SPOILERS! Pokemon Sword & Shield Pre-Release SPOILERS - Check Post 2!

[Cresselia92]

I don't think this is a very fair comparison -- while the DS games did improve with each new game, I disagree that the same thing happened on the 3DS. Pretty much every game there felt like "it's okay but could be a lot better", and USUM was a huge letdown compared to B2W2.

USUM is basically the Yellow of SM (aka, same stuff with a bit of extra paint), which is why I have excluded them for the comparisons between “first Pokémon game” and “next Pokémon game”. B2W2 is another beast, as they are sequels of BW rather than their “polished” versions, so they don’t really count. Only thing they “fixed” was putting old gen Pokémon, I’d say.

I also disagree with gen 7 pushing the 3DS to its limits. Look at something like the monster hunter games (4U or generations) for that.

I mean, the Pokémon models of SM were so advanced for the 3DS that they ended up lagging it as a result. At least, this is the talk that I keep hearing about them, which also brought the whole “reused models” debate. Why throw away all that work if it works good enough?

Besides, this whole convo was by looking at the Pokémon games themselves, not at “Pokémon vs other franchises”. If we did that, I could go hours and hours about how MOTHER 3 utterly demolishes RSE, for example.

 

[trubbish]

Because you said, and I quote, that there's every single character in Smash Ultimate, while this isn't going to be the case in the future and complain about Pokémon don't get new models while they do.
Also, my question at this point would be, how do you want to improve the model of a Pikachu, to use your example?
What would you change on existing Pokémon models? Because I can't think of a way to improve them that much.

"while this isn't going to be the case in the future and complain about Pokémon don't get new models while they do."
I don't know what this sentence is meant to mean, so let me just reiterate my argument. Smash Ultimate has 70+ characters, each with hundreds of animations, very high-res models, voice lines, etc. In addition they brought back NEARLY every stage with updated graphics. In this case, it is forgivable that they re-use some models, because we are getting so much more on top of them. So the model-reusing is justified.

This is NOT the case for Pokemon. Yes, they are re-using the assets, in a similar case to Smash. BUT, unlike Smash Ultimate, SW/SH has also cut a ton of the content. I understand there are more to the games than just the Pokemon models- but even then it looks... really bad, imo. Do I need to bust out the screenshot of that tree? Or the Wailord? or the Double Kick animations? Do you now understand why them re-using some models may be offensive to some people?

I UNDERSTAND that the next Smash game WILL NOT have every character or as many characters as Ult as. In this case, I, and I am sure many other, would EXPECT that the content WE DO GET, will be updated to the generation's standards.

And there are MANY ways they can improve the models. Better textures and animations would be a start. Have you seen a game with good graphics before?

Also, I apologize if I sound overly vitriolic. It is not my intention.

 

[Kami42]

"while this isn't going to be the case in the future and complain about Pokémon don't get new models while they do."
I don't know what this sentence is meant to mean, so let me just reiterate my argument. Smash Ultimate has 70+ characters, each with hundreds of animations, very high-res models, voice lines, etc. In addition they brought back NEARLY every stage with updated graphics. In this case, it is forgivable that they re-use some models, because we are getting so much more on top of them. So the model-reusing is justified.

This is NOT the case for Pokemon. Yes, they are re-using the assets, in a similar case to Smash. BUT, unlike Smash Ultimate, SW/SH has also cut a ton of the content. I understand there are more to the games than just the Pokemon models- but even then it looks... really bad, imo. Do I need to bust out the screenshot of that tree? Or the Wailord? or the Double Kick animations? Do you now understand why them re-using some models may be offensive to some people?

I UNDERSTAND that the next Smash game WILL NOT have every character or as many characters as Ult as. In this case, I, and I am sure many other, would EXPECT that the content WE DO GET, will be updated to the generation's standards.

And there are MANY ways they can improve the models. Better textures and animations would be a start. Have you seen a game with good graphics before?

Also, I apologize if I sound overly vitriolic. It is not my intention.

I'm gonna do this line by line.

First of; yes, Smash gave us back everything we had in the past.
But to make an end to the discussion you still forget one of my arguments:
Smash doesn't drop every year. Smash drops once on one consol and that's it.

