Pokemon Legends Arceus | NSW | Jan 28th 2022 | ‘Daybreak’ update out today!

I think I also have very low expectations for GF too despite usually loving every Pokemon game. I thought it looked 'quite nice' even though I know it's running on the same hardware as something like Monster Hunter Rise and if you put them side by side, Pokemon does not come out well.

I think with a mainline (new gen) Pokemon game, we pretty much know what we're getting. With this, I think there's a chance it could go quite wrong, but I'm at least more excited to see how it turns out than I have been for a while.

shy guy 64 wrote:

Cheeky Devlin wrote:

shy guy 64 wrote:that is petty, abandoning a game cause of how it looks. for shame people

Because if they cant be bothered to put in the effort to make it look halfway decent (on a system that is more than capable of it), then where else are they cutting corners?

While it's a step in the right direction in terms of gameplay, it's looking like a low effort rush job to try and satisfy those who are starting to call them out on repackaging the same game for 25 years. I'll be happy to be wrong about this, but a company with GameFreak and Nintendos resources should be able to put out something a bit better looking, or at least on par with, stuff that came out four years ago on a weaker system.

They're not automatically entitled to our money and frankly it's not your place to judge the criteria other people use to decide their purchases.

that strikes me as flawed logic. just cause you "cut corners" in one aspect doesnt mean you would in the other. whos to say they didnt sacrifice graphics to focus on gameplay. GF's games have never been the most stunning looking but the gameplay its self works fine which is surely what matters

It doesn't mean that they have cut corners elsewhere, but it does suggest that if they aren't showing that much care with one element of the game then it's not unrealistic that they may also be neglecting something else. Again, it's speculation.

It's not about the games being "stunning". It's about them being on par with games (from the same publisher) that have similar open-worlds but that are four and six years older than it respectively. (Again, BOTW and Xenoblade Chronicles X)

So the Pokémon games have never been visually that great, does that mean that they should get a free pass? Does that mean we can't ask for more from them? Or should we just shut up and lap up what is given to us and be grateful for it?

I'm not a graphics over gameplay person by any stretch of the imagination, but I do expect a certain standard to be met from a supposed AAA title and this just isn't meeting that standard.

This isn't previous gens where Pokémon was confined to 3DS and the lack of ambition and technical proficiency was hidden behind it being on handheld. This is a full console and the same standards cannot be applied to both.

I really want to be wrong about this game and I really hope they manage to sort it out before it launches, but I'm not confident that they will.

I genuinely think it looks better than MonHun Rise. That's what I mean by art style beating out technical fidelity almost every time. Legends has bright beautiful colours that really pop and a cheerful world. Meanwhile the aesthetics on MonHun Rise are much more grounded in realism, despite the talking cats and exploding tanuki. Both suit the games they belong to, but give me Pokémon's visuals every day.

I do kind of get where Devlin's coming from though. When I'm into a game I'm enjoying, ninety-nine times out of a hundred it doesn't matter how graphically good it is. I don't notice the technical side of the visuals unless the frame rate throws a wobbly. The one per cent was when I went back to Super Mario 64, or Ocarina of Time, in the Wii U (I think) era... and I just couldn't handle the graphical downgrade. It genuinely spoiled my experience of the games. (Granted, in SM64 at least, the camera not playing ball was a bigger deal.) So there is a line below which I can't overlook the technical side of things. I'd assume that line falls in a different place for everyone, and likely falls in a very different place for those who weren't:
- still on SD home consoles until last gen.
- still playing SD handhelds until this gen.
- playing the least powerful of the three main players as their main machine this gen.

The gameplay should still be the most important thing, natch. That's why I don't buy comparisons with Xenoblade Chronicles X: not only did it have a massively inferior art style (IMHO) to go with its relative graphical heft, there were significant aspects of the game itself that I didn't like so much. If MonolithSoft had spent time improving those at the expense of the graphics, that would have been good.

