Again, this didn't happen because Nintendo couldn't include all the Pokemon, but because they chose not to. It was a deliberate design decision they made, and I don't know why people keep failing to understand that even if they don't agree with it. Easier to attack Gamefreak for being incompetent or lazy, I guess.
-
Welcome to Smogon! Take a moment to read the Introduction to Smogon for a run-down on everything Smogon, and make sure you take some time to read the global rules.
Dexit discussion thread
- Thread starter Codraroll
- Start date
The Pokemon games by themselves have made 17 billion dollars, more than Call of Duty or Assassin's Creed, even for the no. 1 media franchise they matter a lot
I already linked to this but for the lazy here's the chart
Last edited:
Hmm.... this seems suspect now.... coukd we have been smeckledorfed again?
They imported the models and copied the rigging mechanisms. However they still need to re-do the textures and edit the animations to make sure things look smooth. They definitely re-used past animations but there's nothing wrong with that, and transferring the models from the 3ds to the switch is a lot more work than just "copy paste".
The issue is that Gamefreak made a choice to release a game that seems to lack content in favor of meeting it's 3 year release quota. I don't think anyone is realistically calling them lazy, just negatively judging their choices with swsh.
I heard reports that some of the models featured pokemon not in the game, which is why i kind of want to find the source myself.
Also kaphonitcs hasn't said anything??
Also kaphonitcs hasn't said anything??
You're referring of the "35"? that was already revealed in the datamine
No, im refering to the claim the models are copy pastes, which seems odd that our mane miners have t confirmed yet.
EDIT: honestly all the misinformation on both sides has me exhausted...i just wanna play pokemon...
Last edited:
Yeah, this is not a problem. The point about future-proofing models and animations is not that they don't have to be recoded, but that they don't have to be redesigned. That is the big thing. Recoding animations is inevitable if the engine changes, especially when a new console comes out, so they need some kind of conversion tool. What matters with future-proofing is that they don't have to think again about how these animations have to look like and whether they fit with the Pokémon or not - essentially removing work from the artists, not the developers. Say, this way they don't have to think in every single game how Flygon must be animated when KOed.
You can make a point about making some Kanto Pokémon and their Alola forms untransferable, however, given they already had the converted models and animations from Let's Go. And for that... we don't have an answer.
This one's really serious. As... average and incomplete the games may be, outright malice from the streamer is unacceptable.
EDIT: Okay, it might not be malice, but foolishness because he was actually using cheats. Might have used faulty codes then.
Last edited:
I'm out, but I don't consider it a boycott.
The direction they've indicated that they're going in just isn't appealing to me.
I've never cared too much about the gimmicky extraneous things (contests, tickling Pokemon, etc.).
But they're doubling down on that, and cutting Pokemon.
I think they're tightening the demographic focus and are willing to cut older fans now.
I've accepted that so I'm done spending $$ on the games. I'll still follow news though.
The direction they've indicated that they're going in just isn't appealing to me.
I've never cared too much about the gimmicky extraneous things (contests, tickling Pokemon, etc.).
But they're doubling down on that, and cutting Pokemon.
I think they're tightening the demographic focus and are willing to cut older fans now.
I've accepted that so I'm done spending $$ on the games. I'll still follow news though.
One point that hasn’t been discussed is that, if Dexit is going to be the official policy going forward, we are, in essence going to get distinct metas every 2-3 years.
I think that’s something to be cautiously optimistic about. For example, take Staraptor. This Pokémon has seen little use competitively, stuck in BL since it’s debut, as it’s considered too powerful for UU but outclassed by Pokémon like Lando and Kart in OU. And while we can never know for certain, I would wager that with so many Pokémon gaining access to set-up moves, CC, and Brave Bird this gen, Staraptor wouldn’t have fared any better without Dexit.
However, with a restricted Pokédex, there’s a chance that Staraptor and many other mons who were held back by power creep or were just introduced too late in the franchise to carve out a niche ( i.e. Audino always being looked over for Blissey or Clef) finally get a chance to shine.
Yes, there will always be mons that are or become broken and will need to be banned from OU or whatever tier they are in. And yes, a restricted Pokédex offers the ever present danger of a meta becoming ossified quickly. But it also offers us the chance to experiment and team build in new ways without having to always take into consideration inter generational tier staples.