And yes, you said it right, in your opinion.
I, and this is my opinion, can't see that much problems in all three things you pointed out to be outraged.
I see why people are furious, I understood that from the very beginning. And to be honest, I don't care.
I never expected much from the first game on a new consol.

"The content we will get" ... okay, so, lemme ask a question again:
Do the characters look bad for you? The custom trainers? All Pokémon together? All attacks together? The cutscenes?
For the expectations I had, the games look fine. But to be fair, graphic is one point about a game for me.
The overall gameplay, atmosphere and options are more important, for me, again.

Let me think about a game with good graphics ... FFXV? Breath of the Wild? Two games I played, I respected, but acutally didn't liked that much.
I liked Smash, the game looks fine ... but you still can not compare a Pokémon game to a Smash game for obvious reasons.
Give me an example, please, what do you think is a game with good graphics?

First of, you can stop with the capslock, that would help a bit.
I may need glasses, but I can read fine. ^^"

 

[trubbish]

I'm gonna do this line by line.

First of; yes, Smash gave us back everything we had in the past.
But to make an end to the discussion you still forget one of my arguments:
Smash doesn't drop every year. Smash drops once on one consol and that's it.

And yes, you said it right, in your opinion.
I, and this is my opinion, can't see that much problems in all three things you pointed out to be outraged.
I see why people are furious, I understood that from the very beginning. And to be honest, I don't care.
I never expected much from the first game on a new consol.

"The content we will get" ... okay, so, lemme ask a question again:
Do the characters look bad for you? The custom trainers? All Pokémon together? All attacks together? The cutscenes?
For the expectations I had, the games look fine. But to be fair, graphic is one point about a game for me.
The overall gameplay, atmosphere and options are more important, for me, again.

Let me think about a game with good graphics ... FFXV? Breath of the Wild? Two games I played, I respected, but acutally didn't liked that much.
I liked Smash, the game looks fine ... but you still can not compare a Pokémon game to a Smash game for obvious reasons.
Give me an example, please, what do you think is a game with good graphics?

First of, you can stop with the capslock, that would help a bit.
I may need glasses, but I can read fine. ^^"

"Smash doesn't drop every year. Smash drops once on one consol and that's it."
Why can't we hold Pokemon to this standard, too? I'm not asking for yearly releases. I would much prefer if GF spent more time on each one, and the development cycles of Pokemon has been something long lambasted by fans.

"I see why people are furious, I understood that from the very beginning. And to be honest, I don't care."
This is exactly the attitude I'm bemoaning. Why settle for a low-quality product when we've seen what other developers can do with series that are billions of dollars less valuable than Pokemon.

"Do the characters look bad for you? The custom trainers? All Pokémon together? All attacks together? The cutscenes?"
Yes.

"For the expectations I had, the games look fine. But to be fair, graphic is one point about a game for me.
The overall gameplay, atmosphere and options are more important, for me, again"
So what you're saying is "I expected the game to be shitty so its OK for it to be shitty?"
Can you show to me some areas in the game that have good atmosphere? Examples of the good gameplay you are referring to? The game has not come out yet. I am not lambasting the game for its gameplay because I have not experienced it for myself. Can you show me why you think the gameplay has been improved? Are a few QOL changes enough to satisfy your desire for a next-gen pokemon game? QOL updates that, might I add, should have been standard 2 gens ago?

"Let me think about a game with good graphics ... FFXV? Breath of the Wild? Two games I played, I respected, but acutally didn't liked that much.
I liked Smash, the game looks fine ... but you still can not compare a Pokémon game to a Smash game for obvious reasons.
Give me an example, please, what do you think is a game with good graphics?"
Yes. FFXV, BoTW, Mario Odyssey, DQ11. These games may not may not have the highest fidelity graphics or the most polygons, but they atleast look pleasent and are up to the industry's standard for a game in 2019.

"but you still can not compare a Pokémon game to a Smash game for obvious reasons."
I am not comparing the game's themselves, but their approach to development. Both game faced similar issues, and the developers solved those issues in different ways. Game development is about opportunity cost- giving up one thing to get another. Smash Ultimate gave up having updated models and animations for most of its old cast in order to make room for every character in the franchise + hugely requested fan-favorites. See, the fall out of doing an unpopular thing was minimized because they made up for it in other ways. SW/SH, on the other hand, gave up having the entire National Dex in order to make room for..... better graphics? Not really. A large roster of new Pokemon? No, we still only got as much as X/Y and S/M added. Some QOL changes?? Wow. Was it worth it? No.

