So why do you like palossand again? >It's creative!

>>27964188
I like it because I like sand castles and ghost types.

It's a haunted castle, except a sandcastle instead of a regular one.
Kinda clever.

>>27964215
This, pretty much.

>B-B-BUT MUH LORE!

A ghost possessing something to lure people in is hardly unique, even by pokemon standards. It's just a lazy excuse to paste eyes on random objects and call it a pokemon. We WILL have a ghost type shoe pokemon in the future because of this lazy shit

I like it because I like it.
It's Pokemon, I'm not writing an essay on every designs then rank them.

>>27964215

But don't you wish they at least tried something a little more unique with the castle? Like made it a little more elaborate, or something?

By the way, I like bug types, and hot dogs, but I wouldn't want a beetle shaped like a hot dog as a pokemon.

Is there... Is there something wrong with liking a Pokemon based off of a sandcastle?

Guess I'll just have to kill myself because I'm not entitled to my opinion.

>>27964188
The potential porn is what got me interested. Imagine struggling neck deep as the coarse sand slowly pours into your lungs and your vision starts fading. Unf~

god you people are fucking annoying

it's a pokemon, no matter how much you hate it, it will always be a pokemon. We don't need 50 threads a day about how much you cannot handle a sand castle ghost in a game marketed towards 10 year olds

>>27964269

But surely you can admit from an objective standpoint that it is uncreative and lazy and is a slippery slope towards literal fucking yokai

File: 1459860078386.png (20KB, 267x367px) Image search: [Google]

20KB, 267x367px

>blah blah not creative not unique
It literally is. When you have hundreds of common haunted object tropes like dolls, armor, paintings or even fucking furniture, deciding to go with a possessed sand castle is creative. The thing you can argue for is that it's an undercooked concept that they could have done more with, but it's still a unique design.

The rest of your shitpost is just your spewing opinions thinking they are fact, so I'm not even going to bother addressing them. Liking ghosts is definitely a valid reason for liking Palossand.

>>27964188
Serious question OP, do you have some kind of social disorder? Why do you think anyone cares about your feelings on this pokemon?

>>27964317
Honestly I would be entirely satisfied if they did that.

At least it would be something original and not the same copy/paste design of a bird or electric rodent.

>>27964350

I'm just legitimately concerned with the state of pokemon, and don't want to see a haunted plunger in gen 8.

>>27964359

There's tons of unique pokemon already announced, just because they do the same tired electric rodent, early route bird trope doesn't mean that they need a sand castle to spice things up.

>>27964348

It's literally not creative though

>What can we do for hawaiian pokemon?
>Hurrr, well there's lots of sand in hawaii I thinkg
>OH I KNOW, HOW ABOUT A SAND POKEMON
>YEAH, AND IT'LL BE A GHOST BECAUSE IT'S HAUNTED OR SOMETING!

A literal 5 year old could have done this. A 5 year old wouldn't have come up with a turtle that coats its shell in sulfur to utilize explosions in its battle style

File: nofun.png (254KB, 692x356px) Image search: [Google]

254KB, 692x356px

>>27964188
You forgot the right answer: it's funny.

This is not my problem if you don't like it because it's "stupid". The stupid designs are funny designs, and I love fun.

>>27964455
That literal 5 year old would have been creative, unlike another literal 5 year old who would have suggested "it's a doll but it's a ghost inside" or "it's an animal but its tail is on fire!" Things don't have to be advanced or complex to be creative.

Have a (You) anyway.

>>27964188
>We could have gotten a greentext thread
>We could have gotten a "leak" thread to amuse ourselves with for shits and giggles
>We could have gotten a S/M speculation thread
>We could have gotten a thread with original content
>We could have gotten a screencap worthy thread
>We could have gotten a storytime thread
>We could have gotten a thread dedicated to uncommonly discussed characters or pokemon
>We could have gotten a thread that explores the lore of the Pokemon world
>We could have gotten a thread discussing the soundtrack and music of Pokemon
>We could have gotten a thread talking about how to improve specific pokemon competitively.
>We could have gotten a wishlist thread for /vp/'s most wanted features
>We could have gotten a thread made just for OP's favorite pokemon whereupon he would be rewarded with fanart of his favorite pokemon

>but instead we got OP impotently crying, whining and bitching about a pokemon like it raped him every day

>>27964455
>I'm just legitimately concerned with the state of pokemon

So if the designs become too bad for your tastes stop playing. Or just don't use that pokemon. Why do you need to try convince everyone otherwise?

OP, you literally just listed a ton of subjective shit. You need to be 18 or older to post here, and if you can't understand the simple concept of differing opinions by that age, then you've got something wrong with you.

File: gen 8.jpg (28KB, 698x824px) Image search: [Google]

28KB, 698x824px

>>27964492

>HAHAHA DON'T HATE, IT'S SO FUNNY! XD!
>UPVOTE THIS POST SO EVERYONE CAN SEE HOW FUNNY THIS NEW POKEMON IS!

