!
(Meta sure seems to not think much of gen one remakes, weird)
-
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.
-
We have made minor adjustments to how the search bar works on ResetEra. You can read about the changes here.
Pokemon is forced to an HD console and now - the developers are out of excuses
- Thread starter Exellus
- Start date
- Status
!
(Meta sure seems to not think much of gen one remakes, weird)
They're asking us to spend money on a place to store Pokemon on the off chance they'll be transferrable to a game in the future. (Which isn't even guaranteed. Pokemon like Glameow, the Shinx line, and Cherubi haven't been in a regional dex since Gen 4.) The fact that they're using graphics as an excuse for not allowing us to do so in THIS game invites scrutiny.
Talking about new generations here. Remakes and third versions tend to review worse because they're more critical of them for some reason, Emerald is like one of the lowest for example.
If you said sometimes instead of all the time then at least I could think you're reasonable. It's very rare and usually happens because of smoke and mirrors, which pokemon has nothing of. Pokemon reviews well for its gameplay.
I mean, do you feel that Let's Go reviewed poorly mainly because it's a remake? Because HeartGold and SoulSilver reviewed extremely well, and OmegaRuby and AlphaSapphire did quite well all things considered.
https://www.metacritic.com/game/playstation-3/grand-theft-auto-iv Also this is an even better example I reckon
I'd like to see Game Freak partner with Monolith Soft to help make their next game in a similar vein to how they helped with BotW. Game Freak's always been behind in terms of fidelity so it doesn't surprise me that the games look the way they do.
Let's Go reviewed poorly because it's a shit game (to me, not gonna say people are wrong if they like it). And yes some of them still review well but not as well as new generations, but I don't see how that disproves my point that Pokémon games aren't subpar/mediocre like people keep trying to push as a fact :p
I feel that Pokémon can be subpar. There are elements of how Game Freak designs their games that lends to that, such as leaving valuable features behind, such as even having auto-run.
Some of them, sure. I thought XY and Let's Go were subpar. But some people act like every single game is objectively trash or mediocre and it doesn't add anything to the discussion as evidently the world at large doesn't feel that way.
It really isn't.
Keep feeling like you're somewhat better than people who buy and enjoy these games though.
Can't imagine how wonderful your lives must be living it excuse free and only spending money and time on only the best of experiences.
Maybe someday the mindless Pokeplebs will realize that Pokemon games aren't a unique experience and that any dev or person can get out of bed and do a better job even though we're here almost 30yrs later and they are still the only ones in this arena selling they sell and achieving the acclaim that they achieve...
I wish that were a feature every game in the series had standard because, like, how rarely does any game come out that doesn't have a piss-poor walking speed (semirelatedly ask me how many Sonic games I've 100%ed!) but at the same time going back to HeartGold after playing any other generations' Pokemon game and the running speed there is on the level of the walking speed in most other games.
Gamefreak is just a small indie studio, what can they do about it honestly. It's not like they sell millions of copies of pokemon within just the first week, you should expect a small studio of their size on a small budget to only be able to do so much.
I didn't call it an excuse. However the reasons presented so far come off as somewhat dubious, in particular the reasons for cutting Pokemon which apparently are to due with the "better" animations which we've yet to see. I fear that the future of the franchise will revolve around not only paying 60$/€ for a game with a limited selection but also paying whatever for Pokemon Home in order to maybe, maybe, have some of your old favourites be in it.
As for the game itself, it looks competent like I said. Not great (far from it even), not awful (besides needing some better texture work and LoD, the artsyle helps a bunch), but I (and many others I assume) still expected a bit more on the visual department. Nintendo's own output has been far more solid so far on that front.
Though honestly if they could just fix the pop-in, I'd be fine with it. It's kinda pointless to have open areas with roaming Pokemon if they spawn at relatively close range only.
Last edited:
I'd honestly rather Gamefreak be lazy than the actual truth of them being too stubborn to grow their team or allocate more resources. Even ignoring everything but game sales, they make more than most of the industry every release, selling at MINIMUM 5 million nearly every year. That's more than enough income to expand, outsource, anything. Being lazy is less shitty than being stubborn and stingy.
At this point, I'm ready to believe most of their game money is just siphoned into opening another Pokemon center 20 feet away from the last one.
At this point, I'm ready to believe most of their game money is just siphoned into opening another Pokemon center 20 feet away from the last one.
People should be more grateful that they allow us to even play Pokemon in HD with such a tight, self imposed, development schedule and team size.
I don't think we can actually say that with any confidence, lol. We don't know the discussions the investors have; it's not as simple as "if they want this, they'd totally get it", especially in big-name development. Investors and higher-ups are almost always trying to set budgets and cut costs, y'know?
Would they, though? People up at the top of things almost always cut costs. For all we know, at this point, they did get more budget, and can't get any more (or any more time). That isn't to say that they definitely won't get more money or time, but investors and executives can and do place restrictions on development cycles and costs. Considering OP specifically said there are no excuses here, and there are definitely people around that are insisting devs are lazy, I don't buy "it's not the devs that are lazy". Game dev is a complex thing, and Pokemon as a franchise isn't solely run by Game Freak considering The Pokemon Company has multiple owners.
idk man, there are posts even in this thread insisting that the devs can do better and simply aren't. even if you don't literally say the words "the devs are lazy", that's still the sentiment in "Game Freak has no excuses" and such. Like, I'm not saying that they're above criticism or anything, but this zero-sum approach to something we've only seen limited footage of really rubs me weird.
That's for the developer to figure out. Not me.
