GQTDM: #3 What is the first Pokémon?

[Glen-i]

Yeah, sorry. Slipped my mind last week. Probably for the best though, got a bit under the weather after getting a Covid vaccine.

This is Gaming Questions That Don't Matter, A journey through the many gaming conundrums that plague my mind, because frankly, they have no hope of actually being officially answered, so I have to make do and inflict my turmoil on you lot.

It was inevitable that I'd get to a Pokémon question. The series thrives on unanswered aspects and it certainly won't be the only time it'll show up, but for now, let's focus on a question that looks stupidly simple at first glance.

One of my nightmare scenarios is that I go on to "Who Wants To Be a Millionaire?" and get this as the first question.

Your average gamer will look at that and be able to give an answer in a heartbeat. Me however? I'll look at that and start panicking because it's not a case of what I think is the right answer, it's what the person who set the question thinks is the right answer.

Now of course, you'll never see this happen in real life (Although I did once see a question about the Mario series where the answer was "Wart". The person answering it didn't have a hope in hell!), but this question is still problematic because technically, all four of those options could be right!

So, instead of making my case for what I think, I'm gonna explain why each of these four Pokémon could be classed as the first and then leave it to the poll and further discussion.

Bulbasaur

This plant-dinosaur hybrid's case for being number 1 is pretty straightforward. It's #001 in the National Pokédex.

I mean, if you need more explanation than that, then you're gonna struggle with the rest of this...

Rhydon

Mr. Rhino Drill here is a pretty popular Pokémon, despite being cursed with a name that's made it the target of many unfunny, dirty puns and the unholy type combination of Rock/Ground. Despite this, one of these somehow still lost to Ash's Pikachu because Pikachu "went for the horn". Don't do that in any game, by the way, it won't work. Ash is an idiot.

Rhydon's claim for first place comes from a common piece of Pokémon trivia in that it was the first Pokémon that Pokémon artist, Ken Sugimori, created. So as far as real life is concerned, Rhydon is the first Pokémon.

Mew

Some of you might be more inclined to consider the last generation 1 Pokémon as the first Pokémon. The reason being that it's thought to be a claim that quite a few Pokédex entries make, here's the one from the fourth generation of games.

"Because it can use all kinds of moves, many scientists believe MEW to be the ancestor of Pokémon."

A lot of different games have similar Pokédex entries. If they're right, then Mew would have to be the first Pokémon. Although, that's up for debate thanks to contestant number 4.

Arceus

This... thing was the final Pokémon in the fourth generation of games. Simply put, it's strongly implied that Arceus created every Pokémon, which makes it effectively Pokémon God. (Which makes Mew... Pokémon Jesus?)

Now, some might argue that being Pokémon God would mean that Arceus isn't an actual Pokémon. I've played enough RPG's where a villain wants to be better than human and become a God, so I can kinda see where this point is coming from.

So there we have it, 4 different Pokémon claiming to be the first for a host of different reasons. Which one do you think fits the bill?

Oh, and I'm not gonna vote in the poll just yet. Don't want my extreme nerdiness to influence anyone.

[Dcubed]

As always, my vote goes to Rhydon...

Circa 1990 baby!

Though it does call into question... what the hell is that other Capsule Mon’ in that picture!? (This lore goes so deep that it predates the games’ lore itself!)

(BTW, good job on making a new thread this time!)

Edited February 8, 2021 by Dcubed

[Mandalore]

Gengar and Nidorino? Unless the Japanese version had a different intro.

[Julius]

1 hour ago, Dcubed said:

As always, my vote goes to Rhydon...

Circa 1990 baby!

Though it does call into question... what the hell is that other Capsule Mon’ in that picture!? (This lore goes so deep that it predates the games’ lore itself!)

(BTW, good job on making a new thread this time!)

That looks like the opening battle between Gengar and Nidorino, though here it's some unholy sight that's like a Charizard crossed with a Dunsparce. I thought this was Sugimori's concept art for Rhydon?

Man, I really love looking back at Sugimori's older stuff. I don't know what it is about it, but there's just this unbridled sense of both simplicity and exploration that I really hope the core series games can one day achieve. 

Anyways, to the question at hand: it's a tricky one, and I've always found the question of what the first Pokémon was to be a little too open-ended. Being a fictional world, the question of what the first Pokémon is just isn't that simple, because we see different answers for very different lines of thinking. I've always viewed the question as being specific to the first to exist in the Pokémon world, but, again, it's just too vague a question for my liking. 

Rhydon might be the first Pokémon designed, so perhaps in our world it can be considered the first, but in the fictional world of Pokémon, it's just not, given the existence of the other answers to the question.

