Bolt the Cat
Bringing the Thunder
I don't think graphics should really be anyone's priority in a Pokemon game anyways. Pokemon has never had cutting edge graphics, and it's the kind of game that really doesn't need them. Plenty of other games rely on their good graphics (or at least, a perception of them having good graphics...) to cover up gaping flaws in their mechanics, storyline, etc. I can think of at least one example you've all heard of and most of you have played. For Pokemon, it's always been the other way around; unique gameplay at the trade-off of mediocre graphics that serve their purpose well enough and nothing more. You can more or less tell what everything around you is and not much more.
I think trying to bring Pokemon up to the AAA standard graphics-wise really isn't a good decision from any perspective; like I said the series simply wasn't built around graphics as a strong point. Instead, putting those resources towards developing better storylines (which recently have been lacking), new mechanics like Max Raids and Dynamax Adventures, and dare I say including previous Pokemon who might otherwise have been excluded, are all ways to provide more enjoyment for most consumers of the game (and therefore more incentive to buy the game in the first place, and more money for GameFreak and co).
Well high quality graphics is only part of the puzzle as far as AAA development. I agree that to some degree they won't ever have super high quality graphics with so many Pokemon to animate, but some of the graphical issues like those infamous trees definitely need to be cleaned up. Higher quality textures should definitely be at the top of their list of graphical improvements for next gen. But it's the content I'm more concerned about when it comes to Pokemon becoming a AAA game. People do not spend $60 on a game for it to be a glorified mobile game that you just blow through in a few days and put down, console adventure games have generally been grand, open ended affairs that you can immerse yourself in for hours at a time and not put down for weeks. For Pokemon to really be accepted as a console game, the content cutting needs to stop. The games needs large map to immerse themselves in and explore (which they're already improving in thankfully) and they need a large quantity and variety of side activities for players to engage in to keep them playing (this is where they need the most work). The games' philosophy of being quick, streamlined affairs designed for mobile players with short attention spans just isn't compatible with the console market, console gamers generally want the exact opposite type of experience.
I also think crunch can only be blamed for so much, and at the end of the day, somebody is responsible for the crunch. It might be (probably is) the higher-up executives at GameFreak who are ultimately responsible, but crunch isn't something that just happens or is unavoidable. Crunch is an inevitable byproduct of inefficiency and poor decision making in the development process, and usually it's not the people doing the grunt work who are to blame.
My sentiment exactly. Game Freak needs a better understanding of how much time and resources are required to make a quality console game to plan the games' development cycle appropriately. And that falls on the executives. It's probably someone who doesn't know anything about game development and just wants to push the games out the door on a regular basis to sell merchandise. Considering how insanely profitable Pokemon's merchandising arm is that's the most logical explanation.