>>27964188
It's a play on the haunted castle archetype that uses the windows and "gate" as eyes and a mouth, and can turn itself into a quicksand trap to attack. Plus it's cute and I like ghost types.

>>27964569
>resorting to the reddit boogieman

its time to stop posting

>>27964628

>>27964569 It's a play on the haunted house archetype that uses the handle as a body and can attack you on the toilet to attack.

Plus it's cute and I like ghost types ;)

>>27964257

And what if there is? If you don't like it, don't use it. Pokemon don't have to appeal to everyone.

>>27964340

>yokai

So this is the new term to describe pokemon you don't like that's even more meaningless than digimon. And you realize Pokemon have been based on yokai since gen 1 right?

>>27964670
Wow, you formatted that post badly. I can barely understand what you're trying to say.
Why don't you take a nap, kiddo? It won't stop you being a juvenile fuckwit, but you might be better at grammar and getting your points across if you've had some rest.

>>27964569

You seem very upset

File: 1410360939457.png (13KB, 551x349px) Image search: [Google]

13KB, 551x349px

>>27964188
>Hating on Delibird

It's a mimic in the sand. It's dex entry redeems it. It's a spirit possessing sand, if it has the chance it will consume another living individual and suck out its life force until it becomes another spirit possessing the sand.

>>27964340

>Objective Standpoint

This is a completely fucking subjective matter. There's no way there can be an objective standpoint on a fucking design.

I also don't like the sandcastle much and think it's up there with their laziest designs yet, but what's your gripe with Chimecho, Castform and Delibird?

>>27964257
>We WILL have a ghost type shoe pokemon in the future because of this lazy shit
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Red_Shoes_(fairy_tale)

File: Sukamon_b.jpg (70KB, 320x320px) Image search: [Google]

70KB, 320x320px

>>27964569
> WHAT THE FUCK MAN, THIS POKEMON IS LITERALLY SHIT DESIGN
> GF IS RUNNING OUT OF IDEAS

Yes, you are literally "no fun allowed" fan.

>>27964332
http://pastebin.com/8JFzykJm

File: multi-armed-yellow-sand-monster-number-thirty-four.gif (78KB, 269x226px) Image search: [Google]

78KB, 269x226px

Almost every other amorphous sand monster in existence has a design that tries too hard to scream "look at how massively terrifying and intimidating I look for sand, run away now!"

I think it's just refreshing to see one that takes it in the opposite direction by actively trying to appear non-threatening despite actually being just as dangerous.
It's cute in that sense. It honestly doesn't even need to be a ghost.

And while I do like him a lot, I won't deny that the spinning shovel is rather stupid.

File: image.jpg (30KB, 416x416px) Image search: [Google]

30KB, 416x416px

>>27964257
we already have a shoe pokémon you fucking idiot

File: (you).png (177KB, 501x506px) Image search: [Google]

177KB, 501x506px

>>27964188
(you)

File: 1471106254678.jpg (116KB, 640x582px) Image search: [Google]

116KB, 640x582px

>>27964338
This. Underrated post.

File: 98870892-young-hodor-large_trans++-vc9zZQdCQbz6zmclXDeAbVaPWbi5A4PlmVKVUpz9HA.jpg (38KB, 639x399px) Image search: [Google]

38KB, 639x399px

>>27965315
>I think it's just refreshing to see one that takes it in the opposite direction by actively trying to appear non-threatening despite actually being just as dangerous

This
this
/this
/thris
/thread

>>27964188
>>It's creative!
>No it's not, it's literally JUST a sand castle
Welcome to /vp/. Here, if something is ghost or fairy type, any and all faults in its design are automatically excused and dismissed as creative genius. If it were pure ground, it would be universally hated.

>>27964188
>Being this butthurt
What, so liking a Pokemon over petty reason like "it's Ghost type" or "I like sand castle" is wrong now?

>>27964340
>objective standpoint
>uncreative and lazy
You can't have an objective standpoint for this thing, it doesn't work that way.
I'll give you that the coloring does look lazy; I wish they'd make it look more like Desertman from Battle Network.

>slippery slope towards literal fucking yokai
Yokai. He actually said it. Fuck, I don't even have any response to this other than "Fuck you".

>>27964455
>I'm just legitimately concerned
No you're not. If you are, you would actually try to make a change. Posting on an anonymous board looking for people to validate your opinion is not being "legitimately concerned".

How about this OP?

Try realizing that people have different opinions than you, and if they think it is a good design, you don't have to bitch about it on the Internet.

Oh what's that? You are only 5 years old? You should try drinking bleach, I hear that will really settle down your anger.

File: maxresdefault.jpg (98KB, 1280x720px) Image search: [Google]

98KB, 1280x720px

It's a ghost from all the dead syrian refugee's

>>27964188
>nature gets a lot more unique than a fucking sand castle

>sandcastle is naturally occuring

Are you retarded?

File: nig.png (2KB, 493x24px) Image search: [Google]

2KB, 493x24px

.