Cheeky Devlin wrote:

shy guy 64 wrote:

Cheeky Devlin wrote:

shy guy 64 wrote:that is petty, abandoning a game cause of how it looks. for shame people

Because if they cant be bothered to put in the effort to make it look halfway decent (on a system that is more than capable of it), then where else are they cutting corners?

While it's a step in the right direction in terms of gameplay, it's looking like a low effort rush job to try and satisfy those who are starting to call them out on repackaging the same game for 25 years. I'll be happy to be wrong about this, but a company with GameFreak and Nintendos resources should be able to put out something a bit better looking, or at least on par with, stuff that came out four years ago on a weaker system.

They're not automatically entitled to our money and frankly it's not your place to judge the criteria other people use to decide their purchases.

that strikes me as flawed logic. just cause you "cut corners" in one aspect doesnt mean you would in the other. whos to say they didnt sacrifice graphics to focus on gameplay. GF's games have never been the most stunning looking but the gameplay its self works fine which is surely what matters

It doesn't mean that they have cut corners elsewhere, but it does suggest that if they aren't showing that much care with one element of the game then it's not unrealistic that they may also be neglecting something else. Again, it's speculation.

It's not about the games being "stunning". It's about them being on par with games (from the same publisher) that have similar open-worlds but that are four and six years older than it respectively. (Again, BOTW and Xenoblade Chronicles X)

So the Pokémon games have never been visually that great, does that mean that they should get a free pass? Does that mean we can't ask for more from them? Or should we just shut up and lap up what is given to us and be grateful for it?

I'm not a graphics over gameplay person by any stretch of the imagination, but I do expect a certain standard to be met from a supposed AAA title and this just isn't meeting that standard.

This isn't previous gens where Pokémon was confined to 3DS and the lack of ambition and technical proficiency was hidden behind it being on handheld. This is a full console and the same standards cannot be applied to both.

I really want to be wrong about this game and I really hope they manage to sort it out before it launches, but I'm not confident that they will.

Not so much about giving them a free pass so much as it shouldn’t matter. Also botw XCX and legends are all made by different game companies of course they look different. Pokemon has never been the cutting edge of graphics so I don’t see why anyone should be surprised that one of their games don’t look as good as other people’s

Jenuall wrote:I actually think it looks all right visually, very clean and crisp. It's certainly better looking than I was expecting, but maybe that says more about the very low bar I must have set for them!

I think so too. People getting hung up on polygons and textures but the art design is great.

Genshin Impact is a similar style open world which looks considerably better and that game runs on mobile phones.

"Its always looked gooseberry fool, so it should stay looking gooseberry fool"

shy guy 64 wrote:

Cheeky Devlin wrote:

shy guy 64 wrote:

Cheeky Devlin wrote:

shy guy 64 wrote:that is petty, abandoning a game cause of how it looks. for shame people

Because if they cant be bothered to put in the effort to make it look halfway decent (on a system that is more than capable of it), then where else are they cutting corners?

While it's a step in the right direction in terms of gameplay, it's looking like a low effort rush job to try and satisfy those who are starting to call them out on repackaging the same game for 25 years. I'll be happy to be wrong about this, but a company with GameFreak and Nintendos resources should be able to put out something a bit better looking, or at least on par with, stuff that came out four years ago on a weaker system.

They're not automatically entitled to our money and frankly it's not your place to judge the criteria other people use to decide their purchases.

that strikes me as flawed logic. just cause you "cut corners" in one aspect doesnt mean you would in the other. whos to say they didnt sacrifice graphics to focus on gameplay. GF's games have never been the most stunning looking but the gameplay its self works fine which is surely what matters

It doesn't mean that they have cut corners elsewhere, but it does suggest that if they aren't showing that much care with one element of the game then it's not unrealistic that they may also be neglecting something else. Again, it's speculation.