 

[Worldie]

Why can't we hold Pokemon to this standard, too? I'm not asking for yearly releases. I would much prefer if GF spent more time on each one, and the development cycles of Pokemon has been something long lambasted by fans.

To answer this: you can't.

GameFreaks isn't the one making the schedule, TPCI is.

It was brought up several times: the games have to match the releases of anime and TGC. They can't afford delays.

 

[blasphemy1]

Breath of the Wild isn’t a good looking game. Skyrim isn’t a good looking game. Witcher 3 would be an even better looking game if they took the same ‘linear but large level’ approach that W2 did. But guess what? All of those games are better for expanding the game design despite not focusing solely on graphics. These graphics, considering the sheer variety of creatures, are more than acceptable to me. These games (even considering Dexit) have WAY more models than Monster Hunter World or Persona 5. Both of those games run on superior hardware.

If you really want a Pokémon game that maintains the status quo (design wise) but with improved graphics then I’m happy you’re disappointed.

 

[trubbish]

To answer this: you can't.

GameFreaks isn't the one making the schedule, TPCI is.

It was brought up several times: the games have to match the releases of anime and TGC. They can't afford delays.

People say this and yet I have not seen definite proof of it. And even if is what they do.... why? There is no rule that states they have to do this? Restructure the whole thing. Change it. Make it better.
Most people thought the new anime was going to reboot the series and were completely fine with that. It was characters that are not in SW/SH and features Pokemon not in SW/SH and locations from throughout the series. They can do it without support from the games. It isn't 1995 anymore.

Its the same case for the TCG, too. Most new expansions exist beyond the scope of the games.

 

[Worldie]

People say this and yet I have not seen definite proof of it. And even if is what they do.... why? There is no rule that states they have to do this? Restructure the whole thing. Change it. Make it better.
Most people thought the new anime was going to reboot the series and were completely fine with that. It was characters that are not in SW/SH and features Pokemon not in SW/SH and locations from throughout the series. They can do it without support from the games. It isn't 1995 anymore.

Its the same case for the TCG, too. Most new expansions exist beyond the scope of the games.

I am afraid you must be pretty clueless on how merchandise and business works on this large scale.

You can't (as company) go tell your mother company that you are not going to meet the schedule.
You can't. Unless you fancy lawsuits.

Plus, both anime and TGC as well as any merchandise (and the games themselves) is developed/created in months if not years. You (again) can't expect whoever makes the anime to make up on the fly 6 months of anime somewhere else to give GameFreaks time to develop the game.

 

[Chanderule]

This makes no sense, the remakes and third versions have little to no impact on the side merch - they could stop making these and focus on the gen games instead

 

[Crimson Chris]

By the way, can I see confirmed evidence by the dataminers that the models are the same? Also this may be an interesting read.

 

[Crimson Chris]

How do Iink sites here w/o the entire page clogging up the thread?

 

[trubbish]

Breath of the Wild isn’t a good looking game. Skyrim isn’t a good looking game. Witcher 3 would be an even better looking game if they took the same ‘linear but large level’ approach that W2 did. But guess what? All of those games are better for expanding the game design despite not focusing solely on graphics. These graphics, considering the sheer variety of creatures, are more than acceptable to me. These games (even considering Dexit) have WAY more models than Monster Hunter World or Persona 5. Both of those games run on superior hardware.

If you really want a Pokémon game that maintains the status quo (design wise) but with improved graphics then I’m happy you’re disappointed.

Sorry for double posting.
Breath of the Wild is a good looking game. But it doesn't matter because that point is subjective.
Skyrim was released in 2011 and looks better than SW/SH.
Witcher 3 looks great.
I don't see your point here.
I'm not looking for AAA level graphics here.

"But guess what? All of those games are better for expanding the game design despite not focusing solely on graphics."
But SW/SH is not expanding the game design, outside of superficial QOL changes. Atleast, not from what we've seen from trailers and leaks. Still a barebone postgame. Its still a status quo Pokemon game. And I do not want that. Which is why I support a dexcut if it means making the gameplay better.

