winstein
Bob-omb
For a long time, I've noticed that in Pokemon, dual types get a bigger share of love compared to the single types. So for example, it's likely for a Fire/Grass-type to be loved compared to just pure Fire-type or pure Grass-type.
An example of this trend is on the topic of starter types. If a starter Pokemon ended up with a dual type, that would be more exciting that when they ended up being single type in all stages. The Generation 8 starters are an example, where I've heard of some who did not like that they did not gain a secondary type, though I need to point out that I love that they do this because it's a bold choice contrary to fan expectation. At other times, there are those who considered single-type Pokemon to be "boring" as opposed to a dual-type Pokemon. In some ways, there are fans of a Pokemon of a certain type, so a dual-type Pokemon gets more love because they have a larger demography compared to a single type.
This basically extends to competitive viability, where if there are similar Pokemon, the dual-type ones will be considered superior. As an example, there's Heracross as opposed to Pinsir and later on Sawk. Their types are Bug/Fighting, Bug-type, and Fighting-type respectively, and their attack and speed stats are the same. As it turns out, Heracross is considered the superior of the three, so it could be deduced that it's because Heracross's dual type made it perform the best, while the others did not reach the same potential. Another example would be Glalie and Froslass, where the latter's Ice/Ghost-type made it the more useful Pokemon compared to the former's pure Ice-type. Part of it could be because of how offensively superior dual-types are, gaining a power increase in two types as opposed to one, and how the marriage of two types give it neutralised weaknesses and compounded resistances.
That is not to say that single-types are necessarily inferior, because there are those that managed to punch above their weight and be viable among the dual-types. If not counting legendaries or Pokemon that circumvent their single-type by ability (e.g.: Cinderace's Libero bypassing the flaw in offence for being a single-type Pokemon), there might be like Rillaboom who is viable even though it's pure Grass-type. But a comment might exist that these Pokemon might as well be dual-typed to be even more useful, which goes back to how dual-types are viewed as being superior. For Pokemon's TCG, which only depicts Pokemon in single-types, a dual-type Pokemon can be of either one type if it allows (e.g.: Ludicolo could be either a Water-type or a Grass-type) while single-types are always only one specific type. I do think that the games do not provide any reason for single-types to get a bit of edge, exacerbating the "dual-types are superior" comment.
As to my opinion? While I do love a good dual-type so I can't claim to be contrary to popular belief, I genuinely think single-types are underdogs. They have much against their favour, so if something goes well for them, I am glad for it. It could be as simple as a single-type Pokemon being able to compete among the big dogs, with bonus points if the type is viewed as one of the worst ones like Grass- or Ice-types. Of course, it would help immensely if the games provide a bonus for single-types, but perhaps this would be something for the designers to figure out.
To reiterate the question, what is the opinion on single-types and the dual-types?
Thank you for reading.
An example of this trend is on the topic of starter types. If a starter Pokemon ended up with a dual type, that would be more exciting that when they ended up being single type in all stages. The Generation 8 starters are an example, where I've heard of some who did not like that they did not gain a secondary type, though I need to point out that I love that they do this because it's a bold choice contrary to fan expectation. At other times, there are those who considered single-type Pokemon to be "boring" as opposed to a dual-type Pokemon. In some ways, there are fans of a Pokemon of a certain type, so a dual-type Pokemon gets more love because they have a larger demography compared to a single type.
This basically extends to competitive viability, where if there are similar Pokemon, the dual-type ones will be considered superior. As an example, there's Heracross as opposed to Pinsir and later on Sawk. Their types are Bug/Fighting, Bug-type, and Fighting-type respectively, and their attack and speed stats are the same. As it turns out, Heracross is considered the superior of the three, so it could be deduced that it's because Heracross's dual type made it perform the best, while the others did not reach the same potential. Another example would be Glalie and Froslass, where the latter's Ice/Ghost-type made it the more useful Pokemon compared to the former's pure Ice-type. Part of it could be because of how offensively superior dual-types are, gaining a power increase in two types as opposed to one, and how the marriage of two types give it neutralised weaknesses and compounded resistances.
That is not to say that single-types are necessarily inferior, because there are those that managed to punch above their weight and be viable among the dual-types. If not counting legendaries or Pokemon that circumvent their single-type by ability (e.g.: Cinderace's Libero bypassing the flaw in offence for being a single-type Pokemon), there might be like Rillaboom who is viable even though it's pure Grass-type. But a comment might exist that these Pokemon might as well be dual-typed to be even more useful, which goes back to how dual-types are viewed as being superior. For Pokemon's TCG, which only depicts Pokemon in single-types, a dual-type Pokemon can be of either one type if it allows (e.g.: Ludicolo could be either a Water-type or a Grass-type) while single-types are always only one specific type. I do think that the games do not provide any reason for single-types to get a bit of edge, exacerbating the "dual-types are superior" comment.
As to my opinion? While I do love a good dual-type so I can't claim to be contrary to popular belief, I genuinely think single-types are underdogs. They have much against their favour, so if something goes well for them, I am glad for it. It could be as simple as a single-type Pokemon being able to compete among the big dogs, with bonus points if the type is viewed as one of the worst ones like Grass- or Ice-types. Of course, it would help immensely if the games provide a bonus for single-types, but perhaps this would be something for the designers to figure out.
To reiterate the question, what is the opinion on single-types and the dual-types?
Thank you for reading.