I think that’s something to be cautiously optimistic about. For example, take Staraptor. This Pokémon has seen little use competitively, stuck in BL since it’s debut, as it’s considered too powerful for UU but outclassed by Pokémon like Lando and Kart in OU. And while we can never know for certain, I would wager that with so many Pokémon gaining access to set-up moves, CC, and Brave Bird this gen, Staraptor wouldn’t have fared any better without Dexit.
However, with a restricted Pokédex, there’s a chance that Staraptor and many other mons who were held back by power creep or were just introduced too late in the franchise to carve out a niche ( i.e. Audino always being looked over for Blissey or Clef) finally get a chance to shine.
Yes, there will always be mons that are or become broken and will need to be banned from OU or whatever tier they are in. And yes, a restricted Pokédex offers the ever present danger of a meta becoming ossified quickly. But it also offers us the chance to experiment and team build in new ways without having to always take into consideration inter generational tier staples.
I do think there is a certain irony that this is happening when Pokemon will be more expensive to play than ever before.
Being on a "home console" (*wink*) these new games will be $60 as opposed to the $40 we used to pay for handheld Pokemon titles.
Also, since XBox and Playstation owners have been happy to pay, Nintendo decided to start charging $20/year for their online service.
So now Pokemon players need to have a Nintendo Online subscription to battle and trade with others online when this was free on the 3DS.
Finally, there is Pokemon Home. Even though it's similar to Pokemon Bank, which had a fee, I'll assume there won't be another charge.
Hopefully Nintendo will bundle it with the online subscription but perhaps they'll make Bank available separately for a fee.
Anyway, the costs have definitely gone up a bit.
Whether the value has gone up proportionately is a judgement I'll have to leave to people who play later this month.
Being on a "home console" (*wink*) these new games will be $60 as opposed to the $40 we used to pay for handheld Pokemon titles.
Also, since XBox and Playstation owners have been happy to pay, Nintendo decided to start charging $20/year for their online service.
So now Pokemon players need to have a Nintendo Online subscription to battle and trade with others online when this was free on the 3DS.
Finally, there is Pokemon Home. Even though it's similar to Pokemon Bank, which had a fee, I'll assume there won't be another charge.
Hopefully Nintendo will bundle it with the online subscription but perhaps they'll make Bank available separately for a fee.
Anyway, the costs have definitely gone up a bit.
Whether the value has gone up proportionately is a judgement I'll have to leave to people who play later this month.
I've seen a similar post (longer, far more condescending than this one and more... how can I say it, "disingenuously, apparently in depth"?) in one of the leaks thread (can't remember which one). It even started with "gamers don't know modelling": thanks, great attitude. I'm not starting any post by saying to the counterpart "you don't know how to deeply analyse a balance sheet and business plans", it's condescending and does not help the conversation. Given what kind of backlash is found on some social networks, however, it is somewhat understandable.
Again, the timing of all this interpretations about models being imported, redone, and how it is hard work is suspicious. All of a sudden, after months of whispers and in the release week, we get all this analyses about how working on models is not some cookie cutter copy and paste. My advice is to take everything with a
Lawyer jargon answer: beyond the scope.
Nobody argues that models are hard to make, that importing them to a new game is much more than simply CTRL+C, CTRL+V.
We are simply arguing that the one iteration per year policy is crippling the capability to have an all-encompassing game, and the merit of such a decision.
In the AAA world you're not getting away with excessive bulls*hit, and they've already gotten away with a lot in the past. Guess is that the other fear is that if they can get away with a mediocre game with partial content, they could get away with anything.
The first person completely misunderstood what people are angry about.
People aren't mad because GF reused models. They did that with gen 7, GO, masters, etc, and nobody cared, besides the people whose favourite pokemon have "hovering in place" animations.
They're mad because GF said "the reason for the dex cut is because of all the work we had to do to the models and animations" when it's been shown there have been very few changes to those models and animations. So GF lied about why the dex was cut.
Putting various pieces together, I'm pretty sure the real reason was "we didn't have enough time to redo all the textures for everything, test out every single pokemon ingame, then plan and balance 900 pokemon because we had to get the game out before christmas", but they can't say that because it makes their managers and investors look bad.
