Register

Author Topic: An Aesthetic Discussion Spanning 17 Years - Andrew vs Pokemon - DAILY UPDATES!  (Read 39547 times)

Fenrir

  • Denizen
  • *
  • Posts: 2397
  • Social Justice Archer
    • View Profile
Re: An Aesthetic Discussion Spanning 17 Years - Andrew versus Pokemon
« Reply #225 on: July 11, 2016, 06:17:29 PM »
*inserts Djinn-like rant about how Miltank is better than every eevolution*

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 #226 on: July 11, 2016, 10:27:15 PM »
*inserts Djinn-like rant about how Miltank is better than every eevolution*

Fuck off. Have an actual criticism or opinion. Coming in to mock me for discussing aesthetics in a topic that's literally about discussing aesthetics especially when there's already three other (at least somewhat-fleshed-out) negative responses is just piling on me for no reason other than to be pithy and demeaning. That's just dickish, not to mention it's not very conducive to continued discussion.

...Unless of course you're serious about liking Miltank that much? In which case I apologize for reading the dripping sarcasm in it wrong.

Fenrir

  • Denizen
  • *
  • Posts: 2397
  • Social Justice Archer
    • View Profile
Re: An Aesthetic Discussion Spanning 17 Years - Andrew versus Pokemon
« Reply #227 on: July 11, 2016, 10:37:38 PM »
Yeah I like Miltank?

Part of the appeal is Miktank being the hardest single fight in all of Pokemon despite its goofy as fuck aesthetic, I'll admit

Dark Holy Elf

  • DL
  • Denizen
  • *
  • Posts: 8134
  • Well-behaved women seldom make history
    • View Profile
Re: An Aesthetic Discussion Spanning 17 Years - Andrew versus Pokemon
« Reply #228 on: July 11, 2016, 10:43:24 PM »
I am also generally on board with Miltank hype.

EDIT: For all that I'm generally on team "gen 2 was lame for design" I find myself defending them a fair bit in this thread, go figure.

Erwin Schrödinger will kill you like a cat in a box.
Maybe.

AndrewRogue

  • Infinite
  • DL
  • Denizen
  • *
  • Posts: 3079
  • Sadness
    • View Profile
Re: An Aesthetic Discussion Spanning 17 Years - Andrew versus Pokemon
« Reply #229 on: July 11, 2016, 11:27:40 PM »
NEB: That's because I'm harsh, tactless, and brutally dismiss Pokemon I don't care about with little regard for decency.

Someone's gotta stand up for them.

Cotigo

  • Jerkface
  • Denizen
  • *
  • Posts: 4176
  • Yoo-hoo, Mr. Tentacle Guy...
    • View Profile
Re: An Aesthetic Discussion Spanning 17 Years - Andrew versus Pokemon
« Reply #230 on: July 11, 2016, 11:30:11 PM »
*inserts Djinn-like rant about how Miltank is better than every eevolution*

Fuck off. Have an actual criticism or opinion. Coming in to mock me for discussing aesthetics in a topic that's literally about discussing aesthetics especially when there's already three other (at least somewhat-fleshed-out) negative responses is just piling on me for no reason other than to be pithy and demeaning. That's just dickish, not to mention it's not very conducive to continued discussion.

...Unless of course you're serious about liking Miltank that much? In which case I apologize for reading the dripping sarcasm in it wrong.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3qkrKTAOv2M

Magetastica

  • Denizen
  • *
  • Posts: 174
    • View Profile
Re: An Aesthetic Discussion Spanning 17 Years - Andrew versus Pokemon
« Reply #231 on: July 11, 2016, 11:36:36 PM »
Y'know, that is literally the first time I've ever seen Lugia's wings so distinctly hand-like. I've seen the curl before, but the 'fingers' were closed, so they looked like actual wings. I honestly think the biggest thing holding Lugia back (IMHO) is the finger-wings, since they've already shown they can do fairly competent renditions of wings+hands together.

