Author Topic: An Aesthetic Discussion Spanning 17 Years - Andrew vs Pokemon - DAILY UPDATES!  (Read 39352 times)

AndrewRogue

  • Infinite
  • DL
  • Denizen
  • *
  • Posts: 3079
  • Sadness
    • View Profile
Re: An Aesthetic Discussion Spanning 17 Years - Andrew versus Pokemon
« Reply #100 on: October 31, 2015, 11:48:07 PM »
Honestly Gengar's score is higher than I thought it would be.

It takes a lot to get a 1 from me. Gengar is at least tolerable.

We've got some garbage coming up.

Grefter

  • Villain.
  • DL
  • Denizen
  • *
  • Posts: 10386
  • True and Honest. Smarter. More aggressive.
    • View Profile
Re: An Aesthetic Discussion Spanning 17 Years - Andrew versus Pokemon
« Reply #101 on: November 01, 2015, 12:39:23 AM »
Dunno what you are implying.  The Evee line is still like a month away at least.
NO MORE POKEMON - Meeplelard.
The king perfect of the DL is and always will be Excal. - Superaielman
Don't worry, just jam it in anyway. - SirAlex
Gravellers are like, G-Unit - Trancey.

jsh357

  • Denizen
  • *
  • Posts: 346
    • View Profile
Re: An Aesthetic Discussion Spanning 17 Years - Andrew versus Pokemon
« Reply #102 on: November 01, 2015, 03:07:43 AM »
Personally, I like Gengar's design a lot. I just hate that he's the evolution of Haunter; there's not much of a logical progression there. Would have been cool if he'd been a second Ghost type for Gen 1 too.

DjinnAndTonic

  • Genie and Potion with Alcoholic Undertones
  • DL
  • Denizen
  • *
  • Posts: 6938
  • "When you wish upon a bar~"
    • View Profile
    • RPGDL Wiki
Re: An Aesthetic Discussion Spanning 17 Years - Andrew versus Pokemon
« Reply #103 on: November 02, 2015, 01:01:59 AM »
I like Gengar's design a lot too. It is very cool for being such a nonstandard 'ghost'. Like, it has some ghostly shadow-like elements, but then it more resembles a mini-goblin. And then there's the whole "Dark Clefable" thing going on. It is a neat design. Not my favorite, but certainly nowhere near 1/5 level. As for it being Haunter's evolution... Well, I can certainly agree that they could have come up with something different from Haunter, but that doesn't make Gengar's design bad. Just disappointing.

Grefter

  • Villain.
  • DL
  • Denizen
  • *
  • Posts: 10386
  • True and Honest. Smarter. More aggressive.
    • View Profile
Re: An Aesthetic Discussion Spanning 17 Years - Andrew versus Pokemon
« Reply #104 on: November 02, 2015, 05:16:23 AM »
Contrast to previous Pokedudes is always going to come up though in the evolution lines though.

Gengar is fine and all, but after Ghastly and Haunter which Andy insists on being wrong about but both get 4s?  Dropping the ball on that is going to reflect badly. (He might be wrong about the 1 I GUESS, but in the context honestly I kind of agree.  Gengar could be literally anything else and it would be 2 points better for it at least).

I am sure we are going to see something brought up higher because the stuff before it sucks so hard.  If it was Goldeen -> Sea King -> Gengar?  Yeah Gengar would easy be a 3 to me (Fuck goldeen).
NO MORE POKEMON - Meeplelard.
The king perfect of the DL is and always will be Excal. - Superaielman
Don't worry, just jam it in anyway. - SirAlex
Gravellers are like, G-Unit - Trancey.

AndrewRogue

  • Infinite
  • DL
  • Denizen
  • *
  • Posts: 3079
  • Sadness
    • View Profile
Re: An Aesthetic Discussion Spanning 17 Years - Andrew versus Pokemon
« Reply #105 on: November 11, 2015, 04:31:18 PM »
'nother big batch coming by the weekend. Been a bit preoccupied.