I honestly can't believe people still think that thos models were made from scratch. Why would they end up looking almost the same if they were remade? Worst of all, are the people that play victim for no reason like the owner of the Serebii webside Joe Merrick. Well, at least experts on the field can tell us how it is.
The streamer incorrectly tried to apply an "all my moves OHKO" cheat code (alongside "give me 999 Master Balls") to get through the game faster, which screwed with the battle system. (At least three things happened: one of the streamer's own team members took 100% damage from burn in 1 turn, the game softlocked after both sides fainted in the same turn, and the streamer's starter took chip damage from Quick Attack and fainted at green HP.)
People then took clips of the stream and spread them as "lol game is super buggy".
NintendoSoup then published an article twisting it into "at least one streamer is purposely hacking the game in order to make it look worse". The article was later deleted.
Has it been confirmed from a reliable source that the models are the same from SM, with just some small changes?
I mean yes maybe and also very much no. To take the example of Audino and Blissey. They're both out for SnS. Which means we'd reasonably expect them both to appear in whatever game comes next. But if Audino is inferior in the niche Blissey/Chansey fills, then why include Audino?
This is what I legitimately hate about the reason given for Dexit being balance.
To balance the game you look at the available pokemon. You slay the sacred cow that is BST distribution and the type chart. You tweak movepools.
You take a mon like Floatzel and you look at what their intended role on a team is. Fast physical water type that can also have boosted speed in Rain. We have Barraskewda in SnS so it's "ok" to cut Floatzel (it's not but w/ever). You check and make sure that they have a similar BST spread that also allows them to do their job so they're somewhat interchangeable.
You look at the theme of pokemon. Ice types have many that want to be slow bulky tanks like Avalugg or Walrein. What's stopping them doing their job? Well you gather data from all the online battles and you see that their main weakness was being knocked out by fighting types or fighting type moves. Do you want to address that? Or are you happy to keep that weakness but bolster them in other places by giving them more resistances and/or removing another weakness or 2 from the type chart.
And movepools. Do the movepools allow a pokemon to do the job it's stats suggest? Can a pokemons stats support the movepool you're giving it (looking at the new fossils signature moves for example)?
So ultimately the balance explanation leaves a bad taste in my mouth because they haven't balanced enough to warrant Dexit, or the type of Dexit they've chosen to undertake. They've just shuffled some moves around while leaving the core BST and type chart untouched when arguably these would have a more immediate and noticeable impact on balance.
Had it lacked the "theonion" part in the domain it would have been a glorious clickbait.
I think the context explains why many people have been taking the Pokemon situation quite hard.
Really, Nintendo has been knocking out the park on the Switch when it comes to most franchises.
Splatoon, a new franchise, got a full-fledged sequel early in the life cycle of the Switch.
Zelda got a game with a far more expansive and interactive world than any previous title.
Smash brought back every single character that every appeared in the previous games and has had constant DLC updates.
Metroid had a new Prime game announced; the first one in almost a decade and a half.
Fire Emblem, in it's first home console outing since the Wii, got a game much larger in scope than the DS titles.
All of the above plus the fact that Pokemon would be on Nintendo's main console for the first time had people hyped for the new gen.
When Let's Go was revealed, to some disappointment, fans were assured that the upcoming mainline games would satisfy veteran fans.
Yet after all the anticipation, it turns out the the games are, in some ways, more scaled down and less ambitious than the 3DS games.
I don't think it's just Dexit. It's Dexit at this time. It's Dexit handled in a very poor way PR-wise with some evasion and lack of clarity.
I don't have a polarized view of the situation, where you're either "entitled" or a "shill".
I get why many people are let down and I also get why many people are still looking forward to playing.
After all, it *is* more Pokemon even if it's less than many would have hoped for from the Switch generation.
Really, Nintendo has been knocking out the park on the Switch when it comes to most franchises.
Splatoon, a new franchise, got a full-fledged sequel early in the life cycle of the Switch.
Zelda got a game with a far more expansive and interactive world than any previous title.
Smash brought back every single character that every appeared in the previous games and has had constant DLC updates.
Metroid had a new Prime game announced; the first one in almost a decade and a half.
Fire Emblem, in it's first home console outing since the Wii, got a game much larger in scope than the DS titles.
All of the above plus the fact that Pokemon would be on Nintendo's main console for the first time had people hyped for the new gen.
