Info

Here are some things I like and dislike, in no particular order...

Regarding Generation IX Pokémon

The first eight generations of Pokémon species were really quite well done, even if Gen I didn't focus on cuteness as much as later generations. But Gen IX really messed things up. There's barely any cute designs at all! Well, aside from some that were revealed early and are being promoted way too much, that is! One thing that I would really like seeing for a generation is a bunch of cute Pokémon that are obscure, and thus get less promotion than others. But all they're doing for Gen IX is promoting those early reveals and having virtually nothing aside from them!!!In fact, I have stated that the only species I have considered cute in this generation aside from early reveals are Tatsugiri and Dudunsparce...yup, only two. And only ONE of them (Tatsugiri) is an original design!!!!! Dudunsparce is just an evolution of a previous Pokémon from Gen II. I'm not kidding around, there's so little obscure cuteness in this generation that I just don't think it would be worth seeing them over and over again.Oh, and don't get me started on *shudders* Lechonk...it's my least favorite Pokémon species ever in my opinion due to being one of the earliest revealed species (on June 1st 2022, just after the First Partners and cover legendaries), it and its evolution being ugly and this one specifically getting too much attention from TPC and its international branches. I swear if Lechonk Day replaces Bidoof Day on July 1st...And I didn't forget about the duplicates, no...there's Pokémon that are aesthetically similar to previous ones (like Toedscool and Wiglett for Tentacool and Diglett) and "Paradox Pokémon" which are different forms of other Pokémon from the past or future. The biggest problem with them in my opinion is that they are grouped separately from the ones they're based on in the Pokédex, unlike regional forms. I don't get why that would be the case for these when they did it right two generations ago, especially since these Pokémon are closely related... Oh, and all of the future Paradox Pokémon have the word "Iron" starting their names, making them feel repetitive, have less possibilities for unique names, and just add unnecessary padding to the alphabetical Pokédex... ~_~In fact, all of this has gotten me to the point where merely seeing any Gen IX Pokémon species makes me feel uncomfortable, even those I had no problem with before the games released. The vast majority of the new ones are overrated, not cute, weird, or just plain ugly. It's for this reason that, as of 2023, I no longer have any willpower to draw any Gen IX Pokémon. Furthermore, had they not done this stupid revealing Pokémon early thing that made the only cute designs extremely overrated, maybe, just maybe, I would've been at least a little more fond of these things. But no, they had to ruin it by having there be virtually NO cute designs other than the overrated early reveals that I'd get tired of seeing alot. Thus, I think every Pokémon from Gen IX is either very overrated, uncute, or gave me trouble. Sigh...I can only hope that Gen X will bring in a bunch of cute and underrated species that I can adore and feel happier around...Here's a list of my personal hopes regarding Paldean Pokémon...I really hope that:

And, for reference, here's my top 10 least favorite Pokémon:

My opinions on all Generation IX Pokémon

I can't believe I did this, but I've went through all of the Pokémon species from Gen IX, my least favorite generation design-wise, and wrote down small notes about what I think of them from a design (and obscurity) viewpoint. Get ready for a bunch of reused opinions...