Also, Andy, I'm fairly certain that the big bipedal craze is because Gen 2 is the one where everything was supposed to be more of a "human-ish" type of whatever. Like, say, Granbull. Or Elekid. I'm not saying they -work- but that was for sure the feel I got from Gen 2.

Oh, and Dark-Type being signified by being "edgy" and having black somewhere in the colour pallet.

Seriously, I love quite a few of the pokemon in Gen 2, but I do have to wonder what they were actually hoping to aesthetically accomplish with most of it. *coughELEKIDcough*

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 #232 on: July 12, 2016, 12:03:46 AM »

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3qkrKTAOv2M

Like you have any room to talk considering how you get your panties in a twist if someone so much talks about something you're not interested in. Seriously, quit being an asshole. I know it's your "thing" or whatever, but it gets old. You are almost thirty, it ain't cute anymore.

AndrewRogue

  • Infinite
  • DL
  • Denizen
  • *
  • Posts: 3079
  • Sadness
    • View Profile
Re: An Aesthetic Discussion Spanning 17 Years - Andrew versus Pokemon
« Reply #233 on: July 12, 2016, 12:20:29 AM »
Serious request to everyone.

Keep all personal attacks leveled at my taste in Pokemon, please.

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 #234 on: July 12, 2016, 12:33:10 AM »
No. The only thing that can stop this is more design reviews! Gen 3 when?!

SnowFire

  • DL
  • Denizen
  • *
  • Posts: 4935
    • View Profile
Re: An Aesthetic Discussion Spanning 17 Years - Andrew versus Pokemon
« Reply #235 on: July 12, 2016, 02:34:27 AM »
[02:53] <%SnowFire> http://www.rpgdl.com/forums/index.php?topic=6812.0  --> For the Pokefans (aka not me).
[02:55] * +DarkestRogue chuckles
[02:55] <+DarkestRogue> You should make sure to link it in the beauty topic too



Also:
A) Miltank is indeed pretty rad, better than Andy gives it credit for.
B) I dunno, I'd say Chansey > Blissey myself.
C) Celebi strikes me as at least a 4/5.  This is a Pokemon I can trust to go open a branch office for my firm.  Real get-up-and-go, can-do attitude.
D) Hey, ALL the later legendaries aren't terrible.  Look at this cute jellyfish thing:


(just...  skip the siblings)

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 #236 on: July 12, 2016, 03:55:34 AM »

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3qkrKTAOv2M

Your arsehole isn't cute anymore.

If we want to stay on topic though, much like Ho-Oh is showed up by Moltres, Articuno is way more on point for the kinds of design points Lugia's tries to hit.

It has a tripointed crest similar to Lugia's but it sits just above the eyes like a brow or a hat where as Ligia has eyes poking through a growth (that make it like a mask or something?)

It's wings aren't actually really functional being kind of jagged and blocky kind of like Ice.  Then it's whispy tail kind of like Suicune invokes either wind or an Aurora.

It has that solid pale blue all over with the softer blue on the underbelly.  Complimenting colors instead of the hard contrast of the dark blue on white that Lugia has.

Also it has chicken legs like an actual bird instead of T-Rex legs.

Now I know that isn't super fair because I think (?) Articunonis/was generally one of the more well liked Gen 1 pokedudes, but I find it the most direct comparison.  Though I could talk sugar about Suicune for a same gen comparison I guess?  (Suicune is what Vaporeon should have been).
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.

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 #237 on: July 12, 2016, 04:09:10 AM »
The problem you seem to have with Lugia is that it's not bird like enough? I mean, birds are cool and I also like Articuno more than Lugia. But Lugia isn't a bird. It has T-Rex legs because Lugia is more dinosaur than bird. I don't think "not being a bird" should be held against it just because it flies?

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 #238 on: July 12, 2016, 04:51:09 AM »
Edit  to fix up a URL and I guess put in a TLDR; of didn't mean to rambly ramble, its all just "yeah but I don't get it and think its ugly".