>>27965596
>>>/pol/

>>27965624
> Literally literal

File: tmp_557-1471776911790-216023143.png (22KB, 202x206px) Image search: [Google]

22KB, 202x206px

>>27965211
What the fuck did I just read?

File: notsureifwant.png (62KB, 200x200px) Image search: [Google]

62KB, 200x200px

>>27964188
Nobody can give a reason that you'll accept, you mean. You hate it, that's fine, but arguing with yourself on bullet points just looks silly.
I think it's alright, for the record. I like that its ability has a nice feeling of actual water/sand interaction. It didn't have to be a ghost but it's pretty neat to me.

But then again, I just don't find it worth the energy to get crazy upset over Pokemon designs anymore. Time better spent on the ones I like.

File: youkai_watch_10.jpg (3MB, 3685x2400px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 3685x2400px

>>27964188
>>27964340
>shitting on pokemon designs
A reminder to get a load of this and be grateful for what you have

>>27965315
This.

When I first saw Palossand I felt like it was a fucking Kirby enemy. I didn't hate it, but it felt like Whispy Woods' cousin from Alola. But then I noticed how much it looked like it was screaming its head off. I couldn't help but chuckle. It also was right next to the lazy, deviantart tier turd that is Alolan Meowth, so that made Palossand look better to me by comparison.

After the recent english reveal I loved the spinning radar shovel along with how its pre-evo uses it to trick children into falling under its control. It made me feel like the shovel actually had a purpose. I also find it funny how Palossand can control adults but all it makes them do is build sandcastles for camouflage.

Palossand could have been executed better, but a lot of this just made it one of my favorites. That, and I kind of like the ability even if it isn't really good.

>>27964188
>stop liking things I don't like!

>>27964828
People don't actually don't know the difference between the two, they just use them as buzzwords at an attempt to sound, I guess intelligent?

File: ded.png (229KB, 702x447px) Image search: [Google]

229KB, 702x447px

>>27964188

>So why do you like palossand again?

Because it killed Pikachu. None of that swirly eye fainting bullshit, nigga flat out killed his ass.

>>27964317
>Like made it a little more elaborate, or something?
Then there would be complaints about how it's over designed.
Every design without any exception will have people that like it and others that dislike it. This time, you're on the side that doesn't like it.

Tough luck. Deal with it and move on.

>>27964188
>there's already plenty of inanimate object pokemon
There are plenty of animal pokemon. I guess we should ease up on those.

File: 1471632728243.jpg (45KB, 747x566px) Image search: [Google]

45KB, 747x566px

>>27964188
>I want Pokémon to stay as animals the post

Can't wait for Alolan Mr. Mime, Alolan Electrode and Alolan Porygon.

It's subjective hombre.

File: 507.png (25KB, 140x149px) Image search: [Google]

25KB, 140x149px

>>27964188
So why do you like herdier again?

>It's creative!
No it's not, it's literally JUST my mom's dog

>It's unique!
No it isn't, there's already plenty of dog pokemon (with better execution), and nature gets a lot more unique than my mom's fucking dog.

>I like dogs!
And this is the worst and stupidest dog. At least other dogs look different from their real life counterparts. My mom's dog makes literally no sense as a pokemon

>but it'll probably look good in motion!
No it doesn't, it looks literally retarded, fucking faggot dog with its stupid fucking look on its face.

Nobody can give a reason why this is a good pokemon, all they will do is reply with "BUT I LIKE IT!" I'm sure once they saw the backlash, their natural contrarian nature endeared herdier to them. These are the same people that act like bland boring forgettable pokemon like chimecho, castform, and delibird are their favorite pokemon.

>>27964455
Children are more creative than adults so what's your point?

File: 1376350751940.png (346KB, 661x697px) Image search: [Google]

346KB, 661x697px

>>27964188
Because people can like things you don't, you fucking moron. I don't even like Palossand, but yet I'm able to come to terms with something as fucking simple as this. Kek'd.

i forgot youre not allowed to like something without having a 5 page essay describing every reason its objectively perfect

OP, you have to realize this board is populated by the severely autistic. They don't like when you criticize their favorite game. They will like ANYTHING that Game Freak and TPC shit out.

>IT'S SUBJECTIVE!
>MY OPINION
>STOP LIKING WHAT I DON'T LIKE!!!

And you all call OP the 5 year old. OP made paragraphs analyzing the issues with pallossand, and all you do is is just go "lol i dunno!"

Try utilizing some critical thinking skills. Every single form of media is subjective, but you can still analyze, criticize, and reflect on why you like or dislike something

>>27967532
>tfw you liked Wayside but everybody says it sucked and you don't even like it for the wayfoos you just genuinely liked it

>>27967608
least_intelligent_comment_of_the_month.jpg

>>27964188
Your problem is that you think that pokemon has to be different from real life objects or animal, but no.
It can literally look like your mom's sandcastle but that's still fine, just stick some eyes on it and it's ready to go. And we are fine with that.

>>27964188
I dunno why everyone is shitting themselves over this so hard. It's literally Drifloon: Tropical Edition.