Regarding Apple Arcade and subscription-only games

Greed has gotten to the point where companies now have people pay subscription prices to exclusive games that can not be bought standalone for one payment. In the case of Apple Arcade, the access to the games costs $4.99/month ($49.99/year is also available but I haven't seen that many sources talk about that)This money-eating arcade has opened its doors to make exclusive games out of pretty much anything cute I could think of: axolotls, Bomberman, ChuChu Rocket!, and even caught the attention of Game Freak, the developers of Pokémon! (UPD 2/23/2024: Thankfully Game Freak released their Apple Arcade game to Nintendo Switch recently) All of these companies involved appear to prefer paying forever for games to one and done, and I think that's a bad idea...In my opinion, paying only one time provides a convenience where you can play as many times as you want without having to spend another penny. As for subscription games, you're stuck in an endless payment cycle, and if you run out of money or cancel your subscription in some way, you can't play those games anymore until you restart the subscription! It's even worse when games are soft launched in a state of being free to play or having a low-price one-time payment, and then get pushed to Apple Arcade with no prior warning, thus forcing people to start another subscription just to play it again! Or, in other cases, like the ChuChu Rocket! game, the game eventually gets delisted after some time for any reason (like contract expiration) and not only becomes permanently unplayable, but also lost media since usually there's no other place to play these games!!!!!Oh, and don't get me started with Apple Arcade exclusive sequels to free-to-play games, like Cut the Rope 3 and Jetpack Joyride 2 (which actually had a free soft launch period!). Imagine suddenly jumping from completely free to play (even if there's removable ads or microtransactions) to subscription-based in one fell swoop!!! I seriously would've preferred if they had renamed them to be considered spin-offs rather than straight up going greedy and making subscription-based sequels to free to play games.What's worse is that, for many of these exclusive games, the developers have no plans to release these games to other consoles, like the Nintendo Switch. How is this not greedy?! You should at least try to make console versions of these games so people who don't want to pay for another subscription can play these games in a more convenient (and, hopefully, time-resistant) way.This is why console gaming will always be better in my opinion. You can play almost everything you purchase with comfort, online and offline (Apple Arcade only allows offline play for seven days since it checks subscription details when connected to the internet. What if you're stuck in some random place with no internet access?!)Overall I think Apple Arcade would be better if every one of its exclusive titles were released onto at least one other console (NO EXCEPTIONS) and if it was mostly considered a "power-up" for your experience with the App Store Greats library (which must not have any notable new features or changes from the original aside from removing ads and microtransactions, or adding ways to get microtransaction-only features by making enough progress). Another good idea is adding a one-time payment option for the service itself and/or each "game" separately, that would make it more accessible to people who don't like subscription pricing. Even then, Apple Arcade doesn't really have much of a reason to exist other than this "people prefer to pay one subscription for games than multiple payments for each game" thing. At least streaming services like Netflix have the good reasoning that they're intended to be cable replacements! Keep in mind that cable was already a subscription even before streaming services started to appear, and lately cable has been getting much less affordable, further encouraging the usage of lower-cost streaming services. I don't care if over 200 games are available of Apple Arcade, trying to make people pay subscriptions just for games (especially if they want to play only one game from the service) is a pretty bad idea.And yes, I know some mobile games have weekly subscriptions (and usually only those, with no monthly or yearly choices at all) that cost even more than any of the Apple Arcade subscriptions, this is obviously worse since this only takes effect for one specific game that you pay the subscription for. Who would want to pay 8 dollars every week just for very small perks in some random mobile game? Regardless of this, this doesn't change my stance on Apple Arcade. That only adds fuel to the flames that are subscription services being used to play video games, and just proves that companies have been getting greedier and greedier lately.Here's to hoping more companies will do the right thing and release console versions of their Apple Arcade games for convenience... (I'm also looking at you, Cooking Mama Limited. You don't want the infamous/unofficial Cookstar to be the only Nintendo Switch Cooking Mama game available, do you? If so, just release Cooking Mama Cuisine or an enhanced port of it to the Switch...you can even pass it off as the sixth numbered game if you want to! Or at least release a proper Cooking Mama game for the Switch with even more features and playability than Cuisine!)As an aside, maybe I could consider Taiko No Tatsujin: Pop Tap Beat the Bandai Namco equivalent to the KONAMI AMUSEMENT GAME STATION (KONASTA) games like beatmania IIDX INFINITAS and DanceDanceRevolution GRAND PRIX? They're both variations of existing arcade titles that require subscriptions to play...one difference I found is that KONASTA also allows you to use PASELI (Konami's own digital currency) to pay for the subscriptions alongside real money and credit cards.(UPD 2/23/2024) So it appears that in late October 2023, Apple Arcade's price...increased to $6.99/month in the United States (its main base of operations), an approximately 40% increase over its initial price!!! If you're thinking this was to keep up with "inflation," it WASN'T, as the approximate price of the service when it was released ($4.99 in 2019) is closer to $5.99, but they decided to go further than that because, WHY NOT!!! And, if you can believe it, companies are STILL treating this horrible subscription service like it's a gift from the Heavens when in reality, it's more proof that they're getting greedier and greedier than ever before!As a matter of fact, I have a list of franchises I do not EVER want to see get a completely Apple Arcade exclusive title...



