This logo aged fairly well, but it's finally looking very outdated.
Thoughts? Do you think it's time to redesign the logo?
>>25804298
I believe there's a rule that states to never change it
I really wish they'd change it like they do for the japanese logos
The logo itself can stay the same, just change the colors to match the games and I'd be satisfied
Nah they'd make it worse. Westerners, especially autistic man children, don't like change anyway.
>tfw the Japanese logos are so much more eye pleasing.
No, it is too 90's and classic to ever change.
It's iconic..
They are even changing the way gen1 pokemon like onix and venausaur look.. at least one thing should stay the same.
>>25804298
Diamond and Pearl made it monochrome once
fuck this era, it has no style.
We should seek to return to a paradigm where color and style are appreciated.
honestly the big problem is the blue-yellow combination
>>25804298
I don't care about this logo too much, but I like that they started to put more effort in making the western logos more stylized since HGSS, that bland white font for the version name really was, well... Bland.
>>25804298
They'll never do it. In fact, they have instructions that the logo is never supposed to be any color other than ones presented. The only thing they can do is put a white outline or glow around it to set it apart from the background.
>>25804298
>redesign the logo?
make the logo big
Make the logo Bigger.
Make the logo as BIG as you can.
>>25804298
Its kinda annoying, all the japanese boxart has some pretty unique and interesting logos on them, but because of this logo being so well known in the west, they give us the same thing every time.
>>25804378
>changing the way gen 1 pokemon look
wut?
>>25804599
Blue and yellow/gold work well together. That's why you see it combined in everything
Based on how logos are these days, and how new "younger" companies/restaurants seem to name their establishments, the Pokemon logo would likely be in a sans serif font of some sorts, not bold, monochrome, not angled or curved.
>>25804869
Source?
>>25806914
It's that guide again, but I find this to be the most believable part of it because of legal issues having to do with it
