Thread: Do you think Ash/Satoshi should be replaced?

The ironic thing of it all is Japan does like cycling through characters. Almost every long-running anime in Japan has cycled through characters.

There's a reason the games didn't continue having us play as Red in every new gen.

Originally Posted by SSJ_Jup81

I hate this argument. Who cares about that fully. Pokemon isn't the only show that's been around for a long time where the characters don't age. Prime example is Sazae-san. Anime started in 1969. She's still in her late 20s (I think), her brother and sister are still elementary school students. Her parents are still the same age. Her husband is still the same age. Her son is still the same age. They haven't aged either.

The timeline of the shows/movies don't make sense. In the third Pokemon movie (not the actual movie, but the short before it), it's stated by Ash that it's the one year anniversary of Pikachu and Ash meeting. That would make him 11. Not 10. There's probably more, but this is the one that sticks out to me the most. It's inconsistent to the age they give him at the beginning og the Unvoa saga.

Originally Posted by Gliscor'd

The ironic thing of it all is Japan does like cycling through characters. Almost every long-running anime in Japan has cycled through characters.

There's a reason the games didn't continue having us play as Red in every new gen.

That's true, but seems with animated series, it doesn't seem to matter as much. Look at Lupin III. Those characters haven't been aged much either, even though the voice actors are old and you can hear it now, especially with Fujiko's voice actress who has voiced every version of her ('cept for like that one film where they all had to use other voice actors for the main four) and of course the main voice actor for Lupin died back in the 90s and was replaced. Lupin's been around since the 1960s.

I was mostly talking about anime like Gundam, Yu-gi-oh, etc. all change their casts. Even Dragonball tried to shift things to Gohan for awhile.

Originally Posted by Cloudskye

The timeline of the shows/movies don't make sense. In the third Pokemon movie (not the actual movie, but the short before it), it's stated by Ash that it's the one year anniversary of Pikachu and Ash meeting. That would make him 11. Not 10. There's probably more, but this is the one that sticks out to me the most. It's inconsistent to the age they give him at the beginning og the Unvoa saga.

I still wouldn't think much of it. It's not the only series where the characters are purposely not aged even though there could be a lot of inconsistencies. Shinichi in Detective Conan had a birthday, but his character is still technically 6 (as Conan). Movie 1 focused on Shinichi's birthday.

Originally Posted by SSJ_Jup81

I still wouldn't think much of it. It's not the only series where the characters are purposely not aged even though there could be a lot of inconsistencies. Shinichi in Detective Conan had a birthday, but his character is still technically 6 (as Conan). Movie 1 focused on Shinichi's birthday.

You are right on that. But, when all is said and done, it's a cartoon. It doesn't have to make sense, so as long as it's good.

Originally Posted by Gliscor'd

I was mostly talking about anime like Gundam, Yu-gi-oh, etc. all change their casts. Even Dragonball tried to shift things to Gohan for awhile.

Oh, I see what you mean, but with the Gundam series, they usually take place in different years. Toriyama aged his Dragon Ball characters purposely so that we could see Goku grow up, then his sons, etc. I don't know anything about Yugioh. lol Oh, Beyblade can count for this. Not long-running, though, but they aged the characters for that, and had all new characters for whatever the most recent series was.

Didn't Digimon do the same too? Ash being replaced is no different than all these other franchises.

Originally Posted by SSJ_Jup81

Oh, I see what you mean, but with the Gundam series, they usually take place in different years. Toriyama aged his Dragon Ball characters purposely so that we could see Goku grow up, then his sons, etc. I don't know anything about Yugioh. lol Oh, Beyblade can count for this. Not long-running, though, but they aged the characters for that, and had all new characters for whatever the most recent series was.

To an extent, Digimon can also count. The first and second seasons had roughly the same cast, save for a few, but they were all aged. The third season consisted of an entirely new cast, but, the first and second season's cast were still referenced. As for seasons 4 and 5, I really don't know.

EDIT: Nice timing^

I think the reason people (including me) want Ash to age is give the show continuity. With Ash immortal nothing matters. You can cut out any region and it would not change a thing. Since it has no meaning they should replace Ash, take advantage of more pokes and give us something with an arc

Originally Posted by Gliscor'd

Didn't Digimon do the same too? Ash being replaced is no different than all these other franchises.

Yeah, they did age the Adventure characters. With Tamers, no since it ended. Frontier and Savers the same, but I don't think you can fully compare it since Digimon's series is based on more realistic settings. The kids go to school, have parents, etc. Anywho, I guess it was easier to change them since, for the most part, the series didn't have a main mascot. IMO, that's the only reason why Satoshi is probably still around along with Pikachu. Pikachu is like one of Nintendo's main mascots, so they have to find some excuse or reason to keep him around for the anime.

Originally Posted by SSJ_Jup81

Pikachu is like one of Nintendo's main mascots, so they have to find some excuse or reason to keep him around for the anime.[/SIZE][/FONT]

They could always have a different Pikachu around without Ash.

Originally Posted by Cloudskye

To an extent, Digimon can also count. The first and second seasons had roughly the same cast, save for a few, but they were all aged. The third season consisted of an entirely new cast, but, the first and second season's cast were still referenced. As for seasons 4 and 5, I really don't know.

EDIT: Nice timing^

Technically, that was only done for the dub. There was no mention in the original as far as I remember, unless you're counting Ryou and even then, his backstory is from the games and even he (for the anime series) never referenced the dimension hopping and how he even got into the Tamers' world. I don't even think it referenced how Ryou should know the Adventure characters (aside from Ken) in the series at all.

Originally Posted by Gliscor'd

They could always have a different Pikachu around without Ash.

I know, but if they want to stick with the region thing, it'd be odd for anyone to have something that's not indigenous to the area, don't you think?

Originally Posted by SSJ_Jup81

I know, but if they want to stick with the region thing, it'd be odd for anyone to have something that's not indigenous to the area, don't you think?

Well its no more a plot device than Ash getting a Pikachu as his starter because Bulba/Squirtle/Charmander were already taken.

Originally Posted by Gliscor'd

Well its no more a plot device than Ash getting a Pikachu as his starter because Bulba/Squirtle/Charmander were already taken.

I always did find that silly. Oak was dizzy. lol But yeah, I see what you mean, but at least Pikachu are indigenous to the area. As much as I feel they should retire the character (mainly because of the type of show it is), I just couldn't see it happening. They should've retired him (and the other Kanto characters) when AG rolled around at least, imo, and base the series on each region as it went along.