Pokémon TCG: Sword and Shield—Brilliant Stars

5th Gen Legendary Pokemon

Status
Not open for further replies.
Chairman Kaga said:
Oh, you mean the fur?

You seem to have an unhealthy obsession here.
Click to expand...
Yeah, I mean the fur, the composition of it has nothing to do with this. What don't you people not understand here? Shape and Location. I have NEVER seen a cat with fur in that particular shape, if you have an example then please by all means enlighten me.

At the same turn of your insult, I could easily say it's unhealthy to ignore this blatant inappropriateness, just because it's a pokemon and they can do no wrong to you. Or we could just stop with the insults and stay on topic.
 
calisupra2nr said:
Sabett I think at this point you've proven your insanity on this matter. Clearly this is not an issue.
Click to expand...
Again with the uncalled for, off topic insults, and no, it may not be an issue to people who are still posting, but others have agreed once I pointed out this detail to them, and it's still an issue to me.
 
Look, Pokemon's been sued for less, right?

How stretched out were those accusations of kadabra? Stealing of Spoon bending? The star on his head signifying the jude star (even though it had 5 points), and the lightning bolts on him being seen as an SS symbol (even though there were 3 bolts). True it was thrown out of court, however we don't have a kadabra card in the format do we?

I'm honestly more concerned with how stupid the design is, than how inappropriate it is, it just adds to the pile. It adds nothing to the pokemon, that it needed, it looks dumb, and it's asking for a law suit, even more so since this is going to be the poster child for the next generation, have several movies where it will be directly involved with the main story, and tbh, the new "pacing" they're adding to the games inbetween turns isn't helping.
 
Sabett said:
Look, Pokemon's been sued for less, right?

How stretched out were those accusations of kadabra? Stealing of Spoon bending? The star on his head signifying the jude star (even though it had 5 points), and the lightning bolts on him being seen as an SS symbol (even though there were 3 bolts). True it was thrown out of court, however we don't have a kadabra card in the format do we?

I'm honestly more concerned with how stupid the design is, than how inappropriate it is, it just adds to the pile. It adds nothing to the pokemon, that it needed, it looks dumb, and it's asking for a law suit, even more so since this is going to be the poster child for the next generation, have several movies where it will be directly involved with the main story, and tbh, the new "pacing" they're adding to the games inbetween turns isn't helping.
Click to expand...
the lawsuit you're referencing is apples and oranges: it was some 'public figure' accusing pokemon of referencing HIM in the pokemon's design. who is going to sue over a tuft of fur on an imaginary creature?

'mom
 
SD PokéMom said:
the lawsuit you're referencing is apples and oranges: it was some 'public figure' accusing pokemon of referencing HIM in the pokemon's design. who is going to sue over a tuft of fur on an imaginary creature?

'mom
Click to expand...
The lawsuit I'm talking about shows how little people need to begin a lawsuit, and that there's even more water to hold here, with Reshiram.

Also, you say it like that, like it will all be ok, if you keep saying it, but lets take this from the point of view from a lawyer who's on the opposing side of a lawsuit. Not just a tuft anymore is it? Doesn't matter that it's fur, does it? What matters? What I've been saying this entire time. Shape and Location. It's a large pointy object, and it's in a suggestive location. It doesn't matter that it's an imaginary creature, if anything that hurts it, since it was created with the intention to be advertise to little kids.
 
just who is going to sue here, and on what grounds? that their or their children's purity was destroyed by the sight of a imaginary creature's alleged genitals in a piece of line art?

'mom
 
SD PokéMom said:
just who is going to sue here, and on what grounds? that their or their children's purity was destroyed by the sight of a imaginary creature's alleged genitals in a piece of line art?

'mom
Click to expand...
Any parent that wants to take it to that level. Also, why do you keep changing the words of things to make them seem better than they are? Line art? You mean a cartoon?
 
Sabett said:
I asked them, do you see anything wrong with this figure? I guess that's making them look for something wrong, but then that still means theres something wrong there. And idk what you mean about pubic hair, thats not what it looks like.

Also, how many times have you looked at it, it having been just released? Now how many times do you expect to see him? How many times do you expect the younger part of the pokemon fan base to see it? Just because I pointed it out, doesn't mean this wouldn't have become clearer as it became more common place.
Click to expand...
I'll admit, I don't like these new Pokemon at all. I've only looked at them once or twice because I've tried to avoid them as much as possible. I would have probably noticed it sooner or later.

I understand that it's the shape and location. But what generally grows around such a shape in such a location? Hair. But like you said, it doesn't really matter.

I agree, though. It really doesn't add anything to the Pokemon, it looks stupid regardless. So why put it there? And if you just have to have it there, why that shape in that location? I agree that there is a little overreacting going on here, but this is exactly why they have to watch what they're doing.


Suggestive shape and location? Yeah.

Blatantly obvious that's it's a suggestive shape in a suggestive location (especially to little kids, which is the main concern here)? I don't think so.
 
Last edited:
toxictaipan said:
I'll admit, I don't like these new Pokemon at all. I've only looked at them once or twice because I've tried to avoid them as much as possible. I would have probably noticed it sooner or later.

I understand that it's the shape and location. But what generally grows around such a shape in such a location? Hair. But like you said, it doesn't really matter.

I agree, though. It really doesn't add anything to the Pokemon, it looks stupid regardless. So why put it there? And if you just have to have it there, why that shape in that location? I agree that there is a little overreacting going on here, but this is exactly why they have to watch what they're doing.