Ghost Pokemon come in two flavors, they're either malevolent spirits or they're some sort of possessed object. And because children are the easiest thing to lure in, when the spirit possesses the sand it takes the form of a sand castle, because children like sand castles.

But this whole discussion is moot anyway because of this line:

>Nobody can give a reason why this is a good pokemon, all they will do is reply with "BUT I LIKE IT!"

Liking a Pokemon is more than enough of a reason to think a Pokemon is good. Just because you don't like it doesn't mean others can't. The "stop liking what I don't like" attitude is so fucking juvenile, just get over it.

chimecho is my favorite pokemon you shit

>>27967641
>Every single form of media is subjective, but you can still analyze, criticize...
I agree with this. Even if OP is shitposting a lot of guys here are too convinced a design cannot have objective flaws.
>>27967659
>just stick some eyes on it and it's ready to go
>I'm fine with that
That's a really shitty opinion to have, and I like Palossand.

>>27964188
I like it just to spite you shitlord

>>27964223
PRetty much this. It's a characterization of that monster mansion type trope. That's why its mouth is the door for example

>>27967641
>OP made paragraphs analyzing the issues with pallossand

He didn't analyze shit, he just gave reasons why he doesn't like it.

>IT'S NOT CREATIVE OR UNIQUE BECAUSE I SAID SO

Isn't "analysis".

And even if he did provide excellent analysis into the subject, who cares? If someone came up to me on the street and handed me a detailed report on why vanilla is the shittiest ice cream flavor I'd still like vanilla ice cream, because I like it, and all the analysis in the world couldn't change my mind.

>>27964188
>STOP LIKING WHAT I DOMT LIKE REEEEEEEEEEEEEEE

Fuck off, twat.

>>27964257
>We WILL have a ghost type shoe pokemon in the future because of this lazy shit
This is not fucking fair because there is literally a ghost shoe in Japanese folklore and shit. Should have said a haunted car or something.

>>27967766
>Even if OP is shitposting a lot of guys here are too convinced a design cannot have objective flaws.
It can't. Media and artwork is entirely subjective.

>opinions

>>27965808
the coinpurse clam looks alright, even though it looks too much like Shellder

>>27967766
>Even if OP is shitposting a lot of guys here are too convinced a design cannot have objective flaws.

But if you're not gonna name them and try to educate people about them then you're just whining about your opinion being different. Nothing OP pointed out is objective.

>>27967826
But, hypothetically, if the arguments in the report were legit and uncounterable would you admit vanilla is the shittiest ice cream flavor?
I'm actually curious.

>>27967766
>Even if OP is shitposting a lot of guys here are too convinced a design cannot have objective flaws.
See, you'd have a point it looked like a rough sketch that was thrown into the game unfinished but thats not the case is it?

>>27967641
>paragraphs analyzing the issues

Bullshit. Only thing i took away from OP was WAH IT'S A SAND CASTLE THAT'S STOOPID. It's literally the 'why I hate Klefki' complaint. This pokemon is more creative than OP's bitching.

Palossand is a neat idea. It's a ghost that haunts beaches, where people and pokemon frequent, to literally eat them. No victim would suspect a sand castle to swallow them whole. They also use their victim's left behind regrets to make baby possessed sand castles, so their numbers spread constantly.

It also can move, as it can manifest its own sand to build on itself. Imagine walking down the beach and this glob of sand with a shovel sticking upright is moving toward you.

Not every pokemon has to be intimidating unless you're an edgy 14 year old. Sometimes the cutest and harmless looking animals can be the most dangerous.

Also sand isn't exclusive to Hawaii, dumbass. They could have introduced this pokemon in any of the gens and it'd fit.

Many of the pokemon this gen have neat ideas for lore, but it's a shame some people are too negatively simplistic to appreciate that.

>>27965808
I like the pompadour lizard, but shit the rest are embarrassing, is that just a rainbow teardrop?
>money shelder is kinda alright too

>>27967953
>But, hypothetically, if the arguments in the report were legit and uncounterable would you admit vanilla is the shittiest ice cream flavor?
I don't think you know what hypothetical means.

>>27967845
>Should have said a haunted car or something.
He was probably trying to avoid evoking Rotom, since I'm pretty sure most people don't have much of an issue with how Rotom functions.

>>27967826
>And even if he did provide excellent analysis into the subject, who cares? If someone came up to me on the street and handed me a detailed report on why vanilla is the shittiest ice cream flavor I'd still like vanilla ice cream, because I like it, and all the analysis in the world couldn't change my mind.

That's fine, you can like it, but still admit flaws. There's plenty of cartoons I have as my guilty pleasures, and will readily admit that they are juvenile, shallow, flawed, etc. but I still like them. But they are not flawless.

Just admit Pallossand is stupid and lazy, even if you like it. Please.

>>27964188
can people just like something without you getting your pissbaby panties in a bunch? do you have autism?