AndrewRogue

  • Infinite
  • DL
  • Denizen
  • *
  • Posts: 3079
  • Sadness
    • View Profile
Re: An Aesthetic Discussion Spanning 17 Years - Andrew versus Pokemon
« Reply #106 on: November 16, 2015, 06:46:13 AM »
Drowzee: This is one I'm kind of torn on. I find the design kind of clever. Encapsualtes the idea of a psychic tapir monster well. But, at the time, it does a lot of things I dislike. Bipedal design for a quadraped (derp), really overused colors (brown and yellow), having a stupid face... Eh. I'm feeling generous. I'll give it a mercy 3/5 for respecting the idea of what they did with the tapir.

Hypno: Fuck this piece of shit. 1/5.

Krabby: Crab pokemon! It is a crab, basically. Not too much special going on here. Captures the idea well, but doesn't do anything special with it. Not quite cool enough to earn a bias bump, so 3/5.

Kingler: Good evo. It's Krabby, but bigger, meaner, and more awesome. The giant claw is pretty rocking, as is the crown and "fang" design. Plus, I love that "You wanna go, bro?" look it's got. It still isn't technically that special I think (fairly plain color scheme, nothing tooooooooooooo interesting going on), but it is enough for a bias bump. 4/5.

Voltorb: It's an angry pokeball. Yay? The angry expression is all this thing has going for it, but it actually does a surprising amount. It gives the ball some real texture and character. This is the epitome of lazy design that I'm barely gonna let slip with a three, because you can get away with something like this once if you add something to it. 3/5

Electrode: Goddammit GameFreaks. If you want a more serious thing, the additional face details actually take away from the design. Voltorb works because the angry eyes are actually a pretty excellent defining feature on a simple design. Electrode's don't. Also, and this is something I dunno anything about, but Red/White looks better than White/Red. 1/5.

Exeggcute: Goddammit GameFreaks. Wow, we are in a part of the pokedex I hate. Look, it's a bunch of oblong, pink Electrodes. 1/5.

Exeggutor: I quit. 1/5
« Last Edit: November 16, 2015, 06:50:38 AM by AndrewRogue »

Magetastica

  • Denizen
  • *
  • Posts: 174
    • View Profile
Re: An Aesthetic Discussion Spanning 17 Years - Andrew versus Pokemon
« Reply #107 on: November 16, 2015, 07:41:35 AM »
The bias is showing real strong on this one. A full 1/5 for Exeggutor and Hypno? Not a 0/5? I am disgusted with you and your lack of ethics in pokemon gaming journalism.

But seriously. Fuck those pieces of shit. I'm so glad they basically just threw them both under a fucking bus after Gen 2 started. Holy WOW are they just... bad. Like, there's questionable and weird and kinda bad, but those 2 are probably my least favourite because they just look dumb, and I can't even tell what they were trying to do with them. Yes, a tapir becomes... this... weird... thing with white clown-tuft? And some eggs become... a tree? With feet? And a bunch of faces? What?

Grefter

  • Villain.
  • DL
  • Denizen
  • *
  • Posts: 10386
  • True and Honest. Smarter. More aggressive.
    • View Profile
Re: An Aesthetic Discussion Spanning 17 Years - Andrew versus Pokemon
« Reply #108 on: November 16, 2015, 08:23:26 AM »

Quote
Plus, I love that "You wanna go, bro?" look it's got.

This would have been factually accurate.  Exeggcute exists for a really terrible pun, but Egg Gang Clan ain't nothing to fuck with.

Exeggcutor kind of has a greek tragedy thing going but is a pile of shit and you are right for once even if there is the seed of a good idea in there.