I mean it's counterpart in Ho-Oh is a bird, it is closely related to a bunch of birds apparently.  I mean... isn't it supposed to be a bird thing?

If it isn't a bird and it is a dinosaur thingo I would also kinda like it to look like a flying dinosaur and not have gigantic ridiculous hands?

Fuck I would take a giant flying Manta Ray or Plesiosaur (Henceforth referred to as a Pleasureosaur) with oversized flippers that act as wings or something.  There is tons of things involving the Ocean that look similar to flying things with the overlap of fluid dynamics and aerodynamics and none of those have enormous freaky hands.

Even if I go okay it isn't supposed to be a bird, it still looks like a fucking mess to me?  If it is supposed to look like a dinosaur, it mixes a bunch of types of dinosaur that don't make a great deal of sense to me. 

Lets be generous and go with the neck is a Pleasureosaur, the spines and tail are solidly in your Stegosaurus or similar space (so a land based herbivore), like unless it is supposed to be quoting a Spinosaurus(?)  but those have a membrane between the spines to make that distinct dorsal .  And then we still have the tail bits?

I am really struggling to find a bipedal dinosaur that has knees that bend that way as well, unless like it walks on the tips of those feet instead of with them flat on the ground (unless it doesn't ever walk and they are just like... steering for under the water?  In which case it seems terribly inefficient to have them on such bulky legs).

Like... If it isn't quoting a bird and is purely quoting dinosaurs I don't get what it is riffing on.  (Bulbapedia quotes Pleisureosaur and Stego as well, but I came to that distinction separate from it).

If it isn't quoting anything and just is its own thing then it is a thing I find baffling and not particularly visually appealing.  It doesn't score bonus points with me for being minimalist just because it uses 3 colours.  Everything in dark blue on it juts out all over the place and makes it visually noisy and it doesn't interact at all with the paler blue that should be complementing them. 

I mean you could strip them out and it would look a lot sleaker, but it would be missing something to tie it together, you would want it to be about at the shoulders.  For some reason they decided that should be giant fuck off freaky hands.
« Last Edit: July 12, 2016, 05:15:08 AM 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.

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 #239 on: July 12, 2016, 07:43:15 AM »


I do agree that the hand-wings aren't that great, and I prefer shots where the design looks more like standard wings. But I can kinda get behind the uniqueness of it. Pokemon is trying to create new creature designs. I feel like Lugia is one of the few that isn't just "take real animal(/object) and put anime googly eyes on it and color it funny". And yeah, a lot of the other too-original designs fail pretty hard (Dunsparce), but I think they nailed it with Lugia and I've never seen a negative reaction to Lugia's design until today, so I suppose that's why I'm also baffled.





The fin-things also apparently can flatten against Lugia's body and I think that's kind of a neat effect.

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 #240 on: July 12, 2016, 08:15:22 AM »
I would probably have ranted a whole ton more in the past about how much I don't like Lugia, but well... it is far from the worst thing in Gen 2 and by the time you get it you have been staring at Stantlers, Girafarigg, Aipomms, Sentret, Hoothoots and Dunsparce for hours.  So like you run into it super late after game (remembering that lol this is gen 2 aftergame so like 600 billion hours later or some shit), at that point, who even gives a shit that this one legendary pokemon isn't great?

you just played most of a gen 2 pokemon game and half the stuff you have run into either looks like garbage, plays like garbage or both and is a sentient buttplug.

Gen 2 games are pretty good, but holy damn they are great and burning you out on Pokedudes due to pacing and the tumult of Gen 2 being such a standout of mediocrity.

Quote from: Electric Six - Pulling the Plug on the Party
Now just because no one likes you
Don't mean they don't want you around
They wanna throw things at you
And for an encore they push you down, push you down

They sent a man to the moon just to watch him die
We dropped turkeys out of planes just to fill up the sky
And they know damn well they can't fly

Edit - Just trying to tone back language to be less hostile in a few places, not because I am mad but because my resting rageface isn't what I want this to be unless we want to go back to talking about zenny's butt hole.
« Last Edit: July 12, 2016, 08:21:58 AM 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.

