this post was submitted on 24 Aug 2024
130 points (96.4% liked)

RetroGaming

19555 readers
151 users here now

Vintage gaming community.

Rules:

  1. Be kind.
  2. No spam or soliciting for money.
  3. No racism or other bigotry allowed.
  4. Obviously nothing illegal.

If you see these please report them.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

Gen 1 fans of Pokémon, especially those who played Red and Blue versions, can now find a bit more peace regarding the sorrowful character of Cubone. For years, it was known that Cubone never removes its skull helmet due to which nobody has ever seen its real face. However, recent discoveries have proven this notion wrong.

Key Points:

  • Discovery in Picture Book: A 90s coloring book titled Pokémon Picture Diary: Let's Go With Pikachu! by Keiko Fukuyama features a page showing Cubone playing a Pokémon flute without its skull helmet. This indicates that at some point, Cubone was able to take off the skull.
  • Additional Evidence: There are also various products released over the years displaying Cubone’s face when its skull is not on, including a Pokémon card and a plush toy where users can unstitch the skull for it to be revealed.

Do you believe that Pokémon’s creators intentionally included these revelations in their products to subtly provide emotional closure or was it merely coincidental? How do you feel about the revelation of Cubone's face being out there for all to see, given its symbolic representation as a motherless Pokémon?

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 12 points 2 months ago (2 children)

There was a theory going about that they were charmanders, hence the shape of them and the charzard style skull.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 months ago (1 children)

But don't Chars die if their tail goes out? Or is this some weird cross evolution mechanic now?

[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 months ago

maybe they just die emotionally

[–] [email protected] 12 points 2 months ago (1 children)

There was also the one where they are kid Kangaskans who lost their parent.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 months ago (1 children)

This one just seems lazy. They're clearly not the same species directly. So do we have the whole evolution chat won't, or do some skip being Kangaskhan to become Marrowaks, or what? This has so many holes on its face.

Of course, these theories are made by kids while playing and trading cards. So it makes sense.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 2 months ago

I know, I lump that one in with how Gengar and Clefable are the same, just a pallet swap.