Should Pokemon eventually get 4 or 5 stages of Evolution?

[Combo]

I could potentially see them maybe doing a gimmicky 3rd evo, such as two new evolutionary lines for example similar to Escavalier/Accelgor but which both have three stages then can be traded together to 'swap' genes and create a further 'combined' stage. You never know, with the 'DNA' implications of Gen VI :P

I neither want them to nor think they would add any further evolutions to anything which has already reached the third stage though. There needs to be weaker Pokémon which can get players through the early game but eventually lose their usefulness - not every fully evolved Pokémon needs to have gigantic stats.

[lolzkidudz]

No, I think it's unlikely. Maybe they can add another split evolution within an existing branch evolution chain IMO (Like another split evo for Oddish/Poliwag/Slowpoke/Tyrogue/Ralts lines) and of course, another Eeveelution.

[Inferno Vulpix]

If Game Freak broke the barrier for 3 stages, everything would seem kinda fine for a while. It's not like it would cause the Pokepocalypse or anything. Say it started in Gen 6, and they tacked on a fourth evolution to a few previous gen Pokemon as well as some of theirs. Things would be fine, right? But, what happens in 7th gen? Easy, add more 4th evolutions. And 8th gen? Well, we've had 4 stages for a while, and it's not like there's a rule holding them back anymore, so Wynaut add a fifth evolution? And such, the pattern continues until Game Freak is one-upping itself every generation with the number of evolutions. Next thing we know, legendaries start evolving, and the most absurd evolution methods come about (Level this pokemon to level 91 by beating a Gabite on a day in Summer while holding a Quick Claw and inflicted with Poison at 3:21 PM to get Ninetyninetales). You can see how that would ruin the charm of Pokemon, and, even if it doesn't get nearly that far (which is probably won't), the simple charm of Pokemon would suffer because of it.

[supersmew]

Having more evolutions means more of the Pokédex would be evolutions, which means less new Pokémon. Also, Like Inferno Vulpix said, crazy evolution methods would come up. IMO I think the 3 barrier with the occasional branch is perfectly okay.

[The Eleventh]

I wouldn't mind seeing a novelty Pokémon with more than three evolutionary stages, but I'm not up for giving a fourth or even fifth stage to already-existing Pokémon.

[Blood Red Absol]

It is an interesting concept that you put forward.
But as much as it would be interesting to see said 4th evolutions, I think the 3 stage system also holds alot of nostalgia for many people as well.

[Bolt the Cat]

I wouldn't even consider a 4th stage of evolution until every future Pokemon is made so much stronger that some 3rd stage Pokemon feel weak by comparison. And that may never happen, so don't count on it.

[ECM]

I just think it's completely unnecessary to have a 4th evolution. There are plenty of other things Game Freak should spend their time doing than worrying about increasing the number of times a Pokémon evolves. I honestly think that there is no good reason to incude more evolutions. It's better to just make a brand new evolutionary line of Pokémon.

[cantavanda]

That is a bit scary...

[GatedSunOne]

This one pretty much made me lolz to the max, and makes terrific sense why more evos is a generally bad idea. I'd definitely start getting concerned if Game Freak tacked an extra evolution on Charizard, that's for sure.

The power creep extra evos would usher in would throw the metagame out of whack, and pretty much gift everyday pokemon with BSTs on par with non-mascot legendarys, or something...not a pretty sight.

It'd only work if the series decided to give itself a true RPG overhaul, and make legendarys with 1000+ HP, multiple hold items like PokeArmor or the like, and increase the overall BST of all pokemon across the board...but let's face it--this is Pokemon we're talking about, and they rarely switch things up so radically.

Legendary Evolution, though, sounds like new and definitely interesting territory. Gen 6 seems to be playing with themes focused on DNA, and Eevee is getting an unusual amount of attention ingame and on the official site (days after the reveal of X and Y, Pokemon tweets ''Quiz time! How many possible Eeveelutions are there?'')

Not saying we'll get evolved legends at all, Especially since it'd put pokemon over Arceus' strength, but... we're highly likely to at least get a new Eeveelution. That cutesy fox should be as far as multi-evos ever go, for the franchise's sake.

[Doux]

I wouldn't say that, but I do think that all Pokemon should have at least two evolutions. Makes it more interesting. :)

[Unredemption]

I think we must also consider the level of evolution and strength of the evolved forms. It would probably beneficial for Pokemon like Beedrill and Butterfree (that evolve at Level 10 and don't have fantastic BSTs) to get a fourth evolved form. However, if you try to fit a fourth evolved form on Hydreigon, what are you supposed to get? Evolution at Level 88 with the BST of Arceus?

[ShinyBlackWhite]

The problem is, with so many pokemon that don't have evolutions or a second evolution, I do not think it would benefit to add more stages it would use more of the pokedex's space, and therefore Game freak would make less new pokemon that aren't related to others.

[Elysian]

with so many evolutions, they need to level up like crazy. I think they should stick with maximum 3 evo's

[adamfitz]

The stats would be crazy high.
4 maybe at a push, but 5 is way to many.

[dragonskull]

I don't think it will occur any time soon just because going to that point, it may seem that they're out of inspiration. I personally think that for the current time being it'll be 3 stages for quite some time if not forever.

[PaddysTurtwigFanClub]

For some Pokemon this would be acceptable, I mean 3 evos with poor BSTs. But I think 4th and definitely 5th stage evos are totally unecassary for stronger pokemon, as a previous user said, there would be pokemon that would surpass Arceus in power. Overall though i think this would be required as there are no Pokemon that people use that are in dire need of evolution.

[AquaWarrior]

3Rd and Second evolutions are strong enough. Not to mention what the extra evolutions would look like.

[Zanitale]

why add four or five stages? it's stupid and it would fuck the system if you add more.

[Plus side down side]

I don't see the need. I'd prefer it if they made more variety in Pokemon as opposed to adding more to 1 species. Besides, there's the whole power struggle problem.

[Godzuki]

What would they look like? Digimon? This would be so over-complicated the metagame probably wouldn't exist.

[OrcaCity]

If we had evolutions go up that high, the stats would be off the chart. There'd be hysteria. It would be interesting to have a fourth evolution with stats like a legendary. It'd be interesting earning your own legendary through training instead of catching them from an event or from the storyline.

[CAH]

Wow. Weeks later and people are still presenting the same tired arguments that clearly have no logic behind them :/

Anyone still going on about how the stats would be overpowered, it'd be like digimon, they'd need to level up late or anything else that was already countered ages ago needs to read the first few pages of this thread.

It's amazing that people are so narrow minded though, I mean really?

[!jirachi!]

nah pokemon will looks too badass and creepy than.
though shuckle needs a second evo. eviolite shuckle is epic!

[Vivian]

I think that pokemon that may be born "evolved" , like marill, could have another evo. I mean, a azumaril could evolve if it was born as a maril. And when i say it COULD, it does not mean that all pokemon that are born "evolved" WILL evolve twice. So, snorlax wont evolve two times if it happens to marill or chimecho.