PokéBase - Pokémon Q&A
0 votes
Probably supposed to be a beta Zapdos or something.
It's actually slightly different from Zapdos, I couldn't tell you how glitch cries are supposed to work even if I tried, but there's a good chance the cry's type, pitch, and length are similar to Zapdos'.
Here's a video that might help explain how cries work better, but I couldn't tell you why the cry is similar.
Using this tool at http://dotsarecool.com/rgme/tech/gen1cries.html to replicate cries, my rough guess would be that 'M's cry is somewhere along the lines of Type 24, Pitch 248(?), and Length 0. I'm not answering because I couldn't tell you why that's set as the cry data.

For reference, the other cries in type 24 are Fearow, Shellder, Cloyster, Kabutops, and Zapdos.
I always thought that M' was going to be one of the birds but then GF scrapped it and made Zapdos instead and they have the same cry because they never deleted M''s cry data.
How particular would you need us to be in an answer? Truthfully there's not much we can say except that it's a placeholder.
Missingno. can have a handful of different cries to my knowledge so I'll just assume it's a placeholder

2 Answers

1 vote

Glitch Pokémon are caused by glitches that have the game erroneously read placeholder data or non-Pokémon data as Pokémon data. Although many glitch Pokémon draw all their characteristics from data intended to be used elsewhere, some glitch Pokémon may have partially defined characteristics that are not intended to be accessed in-game: for example, in the case of MissingNo., its name is well-defined, but its base stats are read from data intended to represent the parties of several Bikers.

Like most other glitch Pokémon, it's data comes from whatever code it can grab and use as a placeholder. This does really weird things like displaying it's menu sprite as an NPC in the area, having a cry similar to Rhydon's cry when viewing it's stats, evolving into Kangaskhan at Level 0 and Clefairy at Level 128, Making your 6th item having a quantity of 128 upon catching, and corrupting game data if encountered after the hall of fame. :P

It is likely that M''s data picked up some values it could read as it's placeholder data, and it just so happened that the numbers generated picked up Zapdos's cry's index but changed the length and or pitch data. Why Zapdos? It has to have some cry generated, so it is probably impossible to not pick up the base cry of any Pokémon in R/B/Y. and the pitch being similar is just a coincidence; the data could be anything, and it ended up being similar to Zapdos's cry. :P


Hope I helped!

Dude. Your last sentence actually says it’s just a strange coincidence and ended up bieng similar. Dude, actually tho. Why the long answer?
Because I am the long posts guy. Also, this answer isn't that long. :P

It less strange coincidence and more it has to have a cry data, so it would have to have a cry that is similar, at least in type, to another Pokémon in that game. And if your not satisfied with the "it just happened" answer, you'll probably never get an answer that you'll be satisfied with. :P
–2 votes

The M’ glitch doesn’t have Zapdos’s cry. Most Pokémon fans assume it is tho.

You're right that it's not exactly the same, but it's so close it might as well be.
Do you know why they're so similar?
This wasn’t intended by the developers. This is just a strange coincidence. My best response would be: It gives youtubers something to talk about.
Here's what I think, it's a glitch with randomized assets. They chose Zapdos of all Pokemon to use as a cry because of the glitch. Not really sure though. Correct me if I'm wrong.
What?? YouTube didn't exist when Red and Blue released in 1996. What do you actually know about this topic?
I was joking @Fizz. It’s just that the M’ glitch cry has so many conspiracy theory’s on Yt on like any video about glitch Pokémon.  The topic of M’ glitch cry is meaningless unless you are REALLY interested in explaining Pokémon cries.
Why the downvote?
I didn't down-vote this, but I'm guessing it's because you assumed there's no explanation other than "a strange coincidence" when there might have been a better explanation.