>>39103035We're talking about why Squirtle, not Wartortle. Bulbapedia isn't saving your ass this time.
>Psyduck is not a duck.Yeah, neither is Ducklett. Glad you aren't defending Psyduck's simplicity, I like a retard who knows when to shut up. Quit while you're behind.
>>39102843>Pokemon has a whole, prominent move based on it already.You mean Will-O-Wisp? Sorry, I was talking about Hitodama and Aoandon. Come on, it's so easy to google.
>they're just objectsI'm really beginning to question your grasp on Japanese culture. I shouldn't have to explain this to you.
>Litwick is too simpleThe fact that you ignored Psyduck's simple design tells me that's not what you're worried about. I will acknowledge that Litwick has a simple design like many pokemon, new and old - but you've failed to demonstrate why this is unique to Gen V or why it automatically ruins the design.
I will go ahead and point out that the reason Litwick looks so much like a candle is because that's the fucking point, retard. It's supposed to lure people and take their souls, get it? And it looks less and less like its object as it evolves, because it becomes more aggressive and dangerous.
>This is like if Rotom was just its appliance forms and if there was no base Rotom.Or a sheet with a face on it. Or a haunted sword. You were defending Gen 6, right?
>Drifloon is differentHow? Ironically, Drifloon looks a hell of a lot like Lampent. I guess it has a cloud instead of a lantern top but that's an easy way to blow its cover. I guess it would be nice if Lampent had a giant flame above its head or something - wait, Chandelure has that. Since when did my chandelier lack a hanger? Weird.
You're getting boring. Looks like it's around that time where you "pretended to be retarded" or call me a zoomzoom for not mindlessly hating on Gen V. Or you could save yourself some of your valuable time and just stop posting.