Also again wrong on most other points Drowzee > Voltorb.  The sine wave going on around the midriff is rad and you just made cause he is happy (and will devour your dreams).  Hypno got a Brofist thing going on but yeah is kind of bad, looks like half formed Batman villain.
NO MORE POKEMON - Meeplelard.
The king perfect of the DL is and always will be Excal. - Superaielman
Don't worry, just jam it in anyway. - SirAlex
Gravellers are like, G-Unit - Trancey.

Ranmilia

  • Poetry Lover
  • DL
  • Denizen
  • *
  • Posts: 1687
  • Not a squid!!
    • View Profile
Re: An Aesthetic Discussion Spanning 17 Years - Andrew versus Pokemon
« Reply #109 on: November 16, 2015, 10:45:12 AM »
Drowzee is a Baku so there is something going on there.  Both it and Hypno pull a lot more from the Japanese Mythology bag than the goofy animal bag.  I could respect the design if they did anything or weren't yellow. 

Rest of these though... I'd give them all 1/5 except Exeggutor, at least that one has something interesting going on, even if it is LSD-induced B-movie nightmares about putting the egg in the coconut and drinking it all out.


jsh357

  • Denizen
  • *
  • Posts: 346
    • View Profile
Re: An Aesthetic Discussion Spanning 17 Years - Andrew versus Pokemon
« Reply #110 on: November 16, 2015, 12:48:44 PM »
Was exeggcute a pun in Japanese too? I thought they were always meant to be coconuts and that was a translation quirk, but I could just be wrong.

Nephrite

  • Denizen
  • *
  • Posts: 2051
  • President of the Great United States of America
    • View Profile
Re: An Aesthetic Discussion Spanning 17 Years - Andrew versus Pokemon
« Reply #111 on: November 16, 2015, 02:58:42 PM »
Exeggcute's Japanese name, like almost all of them, is stupid and you shouldn't think about it.

It's "Tamatama," tama being the word for ball and also part of the word "tamago" which means, surprise, EGG.

Exegguctor's Japanese name is "Nasshii," which they get from coconuts and yashi, for palm tree.

Seriously, the Japanese names for Pokemon are all fucking horrible and stupid.

Cotigo

  • Jerkface
  • Denizen
  • *
  • Posts: 4176
  • Yoo-hoo, Mr. Tentacle Guy...
    • View Profile
Re: An Aesthetic Discussion Spanning 17 Years - Andrew versus Pokemon
« Reply #112 on: November 16, 2015, 03:01:05 PM »
Exeggcute's Japanese name, like almost all of them, is stupid and you shouldn't think about it.

It's "Tamatama," tama being the word for ball and also part of the word "tamago" which means, surprise, EGG.

Exegguctor's Japanese name is "Nasshii," which they get from coconuts and yashi, for palm tree.

Seriously, the Japanese names for Pokemon are all fucking horrible and stupid.

Untrue. The Bulbasaur line's Japanese names are fucking great. You are correct about the rest though.

Nephrite

  • Denizen
  • *
  • Posts: 2051
  • President of the Great United States of America
    • View Profile
Re: An Aesthetic Discussion Spanning 17 Years - Andrew versus Pokemon
« Reply #113 on: November 16, 2015, 03:13:20 PM »
I'm sorry, "Bulbasaur" is infinitely better than "Mysterious Seed."

It isn't even a pun! It's just two words!

Cotigo

  • Jerkface
  • Denizen
  • *
  • Posts: 4176
  • Yoo-hoo, Mr. Tentacle Guy...
    • View Profile
Re: An Aesthetic Discussion Spanning 17 Years - Andrew versus Pokemon
« Reply #114 on: November 16, 2015, 03:58:50 PM »
I'm sorry, "Bulbasaur" is infinitely better than "Mysterious Seed."

It isn't even a pun! It's just two words!

Or you're missing the pun.

ふしぎだね

だね could mean seed, but also could be the casual form of ですね, so the name could either be Mysterious Seed or, "That's strange, innit?"

It's a pretty good pun.