When Let's Go was revealed, to some disappointment, fans were assured that the upcoming mainline games would satisfy veteran fans.
Yet after all the anticipation, it turns out the the games are, in some ways, more scaled down and less ambitious than the 3DS games.
I don't think it's just Dexit. It's Dexit at this time. It's Dexit handled in a very poor way PR-wise with some evasion and lack of clarity.
I don't have a polarized view of the situation, where you're either "entitled" or a "shill".
I get why many people are let down and I also get why many people are still looking forward to playing.
After all, it *is* more Pokemon even if it's less than many would have hoped for from the Switch generation.
I second the above.
The situation is fluid: there are a lot of people waiting on the edge of the pool, anxious to dive back in the moment the water gets a little bit cleaner, myself included.
I've read and watched at least a dozen reviews and the most complete ones mention some strong suit all the while not backing off from pointing out some glaring issues. Issues are under the microscope more than ever due to the combination of very poor (if not deceitful) communication, new conditions, and a general lack of ambition, and I think some of the reviews got the "hold to higher standards" point.
However, there is a problem with Day 1 reviews, even taking the non-objectivity of some away. Pokemon is a game you're supposed to enjoy for a good chunk of time and where player interaction plays a not fundamental but worth noting role. Most reviewers usually rush through the game with an incomplete experience to get their reviews out (it's competition pressure, understandable), which undermines "enjoy the ride", and they had no player interaction activity.
It's been a roller coaster, especially in the last couple of weeks, but we're finally here. Agreement, disagreements, I enjoyed the discussion much more than my long ass posts may show.
I trust the good judgment of people in here (game savants in one way or the other) and their honest critical thinking much more than any review or internet random player. I hope we can get some as spoiler free as much impressions in the next few days/weeks about how the final games look and feel, how much Dexit is felt (in regards to the game lifetime, too), and if they're truly an ambitious new step hampered by the timeline or, to the contrary, the start of an unfortunate decline toward the industry's most questionable practices.
I have an open mind and I think a lot of other people too. To anybody getting the games: have fun and let us know (if you will)!
The situation is fluid: there are a lot of people waiting on the edge of the pool, anxious to dive back in the moment the water gets a little bit cleaner, myself included.
I've read and watched at least a dozen reviews and the most complete ones mention some strong suit all the while not backing off from pointing out some glaring issues. Issues are under the microscope more than ever due to the combination of very poor (if not deceitful) communication, new conditions, and a general lack of ambition, and I think some of the reviews got the "hold to higher standards" point.
However, there is a problem with Day 1 reviews, even taking the non-objectivity of some away. Pokemon is a game you're supposed to enjoy for a good chunk of time and where player interaction plays a not fundamental but worth noting role. Most reviewers usually rush through the game with an incomplete experience to get their reviews out (it's competition pressure, understandable), which undermines "enjoy the ride", and they had no player interaction activity.
It's been a roller coaster, especially in the last couple of weeks, but we're finally here. Agreement, disagreements, I enjoyed the discussion much more than my long ass posts may show.
I trust the good judgment of people in here (game savants in one way or the other) and their honest critical thinking much more than any review or internet random player. I hope we can get some as spoiler free as much impressions in the next few days/weeks about how the final games look and feel, how much Dexit is felt (in regards to the game lifetime, too), and if they're truly an ambitious new step hampered by the timeline or, to the contrary, the start of an unfortunate decline toward the industry's most questionable practices.
I have an open mind and I think a lot of other people too. To anybody getting the games: have fun and let us know (if you will)!
I can confirm that this is a very good video, and I'd like to add that the bleeding differences in the textures most likely implies that the texture was reprocessed AUTOMATICALY by a program at some point by using a different export option (it's precisely at this point that you chose how you want your textures to bleed out of the UVs). Probably a texturing program in which they had a high resolution (or even procedural that can be upres with minimal quality loss) sourcefile that could be converted to low resolution for 3DS or higer resolution for SWSH.
to add a bit of context I would estimate the work value of the pikachu mouth to roughly a full day for 1 intermediate worker (including the resulting tweaks to the UVs, rigging, skinning and animations)
while everything that is just "move vertices around" is litterally what it looks like. "select the vertex/vertices and drag them with a mouse. it doesn't affect anything else in the model (you don't have to tweak uvs, skinning and whatnot because of it).
