Yeah, that is the big difference here. It won't be possible to transfer missing pokémon to SwSh, even if you have them on Home or from a future title.
-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
Game Developers on Pokemon SwSh Pokedex Cuts: "I'm Surprised They Didn't Cut It Years Ago" [USgamer]
- Thread starter Lady Bow
- Start date
Isn't Nintendo the sole owner of the trademark? I always heard that since they had that they were the only ones with true legal veto power over anything Pokemon-related that gets released, even if TPC de facto manages the IP.
You could get all the old Pokémon from Firered/Leafgreen/Colosseum, but it wasn't ideal since all those came after Ruby and Sapphire.
But it happened in 2002, so there wasn't nearly as much of a furor.
To be clear, what Garcia said didn't really conflict with what I said. Maintaining upwards of 1,000 pokemon is a lot of work no matter how you slice it -- even if you can reuse a lot of work (which it still looks like they are, and Garcia didn't claim otherwise afaik). Both sides seem to take from what they hear to the extremes -- they want to say it either took almost no work or it took an impossible amount of work. Making a game with upwards of 1,000 of anything is going to be a lot of work -- Pokemon games take some smart shortcuts that make it feasible to have so many (making the visuals for attacks modular so you can mix and match a limited set of animations with different particle effects, for example).
My post was mostly debunking the specific claim that they were required to remake models and animations from scratch due to the move from 3DS to Switch because they weren't compatible or whatever. It was a silly claim to begin with, considering the same models/animations were already being used on 3DS, Android and iOS phones (Go), and Switch (Let's Go) -- like I said, models and animations etc are very portable (another big example is Gran Turismo 5's PS2 models).
But I also think this whole "how much work is it" discussion is a bit of a distraction. If they plan on having multiple Pokemon games on Switch, like they usually do, then presumably they'd keep the same style from SwSh and reuse these updated assets. If the removal of the national dex was about how much work it took to update them to Switch quality, it wouldn't need to be a new policy moving forward for every Pokemon game -- it could just be a temporary hiccup starting with SwSh, then each subsequent game adds more until all the pokemon are updated and the national dex gets to come back after a temporary absence while they caught up.
But they've said this is a new policy and have implied that each game will have a limited selection of pokemon -- if it's a new policy moving forward, then presumably the games after SwSh will be missing pokemon that are in SwSh even though the assets are already updated to Switch quality. So unless it's actually not a new policy moving forward and all this drama is over a miscommunication, the main reason for this policy is probably not updating art assets.
(edit: built into this is my impression that they don't plan to permanently, at least for a hardware generation, retire any pokemon -- but that could be a possibility, especially in the far future)
Last edited:
I'm pretty sure people are more mad for the state of the franchise from this point onward, as has been said before, over any sort of anger at Sword and Shield. If they said that this game wouldn't have every Pokemon but eventually there would be another game that did have one, it'd be fine. If they'd revealed this in a Direct or at their presentation, rather than during Treehouse, people would be a bit more understanding. They made this announcement in the most wrong way possible, and it's baffling to a lot of people that they're saying that there won't be a game with every Pokemon in it ever again even when they have every Pokemon's models and assets updated for the Switch.
Nintendo share ownership of the trademarks domestically between them, Creatures and Game Freak but own the majority of the international trademarks alone
What's more baffling is how much a pass Gamefreak is getting by certain posters here.
IP covers more than just trademarks, but yeah Nintendo owns some while a gamefreak shares the rest of the IP with them
A trademark is a registered symbol, for branding and identification purposes, which also prevents infringing upon the brand's identity by imitators. A trademark's only power is that it is, effectively, a name. Nintendo being the sole owner of it (internationally, not necessarily in other contexts) doesn't do much besides protect the brand from being genericized.
I honestly don't care anymore, people are already trying too hard to normalise the idea of not having every pokemon in the game, probably as a reaction to some of the toxic elements of the backlash. It's going to sell a fuckload and any criticism is just going to be buried.
I'm done with this series now, SwSH looks shite and after Let's Go I'm just done, I don't have the time or the money to waste on this franchise anymore, there are loads of better games released all the time and the taste of waiting for gen 8 only to get this won't be washed out of my mouth for a long time, feels like I've wasted all the time I spent invested in this series now.
