bump?
>>28286203
>the bold colors with not too much hue and value variation on many Pokémon
>some rehashes or callbacks to past Pokémon, especially from Generation I, that are more complex, untraditional, and/or heavily designed
>a bit of an edgy touch to several Pokémon designs
>a bit of a less natural and/or animalistic touch to several Pokémon designs aside from the obvious examples
I love the majority of the Pokémon introduced in Generation V, but people have their reasons to dislike it. Also, the games (or at least the first ones) tried to be a reboot, doing things such as restricting players to the new Pokémon before the post-game.
>>28286343
I don't have the source, but they actually said they added more straight lines and literal edges to make them cooler and appeal to younger audiences.
I thought Gen V's designs were freshingly simple and clean compared to the overdesigned shitshow that was Gen IVs Pokemon.
>tweening
I like the overworld and user interface in BW1. XY looks like iOS in comparison. They use gen 4 sprites for some Pokemon so it's not like they are colored differently.
The ugliest games are Ruby and Sapphire. Horrible font and it had a weird use of color. The GBA had that shitty backlight that made everything worse. I was disgusted Emerald didn't look like FRLG since it fucking came out after those games when I was younger.
GSC had a great ambience despite the GBC's technical limitations. This was ruined by gen 4's dreamy colors.
>>28286203
It's simple:
The bookends of the regional dex are garbage overall. People are so ADHD nowadays, that if the first thing they see is shitty, they'll instantly conclude that the rest must be shitty as well, so they don't give many of the wonderful Mid-dex Pokemon a chance.
Oh, and people tend to not like object-mons too much.
>>28286516
>simple and clean
>>28286203
because it's uncanny valley-esque to Genwunners, and they're the loudest minority.
there.
>>28286413
>edgy