Does This Game Feel Right for Console?

[Scammel]

Given the extensive form of the series to date and the fact that there already exists a Switch title, it's hardly an unreasonable list of conclusions to draw.

For me, it's not actually an issue of the game being on a console. It's the fact that this will no doubt be priced as a cutting-edge contemporary release. I enjoy scores of games with (deliberately) historic graphics, but they're usually well-priced independent titles. This a premium product from a premium publisher and it simply doesn't look like one to me.

 

[Sceptile Leaf Blade]

You can probably wait a couple of months after release to see if prices drop. Let's Go Pikachu seems to be dropping in price quite a bit here, it's already down by over 10% compared to release. It seems to really vary from game to game what the price will end up after a while. Pokémon Moon is down by about 50% now to €23, while Alpha Sapphire is still at €40. I've got no idea why some pokémon games stay expensive while others have sharp declines in costs. Chances are one of either Sword or Shield will end up dropping in price. You obviously have to pay attention to whether or not you're buying it in bundle, and so on (Let's Go Eevee + Switch + Poké Ball Plus bundle is more expensive than buying both Let's Go games + Switch + Poké Ball Plus separately for instance, although of course the Pikachu version is usually cheaper than the Eevee version)

 

[Hydrohs]

Given the extensive form of the series to date and the fact that there already exists a Switch title, it's hardly an unreasonable list of conclusions to draw.

For me, it's not actually an issue of the game being on a console. It's the fact that this will no doubt be priced as a cutting-edge contemporary release. I enjoy scores of games with (deliberately) historic graphics, but they're usually well-priced independent titles. This a premium product from a premium publisher and it simply doesn't look like one to me.

Most games are not priced based on what the visuals are, there is so much more that goes into a game. For the most part a game is priced based on what a company thinks people will pay for it, while also factoring in how much they need to stay profitable. Considering indie atudios have exponentially fewer employees, it makes sense that they charge less, it also means they can get the game into more people's hands.

 

[Dragalge]

What gets me is that you formed all of this from an edited 2 minute video of an unfinished game.

It's like you want to dislike this game.

Yes because first impressions aren't everything for some-oh wait!

Sure, perhaps we should wait to see more information but people are still allowed to judge something like this if they want to from what they have seen!

 

[Nodame]

On the topic of graphics, I wonder what people think of this image..

Obviously graphics can be upgraded between now and launch, but also what do people think about the two styles? I actually find myself preferring the GO style, for its smoothness, honestly. Although if the model was refined a bit, I could be easily swayed to SaS graphics.

I said it many times. Let's GO sprites are better than Gen 8. Just look at the black outline in the left image.

Do I care? nah. Can't wait for the game.

 

[PrinceOfFacade]

Yes because first impressions aren't everything for some-oh wait!

Sure, perhaps we should wait to see more information but people are still allowed to judge something like this if they want to from what they have seen!

Judging the game is not an issue.

Judging what you haven't seen, however, is.

Bolt saw less than 10% of the region and he's acting as if he saw the whole thing. He's judging the game as if he's already experienced the final product. It's insane! I'll never understand it.

 

[Mr. Reloaded]

Its got the same issue I and others had with Let's Go, it's really just Sun and Moon HD.

The Switch can do way better than this. But it's hardly a make or break deal.

Environments are pretty decent though.

 

[Sceptrigon]

Judging the game is not an issue.

Judging what you haven't seen, however, is.

Bolt saw less than 10% of the region and he's acting as if he saw the whole thing. He's judging the game as if he's already experienced the final product. It's insane! I'll never understand it.

While I’m not going against waiting until more info is revealed, it should be clear at this point that what the deciding factor is in buying a game is different for everyone. Certain elements of a game are more valued to someone than compared to others. It has pretty much been made evident in the trailer that the setting has a linear format, and non-linearity is something that Bolt has stated to deeply value in the games he wants to play. Even just one thing that you’ve always liked and hoped for in a game is still an understandable reason of deciding whether to play a game or not. The rest of things in the game may not hold nearly as much value and wouldn’t matter.

In my case, I was pretty doubtful of continuing to play Pokémon for a number of reasons, let alone buying a Switch. But after seeing that one trailer, I’m already dead set on buying the game. The Pokémon and themes that have been already shown are what I’ve always been wanting and what I know would appeal to me the most about the game, so I will get it regardless of its other aspects. You can say that I’m also premature in my judgment since we barely have any information to make a “valid decision,” but it can underestimate how much others place value on certain things that would essentially make a game for them.

 

[JohnLynch]

Yes because first impressions aren't everything for some-oh wait!

Sure, perhaps we should wait to see more information but people are still allowed to judge something like this if they want to from what they have seen!

Forming an opinion is one thing. Anyone can do that with as little information as they want. But Bolt went further then that. He mas factual claims that are way too early to be supported. That's where he went wrong.

