Man Gen 7 has amazing starters, I'm so happy with their

DELET THIS

>>27475665
I really, really like this post.

>>27475665
hahaha holy shit

you just made me realize how good starters could be if they weren't so basic-looking and cutesy

File: 1464472909022.jpg (68KB, 633x758px) Image search: [Google]

68KB, 633x758px

>>27475665
Why do the starters suck so bad?

WHY GAME FREAK?!

>>27475791
>he doesn't like a flower that mimics a mantis
>he doesn't like the sneaky salamander bandit
>he doesn't like the wimp isopod

Damn they really hit it out of the park with the concepts this gen! I'm glad we got some weird starters instead of shit like another Emboar, man imagine if we got another Emboar. Wouldn't that be awful?

>>27475784
Nothing even wrong with basic-looking and cutesy. It's that they went all out with defining them by their type instead of with a concept. It worked with gen one because well.. it was the first pokemon we have literally ever seen. It gets old a billion pokemon in.

>>27475985
Litten and Rowlet are very unique as far as fire and grass types go though