As for Bulbasaur, I don't think it is either. First classified in the Pokédex by scientists in the world of Pokémon, sure, but that could just as well be any other Pokémon. As we see from other regions starting their respective Dex (what's the plural here, probably Dexes right? But I guess the plural of Pokédex would be Pokédices? Whatever, that's not important ) with the Grass-type starters, that just seems to be the order of things. It probably doesn't mean that Bulbasaur was the first discovered, or anything like that. It just means Kanto were the first to get out there with the Pokédex and classified their own Pokémon first. 

Mew I've always viewed as being more of an Adam and Eve situation from a religious perspective, and from a scientific one (especially given how heavily Gen I in particular leans into the themes of genetics, what with evolution, artificially created life, and cloning), I've always viewed it as the missing link which ties all Pokémon together. 

Despite being the creator of the Pokémon universe, and basically the closest thing to they have a capital 'G' god, I do consider Arceus to be the first Pokémon, in the context of the Pokémon world (when it comes to fictional worlds that's how I interpret the question, otherwise there's a whole Star Wars argument we could have over who the first Jedi is, which doesn't sound fun at all). Unlike our own world's creators in religious history with the pantheon of gods and God, the Pokémon universe's has a verifiable, physical form, which is officially classified in and recognised by the Pokédex. Given the creation myth of Sinnoh, it's pretty clear that, at least based on what's written in the Pokémon world, Arceus existed before anything like a Big Bang (again, closer to "God" than a "god"; "The Original One breathed alone before the universe came.")

So yeah, I think what's more important here is the vagueness of the question and how it could lead to multiple interpretations of the question being asked (not saying this is on @Glen-i, obviously, because like he says, it's a discussion which stretches back a while, but this is the issue I've always had with this argument and similar ones concerning other topics). You could just as well throw Mewtwo, Portion, Baltoy, Claydol et al into that list too, and starting have a discussion about the first man-made Pokémon inside of this one, because they could be argued to be the first Pokémon in another sense. 

Edited February 8, 2021 by Julius

[RedShell]

All of those options are incorrect I'm afraid. The real answer is:

Spoiler

Yeah, I don't actually know.

However, Pikachu was the first Pokémon to make me take notice of the franchise, so in that sense it really was the first Pokémon.

 

[Ike]

I'd say your question is too vague and it depends on what you are asking. 

[Dufniall]

8 minutes ago, Ike said:

I'd say your question is too vague and it depends on what you are asking. 

Yep, I agree. All four answers are correct, especially in the way you state the question and answers.

[Dcubed]

I propose that Rhydon is the only truly “correct” answer here because it’s the only Pokemon that comes from a position that is truly inarguable; that can sufficiently and satisfactorily dispel its null hypothesis (the null hypothesis being “This is not the first Pokemon”).

Rhydon being the first Pokemon to be designed is 100% stone cold fact; coming from the mouth of its own creator.  However, the same can’t necessarily be said of the other three choices (within series lore); as they can’t state that their claims come from sufficiently high enough quality evidence.

Bulbasaur as the first discovered Pokemon? Only in one region (Kanto) is that true; hell, it doesn’t appear in the wild in that region! There are other regions where Pokemon scientists haven’t even heard of whatever the hell a Bulbasaur is! So it can’t be the first Pokemon to be discovered everywhere.  Therefore, it cannot dispel the null hypothesis.

Mew? There are only two Pokemon which are 100% known to have directly spawned out of Mew (Mewtwo and Ditto; the latter of which is a failed Mew clone), anything else is completely unproven; based solely on its ability to use Transform (a move only learnt naturally by Mew and Ditto throughout all of the 8 mainline games), and its ability to learn any move.  While this is a decent theory? It isn’t necessarily based on fact, but rather is based merely on correlation, and its very possible that Mew was actually made out of something else (fun fact, Mew was first found in South America, and this is even reiterated in Fr/LG, so it doesn’t even come from the same world as the rest of Pokemon!).  Given its horrendous inability to prove its heritage? The confidence interval is too low to satisfactorily dispel the null hypothesis.

Arceus? It might be a Pokemon God, but that doesn’t mean that it was the first of its kind.  Hell, we know for a fact that it did not create all known Pokemon (Mewtwo, Ditto, Voltorb, Electrode, Porygon, Porygon 2, Porygon Z and every single Ultra Beast are all bereft of Arceus’ light for starters), so it’s very possible, and very likely that something came before it (hell, the Arceus plates had to have been made by something other than Arceus that already knew of its existence!).  The plates alone are evidence enough to dispel the notion of divine conception; and thus, this false god cannot dispel the null hypothesis.

So yeah.  The only one that has a watertight argument in its favour is Rhydon.  Therefore, based on the hierarchy of evidence? Rhydon is the only choice that can reasonably be made out of the four.

Edited February 8, 2021 by Dcubed

[Glen-i]

6 hours ago, Ike said:

I'd say your question is too vague and it depends on what you are asking. 

 

6 hours ago, Julius said:

So yeah, I think what's more important here is the vagueness of the question and how it could lead to multiple interpretations of the question being asked

Believe me, I'm well aware of the fundamental problem with this question. That's why I struggle to come up with a satisfying answer.