 

[Nerdy McNerdface]

Honestly I’m gonna say right now: I love the graphics. I don’t think every game has to push a console to its limit with BOTW-level graphics all the time (especially as someone who’s predominantly a portable gamer), and I think the current graphics fit Pokemon as a series brilliantly.

Getting that out of the way, I’m... honestly pretty mixed. The game itself isn’t exactly the issue, it’s more the price it costs to get it including the switch. One of the reasons I game portably is that for the most part games tend to be cheaper for it, and the consoles themselves are affordable as Christmas and birthday gifts. Pokemon’s about accessibility and reaching all kinds of audiences, but making SWSH a Switch game already locks out people who can’t afford the console. However, I do also see why you’d want to port Pokemon to the Switch, since not only is it still portable but it has greater graphical potential than the 3DS (and frame rates won’t drop either). Honestly I think if Nintendo released a portable-only Switch (kinda like how they released the 2DS for those who couldn’t get a 3DS) it would solve my main issue entirely.

 

[PrinceOfFacade]

While I’m not going against waiting until more info is revealed, it should be clear at this point that what the deciding factor is in buying a game is different for everyone. Certain elements of a game are more valued to someone than compared to others. It has pretty much been made evident in the trailer that the setting has a linear format, and non-linearity is something that Bolt has stated to deeply value in the games he wants to play. Even just one thing that you’ve always liked and hoped for in a game is still an understandable reason of deciding whether to play a game or not. The rest of things in the game may not hold nearly as much value and wouldn’t matter.

In my case, I was pretty doubtful of continuing to play Pokémon for a number of reasons, let alone buying a Switch. But after seeing that one trailer, I’m already dead set on buying the game. The Pokémon and themes that have been already shown are what I’ve always been wanting and what I know would appeal to me the most about the game, so I will get it regardless of its other aspects. You can say that I’m also premature in my judgment since we barely have any information to make a “valid decision,” but it can underestimate how much others place value on certain things that would essentially make a game for them.

You would be correct, but it's not evident that the game is entirely linear, as we haven't seen enough to form that conclusion.

You can assume if you wish, but that doesn't make it true. Heck, from what I've seen in the trailer, there seems to be a mix of linear routes and open space, something Unova had a lot of. I won't assume this is the case, however, as that would be gettting my hopes up. However, I will hope this is the case.

You see the difference? I want less linear gameplay just as much Bolt, but I'm not going to assume the worst from such a small amount of footage.

 

[Orphalesion]

I'm completely fine with the graphics the way they were shown in the trailer. The only part I didn't like where the way the starters were rendered, and that part wasn't in-game graphics.

I said it many times. Let's GO sprites are better than Gen 8. Just look at the black outline in the left image.

Do I care? nah. Can't wait for the game.

See I have the opposite opinion here, the Gen 8 Pikachu with it's outline and shading looks like it jumped right out of the anime, while the let's go Pikachu, to me, looks blobby, polygonial and...well...just like an unfinished 3D model that's still being worked on.

 

[Ignition]

Not sure on how I feel about the thread’s question, but the Gen 8 model looks so much better than LGPE’s

 

[JohnLynch]

The LGPE games graphics are quite adequate for what they are (a cheap low effort game by GF to cash in on Pokemon Go's populairty). But if they were to go that way indefinitely the pokemon are missing a layer of texture. Pikachu is a smooth yellow with no fur on him. SwSh gets around this texture problem by going with a stylistic art style for which the black lines are essential. That way they dont need cutting edge graphics.

 

[paipr_christian]

On the topic of graphics, I wonder what people think of this image..

Obviously graphics can be upgraded between now and launch, but also what do people think about the two styles? I actually find myself preferring the GO style, for its smoothness, honestly. Although if the model was refined a bit, I could be easily swayed to SaS graphics.

I like the new style. I don't like 'glossey' pokemon.

Also TC I think the games feel fine for a console. There is no rule that all console games need to look a certain way, play a certain way, be a certain way.

And much as many like to act to the contrary, GF is not required to make a Pokemon game different than what they want to make it. Be it on console or handheld.

 

[Chocolateripplecake]

Looks fine to me

 

[Sceptrigon]

You would be correct, but it's not evident that the game is entirely linear, as we haven't seen enough to form that conclusion.

You can assume if you wish, but that doesn't make it true. Heck, from what I've seen in the trailer, there seems to be a mix of linear routes and open space, something Unova had a lot of. I won't assume this is the case, however, as that would be gettting my hopes up. However, I will hope this is the case.

You see the difference? I want less linear gameplay just as much Bolt, but I'm not going to assume the worst from such a small amount of footage.

True, by evident, I was only referring to how the trailer shows graphical similarities of the style of Gen 7 by the designs of the character models and routes. But then looking at Gen 7, its graphical style is already evident of linearity and limitations. The wider open spaces you mentioned in Gen 5 have basically been dumbed down and traded off by the transition to full 3D since Gen 6 and not much has been changed in that aspect. Of course that can still be considered an assumption regarding Sword and Shield, but still doubtful that Game Freak would act on these improvements. Yes, it’s always nice to be hopeful though, and as the company is gaining more experience in handling the graphics, they would be able to gradually open up these highly detailed worlds more.