I'm done with this series now, SwSH looks shite and after Let's Go I'm just done, I don't have the time or the money to waste on this franchise anymore, there are loads of better games released all the time and the taste of waiting for gen 8 only to get this won't be washed out of my mouth for a long time, feels like I've wasted all the time I spent invested in this series now.
Tbf, Creatures deserves some of the blame too since their modeling dept (Pokémon CG studios) provides models and animations and is woefully understaffed compared to other AAA franchises
I think I'm done. This isn't worth getting upset over. There's to many good games coming out the rest of this year to bother with this one.
Then what is? Genuinely asking since I've never heard anything otherwise
Interesting. So it sounds like legally 2 out of 3 have to agree for anything with a character resembling a Pikachu to be released, while Nintendo always has to agree to anything that calls itself "Pokemon" overseas.
It's probably just trivia since I'm sure in practice all three come to an agreement on everything, but still it's an interesting web of obligations.
Yup this encapsulates it. It was presented as a tough decision they had to make because of unforseen limitations. But in reality, it was clearly a business decision because they've already ruled out making a future game with all of them in it. Even though they announced Home just a couple of months earlier.
I
At 90 billion it's the #1 grossing media franchise. Maybe it's not selling at #1 right now, but in total, it's grossed the most.
I think this a more of a "the straw that broke the camel's back" type of situation. Over the last few iteration people got kind off tired of the game play and GF removing features; people were expecting something big from the first mainline game on switch but all you got was bad graphics, giant pokemon and subpar animations (some of them looks good). When they announced they are removing pokemon, mega evo and z-moves, I think it was the final straw for a lot of people. Ignoring the removal of pokemon and other mechanics, the game itself does not look very good imo.
I thought you was going somewhere with this but they already outsource heavily, sumo already had a huge amount of devs on it, what mames you think they aren't here? And there is a clear step up from sumo to swsh
I wouldn't go as far as to say it doesn't look very good, to me it's just that it looks like just another by the numbers Pokemon game, but with features I enjoyed removed for the sake of features I don't really care about at all.
I don't know. All I know is that the Wikipedia article contains outdated information for stuff like Star Trek and also it double counts basically everything for Pokémon. The $61m stat for "licensed merchandise" includes the games, trading cards, anime, etc., which are all included separately as well.
Yeah and Gamefreak shares in the profits of that licensing since they own 33% of TPC.
And what is up with your arbitrary metric? Hello kitty is #2 and is also plenty of merchandising and licensing.
What ever amount of outsourcing they need to do to have all the Pokemon return in a future game, that's the amount that I'm asking for.
That's kinda of the problem for me. I had to force myself to finish S & M because I got so tired of the formula. I was really hoping they could shake things up with sword & sheild
What '' excites me '' is that since they are cutting down the number of Pokemon available, they really have much less to fall back on if (or rather, when) it becomes apparent how obviously mediocre the game will end up looking, and potentially being. All the trailers we've seen so far look pretty bad, and definitely not the quality I was expecting a Switch-powered Pokemon game to be.
It was in development for around two to three years with millions of dollars put into it before being completely rebooted, presumably with little to no content carried over in the new effort from the work done by Bandai Namco(?). If that's not mismanagement, I don't know what is.
Ehh..we still don't know everything about SwSh. Who knows, it might have more content than Black and White. So its a
I mean, would you rather not have the Wild Area?
Actually a lot of people complained.
And how do you know it is more ambitious? Did you play Pokemon?
Me and lot of other people don't find them looking bad at all. I mean if we going by looks, well FE doesn't exactly look like BoTW or Odyssey in terms of graphical fidelity.
Ahh the old "the game's not out yet so you can't criticize it." That's one of my favorites, along with its siblings "you just didn't play enough to give it a chance," and "if you hate it so much, why did you keep playing?"
Ah the old "this is what you're getting take it or leave it". Basically "stop criticizing this game in particular"
Its a legitimate question. Do you not want the wild area in the game? I mean I certainly didn't even expect something like the Wild Area in the game.
I wanted the entire game to have a free camera instead of just the overworld. I wasn't expecting Pokémon-of-the-wild, but s free camera in a 2019 game shouldn't be too much too expect.