I am afraid you must be pretty clueless on how merchandise and business works on this large scale.

You can't (as company) go tell your mother company that you are not going to meet the schedule.
You can't. Unless you fancy lawsuits.

Plus, both anime and TGC as well as any merchandise (and the games themselves) is developed/created in months if not years. You (again) can't expect whoever makes the anime to make up on the fly 6 months of anime somewhere else to give GameFreaks time to develop the game.

These schedules are set years in advanced, they can easily give Game Freak more time, especially if they cut out the dumb third versions or spin-offs and just focus on making the game good on the first time around.

The S/M anime aired in November 2016 and concluded November 2019. In between that time we had TWO main-line games, US/UM and LG:PE. There is no reason they needed to focus on those titles and take resources away from SW/SH.

 

[Worldie]

This makes no sense, the remakes and third versions have little to no impact on the side merch - they could stop making these and focus on the gen games instead

Tell that to BW2 and UltraSM....

How do Iink sites here w/o the entire page clogging up the thread?

If you're trying to link from fb/twitter/redirects in general, note that the actual address is only at the start of the link.

These schedules are set years in advanced, they can easily give Game Freak more time, especially if they cut out the dumb third versions or spin-offs and just focus on making the game good on the first time around.

Even if they could, any decision taken now wouldn't be in effect for at least 2 or 3 years. Which'd be far too late for any result.

 

[Crimson Chris]

I am trying to link an Ask a Game Dev article.

 

[trubbish]

Tell that to BW2 and UltraSM....

Ultra SM was lambasted for being an inferior and disappointing version of S/M. B/W2 may be the exception, but that was a whole sequel, not just a remake. And was clearly the exception and not the rule.

Even if they could, any decision taken now wouldn't be in effect for at least 2 or 3 years. Which'd be far too late for any result.

Which is why I want people to take what we're seeing on SW/SH seriously and not grow complacent with this franchise. Thats how we got here and it will only get worse.

 

[Yung Dramps]

I am trying to link an Ask a Game Dev article.

just put in the url in your post directly

 

[Kami42]

This is exactly the attitude I'm bemoaning. Why settle for a low-quality product when we've seen what other developers can do with series that are billions of dollars less valuable than Pokemon.

Yes.

So what you're saying is "I expected the game to be shitty so its OK for it to be shitty?"
Can you show to me some areas in the game that have good atmosphere? Examples of the good gameplay you are referring to? The game has not come out yet. I am not lambasting the game for its gameplay because I have not experienced it for myself. Can you show me why you think the gameplay has been improved? Are a few QOL changes enough to satisfy your desire for a next-gen pokemon game? QOL updates that, might I add, should have been standard 2 gens ago?

Yes. FFXV, BoTW, Mario Odyssey, DQ11. These games may not may not have the highest fidelity graphics or the most polygons, but they atleast look pleasent and are up to the industry's standard for a game in 2019.

I am not comparing the game's themselves, but their approach to development. Both game faced similar issues, and the developers solved those issues in different ways. Game development is about opportunity cost- giving up one thing to get another. Smash Ultimate gave up having updated models and animations for most of its old cast in order to make room for every character in the franchise + hugely requested fan-favorites. See, the fall out of doing an unpopular thing was minimized because they made up for it in other ways. SW/SH, on the other hand, gave up having the entire National Dex in order to make room for..... better graphics? Not really. A large roster of new Pokemon? No, we still only got as much as X/Y and S/M added. Some QOL changes?? Wow. Was it worth it? No.

There is an interesting video on youtube from Lockstin&Gnoggin (sorry for mispronounciation) about this exactly topic.
And to be honest, my attitude is pretty realistic, in my opinion.
Why I still settle on it? Simple, because I like Pokémon.
I don't like SM, nor USUM, nor ORAS, to give some examples. But I see no reason to be furious right now.

And if the characters look bad for you, okay.
Then there is nothing to discuss, because our tastes differ too much to argue about.