Here's my list of franchises that I NEVER EVER want to see get "games" that release on Apple Arcade and remain exclusive on there forever, thus never coming to real consoles. Keep in mind that simple ports of the console version to Apple Arcade will not count towards "completely exclusive" as someone could just get the console version instead, therefore bypassing the requirement for an unnecessary and completely useless subscription service. I've already been boycotting franchises like Sonic the Hedgehog and Tamagotchi for joining Apple Arcade following the horrific price increase, so I do not want to have to expand that list.Each franchise will be listed in the below list, and some will also be given different text colors:Any franchise names highlighted in red have since betrayed us with at least one completely Apple Arcade exclusive "game" still available. At least one of those have not been released onto other platforms yet. This also includes "games" that were announced for other platforms, but either haven't been released yet or had those releases cancelled. Once the other platform versions actually release, the franchise's highlight color will be changed accordingly.
Any salmon names have characters that appear physically (or are playable) in at least one Apple Arcade exclusive "game," but the "game" itself isn't specifically focused on that franchise. This is mainly for crossover titles. If said "game" ends up delisted or properly released to other platforms, the highlight color will be changed to white.
Any orange names had previous Apple Arcade "games" that have since been delisted from the App Store. They must also have no currently active Apple Arcade "games" still available.
Any cyan names have done well; ALL of their Apple Arcade "games" have been promoted to real games by releasing onto other platforms.
Any green names have done even better; ALL their games ever released onto Apple Arcade are available on other platforms, and all of them have also been delisted from Apple Arcade.
Of course, any white names have never even touched Apple Arcade.Additionally, any names with this ❗ icon before them represent franchises I'm especially, desperately, absolutely hoping NEVER get any representation on Apple Arcade!!!Note: as I refuse to look at even a single bit of Apple Arcade news since it really scares me (especially after the price increase), I'd suggest you let me know if any of these franchises end up being represented in Apple Arcade. I will then change the highlight color(s) accordingly.

Portfolio

I work on drawings every once in a while, on top of over a thousand small drawings I made on Drawception since May 2022. Here's a sample of what you'd expect from me:

Social

• PanelChutney (Where I mostly draw)
• Drawception (Starting to show much less activity here than PC)
• DeviantArt (Another site to put my art in and out of PC and DC)
• X/Twitter (My art is also on here)
• Roblox (I might play here whenever I don't feel like drawing)
• Scratch (Maybe I can try coding here...)
• Discord (Username is @symmetricalifinity)
• YouTube (I post videos mostly relating to googology here)
• Art Fight (Can't believe I doubted this website)
• Pixilart (This is for pixel art?)
• Interference (Similar to Drawception, I'm not as active on here)
• GitHub (I don't usually code so I just use this to host stuff)
• PanelJam (an old account of mine with a few of my old art)
• Bluesky (Really hope I won't fully regret this)

Regarding Bluesky

There's a couple of big reasons why I'm not willing to join Bluesky:1. People keep talking about it on X/Twitter! All because there's been some less-than-stellar changes made to that website. There's loads of posts from other users that say somthing like "I'm on the butterfly website too!" and have an image of their Bluesky account's header. Some of those users also add a Bluesky account name to their display name rather than putting it in their bio or website link, which I don't think feels like the right thing to do as it just adds to the oversaturation. I feel like it's even more overrated than Art Fight ever was since it appeals to more demographics rather than just artists...
2. I feel like I may end up getting harassed more there than on X/Twitter. Even if Bluesky offers potential for making new friends, I just don't think it would be worth it in the long run as I already feel concerned enough about being insulted at by people who hate my guts, so I don't think I want to make things any worse.
3. It may add more load to the sites I already post my art to. I mean, I already post them to PanelChutney, DeviantArt, and X/Twitter (with Art Fight attacks additionally going into that website) so it most likely would make it less intuitive for me to post my art online.
4. Some of my friends who have accounts there are less active there than on X/Twitter. Pretty self-explanatory; some users are just noticeably more active on the latter website, mainly because they'd be trying to get used to Bluesky...so I think it'd be a little harder for me if I were to interact with them there rather than X/Twitter
5. Pre-2023 stuff don't always show up there. Although Bluesky was founded in 2021, it really started to become popular around 2023 continuing into 2024. Thus, not all of its users would post their older stuff to Bluesky, making it less convenient for people to see what a user did in the past (even if it might be a little embarrassing)In short, I believe joining Bluesky just wouldn't be worth it for me. At all. And besides, I honestly believe that X/Twitter can do some good stuff and make improvements that its userbase would be happy about.