>>38819035>I dunno what program you're using, but it has limited range of saturation or you're manipulating it to try to prove your point.Nope. The colors you're using aren't even the same as mine. Stop using the wrong colors.
>That's true, but think about how children's entertainment is viewed now vs 1996 in Japan.Children are children. Pokemon lasted fine without putting tacky colors on the designs.
>Not specifically but specificallyWhat?
>And? People often make this argument and use baby forms for their argument. No they don't.
> Further still, you still can't tell me why "less simplified designs are better".Because less simplified designs are what the franchise started with. Because less simplified designs make the Pokemon more believable as living creatures instead of cartoons.
>Okay, then let's look at Pidgey. It has massive eyebrows, exaggerated sharpened triangular shaped feathers on its head, and big eyes. Just because it has 10% more realistic fucking wing feathers, doesn't mean the rest of the design is automatically more realistic than nu-gen Pokemon.But it is. No huge head that's meant to look cute, feet and talons actually have visible detail, its feathers are all more detailed instead of having simplified blobs.
>Pidgey is more Nu-gen than Corviknight by genwunner standardsPidgey doesn't have simple blob wings and even its chest feathers are more detailed, so no.
> So why are you bitching about its colors?Because they look bad. Realism is a whole separate argument.
