Does anyone else think these two were the biggest departures design-wise from the other pokemon and legendaries at the time? I can’t really describe it well, but Groudon seems so much more “geometric” than the others. It looks more like a Digimon or Kaiju than an actual pokemon. The only mon I can think of that also captures that “2000s” era feeling are Palkia and Dialga, but even they don’t feel as different as the Gen 3 legendaries. Does anyone else think they look different or don’t fit in? Or am I just fuckin insane and rambling?
>>58198613the first pokemon to have that "this doesn't feel like pokemon" quality to it were palkia and dialga
>>58198613Digimon don’t look like this at all. The closest at the time were the armor evolutions, but they were still much more defined anatomically than the average Pokemon, which is antithetical to Groudon’s design philosophy.
>>58198613I thought that about blaziken first
>>58198655The digimon comparison is pretty bad and overused, I just couldn’t put my finger on what is going on here. Groudon’s “design philosophy” feels different from any other pokemon up until that point.
>>58198613It definitely feels very different to gen 1 and 2 yes. A bit more blocky and the color looks brighter.Both are Still two of my favourites pokemons though
>>58198613the lines definitely make it look way edgier than any other gen 1-3 mon, if it wasn’t for the eyes I would say it’s not even a pokemon.
>>58198660This one I could 100% see as a digimon.
>>58198669Oh I still love them both, especially Groudon.
I agree OP, the gen 3 designs do feel like a definite departure because many were made well after Gen 1. Gen 2 felt like a continuation of gen 1's philosophy because most of those mons existed already before Gold and Silver came out.
>>58198613Pokemon needed this edge after becoming sanitized baby shit that killed off pokemania.