Personally I'd rather not have it if it meant getting all the pokemon back, give me random battles and patches of grass any day of the week.
I'm just not interested in half-baked open world and roaming pokemon, they either do it properly, or they stick to classic style and pump the game full of content.
Ahh, your bad taste in choosing to defend this game makes sense then. It's consistent with your shit taste regarding the best pokemon.
#SAVETROPIUS
Replace Tropius with your favourite pokemon, infact, 20 of your top 25 favourite pokemon, 5 will be kept randomly. Now what?
I work as a game artist and honestly the biggest thing (far more than the models and texturing) is the bespoke rigs and animations for almost every single pokemon.
While the modelling and full texturing process is pretty painful for each one, they do often have existing ones to work from which is a big help. If somehow the majority of the 800 or so pokemon were quadrupeds with similar animation sets, then maybe its doable. Even then though thats still an unbelievable amount of work. To have to do it though for every single pokemon is absolutely insane.
While the modelling and full texturing process is pretty painful for each one, they do often have existing ones to work from which is a big help. If somehow the majority of the 800 or so pokemon were quadrupeds with similar animation sets, then maybe its doable. Even then though thats still an unbelievable amount of work. To have to do it though for every single pokemon is absolutely insane.
As someone who is okay with not having every pokemon in the game, an interesting solution would have been to not go fully 3d.
Gen V has the best looking battles and the best looking pokemon. Because its not 3D you don't have to worry about lighting, rigging, or animations.
The games have been going downhill since gen V, this could be why.
Though, I suppose you can't put the genie back in the bottle.
Gen V has the best looking battles and the best looking pokemon. Because its not 3D you don't have to worry about lighting, rigging, or animations.
The games have been going downhill since gen V, this could be why.
Though, I suppose you can't put the genie back in the bottle.
And, as an artist, hypothetically what would your team do if they had a workload like that, ported them to a new engine, and the rigs broke? How much work would it be to correct?
Our question has been how much work is saved by being able to draw on existing assets but for a different system? So in this case GF has all the files for all 800+ returning pokemon for US/UM. Some posters are saying those are so incompatible they should basically be thrown out while others are assuming you can drag and drop them into Sword and Shield and they'll work perfectly.
Do you have any insight into how difficult that would be typically?
a) Delay the game to fix it
b) Cut down on the number of Pokemon in this game, but reassure the audience that the rest are coming in future titles once you've rebuilt the library
c) Announce that you'll never have every pokemon in a single game ever again
I'll play along but I'd obviously choose my favorites over wild area
Now I know its an example but realistically speaking, we don't know the final cut for all the Pokemon. However, I don't see them cutting away 80% of old Pokemon from SwSh. I say 80 since 20 is 80% of 25.
As a note, I'm not a full-time rigger or anything (work in concept art + 3D production art and only occasionally do rigging on projects), so take this with a grain of salt, as who know what crazy tools they have there.
That being said the best way I can frame it is if you look at the workload in a best case scenario. Maybe in this scenario the rigs are broken but still somewhat usable, maybe they need weight painting redone, to fix up animations etc. Even in this scenario this is a huge workload. Even just to reattach and test the rigs and make sure everythings functioning is huge, let alone testing that each animation works, let alone making sure that they have the correct animations and types of animations for all the necessary moves in the game.
I work in a pretty small team of roughly 10-15 people so we work on different scales for sure, but any other developer would have culled the pokemon a long time ago. That amount of bespoke rigs with bespoke animations is just honestly unbelievable.
EDIT: And if we were the developers, we 100% would have just done the same. Cut the number of pokemon down - then maybe re-approach post release how it can be handled. Maybe its that each Pokemon region gets added down the line? Theres a few answers but none are something consumers would be happy with.
Last edited:
Someone is triggered. Gotta love how upset people get over some missing Pokemon. More importantly, my defense of the game is me realizing that change sucks but its also something that didn't surprise in the slightest so I don't lose sleep over it.
Mostly just fans who were salty that Generations Ultimate wasn't being localized at the time, if I recall. I'm pretty confident that everyone who actually played World understood why the roster had to be trimmed due to the massive leap in quality.
Thats a fair criticism. Hopefully they improve on the design going forward
