>>51224011>Say bros, to what extent does the animation, battle choreography, and length matter in a battle?It adds a lot and anyone who says otherwise is memeing.
Animation quality alone can make a battle look more tense (increasing the stakes and the sense of challenge) and make a given move look more powerful (thus making a comeback feel more triumphant than it otherwise would, or an opponent feel really strong without needing), or a given maneuver look more fluid, than it would otherwise look with a plainer style. In this sense, style IS substance, style IS a tool of communication.
Even if it weren't, the sheer spectacle value good animation adds counts for a lot in entertainment value alone. All else being equal, being well-animated makes something more entertaining than if it weren't. It's aesthetically more pleasant. The fluid movement keeps you more immersed into what's happening.
This is doubly so in a show that's not really dialogue-driven such as Pokemon. The narrative in Pokemon has always been mediocre bad (though this recent series is on its own level of awful lmao). At best we can describe it as good FOR POKEMON, not good in general. So it's not even as if we can say "the drama makes up for shit animation" because most of the time the drama in Pokemon is mediocre.
Really, who gives a shit beyond a superficial level about character relationships in the series? Even Ash vs Gary only really mattered because we were kids back then who wanted to see that rivalry climax, and people only really get invested into Ash winning a league because of over 20 years of this shit. But no one watches this show because they are deeply invested in Ash's rivalry with Leon, or Goh's pathos, or whatever. They want to see Mega Lucario beat the shit out of GMax Charizard and things like that.
