>>55775428>The complete lack of media literacy is staggering.Yeah, yours.
>inb4: "no u"Don't.
>BW's main thing is re-examining what a journey with Pokemon really means for the charactersThat does not make it inherently good. Good intentions don't make awful things forgivable.
>Every other game simply implies the growth the characters go throughThis is bad because...?
>but in BW it's really blantantThis is good because...?
>would you change your worldview from one different interaction, or would you rather check your answer further?We know you never get your head out of your ass to "check your answer" (else you wouldn't be posting this crap) but others do, this is why we complain about N's actions.
>she becomes more interested in researching Pokemon rather than battlingMay became more interested in contests. Prof. Oak decided to just study pokémon despite being offered the position of League Champion. Bianca's story is not special in any way, special is the needs your parents must have dealt with.
>Cheren's is supposed to be about what being strong means but aside from a vague "help people" it doesn't provide any solid answersAt least you could strike the right time here. Too bad your clock is broken everywhere else.
>he weakest part of the storyGhetsis' plan. Easily. At first it was plausible but the more you read about it (because they don't give you a choice) the more you learn how stupid the whole thing is.
>outside of some outlier scenariosWhy do those not count?
>because of his character development"Character development" just means that a character changes. It doesn't have to be a good change- and the development isn't good by itself if it doesn't make sense. Like
>>55775470 says, you have no right to speak about "media literacy".
>I don't know how the fuck you get that reading on NThat was my point, retard. That's why I implied the reason is invalid, because the fundament is weak. It's just Masuda's delusion that some go along with.
