>>55722757>spergyIt's just an image that (You) started sperging about, and when its origins are explained you sperg even more. You truly got it all backwards.
>Because you made itUm....yeah? To poke fun at them "kneeling". You clearly are triggered just by the implication of the imagery.
>Even other countries tooAgain, my position from the beginning was overall fan opinion non, not any one country like you are saying. They're much more hated than Samurott.You saying "but look at this country too!" doesn't exactly argue anything.
>>55722694>gets accused of taking meds and being a tranny>no u! x10Must be nice
>I actually can't.You already did by ignoring all the other images of Samurott ITT, fan art and official, and refer to posting the same gif twice somehow making the other ones disappear.
>I disagreeYou can feel free to have your opinion be "I don't like it because it looks bad to me personally" but don't complain when people call out your "it's somehow objectively bad" pivot and rip your arguments to shreds like every thread you tried it, including this one.
>not an argumentNeither is "it doesn't work because I say so"
>The priority when designing a pokemon design is it to communicate a themeThis is not true at all. When was this ever stated to be a priority by a dev? Themed pokemon are hated and often the best designs are subtle ones and clever ones, as well as cool/cute ones. Themes are common points of criticism.
>No Kanto mons use tools as quadrupeds.You're changing the subject. The reason I brought up Kanto was to show that none of them have blatant themes while being considered good designs by most people. The often cited reason people like those designs is ambiguity and simplicity.
But sure, I'll entertain your switch. How is it a fundamentally retarded idea if Samurott isn't locked to being quadrupedal?
>>55722782I DON'T agree with that philosophy, and I'm really trying to think what part of any of my posts implied I do.