>>27967863
>Media and artwork is entirely subjective.
It's not 100% subjective, it wouldn't be possible to properly analyze and criticize otherwise. People like to think this so they can justify protect their tastes behind the shield of "all tastes are respectable".
>>27967910
>Nothing OP pointed out is objective.
Where did I say the contrary?
I'm not siding with OP; he's clearly shitposting.
>>27967975
You're saying it like the only flaws a design can have is "to look like a rough sketch thrown unfinished".

>>27964188
>my opinions matter

>>27968018
>4.b.(of a proposition or syllogism) conditional.
>5.a hypothetical situation, instance, etc.
I used it correctly, retard.

>>27967991
Maybe that's WHY sandcastles are banned in Hawaii, so that if anyone sees one they will know it's a Palossand and can avoid it.

D E E P E S T L O R E

>>27967953
The arguments can't be legit. Just because you phrase your argument as 'it's the worst' instead of 'i think it's the worst' it's still a subjective opinion.

Saying vanilla is an unpopular flavor statistically would be a fact, because it can be proven or disproven. Saying 'it's bad' is an opinion.

People not understanding the difference between a fact and opinion is why most politics and media coverage are becoming bullshit.

>>27968053
>You're saying it like the only flaws a design can have is "to look like a rough sketch thrown unfinished".
That's because those are the only flaws a design can have. Everything else is down to the viewer and as you know people have differing opinions on things.

The mere idea that art has a standardized and objective way to make it is idiotic.

>>27968053
>People like to think this so they can justify protect their tastes behind the shield of "all tastes are respectable".
All tastes ARE respectable. People do use the excuse to shy away from criticism but it has nothing to do with the "respectability" of the opinion. No one should be less "respected" just because they found themselves entertained by, say, the Transformers movies. What is important is being able to put into words why you like ro dislike something, or at least being able to admit "I just don't like/i just like something" instead of putting up some illusion of purpose behind their opinion. The OP is pretty much doing that since they clearly don't have a grasp on what the purpose and concept that's being conveyed based on the complaints issued.

>>27968096
So you don't know then.

I'M CONCERNED ABOUT THE UNORIGINALITY OF POKEMON YOU GUYS
WHY CAN'T WE GO BACK TO THE DAYS OF LITERALLY A POKEBALL WITH EYES AND A PILE OF SLUDGE
OH BUT IT'S OKAY BECAUSE WE ALSO HAD LITERALLY JUST A CAT WITH A COIN ON ITS HEAD AND LITERALLY JUST A BIRD THAT GETS BIGGER

>>27968036
Whatever helps you sleep at night, which is apparently thinking the world revolves around you.

Read some critiques of a movie you love. More than likely you'll find a complaint from a critic about the movie that you disagree with. In his eyes it's a flaw, in yours it isn't. That's what opinions are, retard.

>>27968114
You're assuming that the only argument the report would have is "it's the worst" as in "is a bad taste", and also avoiding the main point of the question.
The point is, if something (it doesn't matter what) was demonstrated to have plenty of flaws, and you liked that something, would you admit their flaws? Because clearly a lot of people in /vp/ wouldn't.

>>27968036
No.
Not that guy, but I like the damn pile of sand and I don't find anything stupid or lazy on it.

Maybe the concept is lazy, but I really like the model (the art is meh) and the 'lore'.

>>27968155
I gave you proofs, you only gave me a "no u".
I'm sorry, but you're a retard.

ENOUGH IS ENOUGH, STOP LIKING THIS STUPID FUCKING SANDCASTLE NOOOWWWWW

>>27968214
>proofs
Also there was no use of a "no u" literally or figuratively.

>>27964188
Are you the same guy that always goes "hurr durr contrarian" everytime?

>>27964188
For me it is like a Muk but made of sand

>>27968184
That isn't what you said. You asked if there was a report that showed arguments of why vanilla is a shitty flavor, would you admit it is the shittiest flavor. No. Because nothing can 'prove' an opinion because opinions aren't fucking facts.

What you see as a flaw is not what everyone sees. A flaw is still subjective. For example say you hate vanilla and I love it. You can claim a flaw of vanilla is that it's flavor is bland. Good for you. I can argue the flavor is delicious.

Fact and opinion can't be mixed just because you can't stand the thought of being 'wrong'.

>>27968184
The problem is that there are objective flaws and subjective flaws and what OP has demonstrated has been entirely subjective.

Saying that a drawing's anatomy is bad is an objective flaw, it can be proved with factual evidence.
Saying that a drawing is not creative is a subjective flaw, you can elaborate why YOU think it is not creative but it is not something that can be proven.

Saying that vanilla is the least popular flavor statistically is objective. Saying that vanilla tastes bad is subjective.

>>27968212
Even the concept isn't lazy. The reason they picked a sand castle to make a ghost-type wasn't because they threw a dart at a dart board of random island or beach-related things. I'd say the execution wasn't very visually interesting or creative if nothing else but in all fairness there isn't a lot of ways to go with it visually.

