By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
IcaroRibeiro said:
Slownenberg said:

Going off the video I'd say there are definitely better looking and better performing games on Switch, so no, yes I do believe a game made for the Switch would look and run better. Also a main thing about my post was that it is coming out many months late with little to no marketing. It's a total afterthought. That's all very different than a game made from the ground up on Switch and coming out same day as the other current systems when was that like 9 months ago?!

I'm sure there are games that look better, but sometimes is just a matter of both artstyle and being able to render the world size. Maybe if the game was more colorful and cartoonish it would look better 

The kind of art style was defined already, which rely heavily on being darker, with shades of gray and sepia for the most it's part. This looks gorgeous in a console that can handle more complex assets, but won't look as good on Switch

It's the same reason why most of western third parties AAA PS3 games always looked atrociously ugly to me. Everything there was gray/brown without enough process power to make this art style shine

The other versions were also late. PS4 version only released 4 months after PS5 version. What do you wanted them to do? Have the game ready for PS5 (which was already delayed from 2022) but holding off to release it? Doesn't make much sense for me.

You will never satisfy some people don't worry.



duduspace11 "Well, since we are estimating costs, Pokemon Red/Blue did cost Nintendo about $50m to make back in 1996"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8808363

Mr Puggsly: "Hehe, I said good profit. You said big profit. Frankly, not losing money is what I meant by good. Don't get hung up on semantics"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=9008994

Azzanation: "PS5 wouldn't sold out at launch without scalpers."