• A new LGBTQ+ forum is now being trialed and there have been changes made to the Support and Advice forum. To read more about these updates, click here.
  • Hey Trainers! Be sure to check out Corsola Beach, our newest section on the forums, in partnership with our friends at Corsola Cove! At the Beach, you can discuss the competitive side of the games, post your favorite Pokemon memes, and connect with other Pokemon creators!
  • Due to the recent changes with Twitter's API, it is no longer possible for Bulbagarden forum users to login via their Twitter account. If you signed up to Bulbagarden via Twitter and do not have another way to login, please contact us here with your Twitter username so that we can get you sorted.

SwSh What do you think of James Turner being the art director for Sword and Shield

Do you like the fact that James Turner is the art director for Sword and Shield?

  • Yes

    Votes: 50 49.5%
  • No

    Votes: 10 9.9%
  • Indifferent

    Votes: 29 28.7%
  • Unsure

    Votes: 12 11.9%

  • Total voters
    101
You discussed that idea with PkmnTrainerV, not me.
Is it supposed to be on this thread? I don’t really recall such a conversation. I tried looking up the word "unicorn" in my posts and the only thing turned up was my speculation some time ago on a Fire Unicorn/Pegasus starter that dates even before LGPE.

It’s entirely possible that I had a brain fart and forgot, though, but I don’t remember any such thing at all..
 
Is it supposed to be on this thread? I don’t really recall such a conversation. I tried looking up the word "unicorn" in my posts and the only thing turned up was my speculation some time ago on a Fire Unicorn/Pegasus starter that dates even before LGPE.

It’s entirely possible that I had a brain fart and forgot, though, but I don’t remember any such thing at all..
Nah, that's the one I'm talking about, I just didn't specify the thread.
 
I hope those leaks are demos or something cause there are so many poke artists making much better pokemon than him.
 
The pokemon all look fantastic so far. This is seriously going to be my favorite generation at this rate.

Seriously, they're all super creative and unique for the most part. I've been seeing pokemon leaked since gen 5 and this is the first generation where I've never seen a pokemon and went "dear god I hope that's fake that looks really weird."

Plus it's the first generation since Johto where I loved every single stage of all three starters. And the FIRST generation where I've struggled thinking of which starter between water and grass I'll use in a nuzlocke the first time (it's usually grass. I'm rarely fond of the water starter for more than one of its evolutionary stages).
 
Edit. My personal thoughts. Taking into account the designs, Gen 8 is the best one since Gen 4. I'm really happy with what we got so far. I finally got my cool elephant looking pokémon. The starters's final stages could be a bit better, but at least they're decent (Intelleon is the only one that I disliked). In my view, James Turner has some home runs with those new bugs. Bug is far from being my favourite type, but I'm very impressed with those new bugs (I love the Centepedi one and the ice one). So, taking into acount Gen 8's new pokemon, James Turner did a great job.

This is my updated personal rank about Gens's designs:

I love: Gen 1 and Gen 4
I like: Gen 3, Gen 5, and Gen 8
Average/Neutral: Gen 2, Gen 6 and Gen 7.
I dislike/hate: None.
 
Last edited:
A lot of the Pokemon that were leaked are hit-or-miss for me, but I'm glad they're going for different kinds of styles this generation.

I want to see more of the cities and towns though, because from what I've seen of them, they look really nice. The characters so far look lovely too, and I hope we get leaks of all of them soon.
 
Unfortunately, this generation has become my least favourite one in terms of Pokemon designs. This title was previously held by Gen 5, but it looks like Gen 5 has been dethroned. There are, of course, some Pokemon I quite like but sadly most of them really don't appeal to me.

I'm not going to hold it against James Turner since I don't know the degree of his involvement with these new Pokemon designs, besides approving or denying them. However, I won't deny that fact that I'll probably not be very excited if I see him listed as the Art Director in a future game. That's not to say that I think he's bad, it's just that his style and directing so far doesn't appeal to me. The landscape still looks pretty nice though.
 
Last edited:
I think he is the man that could buff Liquid Ooze and make it damage fang , bite and crunch users too with its current effect.

