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

Shiken said:
Flilix said:

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'.

The response from Pokemon fans on the internet have been largely negative.  However most of the Pokemon fanbase does not really participate in these forums, so there is no telling what the vast majority thinks.  Judging by sales of the game, it cannot be that bad.  And from the outside looking in, I have arguably seen just as many Pokemon fans on the net liking the game as those that hate it.

Full disclosure, I am looking at this from the outside looking in.  I am a gen 1 Pokemon player that stopped after yellow.  This is my first game to return to, and I am having a blast.  Most of the complaints regarding the national dex and the cuts mean NOTHING to me.  With that in mind, what I see is a good game that deserves the 8/10.

I am not defending the game, I almost did not buy it as I have said before (glad I did).  That is not even what this thread is about.  But what I am noticing is that fans who are upset about the success of the games for whatever reason somehow feel the need to hijack any discussion that mentions Pokemon just to complain about it.

Now Fililix, I am not refering to you when I say this as I know you to be level headed.  But when someone says that most of the Pokemon fanbase is upset about the game, they seem to using tunnel vision due to their own disappointment.  From the outside looking in, there are just as many who are fine with it as those that hate it and they are just attacking eachother.

The game has flaws, and I blame no one for not buying it for their own reasons.  But it is also a good game, and if it is still a mega hit for being a good game no one has the right to hate on those who bought it.  The vast majority obviously did not have a problem with it.  People who enjoy the game deserve no less respect than those who gave it a pass.

I don't know if this is true, and it's hard to really tell, since of course 'the Pokémon fanbase' is a very vague and hard to define group of people. It's just an observation that I made when I visited the Pokébeach forums yesterday. The discussion over there is a lot calmer over there than it is here - because no one over there seems to be desperate to defend the game against the others. Most people are critisising the game, and the few people who aren't, are just talking about the game without the phony praising and without attacking people who don't like it. Here on VGChartz on the other hand, there's an overwhelming amount of unnecessary provocative comments ("And the haters can't stand that it is a good game.").



Around the Network

The game looks fine , bright cartoon artstyle and colours that pop. It's not cutting edge but everything looks clean to me so far.



JWeinCom said:
Lonely_Dolphin said:

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.

In my opinion (that is most likely not very popular) it would have been better to bring no Pokes from older generations at all and just focus on more new exciting ones,forever keep that pokedex is an unrealistic standard to always keep and only partly bringing the older gens pokes back will only "upset" people more.

I think Gamefreak needs some time to adapt for the consolemarket but they do deserve a bit of credit as this is their first consolepokegame in a long time,the game as a whole does deserve credit and not some "small" parts of it that are very paste copy .



Shiken said:

You were trying to imply opinion on how much something is worth is objective.  I said it is not, as it is subjective.

Please pay attention.

There you go again, calling facts opinions. You can't tell the difference between "435 is less than 800" vs. "I'm fine with 435."

I do look down on you now for going as far as to deny reality and to ignore my most relevant point to this thread yet again, and then to have the audacity to claim I'm the one not paying attention. Meh whatever, enjoy paying more for less.

User warned - Bristow9091

Last edited by Bristow9091 - on 19 November 2019

Immersiveunreality said:
JWeinCom said:

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.

In my opinion (that is most likely not very popular) it would have been better to bring no Pokes from older generations at all and just focus on more new exciting ones,forever keep that pokedex is an unrealistic standard to always keep and only partly bringing the older gens pokes back will only "upset" people more.

I think Gamefreak needs some time to adapt for the consolemarket but they do deserve a bit of credit as this is their first consolepokegame in a long time,the game as a whole does deserve credit and not some "small" parts of it that are very paste copy .

Eh... I personally would probably not buy that game. I mean, they sort of did that with Black and White (new Pokemon until the post game) and I enjoyed it a lot less as a result.   I don't think they necessarily deserve any credit simply for making a console games, because a lot of developers do that.  All I'm saying is that arguing you should essentially pay per Pokemon is logically inconsistent unless you wrote Gamefreak a check claiming they undercharged you for Sun and Moon.



Around the Network
Lonely_Dolphin said:
Shiken said:

You were trying to imply opinion on how much something is worth is objective.  I said it is not, as it is subjective.

Please pay attention.

There you go again, calling facts opinions. You can't tell the difference between "435 is less than 800" vs. "I'm fine with 435."

I do look down on you now for going as far as to deny reality and to ignore my most relevant point to this thread yet again, and then to have the audacity to claim I'm the one not paying attention. Meh whatever, enjoy paying more for less.

The number of Pokemon 435 vs 800 is subjective to how you see value.  Time spent enjoying the game is more subjective to my value.  For example, 30 hours of Sword will equal about 2 dollars an hour.  That is better value than renting a 2 hour HD movie or going to theaters to watch it.  It is also better than the countless other games out there with about 10-15 hours of content that are often deemed worthy of 60 dollars.

So with that, I reiterate that value is subjective regardless of what your own subjective view on the matter may be.  Believe it or not, the world does not operate based on how you design it to in your head.



