? Torchic has "ears", Blaziken looked like a cross between Blaziken and latios too, which I thought looked awesome, but those were modified before the games came out

I find the Trapinch evolution chain odd just the Trapinch evolving to Vibrava it's just strange from orange to green with levitation

Yeah, trapinch looks nothing like vibrava. Granted vibrava bears some resembelence to flygon though. Even trapinch color is not like its evos. And I never understood vibrava anyway, it can use dig right? And how come levitate is still in affect when it uses dig? Surely ground moves like earth power/earthquake should have been able to hit it, even if its levitating while in a hole, it still should get the effects of the ground moves, but this is offtopic

 

[madcowyup]

I saw this thread posted on PC about Trapinch being the original starter that evolved into Charizard, and was wondering what anyone thought of that?

It's strange, but the guy does show pictures that are a striking comparison and brings up interviews or something.

Um, what? No. Just no.

 

[Our Wasted Years]

We know this, duh. What we are saying is that Trapinch is origiinally supposed to be what charmander is now, the first in the evo line of charizard. Trapinch has the colors of a fire type afterall, but I guess it was scrapped because its not cute, charmader is cute, even if charmeleon isn't. So if trapinch was really supposed to be the Fire srarter of Gen I, would that mean there would be a different looking charmeleon then too, since it resembles a stronger charmander?

I never understood some people's thought process. If Charmander>Charmeleon>Charizard has been like that for..what..like 11 years now?!? Don't you think it was SUPPOSED to be like that from the very start. Idc if Pokemon look alike. Most of the 4th Gen and some of the 3rd gen are like some Kindergarten drawings. Also they been making Pokemon for years now, some designs would sooner or later somehow resemble some others. Now I know Tranpinch is weird as hell in looks but look at this:
Vulpix>Ninetales
Oddish>Gloom
Venonat>Venomoth
Psyduck>Golduck
Machop>Machoke>Machamp
Weepinbell>Victreebel
Graveler>Golem

Those are just a few, and yeah bro they all look so ALIKE srsly.

 

[Shinx3000]

Well there was a roumor going round that GF originally designed around 1000pokemon and some got scrapped, other changed and the ones that stayed are the pokemon we know now.

Those are just a few, and yeah bro they all look so ALIKE srsly.

But couldn't they have had charmeleon/charizard designed to look like the starter (what traphinch might have been) looks like and then redesigned them when they put the charmander we know now as the starter and not trapinch looks?

 

[Our Wasted Years]

Well there was a roumor going round that GF originally designed around 1000pokemon and some got scrapped, other changed and the ones that stayed are the pokemon we know now.



But couldn't they have had charmeleon/charizard designed to look like the starter (what traphinch might have been) looks like and then redesigned them when they put the charmander we know now as the starter and not trapinch looks?

We might never know but it doesn't bother me because that evolutionary line has been around for over a decade. It's pretty much "written in stone."
If Tranpich was supposed to be there, fine, that's cool, but what's the point trying to prove it over a decade later?

 

[Shinx3000]

If Tranpich was supposed to be there, fine, that's cool, but what's the point trying to prove it over a decade later?

Suppose thats true, unless you have some evidence to kinda prove what your saying, its too late to try and prove something with no evidence.

 

[Our Wasted Years]

Suppose thats true, unless you have some evidence to kinda prove what your saying, its too late to try and prove something with no evidence.

Hmm that would be the case, but here it's not. I have not attempted to prove it wrong, but I suppose that the Charmander evolutionary line being there for over a decade is not proof for you at all. Also since you're saying I'm wrong, you must think you're right. So how about showing me your proof? It's okay, I can wait.

 

[Shinx3000]

I didn't mean you show me proof or me show you proof, I mean if someone like SmearglePaints was to post something like this, years after, some evidence, not just what some random persons says, should at least be there or it won't really matter

 

[SmearglePaints]

If Tranpich was supposed to be there, fine, that's cool, but what's the point trying to prove it over a decade later?

It doesn't really matter, but it's interesting. The guy brought it up for some reason, so at least he found it interesting enough.

 

[Luna Tiger]

Yeah, trapinch looks nothing like vibrava.

Dragonair looks nothing like Dragonite. A caterpillar looks nothing like a butterfly. Just as different in color as in shape. At least Trapinch and Caterpie have some real life logic going behind them. Dragonair to Dragonite? Not so much (no, you can't play the "they're dragons" card. Eastern dragons don't become western dragons).

 

[DerMißingno]

I never understood some people's thought process. If Charmander>Charmeleon>Charizard has been like that for..what..like 11 years now?!? Don't you think it was SUPPOSED to be like that from the very start.

Umm, no I don't think that any game designers just come up with everything perfectly the first time and releases the game without making any revisions at all. Actually, I think there were probably a lot of situations like this, where they had a design and just decided not to use it in favor of something else. That's generally how most creative processes work.

Were some of the scrapped ideas reintroduced later? Maybe. Unlikely, since they were scrapped for a reason. But I don't find it too inconceivable to believe that they thought a pokemon was a good idea but didn't fit as a starter, so they decided to shelve it for posterity. I'm sure they didn't predict a third generation back then, but when they did end up having one, they could have gone back to their old drawings to get new ideas. I really don't see why this couldn't be the case for many second through fourth generation pokemon.

Was it true for Trapinch? Maybe. I don't think that picture really shows much evidence, but anything's possible. It doesn't matter though.

 

[SmearglePaints]

Well some guy showed up and confirmed it's been brought up before, but the suggested "interview" is still up in air. I guess that'll come out eventually, but for now, what about the statement about the third gen starters? I think that's much more believable.