I feel like, already this early into the rundown, this is an extremely reductive take. The whole point of virtually
every Pokémon villain is that they’re
not just doing things because “mwahaha I’m evil I guess.” Their respective motivations may at times be thinly sketched (because Pokémon tends to tell its stories on a more thematic level than a personal one), but they almost all have reasons for trying to change the world. Archie and Maxie are animated by their desire to make the environment more accommodating to either Pokémon or humans. Their goals are then turned up to the extreme so that the story can make a point about how a balance must be struck between humanity’s infrastructural needs and the stability of the natural ecosystem.
Archie and Maxie aren’t really meant to be deep, complex characters; they’re consciously designed to provide the story with a pair of reckless extremists whose tunnel vision actually does lead them to instigate the calamitous environmental difficulties that such one-sided viewpoints risk bringing about. This is a cautionary tale, and not one that particularly requires villains with a lot of nuance.
“I recognize the fact that Platinum added more depth to Cyrus, but I’m not going to give them credit for that because I can imagine an alternate reality in which Diamond & Pearl didn’t suck as much as they do” is certainly a take of sorts, but it’s not a very useful critique.
Ghetsis needs to be a malignant asshole in order for N’s story — that is, the character’s story who actually
matters in BW — to work. Complaining about Ghetsis not having some “original” motivation is just overlooking everything they did to give N a unique antagonistic perspective.
I would also say that Ghetsis provides a necessary corollary to the story’s broad insistence on the idea that opposing viewpoints can’t necessarily be categorized as “right” or “wrong,” because sometimes there just
are flat-out terrible people who want to hurt and exploit others. N receives sympathy from the other characters who validate his convinction in his beliefs because even though he was manipulated, he still had genuine ideals and concerns about the welfare of Pokémon (enough to win over one of the Legendary dragons, even), but if, hypothetically, N had that same convinction in the belief that he should be the supreme god-king of Unova and should rule with an iron fist, would that still be a viewpoint that is deserving of the same validation? Of course not.
Ghetsis represents and begets everything wrong with Team Plasma’s approach. Team Plasma’s message, its ostensible leader, and many of its followers may were genuinely well-meaning. But as an organization, they still kidnapped peoples’ Pokémon, forever severing countless genuinely meaningful bonds and partnerships without any concern or consent from the parties involved. That’s the part of Team Plasma’s actions that are not justifiable, and the story needs it to spring forth from an objectively unjustifiable character. Otherwise you’d end up with a story that sort of endorses the act of kidnapping peoples’ loved ones based on your own uninformed presumptions.
This
is ultimately dramatized to some degree, though. Sycamore openly regrets that he let such obvious warning signs slip just because Lysandre was his friend and colleague.
Besides that, I think one look at the real world that we live in can provide pretty sufficient evidence that there are in fact tons of people who will ignore or overlook not just warning signs, but blatantly evil acts happening in real time, whether they be on the part of high-profile individuals, organizations, corporations, or governments, as long as that entity presents an appealing image or message.
To most of the Kalos region, Lysandre is an accomplished, stylish, charismatic inventor-celebrity. “Sure, maybe he says something a little eugenics-y on his Chatter account every now and again, but the guy’s a genius, y’know? I mean, coming from a guy like that, maybe he actually has kind of a point? Anyway, didn’t you see the new Holo-Caster unveiling he hosted last Tuesday? I can’t wait to buy it!”
I swear, so many techbros would rally around Lysandre like bees around a beehive.
The main games have been using the “Team ____” format since the beginning. The fact that they eventually chose the word “skull” — a common symbol of delinquency or just general counterculture-ism — after a different game in the franchise also happened to chose that word in a different context is hardly a sign of creative theft.
Wouldn’t TPC own the rights to all Pokémon Mystery Dungeon stuff anyway? Does PSMD have to give credit to the anime for their use of the idea of Mega-Evolved Pokémon going berserk? This is just a bizarrely petty accusation.
Red herrings and twists are like, fundamental tools in the writing toolbox and are used in countless examples of highly-regarded and culturally significant media. Literally wtf
And again this is just a very strange criticism. Pokémon finally tries to experiment with its well-worn formula, but now the issue is that the developers didn’t use 100% original, innovative, cutting-edge writing techniques. The issue if that Pokémon isn’t postmodernist enough? Eh?
Pokémon: *introduces a bevy of new ideas*
Fans: “man, they’re really running out of ideas”
Tale as old as time.