DjinnAndTonic

  • Genie and Potion with Alcoholic Undertones
  • DL
  • Denizen
  • *
  • Posts: 6938
  • "When you wish upon a bar~"
    • View Profile
    • RPGDL Wiki
Re: An Aesthetic Discussion Spanning 17 Years - Andrew versus Pokemon
« Reply #115 on: November 18, 2015, 04:27:18 PM »
Exeggcute's Japanese name, like almost all of them, is stupid and you shouldn't think about it.

It's "Tamatama," tama being the word for ball and also part of the word "tamago" which means, surprise, EGG.

Exegguctor's Japanese name is "Nasshii," which they get from coconuts and yashi, for palm tree.

Seriously, the Japanese names for Pokemon are all fucking horrible and stupid.

You missed out that "Nasshii" also sounds a lot like the japanese word for "Eggplant"! (Which really is kind of a missed opportunity in English if you think about it...)

Nephrite

  • Denizen
  • *
  • Posts: 2051
  • President of the Great United States of America
    • View Profile
Re: An Aesthetic Discussion Spanning 17 Years - Andrew versus Pokemon
« Reply #116 on: November 18, 2015, 05:38:20 PM »
It still doesn't explain why a bunch of gang eggs turn into a weird egg palm tree. Seriously, what?

It should've just turned into like one giant egg that opens up like a russian doll with a smaller egg inside.

Veryslightlymad

  • CONCEPTUALIZATION [Challenging: Success]
  • DL
  • Denizen
  • *
  • Posts: 1141
  • Shitposts are a type of art for webforums
    • View Profile
Re: An Aesthetic Discussion Spanning 17 Years - Andrew versus Pokemon
« Reply #117 on: November 18, 2015, 07:37:52 PM »
That's perverse. Anyone who has played the Sims 3 will tell you that Egg trees are a perfectly cromulent way to grow your produce.

AndrewRogue

  • Infinite
  • DL
  • Denizen
  • *
  • Posts: 3079
  • Sadness
    • View Profile
Re: An Aesthetic Discussion Spanning 17 Years - Andrew versus Pokemon
« Reply #118 on: December 02, 2015, 05:39:18 PM »
Still interested in this. I just have a couple other things eating my time up. Nevertheless, I'll make an effort to finish Gen 1 before the year is over.

AndrewRogue

  • Infinite
  • DL
  • Denizen
  • *
  • Posts: 3079
  • Sadness
    • View Profile
Re: An Aesthetic Discussion Spanning 17 Years - Andrew versus Pokemon
« Reply #119 on: December 22, 2015, 08:54:12 AM »
Okay, the I quit was a joke. Seriously. I've just been working on other projects and neglecting this one. If I want this to get through Gen 1 before the year's end, I gotta do this.

Cubone: Hey, it's one of the bipedals I like. Got a cool primitive dinosaur vibe going and the detailing on the skull works in a way that detailing on the face wouldn't. The entire quality of that design is how amazing that skull looks on it, since otherwise it is pretty simple. 4/5

Marowak: And they fuck it up instantly. Stupid body segmentation and the skull being the actual head (and less interestingly deteailed) is a huge loss. 2/5

Hitmonlee: The Hitmon I sorta like! What I expect a pokemopn martial artist to look like. Something that is vaguely human but quite far removed. The legs are emphasized for the awesome kicks, though I don't understand the stupid yellow heel circle. 4/5 (technically 3.5, but I don't want fractionals so have a half point for not being Hitmonchan)

Hitmonchan: Too human? Check. Stupid clothing? Check. Seriously, fuck Hitmonchan and his stupid skirt. 1/5

Lickitung: Can I quit again? I'm not even really sure what to do with this design. Fat pink bipedal lizard with a massive tongue and weird designs. I think what frustrates me here is that I can't even be inspired to hate this design. It's dumb, but not in any meaningful way. Like, it sorta vaguely works instead of disgusting me. 2/5
« Last Edit: December 22, 2015, 08:57:59 AM by AndrewRogue »

Grefter

  • Villain.
  • DL
  • Denizen
  • *
  • Posts: 10386
  • True and Honest. Smarter. More aggressive.
    • View Profile
Re: An Aesthetic Discussion Spanning 17 Years - Andrew versus Pokemon
« Reply #120 on: December 22, 2015, 08:30:37 PM »
Lickitung could be purple (um except for the whole Gen 1 purple thing) and be much better of for it.  Let's make a thing that's primary feature is its big pink tongue.  Let's make the rest of it pink too. 

