Forums - Nintendo Discussion - The real reason for Game Freak's choice of visuals.

Shiken said:

Never said issues do not exist, I was talking about the graphical aspects alone and how battery life seems to be much higher because of it.  You have a right to be upset about something and not buy it for whatever reason, but despite your claims you seem to look down on anyone who buys the game and enjoys it TBH.  I have never insulted anyone here, so try reading it again.  Hell I even said this thread had nothing to do with other flaws, but you insist on trying to insert them in every discussion you can.

The point I am making is that maybe developers who have always made handheld titles will bring the SAME SCALE products over to the Switch because the Switch is both a Handheld and a console.  Just because it is on Switch does not mean that they will all of a sudden make the games console scale experiences.  Will they make improvements here and there?  Sure they will, but I would not get my hopes up too high.

As for your pricing complaint, talk to the publisher Nintendo.  Game Freak had nothing to do with the pricing.  Last I checked, that was a publisher thing.

lol I was saying I don't look down on you because you weren't doing that. If you're gonna assert that you know what I think better than I do then I'm gonna have to ask you provide evidence of me looking down on people for simply liking the game. Now you said the game isn't worth $60 to me as if it's just my opinion that the game is of lesser value, so yeah I'm gonna highlight how it is indeed a fact to show there's objective value.

And the point I made which you completely ignored is that your "real reason" is just your made up excuse while Game Freak explicitly said they were focusing on quality. Speaking generally, small scale is fine, plenty of great games on Switch like Slay the Spire, Hollow Knight, Stardew Valley, etc. fit that bill. However they do so while still looking good and competently made and don't ask for $60.

I think Game Freak obviously knows and is complicit with what the game is priced at. Doesn't make a difference who's specifically responsible though, the game is $60 so it will be viewed as such.



Around the Network

Pricing is subjective, not objective. People not being able to understand the difference between fact and opinion is ridiculous. I wouldn't pay $20 for Death Stranding, but I would easily pay $60 for Ori (it is that good). Pricing all has to do with perceived value which is dictated by personal preference.

*yes I realize Ori isn't priced at $60, I am saying I wouldn't be bothered if they charged $60, given it is one of the best games I have ever played



Chrkeller said:

Pricing is subjective, not objective. People not being able to understand the difference between fact and opinion is ridiculous. I wouldn't pay $20 for Death Stranding, but I would easily pay $60 for Ori (it is that good). Pricing all has to do with perceived value which is dictated by personal preference.

*yes I realize Ori isn't priced at $60, I am saying I wouldn't be bothered if they charged $60

435 is a lower number than 800, that's simply a fact that wont change regardless of perception or preference.



Lonely_Dolphin said:
Shiken said:

Never said issues do not exist, I was talking about the graphical aspects alone and how battery life seems to be much higher because of it.  You have a right to be upset about something and not buy it for whatever reason, but despite your claims you seem to look down on anyone who buys the game and enjoys it TBH.  I have never insulted anyone here, so try reading it again.  Hell I even said this thread had nothing to do with other flaws, but you insist on trying to insert them in every discussion you can.

The point I am making is that maybe developers who have always made handheld titles will bring the SAME SCALE products over to the Switch because the Switch is both a Handheld and a console.  Just because it is on Switch does not mean that they will all of a sudden make the games console scale experiences.  Will they make improvements here and there?  Sure they will, but I would not get my hopes up too high.

As for your pricing complaint, talk to the publisher Nintendo.  Game Freak had nothing to do with the pricing.  Last I checked, that was a publisher thing.

lol I was saying I don't look down on you because you weren't doing that. If you're gonna assert that you know what I think better than I do then I'm gonna have to ask you provide evidence of me looking down on people for simply liking the game. Now you said the game isn't worth $60 to me as if it's just my opinion that the game is of lesser value, so yeah I'm gonna highlight how it is indeed a fact to show there's objective value.

And the point I made which you completely ignored is that your "real reason" is just your made up excuse while Game Freak explicitly said they were focusing on quality. Speaking generally, small scale is fine, plenty of great games on Switch like Slay the Spire, Hollow Knight, Stardew Valley, etc. fit that bill. However they do so while still looking good and competently made and don't ask for $60.