Also, why is it a bad thing if the genre of a franchise changes? The same decades old formula doesn't have to be rinsed and repeated over and over. Breath of the Wild turned the traditional 3D zelda model on its head and was succesful because of it. Pokemon doesn't have to be confined to a stale formula that limits the franchise's ability to be innovative.
BOTW didn't change Zelda's genre. If BOTW went for turn based battles you'd have a point.
Sure, but I don't know that the user is necessarily making that argument for every game in the series, even if others might be.
I've tried, but I just don't get people who are obsessed with graphics. Is that what you really play games for? I get it, people play games for different reasons: some for a challenge, some for escapism, some for immersion or something else entirely. What I don't get is the focus on power.
The game looks fine to me, and playing games on weaker systems have never hampered my immersion.
The game looks fine to me, and playing games on weaker systems have never hampered my immersion.
Not a man but anyway, that doesn't inherently mean that the OP was calling them lazy. They could also be accusing GF of acting in bad faith.
The point being made is that it's not apparent what about the game makes it so hard for Game Freak to add all of the Pokémon.
Masuda is on the board of directors for GF. It's literally up to him to determine the budget for the games. Considering how much profit they make, budgets should be of no concern to them.
Even if it's only referring to XY and Sun and Moon, it'd be wrong to push it as a fact. I don't like XY very much but I love Sun and Moon, while for others it's the opposite, we even had a thread about this exact thing. I won't go around telling people who like XY that they're promoting mediocrity, or stuff like that... it's childish. It also derails the discussion from the real problems, which doesn't help.
If this was only about graphics, the thread wouldn't be this big.
But I would argue that, literally, Sword and Shield is "below par," especially in the discussion as to whether the game is too graphical to permit all Pokémon be included. It calls into question, to me, either that cost-cutting measures are occurring, that Game Freak is trying to use this to sell later versions, that they wanted to release it this year and not when it's done, or that Game Freak has serious issues handling HD development.
Doesn't read that way. A joke that is indistinguishable from the comment you're making fun of isn't much of a joke :v
User warned: lazy devs rhetoric
I'm on the side of GF being lazy , i mean, if we do compare GF against other companies in terms of content/cut well , I think its laughable at best . Accounting that they're one of the studios that are getting super revenue, so imho they should take care of expectations and trace a plan for outsorcing/hiring whatever they need to accomplish that 'standarts' in term of quality/content. If they're not being in the mood/cirumstances for doing that ,well... prepare for our comlpains I guess.
If we do compare GF against themselves then maybe they're on line with the latest entries...
If we do compare GF against themselves then maybe they're on line with the latest entries...
I'm sorry I didn't notice it. It just shows just how bad this thread is when I can't even differentiate sarcasm from being serious.
I think I've made my point in the thread anyway. I'm just hoping the situation improves. Gonna take my leave
Did you read the second portion of my post?
Why in the ever living fuck are people opposed to a genre change for Pokemon and are adamant about a stale old turn-based system??!? Should Metroid Prime have never happened because it's a genre change?
Well I read the op and that seems to be talking about to me, and maybe complaints about budgeting? I mean the thread is 30+ pages so I don't have time to deep read the entire thing right now. If I've missed something you could give me a tl;dr.
They might have made the decision after seeing that SWSH wasn't shaping up to look how they wanted it to, in which case it makes sense to draw the line as soon as possible instead of providing yet another game with all the Pokémon only to have to cut them for the next one in order to make it look better. It's only speculation, and it's totally their fault for not having explained the situation properly, but it's not impossible to understand game development isn't a zero sum deal. I will keep being disappointed that they're cutting Pokémon until they reverse the decision, but I don't think the games are sub par only because of issues like this. The main experience is gonna be the same after all.
In that case, I think that the game should be delayed. I'd rather get Pokémon Sword and Shield in 2020 but with more and better content than 2019 and less/worse.
Because a lot of people play it for the competitive portion of the games and don't want the strategic aspect diluted due to a genre change?
Turn based games are few and far between, and people consistently push for the remaining ones to change genre on the basis that it's an archaic system, which is bullshit. There are plenty of spin-offs if you want to enjoy another genre with Pokémon.
don't talk to me until you've read all 1,500 comments and turned in 2 pages of notes after gamer class
Monsters available in the game are cut by more than half (tentative could be more or less) from previous standards. Reason stated being improved quality and graphics. Graphics are now being held on a higher standard and people aren't seeing the massive increase in quality to warrant cutting down the number of pokemon.
That's not even necessary (and Nintendo would never let them) as they could patch the game after release. If they refuse to do that, then yeah it's a bad decision and you won't see me defend it.
Thanks. There was a thread here a week or so ago asking if we preferred quality or quantity-I chose quality. Has anyone who actually worked on these games been in this thread to give a statement about the development? If not, it's just conjecture and blind assumptions, and we don't know what went on about the development and creation of this game.
I'm really not a fan of post-release patching, especially when the patching is for the sake of releasing an incomplete game early.
They're not though? You could just keep your pokemon in whatever game they're already in & move them when you know if they're compatable or not
Even if the national Dex was a thing in SwSh, you were going to have to pay for home to bring them over (& then again for the games after that). I don't really buy that these is some sort of dubious scheme to keep people to continue paying for Home especially when that wasn't really the case for Bank
Just to be clear I'm not really defending their decision regarding the National Dex (I personally never cared to complete it). I just think it's a little disingenuous for some to call it an excuse just because they don't like the way it looks, when it actually very well could have been the reason during the development period & comparing it to other Nintendo games is pointless cause they're mostly completely separate entities.
Why game freak remains a tiny studio despite being the developers of a major multi million selling franchise, on a constant development cycle & making other smaller games on the side, is the real mystery to me personally.
Well in a perfect world that wouldn't be needed, but we have to make do somehow.
- Status