>>37304282>>37304289>>37304290This is hysterical. Dog pile all you want but even with your own arguments your reasoning falls apart.
If the first games (I do mean the first) games were Red/Green then wouldn't the second billed games (including Blue) be better represented by being called "Green Games" was the original 2nd billed game?
Still you insist on calling them "Blue" instead of "Green" or the more reasonable "2nd version"
But as you've all argued so far
>The box color has literally zero bearingYet there's one problem, ok several really. But there's one that stand above the rest: X version and Y version.
According to you X would be the "Red" game and Y would be the "Blue" game. This bit awkward since X version sports a bold Blue title and mascot while Y version host a robust red title and mascot. Now it get really awkward when you realize up until gen 6 all game titles had been pure colors or materials with distinct colors. X and Y are not colors. X and Y are members of the alphabet and mathematical figures. Point is Game Freak could have made these title any color they wanted. They could have have given X that robust red and Y a bold blue. But they didn't did they. Because Game Freak doesn't subscribe to your bullshit Red/Blue billing. They adhere to rule of box color Red and Blue/Green is duality. This is why labeling by billing is bullshit Blue is the opposite of Red (at least in the west with warm v cool). Next to Black and White Red and Blue are the most easily noticeable colors in terms of paring/rivalry therefore easier to market. Even if you didn't know what the games were called you'd at least know there's Red one or Blue One each gen to tell apart. Third versions like Yellow, Crystal, Emerald, and Platinum don't apply to this because third versions are released by themselves. There's not other paired game to confuse them with so they could be whatever color they wanted.
Now anymore stupid questions or Olympic displays of retardation?