I think Game Freak obviously knows and is complicit with what the game is priced at. Doesn't make a difference who's specifically responsible though, the game is $60 so it will be viewed as such.

And to me, it was $60 dollars well spent and worth the money.  I am enjoying the game more than other $60 games out there, so yeah it is subjective.  The only thing that matters is what the consumers feel is worth their $60, and by the looks of how the game is selling.....



Nintendo Switch Friend Code: SW-5643-2927-1984

Lonely_Dolphin said:
Chrkeller said:

Pricing is subjective, not objective. People not being able to understand the difference between fact and opinion is ridiculous. I wouldn't pay $20 for Death Stranding, but I would easily pay $60 for Ori (it is that good). Pricing all has to do with perceived value which is dictated by personal preference.

*yes I realize Ori isn't priced at $60, I am saying I wouldn't be bothered if they charged $60

435 is a lower number than 800, that's simply a fact that wont change regardless of perception or preference.

And?  Mario Odyssey has 880 power moons, so if the next Mario has less collectables the game has to be less than $60?  Of course not.  Fact is you want everybody to share your opinion, and many don't.  Everything else is just redundant, let me know if you get an new material.  



Around the Network

High quality animations won't drain the battery life. A full dex wouldn't drain the battery life. Pretty sure Dynamax drains battery life because of how flashy it is.



The sentence below is false. 
The sentence above is true. 

 

Shiken said:

And to me, it was $60 dollars well spent and worth the money.  I am enjoying the game more than other $60 games out there, so yeah it is subjective.  The only thing that matters is what the consumers feel is worth their $60, and by the looks of how the game is selling.....

Yes your enjoyment of games is subjective, that doesn't mean objective value and standards don't exist as I already showed. Seeing as you didn't even respond to the more relevant part of my post, have you just given up on the original point of this thread? xD



Cerebralbore101 said:
High quality animations won't drain the battery life. A full dex wouldn't drain the battery life. Pretty sure Dynamax drains battery life because of how flashy it is.

Never said anything about those draining or not draining battery life.  As I said, the game has its flaws but that is not what the topic is about.  It is about how we should not be suprised of more 3DS developers treat the Switch like a handheld, despite how badly some might want "insert handheld IP" to be treated like a console game just because it is on Switch.  Battery life could be a factor, as seen in my example of Pokemon Sw/Sh.

Unfortunately despite stating this clearly in the OP, some who are upset that people are enjoying a game they want boycotted for their own reasons seem to try and change the subject so they can complain some more.

You can certainly be disappointed in those things...but that is not the topic.

Last edited by Shiken - on 18 November 2019

Nintendo Switch Friend Code: SW-5643-2927-1984

Lonely_Dolphin said:
Shiken said:

And to me, it was $60 dollars well spent and worth the money.  I am enjoying the game more than other $60 games out there, so yeah it is subjective.  The only thing that matters is what the consumers feel is worth their $60, and by the looks of how the game is selling.....

Yes your enjoyment of games is subjective, that doesn't mean objective value and standards don't exist as I already showed. Seeing as you didn't even respond to the more relevant part of my post, have you just given up on the original point of this thread? xD

The objective value is whatever consumers are willing to spend on a product.  If a dev prices it at 20 bucks because they feel it will not sell for more, that is what they feel it is worth.  If they feel it will sell for 60...AND DOES...why are you even still debating this?

Also the games you listed are FAR smaller in scale that Sw/Sh.  A bit of a hyperbole, but I see the point you were trying to make.  Unfortunately you are arguing based on what you feel objective value is in your opinion, which in of itself is subjective.

Last edited by Shiken - on 18 November 2019

Nintendo Switch Friend Code: SW-5643-2927-1984

Chrkeller said:
Lonely_Dolphin said:

435 is a lower number than 800, that's simply a fact that wont change regardless of perception or preference.

And?  Mario Odyssey has 880 power moons, so if the next Mario has less collectables the game has to be less than $60?  Of course not.  Fact is you want everybody to share your opinion, and many don't.  Everything else is just redundant, let me know if you get an new material.  

And that's a fact that wont change regardless of perception or preference.

Pokemon is an incremental series, Mario is not. And no, I have no problem with people thinking the game is good, you've never seen me insult people unprovoked like you have.