4 hours ago, Dcubed said:

Arceus? It might be a Pokemon God, but that doesn’t mean that it was the first of its kind.  Hell, we know for a fact that it did not create all known Pokemon (Mewtwo, Ditto, Voltorb, Electrode, Porygon, Porygon 2, Porygon Z and every single Ultra Beast are all bereft of Arceus’ light for starters),

OK, I had a feeling man-made Pokémon would get a mention here. So here's something that bugs me about that.

I remember a book in Sinnoh (It's normally Sinnoh, that lore gets wild!) stating, and I am paraphrasing, that humans and Pokémon used to be the same thing. So wouldn't that make Porygon and the like just another branch in Arceus' ridiculously large tree of species?

Also, Super Mystery Dungeon has already pretty much confirmed that Arceus can jump between dimensions, so who's to say it didn't create the Ultra Beasts as well?

5 hours ago, Dcubed said:

The plates alone are evidence enough to dispel the notion of divine conception; and thus, this false god cannot dispel the null hypothesis.

They do? I fail to see how. Sinnoh's creation myth kinda implies that Arceus created everything. You think it can't whip up some stone tablets that magically change Arceus' type?

[Cube]

Bulbasaur is #001. So it must be Bulbasaur.

[Glen-i]

2 hours ago, Cube said:

Bulbasaur is #001. So it must be Bulbasaur.

Typical Kantonian attitude.

Edited February 8, 2021 by Glen-i

[Jonnas]

I drank a tad too much for dinner, so I'm not gonna Raichu a long post, but if we look at each case:

• Bulbasaur is #001 on the Pokédex, but that always seemed iffy to me. For starters (heh), the National Dex makes no sense. Beyond being Kanto-centric, there's the issue of Mewtwo coming before Mew, the fossils somehow coming before Dratini and Snorlax, evolutions such as Crobat being way out of order, and Ditto and Porygon being way earlier than the lore suggests. The National Dex order is an overly rigid, arbitrary list made by Oak and his cadre of child researchers, and as such, I cannot in good faith condone its claims of whoever "first" is. Simply Onixcceptable;
• Mew is a theory I cannot Bayleef. So many primordial Pokémon came before her (and we know they're Pokémon, because the Master Ball works on them too). Maybe she originated life on Earth, but that ain't enough;
• Arceus has a better case, being the most primordial of primordials, but there are too many Unowns. For example, did Arceus reset a previous universe? Did he hop in from a parallel universe, bringing his pals with? Or did he hatch from a predecessor egg, like a Demiurge sort of Pokémon? Any new game (even a DPP remake) could introduce further lore to these Farfetch'd tales, displacing Arceus from his spot as the origin of all;
• But you know who created Arceus? The same people who claim they created Rhydon first. And Wynaut, it's as good an answer as any. As such, here goes my vote.

But all that's just Azelf-professed theory. Like Glen-i said, this issue depends too much from person to person, and it's bound to keep running a Muk.

[Glen-i]

I voted.

OK, who are the two dopes who voted Mew?

If you're going by that reasoning, then why not go for Arceus? Just willfully ignoring it?

[bob]

I voted.
OK, who are the two dopes who voted Mew?
If you're going by that reasoning, then why not go for Arceus? Just willfully ignoring it?

As a pure Genwunner, I don't recognise it as a Pokémon.

[Goafer]

"Scientifically, it's Bulbasaur"

 

[Ike]

If Mew contains the DNA of all Pokemon, then why doesn't Mewtwo. Which genius scientist said "nope, don't need all of these."?

Why does Oak need to send 10 year olds to complete a Pokedex that already has the entries written. The trainers didn't write them?

[Dufniall]

22 minutes ago, Ike said:

Why does Oak need to send 10 year olds to complete a Pokedex that already has the entries written. The trainers didn't write them?

[Glen-i]

18 hours ago, Ike said:

If Mew contains the DNA of all Pokemon, then why doesn't Mewtwo. Which genius scientist said "nope, don't need all of these."?

The same genius scientist who made Mewtwo?

Wasn't exactly the best idea.

[Glen-i]

So, poll's closed.

I'm very disappointed in all of you. You manage to settle on the one answer I legitimately think is actually wrong.

Clearly need to assign you some extra homework.

[Jonnas]

On 09/02/2021 at 12:14 AM, Jonnas said:

 

• Mew is a theory I cannot Bayleef. 

You think I Jynxed it?

[Ashley]

On 08/02/2021 at 8:15 PM, Glen-i said:

Typical Kantonian attitude.

You Kant argue with the logic though. 

I would have chosen Mew but I snost and lost because I like the idea of Pokémon progressively getting weaker as it goes against their evolution thing. 

I chose not to acknowledge that Paperchase Christmas decoration as a Pokémon.