>>45203441>Retard-anon, you're trying to "argue" by shifting the definition of quality around multiple times then ignoring itFucking what?
Design quality=how good a design is. Quality is also dependent on what goes into the g, in which GF employs a philosophy, and then said designs go through a committee. Fakemon do NOT get this treatment, thus validating the claim that "they are not up to the standards of GF", even if I disagree sometimes.
Tell me one time I shifted my argument or my definition on design quality. You simply made the stupid fucking claim that there's no evidence they they care about quality because they didn't specifically fucking mention it in their art talks, as if every other thing they've said about the design process DOESN'T denote that they care a whole fucking lot.
>but you aren't actually saying anything at all if you can only hide in semantics.What semantics? Proof of my claim isn't semantics.
>"expressly said design quality"I never said this. From the get go I was simply stating that I think the pasta was leaning on the quality argument more so than anything else, and then you came in and said all of that other shit.
>So you're saying they disregard and downgrade quality because they have to conform to the 3D and pixel art game programming, while pretending that disregarding means it's the main focusI've read that article several times over and nowhere is this even implied, learn to read.
> Having a committee to decide on designs doesn't mean that quality is the main focus when designs. Did you not read what you greentexted where I described what the committee has said is important? Read your own posts.I read YOUR fucking post, and you're saying that the committee describing the process in which they design Pokemon doesn't point towards them caring about quality of a design, which I'M saying is a retarded argument. Please elucidate me on the great meaning of your post, because you sure as shit didn't do a good job before.