• Topic Archived
You're browsing the GameFAQs Message Boards as a guest. Sign Up for free (or Log In if you already have an account) to be able to post messages, change how messages are displayed, and view media in posts.
  1. Boards
  2. Pokemon Sword
  3. Do you think pokemon would have been better off if the dex....

User Info: Lum_Yatsura

Lum_Yatsura
1 week ago#21
thebestestbest posted...
Dannyson97 posted...
A lot of people say "lol they're reusing models" without even knowing the kind of work that goes into making new textures on these models and making them look good, or even the effort that goes into making a game. Even just Dynamaxing the act of making the models bigger requires a new texture for each Pokemon. You can't just enlarge something and expect it to look good.

Considering the time constraint they are constantly under to make Pokemon games is it a wonder why Ultra Sun and Moon feel as rushed and nothing as they did compared to other 3rd version games.
Pokemon was overbloated and either Pokemon needs to slow down a bit for developers to work not just on all the Pokemon being games but just the overall design and flow of the game, which is why I think the games tend to feel more linear now a days.


SIXTEEN MILLION COPIES SOLD OF SUN AND MOON

If they need a longer dev cycle, they could have staggered releases of multiple teams

Oh no they need a few new textures how could they possible handle this workload with a franchise that has NINETY BILLION DOLLARS IN REVENUE since launch

They have the money to do this, they are either greedy, incompetent, or lazy, probably all 3.


Even so basic game design common sense still applies. Pokemon need to serve an active, distinct role in the gameplay for enough players to warrant their inclusion. It's wasteful to put Pokemon in the game that are not worth using.
Shouting "what did you do that for?" at a stationary bucket of water.

User Info: thebestestbest

thebestestbest
1 week ago#22
Lum_Yatsura posted...
thebestestbest posted...
Dannyson97 posted...
A lot of people say "lol they're reusing models" without even knowing the kind of work that goes into making new textures on these models and making them look good, or even the effort that goes into making a game. Even just Dynamaxing the act of making the models bigger requires a new texture for each Pokemon. You can't just enlarge something and expect it to look good.

Considering the time constraint they are constantly under to make Pokemon games is it a wonder why Ultra Sun and Moon feel as rushed and nothing as they did compared to other 3rd version games.
Pokemon was overbloated and either Pokemon needs to slow down a bit for developers to work not just on all the Pokemon being games but just the overall design and flow of the game, which is why I think the games tend to feel more linear now a days.


SIXTEEN MILLION COPIES SOLD OF SUN AND MOON

If they need a longer dev cycle, they could have staggered releases of multiple teams

Oh no they need a few new textures how could they possible handle this workload with a franchise that has NINETY BILLION DOLLARS IN REVENUE since launch

They have the money to do this, they are either greedy, incompetent, or lazy, probably all 3.


Even so basic game design common sense still applies. Pokemon need to serve an active, distinct role in the gameplay for enough players to warrant their inclusion. It's wasteful to put Pokemon in the game that are not worth using.


This is true of at least 90% of pokemon that already exist. What kind of statement is this?

Heck if they want to make more pokemon usable just crank the stats.

User Info: FFT-Fan

FFT-Fan
1 week ago#23
Dark Gunner posted...
They really do need to slow development down I think. That I 100% agree with.

Absolutely. I think it would go a lot better if they could have another year or 2 of development time even if there's no filler game or whatever to fill the gap. It must be very stressful and difficult for the development team to continue to do single year development cycles, they must have to be in perpetual crunch if under no circumstances are delays allowed to happen.

Even 3 years TBH, though I am at a point where I'm not really impatient for releases anymore. There is enough to play that I am happy to wait longer for a better game, it's much worse to get a rushed & incomplete product that had inadequate time for development. I understand that quality takes time plus this is their move to home console so people wouldn't have been shocked, frankly I had assumed they would move to longer cycles for the Switch. I know there are merchandising concerns but IMO it's standard fare in the game industry today for the newest game releases to take longer to create than in the past, many take 5 years in active development and some take longer. It might be best to find a compromise so that the series can have reliably great releases and grow the fanbase.

Even cutting National Dex won't solve the strain on the development team to release a full new Pokemon game or remake every year. Even Call of Duty & Assassin's Creed no longer do single year development cycles, they formed multiple teams so that they can develop separately to release in a rotation. While not perfect this still at least allows them to have 2 or 3 year development cycles for each game. I believe single year development cycles are becoming unfeasible and it will only get worse as technology advances resulting in ever increasing complexity/scale.

