>>52568537>What about it is solid?You know, decent balance, overall good map design, pretty good pacing, Pokemon availibility is not too much but not too sparse. Like, the only part of the game that's not well designed is the entire segment before the first gym, the entire rest of the game manages to hit above average on every mark. It's not the best at any of those, but given the Pokemon games that are the best at all of the above shit the bed one way or another, and some don't even hit that much, I'd say it's above average for a first version. Solid is the best way to summarize it.
>What about it is reasonable?Well, it has a number of optional maps to visit, above average for the series, alongside the more standard stuff like a Battle Tower and other repeatable content. Again, not every Pokemon game has that much, off the top of my head RG/RS/XY have a dearth of postgame maps in general, but when the major competition comes from DP in that area I'd rather have BW if we're just talking first versions.
>How is inconsistently scaled poorly tweened sprites mixed with low poly models "a pretty good art style"?Because it looks consistent? Again, RS and XY don't look consistent between their two major styles. Consistency is important.
>By "even" do you mean "you can mindlessly mash A to win the entire game"? If so you're right.No, I mean not being to difficult while also not being too easy. That way, if you want to mash A you can, but if you want to deviate from that in any way you can have a more tailor made experience. Pokemon games have been slowly losing that as of late.
