While I haven't bought it yet, I'll probably get Violet too because the legendary motorcycle looks marginally less stupid than Scarlet's legendary motorcycle, since the Scarlet version uses its legs to run around while the wheels are going and I just can't not start at it. In the end, I'll probably just have to see which pokemon are version specific so I can get whichever one has more pokemon I like.
I was watching ZFG playing. the motorcycle pokemon is dumb. I am sorry. I just cannot understand what they are going for. in my mind, it is like the ice cream cone pokemon, Vanillish, or the key-ring pokemon, Klefki. I get it - they are children's games - and what is more childish that a mish-mash of thematically jarring characters and attributes?
Looking at the first gen pokemon, people might point to the various electric-types who seem to be less of animals and more of the objects or mechanisms that one might expect in an industrial setting, and say that these are the precursors to the modern 'inanimate everyday object' pokemon.
take Voltorb,
First discovered in the plant where Poké Balls are created, Voltorb is said to be a Poké Ball that came to life after being imbued with electrical energy. It's a strange origin story, but an original and interesting one.
I suppose my western mind looks at this notion of spirit objects, imbued with the ever-present life force that exists in the world of Pokemon.. and thinks the designers got really lazy. the motorcycle pokemon doesn't even use the wheels. where is this pokemon supposed to meaningfully exist within the larger world?
not only does it conflict with the themes of evolutionary adaptation present in the earlier gens, but it conflicts with the idea of pokemon being meaningful for themselves without the presence of humans. Voltorb, Magnetite, etc... they are suggested to have their own existences beyond the human modern life. They possess autonomy, even if that autonomy is that of a wild animal.
but... what is an animal adapted to represent the form of a man-made vehicle, and then that animal is also willingly co-opted into a never ending existence as a transportation device - working (without apparent effort) forever to move the player character across these vast distances?
it seems absolutely odd that the developers would create this creature, faced with this existence, and claim that it is within the same IP as the earlier gens, with their soft-bordered lore, expressionist worldbuilding.. sense of place and setting.
I think the general style of the games, three-dimensional open world, is a complete denial of creative opportunity presented by the IP's wealth and heritage. you trade a finely detailed 2-d world, with hard narrative borders that really sell the idea that the world IS the story and the player is IN the world... you trade that feeling for a fairly derivative "open world" that fails to even sell the biological reality of the creatures within it. they straight up included the towers from BOTW as if doing some kind of rote checklist meant to qualify as a modern open world game. can you imagine falling in love with this new generation as a young child? it is doubtful to me.
I welcome people who disagree to point out what I fail to see in the newer gens. maybe I am mistaken.