Fiddled with the tiles, though I kept their tiling approach the same, just made the tiles themselves look different.

The lighter ground tiles better, the next darkest ground reads better as a grassy texture.

Tall grass though? Not sure if a more 'real' approach works better than the other approach that uses giant weeds.

My new tree probably tiles worse because I gave my tree more form.

The big trees from Viridian forest might be interesting to tackle next.

It's not that bad, is it?

Also, with anything commercial, time is much more important and most players have no idea what banding is, nor do they care, they just want to play the game as soon as possible.
I also feel that people who don't see themselves as pixel artist just blames all the faults on the medium instead of a lack of understanding of the medium.. Like, "This is good enough for pixel art.." or "Meh, it's pixelart so yeah it's gonna look a bit bad.."

Let's put aside the pixel technique. Obviously the technique is bad but I would bet there are a lot more interesting things we can bring up about the art. What I am noticing is that some of the pokemon sprites have compositional problems. Others have noodly appendages and anatomy quirks that doesn't seem intentional. I think there's plenty of stuff you shouldn't need to be a pixel artist to notice with these sprites.

But then again I just read that Ken Sugimori worked at the original Red/Green versions as a character and pokemon designer. Whatever was the deal with stylistic inconsistencies, he has definitely become a stronger artist over time.

Quick notes glancing through each pokemon.

Bulbasaur: Something tells me that it's not a smart idea to have its legs cover both sides of its mouth.
Ivysaur: Only one leaf is visible. More visible leaves might do this some justice.
Squirtle: This sprite has bad readability. The mouth would be more readable if that mouth cluster was black. The arms are also short so the raised arm appears to be part of its shell, but the solution is to make that arm longer.
Wartortle and Blastoise: Wonky forms are wonky. So many parts are shaded the same way so it flattens the forms.
Caterpie: Noise under its mouth.
Beedril: Aaahahaha, I can relate when I've seen plenty of pony artists who draw hind legs much like humans. Beedril's legs are structured like a pair super-simplified human legs. I noticed that in later versions Beedril's 'foot' is much larger now.
Pidgey Family: Did the spriter know how wings work? The anatomy is different from each evolution. Pigeot has the most confusing composition.
Spearow: Readability, dammit! I can't tell how the wing is attached to the body.
Ekans: Interesting head anatomy. iirc snakes do not have a brow and I am not sure what the brow is adding to the design.
Arbok: The body looks like one of a worm, not a snake. Same for Ekans. Not sure how a more proper texture would work out, but possibly they made the body worm-like for the sake of ease.
Pikachu: One leg appears to be different from the other.
Raichu: Two visual tangents: the arm touching the ear, and the tail touching the underside.
Sandslash: Broken neck?
Ninetails: The raised leg appears shrunken.
Golbat: Haha, how is that tongue attached to its mouth? Composition is also a tad confusing.

There's a lot of pokemon to go through but I'll stop here for now. Other stuff for me to do atm now

After using a wood texture (referrence), I started to get how to do the texture on the wood. But I believe the wood lacks contrast? Right?

Let me know, thanks

The important part that the wood floor should not compete for attention and be only a background element. If you go deeper into game art, you'll eventually figure that game assets never exist in a vaccuum. It's hard to judge a game asset by itself and you're gonna want to see how everything meshes together in a unified game screen.

Update. I went a bit farther defining my forms and tried adding some more furniture.





I know I'm gonna need to do more research to go farther but as it is, I'm gonna need to focus on conveying a night time scene. I unwittingly gave myself a challenge knowing that the kinds of light sources I gave myself are a bit obnoxious for tiles 

And, the box in the corner is gonna be a grandfather's clock. lol I created an out-of-place gray color only for the sake of making that top plane visible.

The 'subpixelling' trick isn't something I'm all that fond of lately. While it's less weird and chaotic than moving something a distance of a pixel, it would either tamper with the intended form or create an undesirably level of blur depending how you approach it.

You can also consider making stuff move in circles instead of back and forth in a straight line, though I dunno how that would turn out since it will add more movement to an animation that's supposed to have less. Afterall, in theory everything moves in an arc.