>>55137505>even before they decisively removed animalsThis never happened, animals are mentioned in every single main series Pokémon game to this day.
>they still never committed to showing themCorrect, this is what they do.
>“Animals must exist!” Then why the fuck do we never see pet dogs or cats, farm cows or pigs, or even just wild animals?Because they aren't relevant. Pokémon is about Pokémon. Animals merely need to exist to keep the idea of what Pokémon are consistent and to provide a comparison. They aren't relevant beyond that. They don't need to explore animal lore. They don't need to explain why you see or don't see animals. That's how simple it is. The theories in this thread are absurd and inconsistent.
>>55137632Read the quote in its original context and you'll find out that he said that because he was told animals are extinct in the anime continuity. The mistake wasn't suggesting that they exist (the series does that all the time), the mistake was making them appear, which is a topic the series doesn't explore as it's considered irrelevant and unhelpful to the brand. He was told that they are extinct, not that the concept doesn't exist in that fictional universe. Which is what gave him the idea to make a movie about why they went extinct. And as I said, they didn't go through with the idea because it isn't relevant to the series and it's just a background detail to keep one of the most fundamental aspects of the series consistent.