Also nice fucking knee pads nerd.
« Last Edit: December 22, 2015, 08:59:28 PM by Grefter »
NO MORE POKEMON - Meeplelard.
The king perfect of the DL is and always will be Excal. - Superaielman
Don't worry, just jam it in anyway. - SirAlex
Gravellers are like, G-Unit - Trancey.

AndrewRogue

  • Infinite
  • DL
  • Denizen
  • *
  • Posts: 3079
  • Sadness
    • View Profile
Re: An Aesthetic Discussion Spanning 17 Years - Andrew versus Pokemon
« Reply #121 on: December 22, 2015, 08:36:42 PM »
You know, I didn't think about that, but that is a good point. The overall coloration actually detracts from it's major defining feature.

Grefter

  • Villain.
  • DL
  • Denizen
  • *
  • Posts: 10386
  • True and Honest. Smarter. More aggressive.
    • View Profile
Re: An Aesthetic Discussion Spanning 17 Years - Andrew versus Pokemon
« Reply #122 on: December 22, 2015, 09:07:34 PM »
Also your Hitmonchan hate ain't cool bro.  Those purple clogs match the belted summer mini dress.

Serious though, why is a boxer wearing shoulder pads (that are made of them-self????) and the head ridge is fucking terrifying.

I think it would work in another kind of series (like not Pokemon but a boxing sports anime based around monsters... so like grimdark pokemon I guess?) and it reaaaallly suffers being put up against Hitmonlee which I like a lot more than you do.  I dig how featureless the torso is.  It really emphasizes the arms and legs, which then highlights the comparison of the segments/wraps around the arms really highlight the legs being the important part.  Even with that though Hitmonlee doesn't have T-Rex arms, they are actually mostly in proportion with the body for its height. 

If you take out the crown of the skull and replaced it with shoulders and a head Hitmonlee would be pretty much straight up human, but small change and good visual design make it distinguishable yet very not human.

Hitmonlee is fucking great.
NO MORE POKEMON - Meeplelard.
The king perfect of the DL is and always will be Excal. - Superaielman
Don't worry, just jam it in anyway. - SirAlex
Gravellers are like, G-Unit - Trancey.

Lady Door

  • Coming up with words is, like...
  • DL
  • Denizen
  • *
  • Posts: 1998
  • ... really hard.
    • View Profile
Re: An Aesthetic Discussion Spanning 17 Years - Andrew versus Pokemon
« Reply #123 on: December 22, 2015, 09:19:49 PM »
[quote
If you take out the crown of the skull and replaced it with shoulders and a head Hitmonlee would be pretty much straight up human, but small change and good visual design make it distinguishable yet very not human.

If you change something, it is no longer that thing, and the fact that it is not that thing when you don't change anything is why it is great.

I am pretty sure the humanoid thing was the problem, and I gotta agree. It's why Gardevoir is so goddamn creepy.
<Demedais> Humans look like cars to me.
<AndrewRogue> That must be confusing in parking lots

AndrewRogue

  • Infinite
  • DL
  • Denizen
  • *
  • Posts: 3079
  • Sadness
    • View Profile
Re: An Aesthetic Discussion Spanning 17 Years - Andrew versus Pokemon
« Reply #124 on: December 22, 2015, 09:40:05 PM »
I am pretty sure the humanoid thing was the problem, and I gotta agree. It's why Gardevoir is so goddamn creepy.

Well this is gonna get awkward in 174 more reviews.