Talk:Leaf (game): Difference between revisions

Talk:Leaf (game) (view source)

Revision as of 14:41, 17 November 2018

434 bytes added , 17 November 2018

no edit summary

LavaringX

247

edits

Revision as of 14:37, 17 November 2018 (view source) Maxim (talk \| contribs) (→‎Is LGPE Green the same person as Leaf?) ← Older edit		Revision as of 14:41, 17 November 2018 (view source) LavaringX (talk \| contribs) No edit summary Newer edit →
Line 290:		Line 290:

	:::You people really overestimate Kotobukiya's value. It's not a Game Freak source (and we don't know their philosophy of naming player characters - for example, if they made a GSC male character figure and named it "Gold", would you split Ethan's article into two? Or if they made an USUM-based "Ailey" figure?) and the FR/LG data name is just unused beta content. The pose and design of her LGPE appearance makes it blindingly clear that they meant Green to represent both the FR/LG girl character and the unused Gen I girl. Of course they wouldn't make her appear in her full FR/LG attire, because that'd be inconsistent with Red and Green's designs in these games. But they gave her some FR/LG elements in order to make her recognizable (not that it was ever a problem to recognize her - to me, Red's Gen I and Gen III designs are way more apart than Green's, but that's of course an opinion). How is it speculation? It's simply logic. I know that Bulbapedia loves denying things until an unambiguous answer is shoved into our faces. But treating the two as separate is just as speculative than treating them as one (I'd say way more speculative, considering that GF is obviously trying to bring their appearances together). They are different characters, but only because of multiverse and in this logic, we would have to split literally everyone. --[[User:Maxim\|Maxim]] ([[User talk:Maxim\|talk]]) 14:37, 17 November 2018 (UTC)		:::You people really overestimate Kotobukiya's value. It's not a Game Freak source (and we don't know their philosophy of naming player characters - for example, if they made a GSC male character figure and named it "Gold", would you split Ethan's article into two? Or if they made an USUM-based "Ailey" figure?) and the FR/LG data name is just unused beta content. The pose and design of her LGPE appearance makes it blindingly clear that they meant Green to represent both the FR/LG girl character and the unused Gen I girl. Of course they wouldn't make her appear in her full FR/LG attire, because that'd be inconsistent with Red and Green's designs in these games. But they gave her some FR/LG elements in order to make her recognizable (not that it was ever a problem to recognize her - to me, Red's Gen I and Gen III designs are way more apart than Green's, but that's of course an opinion). How is it speculation? It's simply logic. I know that Bulbapedia loves denying things until an unambiguous answer is shoved into our faces. But treating the two as separate is just as speculative than treating them as one (I'd say way more speculative, considering that GF is obviously trying to bring their appearances together). They are different characters, but only because of multiverse and in this logic, we would have to split literally everyone. --[[User:Maxim\|Maxim]] ([[User talk:Maxim\|talk]]) 14:37, 17 November 2018 (UTC)

			::::I propose a compromise because this argument is getting to be ridiculous. We rename this page to Green, but restructure the entire page, starting from the unused character art from Generation I, include a section about Leaf, and finally get to Pokémon Let's Go. In the page itself we should address the character's complicated history. --[[User:LavaringX\|LavaringX]] ([[User talk:LavaringX\|talk]]) 14:41, 17 November 2018 (UTC)