I just have to watch a trailer, gameplay (or even take a look at the stream). And I think the gameplay has improved in terms of catching, training, nature changing and dynamaxing (a feature I hate at the beginning, but it has grown to me). Also, I like the idea of cooking curry (my personal favorite food), raids and so on.
Still, I don't expect the games to be shitty (I wouldn't buy them then). But they don't seem to be shitty for me. I'm just ... don't really have any expectations, aside from a new Pokémon on a new console.
You're still treating QoL is everything. What I love most about Pokémon is competetive play, which seems finally be easy to get in this gen, custom trainers and ... well, cool looking new Mons with a new mechanic. Am I easy to please?
Maybe.
But that's what I want from a new Pokémon. Even more, things that can surprise me. And I think this game will.

Sorry, I really don't like Mario, never did, nor can I say it looks good or not. For me, it looked ... okay-ish, I would say.
But again; I'm not gonna buy ShSw because it has the best possible graphic, which it doesn't, obviously. Still, the games do not look bad enough to make me not buying it.

I'm not gonna say much to your last part, because you still don't seem to get the point, why you can't compare the games.
Just let me say, we're getting more mons then in XY and SM and the graphics did improve compared to the last gen.

 

[Crimson Chris]

I do that, but then the post appears in full. Here.

https://askagamedev.tumblr.com%2Fpost%2F186632316431

 

[Crimson Chris]

I mean, this becomes a point in which one can enjoy SwSh and support the games, but also criticize the decisions made. Not everyone has the same views as you in which you should keep in mind. People do what they want with their money. You can't change that.

 

[Kami42]

trubbish Also, just to put an end here now, because I've things to do.
It's okay, if you don't like sword and shield.
You have some good points (while your argumentation is pretty ... meh), but let me ask you one final question:
Are you going to buy the games?

 

[trubbish]

There is an interesting video on youtube from Lockstin&Gnoggin (sorry for mispronounciation) about this exactly topic.
And to be honest, my attitude is pretty realistic, in my opinion.
Why I still settle on it? Simple, because I like Pokémon.
I don't like SM, nor USUM, nor ORAS, to give some examples. But I see no reason to be furious right now.

And if the characters look bad for you, okay.
Then there is nothing to discuss, because our tastes differ too much to argue about.

I just have to watch a trailer, gameplay (or even take a look at the stream). And I think the gameplay has improved in terms of catching, training, nature changing and dynamaxing (a feature I hate at the beginning, but it has grown to me). Also, I like the idea of cooking curry (my personal favorite food), raids and so on.
Still, I don't expect the games to be shitty (I wouldn't buy them then). But they don't seem to be shitty for me. I'm just ... don't really have any expectations, aside from a new Pokémon on a new console.
You're still treating QoL is everything. What I love most about Pokémon is competetive play, which seems finally be easy to get in this gen, custom trainers and ... well, cool looking new Mons with a new mechanic. Am I easy to please?
Maybe.
But that's what I want from a new Pokémon. Even more, things that can surprise me. And I think this game will.

Sorry, I really don't like Mario, never did, nor can I say it looks good or not. For me, it looked ... okay-ish, I would say.
But again; I'm not gonna buy ShSw because it has the best possible graphic, which it doesn't, obviously. Still, the games do not look bad enough to make me not buying it.

I'm not gonna say much to your last part, because you still don't seem to get the point, why you can't compare the games.
Just let me say, we're getting more mons then in XY and SM and the graphics did improve compared to the last gen.

Well, you are free to be excited about the game. That is your own prerogative. I'm not going to bother arguing because it is clear we just have completely different perspectives on what we want from this franchise.

I mean, this becomes a point in which one can enjoy SwSh and support the games, but also criticize the decisions made. Not everyone has the same views as you in which you should keep in mind. People do what they want with their money. You can't change that.

I'm not saying you can't enjoy the game. I am actually personally excited for the competitive aspects of the game. But I do think that complacently with the series has lead us to the point we are. That is what I see and have seen for the past 15 - 20 years. You are free to enjoy the game at your leisure and I am free to explain my points with hope that it makes you see with a different perspective.

trubbish Also, just to put an end here now, because I've things to do.
It's okay, if you don't like sword and shield.
You have some good points (while your argumentation is pretty ... meh), but let me ask you one final question:
Are you going to buy the games?

I'm going to ignore your comment about my "argumentation," because its only a baseless attempt to undermine my argument without actually addressing anything.