Cotigo

  • Jerkface
  • Denizen
  • *
  • Posts: 4176
  • Yoo-hoo, Mr. Tentacle Guy...
    • View Profile
Re: An Aesthetic Discussion Spanning 17 Years - Andrew versus Pokemon
« Reply #241 on: July 12, 2016, 10:33:14 AM »
tl;dr still worse than magmar got it

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 #242 on: July 12, 2016, 10:59:46 AM »


Zenn "literall" y
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.

Cotigo

  • Jerkface
  • Denizen
  • *
  • Posts: 4176
  • Yoo-hoo, Mr. Tentacle Guy...
    • View Profile
Re: An Aesthetic Discussion Spanning 17 Years - Andrew versus Pokemon
« Reply #243 on: July 12, 2016, 11:09:30 AM »


Zenn "literall" y

Only thing better than a onebuttduck is a threebuttduck

EDIT: OH GOD LOOK AT THIS THING WHILE LISTENING TO BABY MARIO CRY THAT IS EXACTLY THE ANIMAL SOUND IT WOULD MAKE
« Last Edit: July 12, 2016, 11:50:34 AM by Makkotah »

AndrewRogue

  • Infinite
  • DL
  • Denizen
  • *
  • Posts: 3079
  • Sadness
    • View Profile
Re: An Aesthetic Discussion Spanning 17 Years - Andrew versus Pokemon
« Reply #244 on: July 12, 2016, 06:16:40 PM »


Zenn "literall" y

Only thing better than a onebuttduck is a threebuttduck

EDIT: OH GOD LOOK AT THIS THING WHILE LISTENING TO BABY MARIO CRY THAT IS EXACTLY THE ANIMAL SOUND IT WOULD MAKE

https://youtu.be/1cjXqvi4ajU?t=11m1s

AndrewRogue

  • Infinite
  • DL
  • Denizen
  • *
  • Posts: 3079
  • Sadness
    • View Profile
Re: An Aesthetic Discussion Spanning 17 Years - Andrew versus Pokemon
« Reply #245 on: July 12, 2016, 09:03:38 PM »
Oh right, I did want to say, the non-Sugimori art does help deal with some of my issues with how... ungainly Lugia looks. Smoother lines and the like.

Anyhow, before I start Gen 3, I figured I'd give you guys a chance to mock my taste ahead of time. I've updated the first post to nicely feature the best and worst of Gens 1 and 2, so, if you want, feel free to do some spoiler hidden guesses for what will be Best of the Best and Absolutely Shameful in Gen 3 if you'd like!

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 #246 on: July 12, 2016, 10:33:56 PM »
I predict you will like some trashy fire Pokemon that isn't even that good looking and there will be something that you list off a bunch of reasons that it is trashy and then give it a 3/5.
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.

Fenrir

  • Denizen
  • *
  • Posts: 2397
  • Social Justice Archer
    • View Profile
Re: An Aesthetic Discussion Spanning 17 Years - Andrew versus Pokemon
« Reply #247 on: July 12, 2016, 10:52:30 PM »
I'm seeing a pattern with Andrew's best here

Anyway.

Spheal.

5/5.

Right? Of course.

Hunter Sopko

  • Heavily in Debt
  • DL
  • Denizen
  • *
  • Posts: 4556
  • Hai, Kazuma-desu
    • View Profile
Re: An Aesthetic Discussion Spanning 17 Years - Andrew versus Pokemon
« Reply #248 on: July 12, 2016, 10:58:05 PM »
Nope. Spoink

Fenrir

  • Denizen
  • *
  • Posts: 2397
  • Social Justice Archer
    • View Profile
Re: An Aesthetic Discussion Spanning 17 Years - Andrew versus Pokemon
« Reply #249 on: July 12, 2016, 11:03:14 PM »
Naaaah

By the way Grumpig is going to be the most obvious 1/5 for Andrew out of all of Pokemon, even including gen 2