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

Animal Crossing NH Dream Address: DA-1078-9916-3261

Flilix said:
Shiken said:

The response from Pokemon fans on the internet have been largely negative.  However most of the Pokemon fanbase does not really participate in these forums, so there is no telling what the vast majority thinks.  Judging by sales of the game, it cannot be that bad.  And from the outside looking in, I have arguably seen just as many Pokemon fans on the net liking the game as those that hate it.

Full disclosure, I am looking at this from the outside looking in.  I am a gen 1 Pokemon player that stopped after yellow.  This is my first game to return to, and I am having a blast.  Most of the complaints regarding the national dex and the cuts mean NOTHING to me.  With that in mind, what I see is a good game that deserves the 8/10.

I am not defending the game, I almost did not buy it as I have said before (glad I did).  That is not even what this thread is about.  But what I am noticing is that fans who are upset about the success of the games for whatever reason somehow feel the need to hijack any discussion that mentions Pokemon just to complain about it.

Now Fililix, I am not refering to you when I say this as I know you to be level headed.  But when someone says that most of the Pokemon fanbase is upset about the game, they seem to using tunnel vision due to their own disappointment.  From the outside looking in, there are just as many who are fine with it as those that hate it and they are just attacking eachother.

The game has flaws, and I blame no one for not buying it for their own reasons.  But it is also a good game, and if it is still a mega hit for being a good game no one has the right to hate on those who bought it.  The vast majority obviously did not have a problem with it.  People who enjoy the game deserve no less respect than those who gave it a pass.

I don't know if this is true, and it's hard to really tell, since of course 'the Pokémon fanbase' is a very vague and hard to define group of people. It's just an observation that I made when I visited the Pokébeach forums yesterday. The discussion over there is a lot calmer over there than it is here - because no one over there seems to be desperate to defend the game against the others. Most people are critisising the game, and the few people who aren't, are just talking about the game without the phony praising and without attacking people who don't like it. Here on VGChartz on the other hand, there's an overwhelming amount of unnecessary provocative comments ("And the haters can't stand that it is a good game.").

Your point of view makes sense.  The issue I have is when people look down on or call people who are enjoying the game "part of the problem" for example.  Just to be clear, if I ever use the word "hater" that is who I am refering to.  Not people who might have genuine problems and are simply voicing their opinion.



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

Animal Crossing NH Dream Address: DA-1078-9916-3261

Shiken said:
Lonely_Dolphin said:

There you go again, calling facts opinions. You can't tell the difference between "435 is less than 800" vs. "I'm fine with 435."

I do look down on you now for going as far as to deny reality and to ignore my most relevant point to this thread yet again, and then to have the audacity to claim I'm the one not paying attention. Meh whatever, enjoy paying more for less.

The number of Pokemon 435 vs 800 is subjective to how you see value.  Time spent enjoying the game is more subjective to my value.  For example, 30 hours of Sword will equal about 2 dollars an hour.  That is better value than renting a 2 hour HD movie or going to theaters to watch it.  It is also better than the countless other games out there with about 10-15 hours of content that are often deemed worthy of 60 dollars.

So with that, I reiterate that value is subjective regardless of what your own subjective view on the matter may be.  Believe it or not, the world does not operate based on how you design it to in your head.

Eh... I agree with you mostly on that, but I'd say converting it into time is probably not the best way to do things.  I put about 30 hours into Skyrim and honestly enjoyed it just barely enough to keep going until I stopped.  I beat Mario Galaxy probably in about 10 hours or so but loved every minute of it.  So quality of the time has to factor in as well.

But the main thing I think we're agreeing on is that the value of a game is based on how much you'll enjoy it, which is not determined by the number of a particular thing in it. Didn't enjoy Mario Odyssey more than Galaxy just because it had more power moons than Galaxy had Power stars.  Didn't enjoy Shadow of the Colossus less than Punch Out!!! just because it had less boss battles.  Didn't enjoy Pokemon Sun more than I enjoyed Pokemon Pearl because it had more Pokemon.  Most people didn't enjoy Brawl more than Melee because it had more characters in it.  It's kind of weird to pick one factor and insist it's the only one related to value.



Wow. This thread feels very similar to all the others with the same one guy and a few others that are less aggressive about their hate for the game and anyone buying it. Give it a rest. Some people buy games because they like them, others do not. I've never spent my days trying to convince people not to buy a game I'm not interested in day after day...... after day. Let it go. If it's not for you, great. If it is, great. Life will go on and there will be more games.



Lonely_Dolphin said:
Shiken said:

You were trying to imply opinion on how much something is worth is objective.  I said it is not, as it is subjective.

Please pay attention.

There you go again, calling facts opinions. You can't tell the difference between "435 is less than 800" vs. "I'm fine with 435."

I do look down on you now for going as far as to deny reality and to ignore my most relevant point to this thread yet again, and then to have the audacity to claim I'm the one not paying attention. Meh whatever, enjoy paying more for less.

Why do you care if he or anyone "pays more for less"? Your opinion is irrelevant to other peoples opinions. You dont spend their money. You dont spend their time. You dont decide their level of enjoyment. Get over it man.its just another game.