Too many mono types... We need more dual types and form changes.
Sad that there is no swordsman mouse and lack of armored ghost pokemon...
 
Last edited:
I was so so excited for this because he's designed some of my favorite Pokemon. Vanilluxe is my fourth favorite. But after seeing the full dex, without spoilers, I will say that this is the ugliest generation of Pokemon I've seen and my life. I will add too, that there's been a gigantic artshift and you can tell from the art of Pokemon like Yamper that all of the new Pokemon are much more westernized and cartoonish, in the vein of Warner Bros or mid-50s Disney, in a way that causes them to horribly clash with the first 7 generations.

Besides Jynx, I've never truly hated Pokemon before now, but now I hate pretty much 99% of Generation 8. They're not Pokemon - they're more like Neopets or FakeMon done by American and European artists that don't want to adhere to the artstyle laid down and then refined by Sugimori over decades.

If Turner is in any way responsible for this (and it's pretty much a given he at least has a hand in it) he definitely need to be demoted back down into a regular artists position. He's fantastic when he has oversight, but when he's in charge it seems like he'll let anything through.
 
I will add too, that there's been a gigantic artshift and you can tell from the art of Pokemon like Yamper that all of the new Pokemon are much more westernized and cartoonish, in the vein of Warner Bros or mid-50s Disney, in a way that causes them to horribly clash with the first 7 generations.

So this right here is really interesting, especially since I've seen other people say pretty much the same thing, that the new Pokemon look like they're in the style of Western cartoons. I've even seen some of the leaked Pokemon, and I would definitely say that some of them do look like westernized cartoon characters, noticeably with the Poison/Ground snakes, starter evolutions, second stage fox, and Impidimp's second stage evolution, but I haven't noticed an overall art shift in the designs. Could you elaborate on that; I'm genuinely really curious.
 
So I'm an amatuer artist but animation afficianado for both western and Japanese artstyles. Generally, you can break down the difference between western and Japanese art into a few key differences.

First of all - Japanes art is very physiology focused, meant to mainly be appreciated while a subject is standing still in a static pose. To that end, Japanese art usually goes into to depth considering the positioning of muscles and skeletons beneath the lifeform. It also places a higher emphasis on symmetry, clean straight lines, and lighting.

Western cartoon art is very different. There's a greater focus on motion or even POTENTIAL motion if it's a stock photo. There's less of a consideration of musculature or physiology. The character isn't meant to be real but meant to entertain while in motion.

See, look the attatched file "Example 1". Both of these drawings both have the same level of detail.
128044


However! You will notice that the drawing on the right has a relatively believable and recognizable skeleton, particularly in the detail of the ankles on the front paws. The fur is lightly scribbled in but more noticeable. The face is less expressive and anthropomorphic, but still cartoony. There's a weightiness to this creature where if it's head stretched out 3 feet when it was surprised - would not at all look right.

Now observe Pluto! It's hard to see in a still illustration, but this isn't a "standard" pose because the character won't have a standard set of body proportions. Only a loose guide meant to keep consistency while shifting and bouncing. The eyes are illogically, almost frighteningly large and exist only to shift and bulge and shrink as necessary. The "spine" appears to almost be broken, along with the exaggerated hind legs. This is something meant to bounce up and down as it walks, not walk like a real creature. It doesn't look like it has a solid body. It looks like it's custard temporarily in the shape of a dog.
128046


Now let's compare these two and you'll notice that Yamper is almost even more cartoony and abstract than Pluto! While our buddy Growlithe has a defined musculature, with clear breaksin joints and a physical weight to it, Yamper is basucally Minnie's new friend to go along with Pluto. There's no real muscle or skeletal mass to this thing. It looks like it would shake like gelatin if you picked it up. You'll also notice that while Growlithe has anthropomorphic eyes, they are less rounded and more focused. Yamper's eyes look watery and are much more detailed. Growlithe's eyes exist for it to logically SEE in universe. Yamper's eyes, like Pluto's exist chiefly to convey emotion. You'll also notice that while Growlithe has shading to detail a 3 dimensional existence (and we can even see some fur employed by how and where it's shaded) Yamper's shading exists only in the most abstract sense to allow lighting to work on its model.

