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

Shiken said:
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.

I didn't mean to imply that you said something about those things draining battery life. I was just commenting on my own, without intending for it to be a reply to anybody in particular. 

I'm actually enjoying the game immensely. Gameplay is more important to me than graphics. I'm excited to see how the meta turns out with so many moves and Poke'mon not making it in. 



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

 

Around the Network
Immersiveunreality said:
Xxain said:
400 Pokemon was still too much for GameFreak for the time frame they were given. It is annoying that it is the answer because they should have expanded to accommodate that number, but they didn't and that in combination with new feature and tech was more than they could chew.

Yeah i wonder what Nintendo's part was with the rushed state of this game,can be that gamefreak tried the best they could in the time that had been given to them.

Naaw man. I'm thinking Pokemon Company could be the other problem. They're in charge of marketing, merchandising and the Animes and you know the game gotta be out in time for that anime. I just dont think that Nintendo had any major hand in this because GameFreak has been on this path for awhile. 



mZuzek said:

I think's it's moreso that the Pokédex cut led people to start complaining about other issues that they were okay with before, especially after Game Freak specifically talked about how the cut was for reasons such as polish and making better animations. If you cut content and say it's because of better graphics, but your graphics are still shit, then people are either going to complain about the cut content or the graphics. Pretty obvious, really.

That said, I'm kinda glad all of this happened, because it made people finally realize many issues that have been plaguing Pokémon for years.

Pokémon missing didn't become known until weeks after the first trailer had been shown. I remember that I had watched the Direct and thought that Sword/Shield had decent graphics for a Pokémon game, but here on VGC there were quite a lot of comments about supposedly terrible graphics. Still, many people realized eventually that their own expectations were more at fault than the game.

When it became known that not all Pokémon would make the cut, the real bandwagoning for an anti-hype train started. The graphics have been more focused on again recently, because it turned out that there are still plenty of positive things to say about Sword/Shield, so the ongoing dismissive stance towards the latest Pokémon needed more justification than just the cut Pokémon and GameFreak's dumb statements in response to the cuts.

It's the same old story of a divisive build-up until a game's release where naysayers ultimately face the choice of either admitting that it was never as bad as they argued or doubling down by latching on to every little detail to justify themselves. Of course this same old story can also end with the apologists facing such a choice, but that isn't the case here.

As for the realisation of many issues, I don't think that matters much when even most of the naysayers will end up buying the game anyway, if they haven't bought it already.



Legend11 correctly predicted that GTA IV (360+PS3) would outsell SSBB. I was wrong.

A Biased Review Reloaded / Open Your Eyes / Switch Gamers Club

Xxain said:

Naaw man. I'm thinking Pokemon Company could be the other problem. They're in charge of marketing, merchandising and the Animes and you know the game gotta be out in time for that anime. I just dont think that Nintendo had any major hand in this because GameFreak has been on this path for awhile. 

Eh Nintendo may not be encouraging them as far as we know, but they aren't stopping them either by having them delay the game like all their other developers are willing to do. Naturally they stand to gain more profits with Game Freak putting in the bare minimum resources.



Your reasoning doesn't make a lot of sense... I'm 99% positive that not a single person at Game Freak has considered the battery life when designing the graphics. If they did, they probably would have advertised it more than enough. It's a nice benefit, but do you really believe that they would have put in fancy graphics if the Switch had a better battery life? And like Lonely_Dolphin said, if they really wanted to keep presenting Pokémon as a handheld franchise, they would've kept the handheld price.

I don't care much about graphics, but this fits in the general picture of Game Freak / Nintendo not wanting to invest in the games. Aside from the graphics, half of the Pokémon are still missing, there are very few innovations, it's one of the few games that still don't have a Dutch translation... There are plenty games that barely sell 1/10 of what Pokémon does, and that feel a lot more polished in every way.

Game Freak seems to realise that the quality of their games has little to no impact on its sales. They could probably cut their budget in half, and they would still sell 15 million. And that's a shame, because the quality of the franchise will only keep going down this way.



Around the Network
Chrkeller said:
The game isn't perfect but no where as bad as some are making it out. It is a good game and I expect any follow ups will be even better. Clearly GF struggled a bit with the HD transition.

I sort of agree with this sentiment but the more I think back on past Pokemon generations, the more I start to notice patterns. The most apt for Sword and Shield is X and Y, which were the first installments on the 3DS. I distinctly remember the first third to half of the game lacking any reall character or substance, with many of the environments and character models lacking any real sort of style and just feeling generic. Anyone remember the 2D images of trainers in NPC battles?

Sword and Shield exhibits some similar traits, but they more seem to be related to optimisation and techical process instead of design. These sort of issues had been cleared up by the time of Sun and Moon so maybe it's just a case of experience.



You really do not help the idea that Nintendo fans defend their franchises to death, sorry, this game warrants all the flak it gets.



Lonely_Dolphin said:
Shiken said:

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 you our opinion, which in of itself is subjective.

No it isn't, objective value is based on facts and evidence, not feelings. 435 < 800, fact. If you still don't understand this then we'll just have to leave it there.

If this is the argument you want to make, you'd have to address the fact that we've been drastically underpaying for Pokemon games for around the past two decades.  Despite the number of Pokemon going up by more than 500%, the price of the game had only gone up by 33%.  From 2006-2017, Pokemon prices were flat, despite 300 new Pokemon being added.  When you factor in inflation, that actually means the price of Pokemon had gone down considerably during that time period.  Pokemon Red and Blue were actually more expensive than Ultra Sun and Ultra Moon when you adjust for inflation.  If more Pokemon means the game is objectively more valuable, were you lobbying for price increases as they added more?

So, either Gamefreak has been drastically undercharging us, or there is not a direct correlation between number of Pokemon and the objective value of a game.

Last edited by JWeinCom - on 18 November 2019

Random_Matt said:
You really do not help the idea that Nintendo fans defend their franchises to death, sorry, this game warrants all the flak it gets.

Even as a total Nintendo fanboy, I'm starting to get this impression as well. Any major release of Nintendo gets a whole group of defenders by default.


It's pretty remarkable that the response of the Pokémon fanbase is mostly negative, while other Nintendo fans seem to go very far in defending it from the 'haters'.



Lonely_Dolphin said:
Xxain said:

Naaw man. I'm thinking Pokemon Company could be the other problem. They're in charge of marketing, merchandising and the Animes and you know the game gotta be out in time for that anime. I just dont think that Nintendo had any major hand in this because GameFreak has been on this path for awhile. 

Eh Nintendo may not be encouraging them as far as we know, but they aren't stopping them either by having them delay the game like all their other developers are willing to do. Naturally they stand to gain more profits with Game Freak putting in the bare minimum resources.

I'm not sure what's Nintendo's role in all of this. On one hand, the weakening of the pokemon games from GameFreak's grasp could give Nintendo the opportunity to exert more control over the franchise, and thus its incredibly profitable side businesses. On the other hand, the mobile-ization of the series is just what Nintendo needs the absolute least, considering it still is their biggest hardware seller.

The general ownership of the IP is an overall headache, and I assume Game Freak is being pulled between The Pokemon Co. and Nintendo, with added problems of leadership, work overload, team morale and really tight deadlines. Mobile profits being as high as they are is in no way helping Game Freak in getting their shit together, considering the impossible task of keeping up with microtransaction money.



You know it deserves the GOTY.

Come join The 2018 Obscure Game Monthly Review Thread.