As for your question. Yes, I am going to buy the game. Maybe not on release day, depends. I might end up buying it used. I know next you will say "you can't criticize Game Freak while supporting them." But I disagree. We live in a society that is very connected- where one person can be heard by tens of thousands. Twitter, Youtube- these things have huge audiences. And what people are saying also matters. I think the negative impact of bad reviews/word of mouth goes much further than the positive impact of *one* sale.

 

[Worldie]

As for your question. Yes, I am going to buy the game. Maybe not on release day, depends. I might end up buying it used. I know next you will say "you can't criticize Game Freak while supporting them." But I disagree. We live in a society that is very connected- where one person can be heard by tens of thousands. Twitter, Youtube- these things have huge audiences. And what people are saying also matters. I think the negative impact of bad reviews/word of mouth goes much further than the positive impact of *one* sale.

And that is all fine, but I am afraid that the answer to GF's problems isnt "ask for slower schedule" because that's not realistic.

They should invest more in quality (and actually playing their games before releasing them sometimes...) and stop relying on the brand to sell, that's sure.

 

[blasphemy1]

Sorry for double posting.
Breath of the Wild is a good looking game. But it doesn't matter because that point is subjective.
Skyrim was released in 2011 and looks better than SW/SH.
Witcher 3 looks great.
I don't see your point here.
I'm not looking for AAA level graphics here.

"But guess what? All of those games are better for expanding the game design despite not focusing solely on graphics."
But SW/SH is not expanding the game design, outside of superficial QOL changes. Atleast, not from what we've seen from trailers and leaks. Still a barebone postgame. Its still a status quo Pokemon game. And I do not want that. Which is why I support a dexcut if it means making the gameplay better.

Raiding with friends / other humans is a fundamental change to how we play Pokémon. Same with the wild area. This is a possible stepping stone to the game most of my friends and I have been wanting for years.

 

[trubbish]

And that is all fine, but I am afraid that the answer to GF's problems isnt "ask for slower schedule" because that's not realistic.

They should invest more in quality (and actually playing their games before releasing them sometimes...) and stop relying on the brand to sell, that's sure.

What exactly does 'invest more in quality' mean, really? I don't see how asking for a slower schedule is unrealistic. There are ways to restructure a company and its priorities to focus on quality. There are people who make their own careers out of it. GF's problems stem from the tippy top of Pokemon's adminstration, sure- which only means that, if we want to see change, we need to start demanding it. With our wallets, with our reviews, etc. See: The Sonic movie. It can work, we just need to not be complacent with the bare minimum of what we want from the series.
And no, that does not mean making death threats to the developers.

Raiding with friends / other humans is a fundamental change to how we play Pokémon. Same with the wild area. This is a possible stepping stone to the game most of my friends and I have been wanting for years.

Fair enough, though I think they could've done quite a bit more with these mechanics.

 

[Kami42]

I'm not saying you can't enjoy the game. I am actually personally excited for the competitive aspects of the game. But I do think that complacently with the series has lead us to the point we are. That is what I see and have seen for the past 15 - 20 years. You are free to enjoy the game at your leisure and I am free to explain my points with hope that it makes you see with a different perspective.

I'm going to ignore your comment about my "argumentation," because its only a baseless attempt to undermine my argument without actually addressing anything.

As for your question. Yes, I am going to buy the game. Maybe not on release day, depends. I might end up buying it used. I know next you will say "you can't criticize Game Freak while supporting them." But I disagree. We live in a society that is very connected- where one person can be heard by tens of thousands. Twitter, Youtube- these things have huge audiences. And what people are saying also matters. I think the negative impact of bad reviews/word of mouth goes much further than the positive impact of *one* sale.

As someone who spend much, maybe to much, time about how to feel about sword and shield, sadly, you couldn't give me anything new in my point of view, but that's fine. I liked the discussion and maybe, you see some things different now.

Feel free to ignore that point. It's not an attempt in any way, that is just the way I feel about some of your arguments.

Nope, that is not even close to what I wanted to say.
It was more: "I hope you can enjoy the game", as well as I still have the feeling, you tried your best to make others raging on the games as well. Maybe in the end, you're going to like it.
Why the hell would I care what you're doing with your money?

Also, just to make sure you really got my point - I never tried to convince you of my feelings for SwSh.
I tried to explain, why I'm looking forward to the games.