Frankly, these two designs look like they come from COMPLETELY different franchises, and I'm sure if you showed them to a non-Pokemon fan they would quickly identify Yamper as coming from a cartoon and Growlithe as either a semi-serious comic book or manga or perhaps an anime.

Basically, as a rule - western art is designed for cartoons so it's designed to MOVE first and LOOK GOOD secondly.

Japanese art is designed for manga sensibilities or anime which generally has more limited budgets and movements. So it's designed to look GREAT while still and have a physical presence but be much less expressive and flexible.

This is the most extreme example I can find of the revealed Pokemon, but there are MUCH MUCH MUUUUCH more extreme cases to be revealed when Sword and Shield releases. There are frankly some new Pokemon that look like parodies of Pokemon you'd see when people are trying to be funny and calling them "Twerkboy" and "Tugnutts".

"I am of course talking about Eiscube. The worst designed Pokemon of all time. If not the worst designed monster of any mons franchise ever. And to a lesser extent the fossils.
 
Last edited:
"I am of course talking about Eiscube. The worst designed Pokemon of all time. If not the worst designed monster of any mons franchise ever. And to a lesser extent the fossils.

Absolutely agree. That's the laziest design ever.
 
So this right here is really interesting, especially since I've seen other people say pretty much the same thing, that the new Pokemon look like they're in the style of Western cartoons. I've even seen some of the leaked Pokemon, and I would definitely say that some of them do look like westernized cartoon characters, noticeably with the Poison/Ground snakes, starter evolutions, second stage fox, and Impidimp's second stage evolution, but I haven't noticed an overall art shift in the designs. Could you elaborate on that; I'm genuinely really curious.
This thread explains it in a really nice manner imo (spoilers, if it wasn’t obvious already...)
 
So I'm an amatuer artist but animation afficianado for both western and Japanese artstyles. Generally, you can break down the difference between western and Japanese art into a few key differences.

First of all - Japanes art is very physiology focused, meant to mainly be appreciated while a subject is standing still in a static pose. To that end, Japanese art usually goes into to depth considering the positioning of muscles and skeletons beneath the lifeform. It also places a higher emphasis on symmetry, clean straight lines, and lighting.

Western cartoon art is very different. There's a greater focus on motion or even POTENTIAL motion if it's a stock photo. There's less of a consideration of musculature or physiology. The character isn't meant to be real but meant to entertain while in motion.

See, look the attatched file "Example 1". Both of these drawings both have the same level of detail.
View attachment 128044

However! You will notice that the drawing on the right has a relatively believable and recognizable skeleton, particularly in the detail of the ankles on the front paws. The fur is lightly scribbled in but more noticeable. The face is less expressive and anthropomorphic, but still cartoony. There's a weightiness to this creature where if it's head stretched out 3 feet when it was surprised - would not at all look right.

Now observe Pluto! It's hard to see in a still illustration, but this isn't a "standard" pose because the character won't have a standard set of body proportions. Only a loose guide meant to keep consistency while shifting and bouncing. The eyes are illogically, almost frighteningly large and exist only to shift and bulge and shrink as necessary. The "spine" appears to almost be broken, along with the exaggerated hind legs. This is something meant to bounce up and down as it walks, not walk like a real creature. It doesn't look like it has a solid body. It looks like it's custard temporarily in the shape of a dog.
View attachment 128046

Now let's compare these two and you'll notice that Yamper is almost even more cartoony and abstract than Pluto! While our buddy Growlithe has a defined musculature, with clear breaksin joints and a physical weight to it, Yamper is basucally Minnie's new friend to go along with Pluto. There's no real muscle or skeletal mass to this thing. It looks like it would shake like gelatin if you picked it up. You'll also notice that while Growlithe has anthropomorphic eyes, they are less rounded and more focused. Yamper's eyes look watery and are much more detailed. Growlithe's eyes exist for it to logically SEE in universe. Yamper's eyes, like Pluto's exist chiefly to convey emotion. You'll also notice that while Growlithe has shading to detail a 3 dimensional existence (and we can even see some fur employed by how and where it's shaded) Yamper's shading exists only in the most abstract sense to allow lighting to work on its model.

