>is objectively the best shiny pokemon in your path
technically it is a two-for-one deal
That's not Garchomp or Espeon.
>>58919562Not even technically they just straight up say “here’s two shinies, one good one and one eh but why are you complaining”
OP here, sorry, I meant to post this
>>58919565>>58919577Would you rather have a good shiny, or two shinies, and you could use the one you like less of to negotiate a trade for another shiny? You gotta think like g_d’s chosen people guys
>>58919593a good shiny