>>27968036
I already said that I thought the spinning shovel was dumb, but that's pretty much the extent of what flaws I feel it has, aside from disliking practically every piece of official artwork released this generation.

>>27968184
You can't have flaw in a design with no utility.

A car that doesn't work is flawed. A cracked hammer is flawed, but how is vanilla or a pokemon flawed?

If you said that the sand castle is designed around a myth and that palossand is unloyal to it, then you could argue a flawed execution.

>>27968324
Personally, I do think creativity can be "quantified" in some ways but it has to take in so many factors that it's tough to do it reliably and 100%, and that also doesn't necessarily mean something is better than something that is "less" creative.

>>27968324
>Saying that a drawing's anatomy is bad is an objective flaw, it can be proved with factual evidence.
Even with that, it doesn't make it objectively BAD. Deliberately futzing with anatomy for effect is a valid technique.

>>27964188
The word "creative" on /vp/ means "based on human stuff".
When the starters evos are based on human stuff (archer, luchador, mermaid), they're "creative", even if the designs are terrible
When a bear pokemon is based on a mascot, it's "creative", even if it's the worst design of the franchise

>>27968125
>That's because those are the only flaws a design can have
I disagree, opinions are subjective, but between two people there will usually be one that is closer to the truth. The irony on this is that this is also my opinion so I guess we enter into a dangerous circular argument.
>The mere idea that art has a standardized and objective way to make it is idiotic.
Of course if you pick for your example something the whole concept of "art" you cannot have objectivity; not in such an unspecified field that covers so much. Because what is bad on one field of art it can be good on other.
However if you pick a side/direction of art, then a movement and a ramification.... the more you specify the more objective and easy to analyze a field becomes simply because you begin to use a set of rules within that field.
>>27968142
Ok, I worded what I was trying to say wrong.
I'm not implying that people shouldn't be respected when they have different tastes, I'm just saying that some opinions, as much as people like to call them "purely subjective", can be very wrong. And that includes ignoring the flaws of a design.

>>27964188
It's a fucking retarded looking Pokemon, that's why I love it

>>27968435
>but between two people there will usually be one that is closer to the truth
That's assuming you're in a conversation that has a true outlook.
In the case of art and design there is no truth. Only personal interpretation.

>>27964188
>a sandcastle isn't unique because there are other pokemon based off inanimate objects
The fuck? By that logic any pokemon based off a living thing isn't unique because there are other pokemon based off animals
fucking retard, if you don't like it don't like it

>>27968311
Forget about the fucking vanilla, it was just an example. The question is if you would admit something's flaws if they were properly demonstrated. Forget about flavor because that is something that, as you said, it's mostly subjective.
>opinions aren't fucking facts
No they aren't, but you have to admit some people get very distanced from real facts with their opinions.
>>27968324
I agree that OP is full of shit though. And your post is pretty much what I'm trying to say with other words. I guess I'm "objectively" shit at explaining myself.

We get this thread every gen with new words complaining about the same basic thing. Why should I care about this, over the 20 years I've been playing these games. Especially when I never had a problem with it in the first place. It's fine if you don't like something, but telling everyone else that they are in fact wrong for liking something that is completely subjective and whining about it constantly is absurd.

Please move on and acknowledge that not everyone does or should think the same way you do. That is why we even have a different variety of Pokemon. We are going to have over 800 Pokemon soon and people are still forcing themselves to find reasons to complain about 3 or 4 instead of using the ones they do like. It is truly baffling.

The thing that gets me most about palossand is it is such a threat that I have to wonder why it wouldn't be hunted to near extinction. It is a terrible monster that haunts beaches killing humans and pokemon alike and spawning new killers every time it kills somebody.

I didn't like this guy until I realized it's less about him being a sandcastle, and more about him being an actual haunted castle in general. I still don't care for it, but I like it a bit more.

>>27964188

And since when you son of a bitch decide the way people should like their pokemons ? I like Palossand because he's cool and he's not a whiny bitch like you.

>>27968541
Every part of the franchise much be objectively flawless so I don't have to feel insecure about liking it.

>>27968577
That's just how nature is. Especially in this world. Also it only seems to steal the lifeforce of small things. I imagine it is incredible ill advised to leave you're children alone at the beach.

>No it's not, it's literally JUST a sand castle
I forgot that sandcastles lure in prey and swallow them, turning them into smaller sandcastles, thanks for reminding me

File: 1354310506596.png (33KB, 174x167px) Image search: [Google]

33KB, 174x167px

>OP will make a thread crying about sand castles every day until he dies

>>27968630
What makes palossand scary is its mind control powers and the fact it does it mostly for kicks.

>>27968577
I imagine there are routine exocisms performed on the areas they appear most frequently in, but ghostbusting hardly ever seems like a permanent solution in general because more just pop up in eventuality.

>>27968635
Also a small child detecting shovel radar on its head

>>27968508
>In the case of art and design there is no truth. Only personal interpretation.
That is true, I have to admit it, that is true and I guess personal interpretation nullifies most of the "objectivity" of an analysis.

