For example, I think we have two very different naturals if Meloetta is conceived to be natural. But again, this is pokemon. There is no set design and concepts as to which pokemon can be delegated to
Hoooooooold on there buddy, I'mma bring out some pictures!
If you had no prior knowledge of Pokemon, would you group Meloetta with this:
or this:
I would group Meloetta up with Clefable myself. It really looks, to me at least, that if they had stuck Meloetta into Gen 2 in place of Celebi people would think it'd fit in just perfectly.
Gamefreak has really caught a good amount of fans pleasantly off-guard, as they've really dug deep into their imaginations and made something that, while it might not physiologically resemble anything in real-life, would appeal to gamers regardless.
I honestly do not agree. If they really did dig deep into their imaginations, they didn't take the necessary step to refine their ideas fully before implementing them. You don't mine a raw diamond and call it a day, you clean it and cut it so it fits in with all the other diamonds.
I think we can both agree that Haxorus looks more badass than the previous dragons. And though we may never know whether Game Freak specifically said, "Oh, let's just make it badass and that'll be the design. Everyone likes dragons like that," we'll never know. We can infer just by looking at it that that was the case, however. The axes, the spikes, and the body armor clearly set it apart from its earlier counterparts.
This trend is prevalent in all the Gen 5 cross-generational counterparts. They either badass them up and call it a day, or strip them down to nothing and call it a day. That's not consistent with the Pokemon style at all, and in my opinion, is what made many of the Pokemon this time around not seem like Pokemon.
Also, think about how Haxorus would have to position itself to butcher a Pokemon of smaller stature standing right in front of it? It'd either have to turn its head so the axes are vertical and chop downward (which would be a sideways motion for its now turned neck), or crouch all the way down and horizontally swipe. The heavy body armor and spikes on its spinal column reach up into its thin neck. I can't see Haxorus being able to chop quickly, or with much power with that thin little neck. All its bulk is in its lower body. This whole picture together makes Haxorus poorly adapted for battle from a realistic standpoint. That's my take on it at least.
Though I personally am a fan of Ludicolo, I think that it can be classified into the bad category by many fans. Unfortunately, it share this distinction with many of the Gen 5 Pokemon, so I guess it has plenty of opportunities to make friends!
Obviously, it's not like it has spikes on its arms and legs or anything. (What are those for? Does Garchomp impale prey... with its elbows and knees?) Or two weird things protruding from the side of its head. (Can you please tell me what those are for?) Or that tail, with the giant ridge on it. Or the star on its head. Or the giant dorsal fin protruding from its back for no apparent reason.
Garchomp exudes its power with a more simplistic design than Haxorus does. Also, Garchomp is based on a hammerhead shark. That's what the head things and the fins come from. You've got me with the spikes, but I don't think that having them brings Garchomp into pleading for badass appeal territory, like Haxorus does.
While your comparison between Jigglypuff and the other previous generation Pokemon are correct, you're comparing Pokemon that you can't draw any relation to. Compare Jigglypuff instead to Audino, and Whismur, who I would consider close to cross-generational counterparts.
I would argue that the screws in Magnemite keep his design from being too bare bones, which would conflict with the style Game Freak had had going until Gen 5. Take a look and Klink and compare him to Magnemite. See what I mean?
Pokedex entry cleary states its Teeth/tusks. And...why does every dragon have to have the same design? You don't see animals having the exact same adaptations across the world in their different environments and survive.
And above all else, it seems that they are teeth/tusks! Which means Haxorus shouldn't be able to fully close its jaw. Not every dragon has to be the same dragon. Dragonite, Salamence, and Garchomp are clearly not the same. But they're also different without reaching Haxorus-level grabs for badassery.
What you are stating, doesn't sound valid. Changing some of the constant features relate-able pokemon having from one gen to another is hardly what I would call changing an art style.
I do see it as changing an art style in regards to Pokemon creation, and it's clear when I look at the new ones and compare with cross-generational counterparts. Though, I don't suppose this is a point that can be argued or well defended.
They work cuz Ken Sugamori says so
Well then, if you insist :P
I really need a word with the same connotation as "badass". I actually hate that word.