Frankly, these two designs look like they come from COMPLETELY different franchises, and I'm sure if you showed them to a non-Pokemon fan they would quickly identify Yamper as coming from a cartoon and Growlithe as either a semi-serious comic book or manga or perhaps an anime.

Uh...what?

First of all bad examples. Anime isn't a one style fits all art form. Look at this:

128056


If you didn't know what Astro Boy was, what would you think of this image? Probably the same thing you're thinking of all the pokemon now. Guess what inspired Tezuka? Yep, western cartoons; specifically Disney! The truth is a lot of anime since the dawn of Japanese cartoons go hand in hand with western cartoons, it's not like they're exclusive to each other. I mean going by your logic, shows like Panty & Stocking, Sgt. Frog, Milk-chan, Bo-bobo Bobo-bobo, and Popteam Epic, just to name a few, aren't anime because they have a different art style that's more cartoony than a more serious one the FMA example you gave has.

Also did you forget that Growlith doesn't look like that anymore because Sugimori refined his style when he switched to digital media? Because Yamper really looks close to the newer art:

250px-058Growlithe.png


It's also possible that Yamper wasn't even drawn by Sugimori in the first place. There are other artists that work for Game Freak now. People seem to forget this fact and pin everything either on Turner (Who appears to be the devil himself) or Sugimori (a god amongst men, apparently).

Basically, as a rule - western art is designed for cartoons so it's designed to MOVE first and LOOK GOOD secondly.

Japanese art is designed for manga sensibilities or anime which generally has more limited budgets and movements. So it's designed to look GREAT while still and have a physical presence but be much less expressive and flexible.

You're really blinded by the "fine art of anime" aren't you?

Again, anime isn't some high art that should be put on a pedestal and admired, it's literally the same as any other form of animation. It's all just moving drawings in the end. That, and everyone has a different art style.

This is the most extreme example I can find of the revealed Pokemon, but there are MUCH MUCH MUUUUCH more extreme cases to be revealed when Sword and Shield releases. There are frankly some new Pokemon that look like parodies of Pokemon you'd see when people are trying to be funny and calling them "Twerkboy" and "Tugnutts".

Creativity is bad. Noted.

Because honestly I doubt the people who were trying to make parody mons could even think of something as wacky as a roving Stonehenge arch with a bored expression, arms, and shoelaces.

"I am of course talking about Eiscube. The worst designed Pokemon of all time. If not the worst designed monster of any mons franchise ever. And to a lesser extent the fossils.

It's head literally looks like an item. Also this is the same as calling Staryu badly designed because it's just a starfish with a jewel glued on to it.

Also the fossils are great and also an intresting concept that's based in real world orgins. I will protect those lovable abominations of god forever.
 
Last edited:
I have no interest in arguing over taste or analyzing the intricacies of monster design, but I do appreciate some amount of general cohesiveness and I feel that it's missing in the new designs when compared to the old ones (even those that made the Dexit cut). On the one hand you could argue that "anything could be a Pokemon" but then on the other hand you have official quotes about Pokemon getting scrapped due to not feeling right. Maybe Game Freak can look at all designs to date and see how they fit together, but I can't even after excluding intentionally bizarre ones like the UBs and Eternatus. This is not a new thing, but it's more pronounced this time around.

I also have to add that creativity isn't necessarily what I'm looking for, especially if it means wacky. Does it look nice (be it cute, elegant or cool)? Is it inspired by a previously unused species or lore? If it's based on another species as another Pokemon, does it have a different typing and comparable/better design quality? If the answer is no to all of these, I'm unlikely to grow fond of it and that could make it hard to use a team of just new Pokemon.
 
Last edited:
Please note: The thread is from 4 years ago.
Please take the age of this thread into consideration in writing your reply. Depending on what exactly you wanted to say, you may want to consider if it would be better to post a new thread instead.
Back
Top Bottom