But what I'm badly trying to say here is that I think bad choices in design (ergo flawed) can always be made.
What makes difficult to see this is that this depends completely on the "in-universe" this design is functioning in: what may be like a great idea/addition to a universe can be really bad for another.
So a design can be objectively analyzed using the set rules of that universe world-building, and see if the new addition is consistent, cohesive and coherent with the rest of its own "fictional world"/art picture/etc.
I'm explaining pretty badly, don't I.
>>27968400
This is a really interesting concept and part of what I'm trying to say; the fact that something is objectively bad compared to something out of that universe doesn't make it objectively bad in-universe.
In the same way something that make sense disregarding the rest of its world, could be out of place in that world.

I really enjoying this "conceptual" conversation by the way.

>>27968630
There are soul-sucking ghosts made of negative energy in our world?

Also, we hunted all the biggest animal threats to extinction already.

File: Untitled.png (2MB, 1362x1490px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1362x1490px

>>27967257
>>27964257
>>27968160
>>27968407
>STILL shitting on pokemon designs
Fine. Get a bigger load of it

>>27968748
I'm talking about the Pokemon world.

>>27964828

That isn't true. I'm an art professor and there is definitely an objective way to measure this kind of stuff from a compositional standpoint. shading/liighting, Contour, Color theory etc.

That being said, as much as I personally think the concept itself is lazy from a subjective standpoint considering how they've created plenty of other interesting concept designs, and they have plenty of time to create these things. Objectively speaking though this design is fine and works for what it's going for.

>>27968822
Oops I misread, sorry.

>>27968577
It's probably an important part of the ecosystem.

File: 1471441634121.jpg (338KB, 1344x756px) Image search: [Google]

338KB, 1344x756px

>>27968789
Wrong pic friendo

>>27968848
I don't see ghost types existing in an ecosystem at all

Palossand are born from negative energies, that's why they do evil things. In fact, you could wipe them all out, and as long as Pokemon continue to lose battles in beaches, they'd still reappear.

>>27968875
Lemon lady porn when?

File: 1458182469225.jpg (54KB, 612x574px) Image search: [Google]

54KB, 612x574px

>>27964188
>it's not creative
Except it is. No matter how simple it is, they still took a concept and made a design of it.

Sometimes you don't need to go super detailed to make things work. Sometimes simplicity is the best design. They took the idea of a haunted sandcastle and did it.

There's nothing wrong with simplicity. There's nothing wrong with complexity. What matters is if such things work for the concept at hand.

A creature like this fits in the world of Pokemon. It fits in the established world. It isn't out of place. Anybody who has been a part of this franchise long enough should understand this.

Could they have done it differently? Yes, but the same can be said for a majority of Pokemon. There's no reason to devote so much hatred and spite towards a single Pokemon.

So if I like Pokemon in general, that means I'm now officially a critic, and I have to analyze every single bit of a Pokemon according to a preset standard that isn't mine?

Brilliant, absolutely fucking brilliant.

>>27964188
Fuck you, I like it. More so now because of all the exposure you keep giving it.

>>27964188
Anon, do you like Charizard?

>>27964188

>i hate monsters for monster collection series for being monsters and not a cute animal

Is there a ghost type that isn't a cancer upon the world? The most benign ghost type I can think of is Shedinja.

>>27964188
>It's not unique
Has there been a sand castle pokemon before? There isn't a limited number of inanimate pokemon they can make before they become "unoriginal."

I like it just to spite (You).

>>27964188
Palossand is garbage, I agree, but no one will give a shit about your complaints, especially if you make an OP about it. They will think you need a life.

>>27964550
this

File: 1469513422448.gif (1MB, 500x280px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 500x280px

>>27965413

>>27964188
I really hope this thing turns out to be somehow incredible competitively, and so we all have to see it on every team.

That being said, it's easily my least favorite of those that they've revealed so far.

>>27964550
most deserved (You) in this fucking waste of a thread

>>27964188
OP:
>Someones opinion
I disagree!

>Someones opinion
I disagree!

>Someones opinion
I disagree!

>>27964188
>I'll use my personal opinions to """debunk""" your personal opinions about a fictional monster.

File: tsukumogami.jpg (98KB, 736x865px) Image search: [Google]

98KB, 736x865px

>>27964257
>We WILL have a ghost type shoe pokemon in the future because of this lazy shit

We'd better, I've been waiting on a new tsukumogami Pokemon for a long fucking time

I don't, in fact I don't really give a shit about it.

Why are people who hate the sandcastle so insecure?

>>27967532
Thank you...

I think I'd like it if it changed forms easier. I like that there's a hole through the whole thing too.

Something I think would be cool is if there was a kind of dodging animation where it splits apart.
The cool thing about sand is how malleable it is.

It'd be super cool if there were variants in the sand castle. Like different kinds of houses or something.