 

[Bolt the Cat]

You would totally write off a game because it doesn't look like something on a more powerful console?

No, it's not the prettiest game on the Switch, but it's not nearly as bad as you're describing. Are you sure you don't just have a poor internet connection and thus were watching the video in like 240p or something?

Just watched it again for good measure, and you might be right. I didn't see the blurriness that I did before, it looked fine. Weird because I have high speed internet and didn't see any other signs that the video quality was deteriorating.

Most games are not priced based on what the visuals are, there is so much more that goes into a game. For the most part a game is priced based on what a company thinks people will pay for it, while also factoring in how much they need to stay profitable. Considering indie atudios have exponentially fewer employees, it makes sense that they charge less, it also means they can get the game into more people's hands.

It's more than just the visuals that are different between indie releases and AAA games. AAA games also have larger worlds and more content. You don't see indies making a game like BotW, that's too large a project for them. The most you'll usually see out of an indie studio is an N64 scale game. Game Freak's capabilities seem to be more in line with that than a AAA studio, hence they don't deserve a AAA price tag.

You would be correct, but it's not evident that the game is entirely linear, as we haven't seen enough to form that conclusion.

You can assume if you wish, but that doesn't make it true. Heck, from what I've seen in the trailer, there seems to be a mix of linear routes and open space, something Unova had a lot of. I won't assume this is the case, however, as that would be gettting my hopes up. However, I will hope this is the case.

You see the difference? I want less linear gameplay just as much Bolt, but I'm not going to assume the worst from such a small amount of footage.

If you consider Unova to be a mix of linearity and openness then the problem is you have a different definition of open, not that I'm assuming anything that isn't there. I don't see how Unova is open in the slightest, it's as railroady as anything and it's full of narrow corridors. Look at some of the games I've pointed to like BotW and Odyssey and even Mario 64 and Ocarina of Time and they have a VERY different approach to map design. They're full of open fields you can wander around in any direction and even in the spots that are linear, you can usually walk more than 5-10 steps without hitting a wall. And we already know that this approach is not happening, the only open field we see in Galar is that one south of the first big city (and they might not even let us wander around in it), and the trailer indicates that the map design is still full of narrow pathways. So yes, that has been effectively ruled out.

Also TC I think the games feel fine for a console. There is no rule that all console games need to look a certain way, play a certain way, be a certain way.

And much as many like to act to the contrary, GF is not required to make a Pokemon game different than what they want to make it. Be it on console or handheld.

There is no rule about how a console game should be made, but there is a tendency for developers and gamers to favor certain gameplay styles, so creating those styles would be more profitable. In this case, you have games like BotW and Odyssey driving momentum for the Switch to the point where Game Freak looks foolish to not try and appeal to fans of those games in some way.

 

[paipr_christian]

There is no rule about how a console game should be made, but there is a tendency for developers and gamers to favor certain gameplay styles, so creating those styles would be more profitable. In this case, you have games like BotW and Odyssey driving momentum for the Switch to the point where Game Freak looks foolish to not try and appeal to fans of those games in some way.

Valid point.... But some would argue it also be foolish of them to not go with what has been working for 23. Specially when it's been delivering big at almost a yearly rate.

And for many, we prefer and want more of the same.

 

[shoz999]

So after much anticipation this game has been finally been revealed and we've seen some gameplay on what the game is like. However, it appears to be very similar to SM in terms of the graphics and design, and with this game being the first new generation on console, some might have expected more out of those elements to take advantage of the stronger hardware. Do you think more should've been done with this game? Does an iteration of the SM formula in HD feel appropriate for a console game?

It's definitely worth the 60 bucks and you people are forgetting something about Sun & Moon.

Some people here are underestimating the fact that Pokemon Sun & Moon, a 40 dollar game, is also worth 60 bucks in terms of story, world-design, content, multiplayer and even it's aesthetic. It's a game that not only pushed the 3DS tech to it's limits but it is on the same-level as most or even bigger than some Triple-A games like Call of Duty, Destiny and recently the very rushed Battlefield V. So it's pretty obvious that Sword & Shield are worth the 60 bucks by first glance at least. And you @Bolt the Cat, I understand you think that there will be no game like BW2 but if a Pokemon game with stunning graphics and more content than even BW2 does come out, then unlike Sword & Shield which does look like it's worth 60 bucks, such a game would be a game worth MORE than 60 bucks, worth more than a lot of Triple A games that these A-list studios produce.

At least that's how I see things anyway in terms of quality. To sum it up.

• Pokemon Sun & Moon & hopefully Sword & Shield = A better Triple-A experience that's on par or better than most 60 dollar priced games, especially Activision and EA.
  
• State-of-the-art Pokemon dream game in the future = Worth more than most 60-dollar Triple-A experiences.