This is a split board - You can return to the Split List for other boards.

Creativity and objects.

#31Duskull24Posted 10/3/2013 9:27:57 PM
jimmyzeke13 posted...
Pokemon are living creatures.
Inanimate objects are not living creatures.
For that is the definition of inanimate.

The idea for Klefki almost certainly grew out of a designer desperately looking around the room for something that he could turn into a pokemon.


That last sentence is extremely biased.

The first three sentences, though, prove TC's point. Inanimate objects aren't living. They don't move, they don't breathe, they don't do anything. It is thus up to the designer's imagination to give the object life, to show how it moves, how it breathes, how it functions. Using an animal can be compared to a simple copy-paste, as all the major work has already been done
---
Not changing this sig until Gamefreak brings back the Trick Master. Started 9-19-10
I'm not a hater, I just have a low threshold for stupid.
#32vital_tundraPosted 10/3/2013 9:29:39 PM
Duskull24 posted...
jimmyzeke13 posted...
Pokemon are living creatures.
Inanimate objects are not living creatures.
For that is the definition of inanimate.

The idea for Klefki almost certainly grew out of a designer desperately looking around the room for something that he could turn into a pokemon.


That last sentence is extremely biased.

The first three sentences, though, prove TC's point. Inanimate objects aren't living. They don't move, they don't breathe, they don't do anything. It is thus up to the designer's imagination to give the object life, to show how it moves, how it breathes, how it functions. Using an animal can be compared to a simple copy-paste, as all the major work has already been done


This is why things like Toy Story and The Brave Little Toaster are so awesome.
---
3DS friend code: 1848-2159-5405 (Richie)
#33jimmyzeke13Posted 10/3/2013 9:31:49 PM
CA0001 posted...
jimmyzeke13 posted...
Pokemon are living creatures.
Inanimate objects are not living creatures.
For that is the definition of inanimate.

The idea for Klefki almost certainly grew out of a designer desperately looking around the room for something that he could turn into a pokemon.


It is this desperation that proves that the designer wasn't lazy, but actually wanting strongly to create something new.


I would also like to add that a creative design is not necessarily a good one. Look at fashion, for example. Fashion designers may create outfits that no one else could ever even dream of, but they may also be hideous monstrosities concurrently.
---
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gbYYJF0c4VA
http://25.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_llmkrldAkh1qdqxczo1_400.gif
#34ZamphiasPosted 10/3/2013 9:32:17 PM
Duskull24 posted...


The first three sentences, though, prove TC's point. Inanimate objects aren't living. They don't move, they don't breathe, they don't do anything. It is thus up to the designer's imagination to give the object life, to show how it moves, how it breathes, how it functions. Using an animal can be compared to a simple copy-paste, as all the major work has already been done


I get it now...makes sense...I suppose there's a little more creativity involved in the moving/functioning details...sorry for the explosion earlier I definitely overreacted.
#35vital_tundraPosted 10/3/2013 9:33:22 PM
jimmyzeke13 posted...
CA0001 posted...
jimmyzeke13 posted...
Pokemon are living creatures.
Inanimate objects are not living creatures.
For that is the definition of inanimate.

The idea for Klefki almost certainly grew out of a designer desperately looking around the room for something that he could turn into a pokemon.


It is this desperation that proves that the designer wasn't lazy, but actually wanting strongly to create something new.


I would also like to add that a creative design is not necessarily a good one. Look at fashion, for example. Fashion designers may create outfits that no one else could ever even dream of, but they may also be hideous monstrosities concurrently.


In Klefki's case though its a fantastic design.
---
3DS friend code: 1848-2159-5405 (Richie)
#36the_NGWPosted 10/3/2013 9:33:29 PM
AlbinoCrocodile posted...
the_NGW posted...
inTaCtfuL posted...
I'm no artist and I can't even draw a stick figure but i never got all the b****** and moaning about inanimate pokemon. most rpgs have stuff like trash for monsters, clocks, violins and other random crap. why should pokemon be different?


While I generally have nothing against these kinds of Pokemon, I can at least understand why others do.

These are living, breathing creatures that are meant to, within the games own logic, realistically exist. Yes you can kinda argue similar to other RPGs, but Pokemon is almost meant to be a representation of a world quite similar to ours, and with wildlife that has evolved and adapted and..it just makes more sense for things to be..animals than for them to be objects.


Things get retconned or change, do you genwuns ever get that? They drifted away from that notion, and even so, is it Pokenimals or is it Pokemon, ala Pocket Monsters?


Gen V is my favorite generation, don't assume things, especially since I outright stated I generally do not dislike these designs and was merely playing devil's advocate.

Dumbass.
---
3DS Friend Code: 0344-9443-2457, Newtown Dream Address (AC:NL): 5400-2162-1014
"Do you have the courage to ride with the devil?"
#37Duskull24Posted 10/3/2013 9:34:37 PM
Zamphias posted...
I get it now...makes sense...I suppose there's a little more creativity involved in the moving/functioning details...sorry for the explosion earlier I definitely overreacted.


It happens to the best of us
---
Not changing this sig until Gamefreak brings back the Trick Master. Started 9-19-10
I'm not a hater, I just have a low threshold for stupid.
#38CA0001(Topic Creator)Posted 10/3/2013 9:35:43 PM
jimmyzeke13 posted...
I would also like to add that a creative design is not necessarily a good one. Look at fashion, for example. Fashion designers may create outfits that no one else could ever even dream of, but they may also be hideous monstrosities concurrently.


Well I wouldn't want to comment strongly on fashion because that is another totally different type of art, they are not purely appearance and wearing them.

Alot of times they are there to let people realise just how insane it is if you push something in a certain direction.

Unless we have an actual fashion designer here, I don't think any of us can make any good argument about fashion on these boards.
---
FC: 0518 8972 2483 (Black) 0046 9893 2351 (White2)
#39jimmyzeke13Posted 10/3/2013 9:42:53 PM
CA0001 posted...
jimmyzeke13 posted...
I would also like to add that a creative design is not necessarily a good one. Look at fashion, for example. Fashion designers may create outfits that no one else could ever even dream of, but they may also be hideous monstrosities concurrently.


Well I wouldn't want to comment strongly on fashion because that is another totally different type of art, they are not purely appearance and wearing them.

Alot of times they are there to let people realise just how insane it is if you push something in a certain direction.

Unless we have an actual fashion designer here, I don't think any of us can make any good argument about fashion on these boards.


You also don't have to be a professional artist to critique a pokemon's design. I think that Gamefreak has had a lot of highs and lows in the last couple generations.

Pokemon like Tyrantrum and Pyroar remind me that they still have good ideas, but pokemon like this one make me believe that they are letting more bad designs slip through the cracks.
---
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gbYYJF0c4VA
http://25.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_llmkrldAkh1qdqxczo1_400.gif
#40Lord_Ka1nPosted 10/3/2013 9:44:06 PM
pokemon are basically fantasy animals.

a key ring is not an animal

this is why people hate that stupid key.