ON NONONO-- KANTO SISSIES...?WHAT IS OUR RESPONSE?
>>58831476anon, did you understand what is being said?he is defending Kanto, saying it is the peak generation because it has a cohesive design philosophy
? Those tweets are explaining why Kanto has good consistent designs, dumbfuck
>>58831476Someone took time out of their life to make this lmao what a loser
>>58831476>"I'm not complaining"just what it saysthat collage is just pointing stuff out
>>58831488>>58831491>gen 1 pokemon are just remixes of the same traits and they lack originality>this is being defended as "consistency"lmao
i'm not reading this fucking idiotic time-wasting shitcollage. i am giving you five minutes to sum whatever inane shit you want to say within two sentences before i hide your thread and never look back
>>58831476based autist making all the 'to boomers seethe their feets off
>>58831724Your position: ParticularismThe correct position: Holism
>>58831476kanto copied kanto JEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEJ!!!!!!!!!!
>>58831742I was bored and read the whole thing but the TL;DR is:Gen 1 Pokemon had consistent design elements and recurrent motifs that gave them a unified visual identity, elements and motifs that aren't seen as often in latter gens. It's not a statement for or against newer gens, it's just saying that the reason newer designs may not "feel like Pokemon" to older players is simply because they no longer use these themes.
>>58831476Gen 1 mons had so many samey features because they were designed as sprites first. Sugimori made the watercolor illustrations later. All the mons were designed by Sugimori and Nishida afaik. Later generations have more designers, so of course different styles will become apparent.