File: toad.png (39KB, 324x166px) Image search: [Google]

39KB, 324x166px

I love this pokemon to death, but I think its ability "Water Compaction" is a bit backwards. Rather than its defenses being risen when hit by a water type; to make this thing really shine in the dark would be to raise its special defenses. Make this thing terrifying to trainers thinking they can take this down with a simple "surf" move.

Trainer: "Popplio, use surf!"
Palossand: "Pfft, not today hoe. *defenses raise*
Trainer: ....

File: Screenshot_20160819-133313.jpg (106KB, 534x346px) Image search: [Google]

106KB, 534x346px

It kills the Pikachu. What's not to like?

>>27964455
I would totally use a haunted plunger, if it was made well. Maybe ghost/grass or ghost/water, with suction cups and the ability to pull pokemon out of hidden places with it's signature move? So it could make pokemon using protect or dig or something hittable by other pokemon.

Maybe people just like it? If you hate this thing that's fine but saying that people shouldn't like something because you yourself despise it is beyond retarded. FYI it's based on a Youkai

File: bruh.jpg (7KB, 115x118px) Image search: [Google]

7KB, 115x118px

The unovabortions festering on this board will stop defending it anyways once it heads straight to PU with it's bad typing and ability.

>>27964269
Only correct answer

>>27964455
>haunted plunger in gen 8.
that sounds cool

but I like it

File: 1452589643897.png (265KB, 822x504px) Image search: [Google]

265KB, 822x504px

>>27968875
>shitting on pokemon designs
>in 2016
This is a toughie. How about a load of this?

File: image.jpg (23KB, 512x288px) Image search: [Google]

23KB, 512x288px

>>27964257

>>27964188

>At least a chandelier and a coffin would be possessed as haunted mansions and tombs are infamous for being haunted and related with ghosts. A beach doesn't make sense to be a fucking breeding ground of ghosts

I can recall hearing numerous times about how Civil War battlefields in the US are supposedly haunted because of what occurred there.

Now a beach isn't a battlefield, but the Pokemon are still dying there.

>>27964223

This never occurred to me, kind of neat.

>>27964257

I wouldn't mind this

>>27964188
>there's already plenty of inanimate object pokemon
A Japanese company based in Japan, with a team of mostly Japanese art directors, who grew up in Japan, where animate inanimate objects have been a popular and recognised concept since the 10th century, makes more Pokemon based off of inanimate objects? Wew! Imagine that!

Not defending this thing because I find it a bit boring and I won't be using it, but don't shit out statements that imply there shouldn't be more inanimate object Pokemon. You don't have to like it, just acknowledge that objects brought to life has been part of their culture for centuries.

>>27964188
I agree OP, this combined with the fact that the very thing it resembles are highly illegal in Hawaii (region Alola (worst region name) is based on) makes me seriously consider dropping out of Pokemon for good.

The crab sucks too. It just looks too cartooney, as if they're making a fashion statement. They don't look like pokemon anymore

>>27964188
Im gonna make one of these about Voltorb/Electrode. Just give me a minute.

>>27964188
Because I fucking love sandcastles and ghost and ground type. It's a triple win

>>27978460
If you seriously don't understand why mimics are a thing and how it's not the same nor contradicts OPs point you're one sad individual to think you've thought up something uniquely

File: mike.png (40KB, 247x157px) Image search: [Google]

40KB, 247x157px

>>27976133

Wow, there are a few autists that are super butthurt about this Pokemon for some reason.

>>27964492
I agree with this guy.
Stupid=Fun
Why do you think i like alolan exeggutor?

Why do I like the sand castle?

It all goes back to 2004. My family and the neighbors were taking a trip to the beach in Grand Haven to have some fun. Now my neighbor Jimmy sucked a lot. I mean, if I had to give him a rating, it'd be 9/10 suckeroos.

We got there and I decided to not go into the water. Having brought a pail and trowel with me, I decided to make a kickass multi story castle.

Jimmy was having none of that shit. He came over and kicked the sand and stomped it saying I was a child.

I wished for the next few years that the sand would have came alive and whooped his ass or engulfed him in it like a whirlpool of quicksand.

Fuck you Jimmy, you're a piece of shit and I wish your mother smothered you to death with a damp pillow.

looks like a bro

File: image.gif (45KB, 400x225px) Image search: [Google]

45KB, 400x225px

>>27976133

>>27978840
Palossand could be a mimic. There could be a sandcastle on the beaches and when you interact with them they attack, just like what their descriptions describe.

>>27978840
>lol it's a mimic so it's lazy design, especially Electrode, is justified

No

>>27979500
Yeah because sand castles are know for all being the exact same and line up on beaches

Sand castles aren't treasures, you have no reason to interact with them. Ergo they aren't the same thing. Now a sea-shell would be a more valid thing to make into a mimic. Because people tend to collect those. People tend to pick those up. On beaches.

>>27979557
Nice strawman.

File: tamponmon.png (363KB, 1188x740px) Image search: [Google]

363KB, 1188x740px

Reminder that this shithole of a board would like pic related if it were made by Game Freak.

>>27980327
I like pic related and it was made by you.