Suggestive shape and location? Yeah.

Blatantly obvious that's it's a suggestive shape in a suggestive location (especially to little kids, which is the main concern here)? I don't think so.
Click to expand...
Thank you for being more admitting than our other peers.

In retrospect, saying it was blatantly obvious to everyone, including the younger audience, was extreme, although it is uncomfortably suggestive for a child's franchise, and a gateway to be exploited by people looking for a lawsuit. My point is that this isn't overreacting from that person's POV. You have to observe things from their perspective, or they'll find things like this and have a field day.
 
Of course it's not overreacting from that person's point of view. That's the kind of person who's actively searching for anything and everything even slightly suggestive to sue over.

Will that happen here? I don't know, but I highly doubt it.


What we have to realize here, though, is that anyone who doesn't see it won't be affected by it. Anyone who does see it obviously already knows enough about it to be unaffected. So I don't see an issue here.
 
toxictaipan said:
Of course it's not overreacting from that person's point of view. That's the kind of person who's actively searching for anything and everything even slightly suggestive to sue over.

Will that happen here? I don't know, but I highly doubt it.


What we have to realize here, though, is that anyone who doesn't see it won't be affected by it. Anyone who does see it obviously already knows enough about it to be unaffected. So I don't see an issue here.
Click to expand...
My point however, is that people have taken action against Pokemon, over less, and that making this doesn't really seem to be a cautious move.
 
http://members.multimania.nl/dinosaurs/model13.jpg

http://www.directtoys.co.nz/shop/images/Velociraptor.jpg

http://www.abc.net.au/science/slab/dinobird/img/archaeop.jpg

Here are images of velociraptor's skeletal makeups. Each one has a defining pelvic bone that protrudes. The last link is that of a bird raptor (starting to see a similarity between that and Reshiram..). You can clearly see it has a protruding pelvic bone as well. When they design pokemon, they find something to base it off. Then, they take features and exaggerate or edit them to make them distinguishable. Either way the image pays homage to its source.

You clearly need to calm down and stop freaking out about nature and the way creatures develop, and in turn how artists translate those to new creatures that are recognizable, yet new.
 
calisupra2nr said:
http://members.multimania.nl/dinosaurs/model13.jpg

http://www.directtoys.co.nz/shop/images/Velociraptor.jpg

http://www.abc.net.au/science/slab/dinobird/img/archaeop.jpg

Here are images of velociraptor's skeletal makeups. Each one has a defining pelvic bone that protrudes. The last link is that of a bird raptor (starting to see a similarity between that and Reshiram..). You can clearly see it has a protruding pelvic bone as well. When they design pokemon, they find something to base it off. Then, they take features and exaggerate or edit them to make them distinguishable. Either way the image pays homage to its source.

You clearly need to calm down and stop freaking out about nature and the way creatures develop, and in turn how artists translate those to new creatures that are recognizable, yet new.
Click to expand...
First of all, those aren't birds as you said before, secondly those pelvic structures are much more subtle, rather than reshirams fine point, and last of all, the only similarities that reshiram and that bird raptor are the general body shape, and then it ends there, there's not nearly enough resemblance to warrant reshiram's inappropriate detail, not to mention the obscurity of this connection. No one's going to look at reshiram and think, oh just like velociraptors. And if it were supposed to be some "homage" to the dinosaur, then, as plenty of people have pointed out, why is it fur and not a bumb in the pokemon's skeletal structure? There are only reasons for Reshiram to not have it, as silly as other people find it, but I fail to find any reason at all, why Reshiram needs it there in the first place. Wouldn't it have been better had it not be there? Wouldn't the pokemon look even better?
 
Velociraptors are actually more closely related to birds than reptiles... that bone structure is in essence the same as a modern bird's structure.

I don't see a huge problem with it. Kids will be exposed to much worse than this issue here. Doesn't this Pokemon have enough other distracting features on it where it's more like a walking cluster-badword-?

Also, who in their right mind will sue a billion dollar company over that one of their things looks like it has a thing on it? Pokemon, Inc. will utter one sentence and it will be over 'Don't let your kid play Pokemon then'. Then said parent pays lawyer fees, etc (what lawyer would be desperate/crazy enough to take the case?)

I dont know if im a fan of the new Pokemon so far. These guys look like digimon. The jury is out on the starters. Not a hot start for the 5th generation in my opinion.
 
Sabett said:
First of all, those aren't birds as you said before, secondly those pelvic structures are much more subtle, rather than reshirams fine point, and last of all, the only similarities that reshiram and that bird raptor are the general body shape, and then it ends there, there's not nearly enough resemblance to warrant reshiram's inappropriate detail, not to mention the obscurity of this connection. No one's going to look at reshiram and think, oh just like velociraptors. And if it were supposed to be some "homage" to the dinosaur, then, as plenty of people have pointed out, why is it fur and not a bumb in the pokemon's skeletal structure? There are only reasons for Reshiram to not have it, as silly as other people find it, but I fail to find any reason at all, why Reshiram needs it there in the first place. Wouldn't it have been better had it not be there? Wouldn't the pokemon look even better?
Click to expand...

Archeoptryx is extreamely similar to Reshiram, and far more related to birds than anything else.
Also, the "reshirams fine point" part makes it, if anything, less phalic.
Reshiram is extreamely similar to a raptors, most notably the placement of primary body parts (wings, hands, head and neck structures, legs, and tail)

Also, cartoon art cannot acurately depict the difference between hair and feathers, and even more so hair, and down feahers.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top