Why is Pocket Monsters considered the first adaptation?
4koma came out one month before Pocket Monsters came out, did it not? Yet it's considered the first adaptation of the games by many.
Are 4koma's not considered manga? Lucky Star and Azumanga would like to talk to anyone who thinks that.
It was only one volume but it was a manga, and a cute one at that. It was one of the manga that actually used one of Red's designs, straight from the games too, and called him by his name.
Re: Why is Pocket Monsters considered the first adaptation?
There's more than one volume of them. I have three and there may be more.
But they don't have an ongoing plot like Pocket Monsters, or even like either of your examples. Sure when you get down to it, those two don't have *much* of a plot, but they have a set path. These really don't (heck, one of them killed off Blaine when he used a Tentacruel as a wig, but he was back later).
Re: Why is Pocket Monsters considered the first adaptation?
I suppose it's because Pocket Monsters is the first "regular" manga with a continuous story.
Re: Why is Pocket Monsters considered the first adaptation?
I dunno, could be the same reason why Zensho has such little attention. :P
Re: Why is Pocket Monsters considered the first adaptation?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Iron Mask Marauder
There's more than one volume of them. I have three and there may be more..
I heard that but I was unsure.
So what if it did not have a plot? It's still a manga, accurate, and has "Pocket Monsters" slapped on it.
Re: Why is Pocket Monsters considered the first adaptation?
Do you have a vendetta against Pocket Monsters?
Re: Why is Pocket Monsters considered the first adaptation?
...What. How would you come by that? They were asking why it's said, and in the post before yours, "Pocket Monsters" didn't refer to the Scary Clefairy comic but to the franchise as a whole.
Also, "accurate" is a matter of viewpoint when the entire thing is set out as a gag series. I have some Street Fighter 4koma by the same publisher and it's got the same sorts of things (random character death, incredible OOCness, etc).
Re: Why is Pocket Monsters considered the first adaptation?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Iron Mask Marauder
...What. How would you come by that? They were asking why it's said, and in the post before yours, "Pocket Monsters" didn't refer to the Scary Clefairy comic but to the franchise as a whole.
Also, "accurate" is a matter of viewpoint when the entire thing is set out as a gag series. I have some Street Fighter 4koma by the same publisher and it's got the same sorts of things (random character death, incredible OOCness, etc).
Dude.... it was supposed to be a pun. Flew over your head, I suppose .