Bulbasaur if he gen 5
nah, gen 6. Those soft and round curves were incidental in gen 5 but the overly simplified style was only done on purpose for gen 6 and above.
>>59249510nah, gen 5. Those soft and round curves were incidental in gen 6 but the overly simplified style was only done on purpose for gen 5.
>>59249518Hi kojo
>>59249475unironic improvementthat little negro is cute
>>59249518What? I was describing how the trend was only cemented in gen 6 but was occasional in gen 5. Is this a bot?
>>59249475I unironically like this way more than any first stage grass starter we've ever gotten, including Bulbasaur
>>59249665/vp/ is full of brown, retarded, underage users.
>>59249665What? I was describing how the trend was only cemented in gen 5 but was occasional in gen 6. Is this a bot?
>>59249948That doesn't even make sense as a "I know you are but what am I", dumb bot.
More G7 desu. He' have more sharp edges if he was in G5 or G6
>>59249475Bulbasaur if it wasn't made to flop compared to squirtle and charmander
>>59249510Gen 5 and 6 have basically the same style for their Pokemon. There's very little difference
>>59251373the design of mons intended for 3d was actually significantly different imomore extreme with sm leaning into it but there's definitely a difference between philosophies
>>59249475C-CUTE!!!!
>>59249475kinda like tepig, but not really
>>59251378Gen 3, 4, and 5 designs are closer to 6 and 7 in style than they are Gen 1
>>59251426You're describing a gradient as "the points in the middle are more like these points towards one end than they are the other end"it's meaningless, really.
