Thoughts on these starter redesigns?
dear Gamefreak
>>59665565I like them anon
>>59665565atrocious
>>59665565my gut's telling me it's ai.
>>59665576Use your eyes anon, AI can't replicate the Sugimori style (yet...)
>>59665565My favorite is Charmander
>>59665565My favorite is bulbasaur, nice frog
>>59665565My favorite is Squirtle becomes he reminds me of Sobble
>>59665582>>59665593>>59665600Now fight
>>59665613Man I miss the 90s Sugimori artwork, so much charm lost to souless art
>>59665619Truer words have never been spoken. The watercolor artwork perfectly captures the mystery of Pokemon in the 90s. When the 2000s hit, suddenly that art was replaced by digital-friendly redesigns that make Pokemon like Charmander more accurate to the anime (also why Gen 3 had a style change early in development, see the teraleak).
>>59665565these are literally the only simplified designs ive seen that actually look ok.
>>59665657It honors the originals really well, other redesigns look retarded
>>59665565So kino
Dogshit (obviously)
>>59665565Better than the originals, but genwunners don't want you to think that.
>>59665565Gen 1 if originally designed by foids.
>>59665565The hydrocephalus starter trio
>>59665941a foid literally made pikachu.
game freak hire this man
>>59665565I like it, anon, but squirtle and charmander look a bit same-y.
>>59665998Charmander and Squirtle already looked similar to each other in Gen 1 though.
>>59666073This somehow makes Charmander look naked.
>>59666076Because he now looks like a squirtle without a shell.
>>59665565I would want to see the evolutions. But I like the Bulbasaur.
>>59665619>SoullessSay what you mean, don't use meaningless buzzwords or your opinion is void.
>>59665565Whoever did these doesn't understand pokemon design. They're literally shitposting OLD GOOD NEW BAD nonsense. Modern pokemon have far more detail than these.
>>59665565Which one is gonna be the waifu starter?
>>59666143None of these look less detailed than browt
>>59666154That's simply not true. Browt's eyes have actual expressiveness in them, there's the detail of the fluffy downy feathers around the waist, the harder angles of the toe joints, the more detailed leafs on the face and the way the tuft is detailed.That charmander looks bald as shit. There aren't any lines separating its colors, the solid-color eyes look nothing like Browt's.The only one of those that almost understands pokemon design is the Bulbasaur, but the face is too flat.In trying to literally illustrate my point by referencing gecaqua or whatever it's called (another lizard from gen 10) I have accidentally made Agumon.
>>59666164I see what you mean now
