>>53822603i'm not trying to bait or incite any serious arguments, i just really dislike lickilicky
but i suppose its human nature to respond to a post quoting you by quoting the responses so fuck it
>dex literally states how its made of stretching, ken sugi art does it no favors. card art and anime are really where it shows it off, even it its game animations both 2d and 3d (granted nobody uses it enough for it to be common knowledge)you just mentioned it, the tongue should be emphasized in way more than just its animations. its a tongue monster first and foremost, it shouldn't just be slightly sticking out
>not every pokemon needs to look monstrous or anywhere close to their inspiration, though its subjective so i'll give you a pass on thatthough, ive never seen a bear that looks like snorlax, a tapir that looks like drowzee, or any animal/monster that looks remotely like the slow family?
when i said it doesnt look like any type of natural monster i meant it looks inorganic. the ones you mentioned seem like plausible creatures that could exist. lickilicky is made of simple shapes which is a downgrade from lickitung. despite being a strange monster it had organic structure to it and pleasantly done shapes. you can imagine a lickitung walking about with it's tongue in front of it like a vacuum cleaner. you can't really say the same for its evo
>you love lickitung for putting all it's brain points into taste but when a gluttonous tongue monster becomes a bigger, fatter, even more gluttonous tongue monster is a problem? i feel as if youre trying to look at lickilicky as an evolution in the same vein as electivire or scizor, which are a long ways from what lickilicky aims to accomplishemphasis on the tongue isnt the same as emphasis on gluttony. if you want my ideal evo, it would be normal/poison. the same size, but with a super long tongue with poison dripping off of it. the idea is that its licked so much gross stuff its become immune to even the worst of poisons
