>>54609550Classic subjectivity backtracking. You hate to see it. If you make a statement like "This is the worst pokemon character of all time" then you will have to contend with objective fags (Me. I'm the objective faggot.) because you're making an objective statement even if you don't think it is one and even if you think it's autistic having to add "In my opinion" to it.
If you've ever studied an art, or made art, you'd intuit that "objective quality" when discussing it is the measure by which a component, small or large, succeeds in doing what it was created to do. The point of contention when this is used as critique is that it involves assuming creator intent. Death of the Author and everything. But it's still useful because creator intent is piss easy to see in most commercial products.
Example: I can be pretty sure they didn't mean for Lillie to be something the player dreads seeing, but she became that, because she never shuts up or says anything interesting. So I can say her role in the player journey was badly thought out and this reflects poorly on the player's perception of her character.
(I do like you assuming a subjective stance by saying "my perception is reality". It's funny.)
For the rest, I do agree. Her character is basically her circumstances with "generic character young girl" slapped over the top of it. I agree she's bad, I just think your argument's a shit and there's worse characters in the series.