This reminds me of a similar experience of fan meltdown, although in this case it actually did (I'd argue unjustly) doom the game; Marvel vs Capcom Infinite.
During the development of the game, many people were awaiting the triumphant return of series favorite characters Wolverine, Magneto, Storm, and more. Things were very unclear at the time, because those characters were no longer owned by Marvel; Known as the X-Men, they were still a property of FOX, and would have to get their rights bought out for use in the game. The Devs likely knew early in development that the X-Men weren't able to be licensed, so they developed characters that played similar to the way their original counterparts did. A 'function' of the character if you will, with similar mechanics but different graphics, visuals, and context.
In an interview with the developers, to try to save face at requests for Magneto, they said that the 'function' was what was important, not the character; basically that Magneto is worthless, but their function isn't. This was met with tons of outrage.
Overall, that could argue for or against your point. On the one hand, Floatzel has a value as a function and as a character, each independent of each other. Replacing Floatzel with Barraskewda feels bad, because even thought the function is there the character isn't. But Barraskewda also has value. It's different to Floatzel in design in it's own ways, being a bit sillier looking, and there will certainly be people who end up preferring the newer take on a similar function. I feel like putting the effort into re-tweaking the function of creatures can only go so far when you also need to create entirely new characters and functions as often as Pokemon does. Besides, Floatzel isn't a character that would alone cause an outrage if removed. Besides all the Kanto staples and Lucario, I don't think any single character holds that much sway.
I would argue to not mess with the type chart (it’s already only held together with scotch tape and giving ice more resistance nerfs those other types offensively, even tho they don’t need it), and I would also say the movepool buffs were pretty good for a lot of Pokémon. Stuff like Avalugg got a pretty significant buff by virtue of Body Press and Heavy Duty Boots. Also, can we talk about Heavy Duty boots? This item alone is one of the best balance changes for bad types I’ve seen so far in recent memory, making pokemon like Vespiquen better (not good, but probably low-tier usable) as a fighting check and bulky pivot, because bug/flying really isn’t that bad once you can ignore the Stealth Rocks weakness.
I can’t remember too many more examples off the top of my head but I discussed all of the movepool changes with some people yesterday and a lot of them were surprisingly nice (Delibird has a phenomenal suicide lead movepool now and will be PU viable probably). No (sans Aegi) BST changes are a bummer but I wouldn’t say they’re any better or worse than movepool buffs outside of extreme cases like Masquerin.
Last little bit, I think the Fossils signature moves work with them, they have the weather-speed abilities and they seem to exist to bring type diversity to those weather cores (at least for the Dracos-).
I don’t think dexit itself did too much directly for balance in the “outclassed stuff is better now”, although I’m sure plenty appreciate the power-creep reversal for OU
I’m popping in as a Dexit supporter. Like, a full dexit supporter, I agree with the decision.
I think the big thing for me is that finishing the pokedex feels way more feasible now, but the regional dex is, at the same time, really diverse. Going through the wild area alone I already feel like I’ve seen all sorts of species, way more than what would be on the typical island in SM.
Also there’s of course the competitive metagame shifting, which I think is a welcome change. A lot of the teams I’ve been seeing lately in ou have the same couple Pokémon so a complete revamp is nice
I’m also wondering if there’s a chance that we’ll be able to trade forward Pokémon from SwSh to future switch games, but not trade backward. They may very well have a national dex in a couple gens, by adding more Pokémon each game and reusing models from the last ones. This may have been disproven but I’m not sure
Most importantly I’m hoping that Haxorus becomes competitively viable
Aight im out
I think the big thing for me is that finishing the pokedex feels way more feasible now, but the regional dex is, at the same time, really diverse. Going through the wild area alone I already feel like I’ve seen all sorts of species, way more than what would be on the typical island in SM.
Also there’s of course the competitive metagame shifting, which I think is a welcome change. A lot of the teams I’ve been seeing lately in ou have the same couple Pokémon so a complete revamp is nice
I’m also wondering if there’s a chance that we’ll be able to trade forward Pokémon from SwSh to future switch games, but not trade backward. They may very well have a national dex in a couple gens, by adding more Pokémon each game and reusing models from the last ones. This may have been disproven but I’m not sure
Most importantly I’m hoping that Haxorus becomes competitively viable
Aight im out