It's not about the games being "stunning". It's about them being on par with games (from the same publisher) that have similar open-worlds but that are four and six years older than it respectively. (Again, BOTW and Xenoblade Chronicles X)

So the Pokémon games have never been visually that great, does that mean that they should get a free pass? Does that mean we can't ask for more from them? Or should we just shut up and lap up what is given to us and be grateful for it?

I'm not a graphics over gameplay person by any stretch of the imagination, but I do expect a certain standard to be met from a supposed AAA title and this just isn't meeting that standard.

This isn't previous gens where Pokémon was confined to 3DS and the lack of ambition and technical proficiency was hidden behind it being on handheld. This is a full console and the same standards cannot be applied to both.

I really want to be wrong about this game and I really hope they manage to sort it out before it launches, but I'm not confident that they will.

Not so much about giving them a free pass so much as it shouldn’t matter. Also botw XCX and legends are all made by different game companies of course they look different. Pokemon has never been the cutting edge of graphics so I don’t see why anyone should be surprised that one of their games don’t look as good as other people’s

XCX and BOTW are both published by Nintendo as are the Pokémon games.

When Nintendo moved to open world with Zelda they got Monolith to help them get the open world up and running. Why doesn't it look like the same was done with this?

They have access to a team with a proven record of creating exactly this kind of open world.

Also, to agree with and directly quote Dual...

Dual wrote:"Its always looked gooseberry fool, so it should stay looking gooseberry fool"

Why the hell should it be acceptable? Just because they've never had to bother before so why should we expect them to now?

I guess I just expected more from the fifth highest selling video-game franchise of all time.

Cheeky Devlin wrote:

shy guy 64 wrote:

Cheeky Devlin wrote:

shy guy 64 wrote:

Cheeky Devlin wrote:

shy guy 64 wrote:that is petty, abandoning a game cause of how it looks. for shame people

Because if they cant be bothered to put in the effort to make it look halfway decent (on a system that is more than capable of it), then where else are they cutting corners?

While it's a step in the right direction in terms of gameplay, it's looking like a low effort rush job to try and satisfy those who are starting to call them out on repackaging the same game for 25 years. I'll be happy to be wrong about this, but a company with GameFreak and Nintendos resources should be able to put out something a bit better looking, or at least on par with, stuff that came out four years ago on a weaker system.

They're not automatically entitled to our money and frankly it's not your place to judge the criteria other people use to decide their purchases.

that strikes me as flawed logic. just cause you "cut corners" in one aspect doesnt mean you would in the other. whos to say they didnt sacrifice graphics to focus on gameplay. GF's games have never been the most stunning looking but the gameplay its self works fine which is surely what matters

It doesn't mean that they have cut corners elsewhere, but it does suggest that if they aren't showing that much care with one element of the game then it's not unrealistic that they may also be neglecting something else. Again, it's speculation.

It's not about the games being "stunning". It's about them being on par with games (from the same publisher) that have similar open-worlds but that are four and six years older than it respectively. (Again, BOTW and Xenoblade Chronicles X)

So the Pokémon games have never been visually that great, does that mean that they should get a free pass? Does that mean we can't ask for more from them? Or should we just shut up and lap up what is given to us and be grateful for it?

I'm not a graphics over gameplay person by any stretch of the imagination, but I do expect a certain standard to be met from a supposed AAA title and this just isn't meeting that standard.

This isn't previous gens where Pokémon was confined to 3DS and the lack of ambition and technical proficiency was hidden behind it being on handheld. This is a full console and the same standards cannot be applied to both.

I really want to be wrong about this game and I really hope they manage to sort it out before it launches, but I'm not confident that they will.

Not so much about giving them a free pass so much as it shouldn’t matter. Also botw XCX and legends are all made by different game companies of course they look different. Pokemon has never been the cutting edge of graphics so I don’t see why anyone should be surprised that one of their games don’t look as good as other people’s

XCX and BOTW are both published by Nintendo as are the Pokémon games.

