>>16330374>>16330084Let's try to diffuse this. This is how I look at it, try looking at it like this from now on, okay?
Personally, I don't mind saying that X Pokémon that doesn't really look much like Y animal is based off of it if it is, or if it has elements of that animal rather than being out and out based off of it.
I think we can objectively say that Kanghaskhan has kangaroo elements in it if nothing else, right? And Aerodactyl certainly has pterodactyl elements, even if it doesn't match one perfectly, right?
To make an out there example - take Kamen Rider Faiz. Originally they wanted to design a shark rider, so they made his fins into shark fins. The thing is, the end product of Faiz is more based off of a firefly and a Greek letter, but a lot of people still like to say it's based off of a shark, while saying it has shark ELEMENTS would be more accurate.
So if it gets you all mad saying it's based off of those things, just think of them as having elements of those animals instead, while having elements of other things. I think this is especially true in Phanpy and Rhyhorn's lines, which you brought up in one post - Donphan is a tire too, so it had to be small, and Rhydon is kind of a kaiju sort of thing.
In other words, Pokémon can be a lot of things and a Pokémon based on or having elements of a certain animal might only have a little bit of that animal in the actual design. That doesn't make those elements not present.