User Info: Lum_Yatsura

Lum_Yatsura
1 week ago#24
thebestestbest posted...
Lum_Yatsura posted...
thebestestbest posted...
Dannyson97 posted...
A lot of people say "lol they're reusing models" without even knowing the kind of work that goes into making new textures on these models and making them look good, or even the effort that goes into making a game. Even just Dynamaxing the act of making the models bigger requires a new texture for each Pokemon. You can't just enlarge something and expect it to look good.

Considering the time constraint they are constantly under to make Pokemon games is it a wonder why Ultra Sun and Moon feel as rushed and nothing as they did compared to other 3rd version games.
Pokemon was overbloated and either Pokemon needs to slow down a bit for developers to work not just on all the Pokemon being games but just the overall design and flow of the game, which is why I think the games tend to feel more linear now a days.


SIXTEEN MILLION COPIES SOLD OF SUN AND MOON

If they need a longer dev cycle, they could have staggered releases of multiple teams

Oh no they need a few new textures how could they possible handle this workload with a franchise that has NINETY BILLION DOLLARS IN REVENUE since launch

They have the money to do this, they are either greedy, incompetent, or lazy, probably all 3.


Even so basic game design common sense still applies. Pokemon need to serve an active, distinct role in the gameplay for enough players to warrant their inclusion. It's wasteful to put Pokemon in the game that are not worth using.


This is true of at least 90% of pokemon that already exist. What kind of statement is this?

Heck if they want to make more pokemon usable just crank the stats.


I'm saying the pokemon subject to removal ought to be very few. Appearances can be deceiving.
Joke characters give the game flavor, or a pokemon might have a vital non-battle ability, etc.
Shouting "what did you do that for?" at a stationary bucket of water.

User Info: Anthayashi

Anthayashi
1 week ago#25
firedoom666 posted...

The official pokemon twitter does still have "Catching ‘em all since 1996" in its bio, and it is still right in the beginning of trailers for Sun and Moon. So not sure where you get the idea it was dropped after gen 3


It was dropped in gen 3. They only brought it back in gen 6.

User Info: Lucario39

Lucario39
1 week ago#26
It'd be better of if they didn't rush the main games out, using spin-offs to buy them time to do a good job on the main games. It'd be better off of they invested more in improving/expanding GF's staff instead of keeping them relatively small and inexperienced.

Cutting Pokémon from the start? Pokémon's the biggest monster-collecting series there is. Why on earth would you think they'd be better off following the choices of the franchises beneath them?

User Info: DeltaSilver88

DeltaSilver88
1 week ago#27
Zeta777 posted...
It would’ve killed Pokémon like it did all the other monster franchises

Like Digimon and Monster Hunter that are actually still relevant?
...I became a Super Robot Wars fangirl without playing the games. Bite me.

User Info: AlfredoJones

AlfredoJones
1 week ago#28
I think it would have helped, though the franchise would probably be different to how we know it now. Honestly I commend Game Freak for managing to go as long as they have before the scope creep caught up to them. From what they said in the Game Informer interview they likely could have kept going, but chose to cut it off now so that they can focus on improving the games in other areas.
You can't fool me, 'cause I'm a moron!
Nintendo Switch Friend Code: SW-2960-9608-3596

User Info: Lum_Yatsura

Lum_Yatsura
1 week ago#29
Lucario39 posted...
It'd be better of if they didn't rush the main games out, using spin-offs to buy them time to do a good job on the main games. It'd be better off of they invested more in improving/expanding GF's staff instead of keeping them relatively small and inexperienced.

Cutting Pokémon from the start? Pokémon's the biggest monster-collecting series there is. Why on earth would you think they'd be better off following the choices of the franchises beneath them?


At the time, that wasn't much issue. The transfer system was devised around 1997/1998. Many monster-collecting series were new or unheard of outside Japan.
Shouting "what did you do that for?" at a stationary bucket of water.

User Info: Twinklestar

Twinklestar
1 week ago#30
DeltaSilver88 posted...
Zeta777 posted...
It would’ve killed Pokémon like it did all the other monster franchises

Like Digimon and Monster Hunter that are actually still relevant?


Funnily enough, Sw/Sh basically asks players to treat Pokemon games like Digimon games from now on.

Stop collecting, because they may get cut in the next games anyway. Just pick the few you want to play with, and finish the game with them, defeating the rest of the creatures in the process. You can even treat box cover legendaries as non-recruitable/accessible bosses that Digimon games have plenty of. Digimon World 3/2003 is the best example for this, as the equipment system aside, it basically plays like a Pokemon game without the catching and collecting part. Heck it even has "gym leaders" lol

Maybe even remove Pokedex altogether. That concept only serve to remind players about the collecting aspect.
  1. Boards
  2. Pokemon Sword
  3. Do you think pokemon would have been better off if the dex....
  • Topic Archived