Yes, it is aliased, but how is it not pixel art? When I draw in GIMP sometimes, I might draw stuff just like as shown in the CD-I Link screenshot; I use the pencil tool with alias, which to me is helpful for editing details, and then I color in with the bucket fill tool afterwards. This is definitely not vector art. What I’m describing is raster/bitmap art. But why can’t it be called pixel art? It is pixel art because it uses pixels and it is aliased. I don’t see anything wrong with using pixel art. But if you want to be more professional, like how most animations are done in production companies, then it’s best to use raster/bitmap art, particularly for background paintings and animation sketches. I agree with you that it is not exactly pixel art in the conventional sense, which is aliased like the method I’ve described earlier, but no matter how any of us look at it, bitmap/raster drawings are still pixel art. Even when you export vector graphics to GIF, PNG or JPG, it will become bitmap/raster drawings and therefore pixel art, just anti-aliased. When you zoom in on vector layers, the vector outlines and edges will appear smooth, never pixelate, and inherently anti-aliased.
I’m sorry if I made you upset. I don’t mean to cause an argument over semantics. Please forgive me. 