When Nintendo moved to open world with Zelda they got Monolith to help them get the open world up and running. Why doesn't it look like the same was done with this?

They have access to a team with a proven record of creating exactly this kind of open world.

Also, to agree with and directly quote Dual...

Dual wrote:"Its always looked gooseberry fool, so it should stay looking gooseberry fool"

Why the hell should it be acceptable? Just because they've never had to bother before so why should we expect them to now?

I guess I just expected more from the fifth highest selling video-game franchise of all time.

Game freak is still entirely independent from Nintendo. Just cause they co own Pokemon doesn’t mean Nintendo own game freak

To try (desperately) to get this onto another conversation topic: if you are buying this, what starter are you going to go for? I think they've picked a really balanced selection with no wrong choices... so long as you don't go for Cyndaquil for nostalgia alone, of course.

I'll be going for Rowlet, who is my favourite starter of all time. Cute ball -> ninja Edgeworth -> awkward nerd ghost archer. What's not to love?

Hey, Cyndaquil's got a lot going for him besides the nostalgia. He's a cute little... um... mouse? Why do I not know the inspiration for one of my favourites again? Anyway, I'll be going Cyndaquil. Which will more than likely become a secondary of the team if Eevee are easy enough to find and evolve.

I get the arguments about the graphics though (despite the fact I’m a fan of the style they’ve opted for), for a series that turns over a ridiculous amount each year from its various sources of income, they could put a lot more of it into the games if they wanted to improve areas such as the graphics as I do sometimes get the feeling they almost try and do it on the cheaper side of game development to try and maximise profits from the games, despite their continued success. Not that the games will be cheap to develop at all mind!

Balladeer wrote:To try (desperately) to get this onto another conversation topic: if you are buying this, what starter are you going to go for? I think they've picked a really balanced selection with no wrong choices... so long as you don't go for Cyndaquil for nostalgia alone, of course.

I'll be going for Rowlet, who is my favourite starter of all time. Cute ball -> ninja Edgeworth -> awkward nerd ghost archer. What's not to love?

Cyndaquil nostalgia of course!

Hoping it’s movepool is indefinitely better than in gen 2

The environment just looks very bland and flat to me. It's not helped by the textures and the fact the open world itself seems really barren in what they've shown. I like the player model in that screenshot but because of the lack of a coherent art style, it kinda looks like he's out of place or photoshopped in.

I get that graphics can be subjective but I'm very confused at the idea that this game looks good.

I’m gonna use trading to have all three starters

DarkRula wrote:Hey, Cyndaquil's got a lot going for him besides the nostalgia. He's a cute little... um... mouse? Why do I not know the inspiration for one of my favourites again? Anyway, I'll be going Cyndaquil. Which will more than likely become a secondary of the team if Eevee are easy enough to find and evolve.

Oh sure, there are good reasons for liking Cyndaquil that aren't solely born of nostalgia. It's my partner's favourite Pokémon for non-nostalgia reasons, and until it hits Typhlosion I'd agree that it's pretty cute!

Robbo-92 wrote:Cyndaquil nostalgia of course!

Then there's this wastrel.

I’m a proper sucker for Gen 2 nostalgia to be honest

The simple truth is they haven't given it the full BOTW treatment because this will still sell 20m+ despite the complaints. Why incur all that extra cost?

I personally think it looks alright, playing it on handheld it won’t look awful. I’m more concerned that the world will be barren and won’t have anything worth exploring.

^ Much more valid complaint. My main technical gripe with the series is that we're eight gens in and they still have the nonsense synthesised cries.

Tomous wrote:The simple truth is they haven't given it the full BOTW treatment because this will still sell 20m+ despite the complaints. Why incur all that extra cost?

Ah, game design via Mike Ashley's methods. Imagine those poor Newcastle fans who are also Pokemon fanatics.