>>56905261>therefore it's bad according to youThat was only a standard for gens overall, as already explained
>nor confirmed by leaksYou're denying photo and text evidence from devs
>has no new pokemonmeans nothing except for gens overall
>quotes nothing about specific gamesthanks for conceeding
>reverse burden of proofRetard, show me where multiple language names for a mon exist in the same canon.
>Gens are made up of specific gamesDoesn't matter. Only thing mentioned were gens overall. Do you think the anime, TCG, side games, and mobile games are all shit because they don't introduce mons? Introducing mons is the role of the first pair of games in the gen. Overall, the gen needs a certain amount of mons to be good, or else we're getting too few over 3 years. No one said anything about each game.
>parrottingNew pokemon have new dex numbers, which Megas don't have. So they are forms.
>Yes it isNo it's not, the stories must be very intertwined. Say it as many times as you like without actually reading and responding with substance. Merely happening after doesn't automatically make something a sequel. The stories have to be very intertwined as well. Not every WW2 movie is a sequel to every WW1 movie. Likewise, certain games are "new gen pair" games like XY while BW2 are sequels
>projectingNope, only you show you can't read ITT.
>No it doesn'tYes it does. Sorry XY is a shit game in a shit gen.
>Glad you admitThat BW2 is a good game that filled its purpose? Sure!
>NopeYep, Gen 5's berry system is better
>typofaggingYep, Gen 6's listed content get's mogged by 5's.
>Yes it doesNope, no one said specific games except you. Do you think the anime, TCG, side games, and mobile games are all shit because they don't introduce mons? After all, they also constitute gens by your retarded standard.
>NopeYep, BW2 is higher quality
>false advertisingIt's false advertising because they later revealed it's just a new form in subsequent trailers and gameplay. Try again.
