Gamefreak lies about not reusing models in pokemon sword and shield (spoilers)

[KaitouX]

2 minutes ago, handymanshandle said:

And in the given context, 10 grand in the polygon department for most Pokemon models is pretty good. They don't need massive detail at all, and anything that could use smoothing off could probably be done with tessellation. 

Again with the Gran Turismo comparison, the Premium cars in GT5 and 6 have polygon counts far exceeding what would be rendered on the screen in any Pokemon game at any given time, while the Standard cars have polygon counts around the 4000 mark, far below what'll likely be many Pokemon models and something that'd look very out of place in the given context of GT5 and 6.

Not to mention, it seems like a case of "how many models are reused?". If it's a small minority of models, who cares? They still fit and look good in the given context, so why complain?

The issue isn't that the models are from the 3DS games, the issue is that they said that they had to redo all models making adding all pokemons too hard, but the models are from the 3DS making their excuse look pretty bad.

I don't think this models from the 3DS would even be an issue if Gamefreak didn't say that they had to remake the models implying that it was causing the reduction in the number of pokemon.

[CyanideInsanity]

14 minutes ago, handymanshandle said:

And in the given context, 10 grand in the polygon department for most Pokemon models is pretty good. They don't need massive detail at all, and anything that could use smoothing off could probably be done with tessellation. 

Again with the Gran Turismo comparison, the Premium cars in GT5 and 6 have polygon counts far exceeding what would be rendered on the screen in any Pokemon game at any given time, while the Standard cars have polygon counts around the 4000 mark, far below what'll likely be many Pokemon models and something that'd look very out of place in the given context of GT5 and 6.

Not to mention, it seems like a case of "how many models are reused?". If it's a small minority of models, who cares? They still fit and look good in the given context, so why complain?

Again you are missing the point. People don't think the old models look bad, in fact its the opposite. People were under the assumption that the 3ds models would be used in the switch games. The issue is that there had been talk that because of NEW models and animations OLD pokemon were cut, yet it seems old models are being used not the alleged new models.

 

Most people who want to see all pokemon return wouldn't care that the old models are used because the use of old models isn't the issue, the issue is saying something while appearing to do the opposite.

[Mira Yurizaki]

11 minutes ago, CyanideInsanity said:

Again you are missing the point. People don't think the old models look bad, in fact its the opposite. People were under the assumption that the 3ds models would be used in the switch games. The issue is that there had been talk that because of NEW models and animations OLD pokemon were cut, yet it seems old models are being used not the alleged new models.

 

Most people who want to see all pokemon return wouldn't care that the old models are used because the use of old models isn't the issue, the issue is saying something while appearing to do the opposite.

The problem is is that the only "proof" is some Blender modeler somehow importing static models from the game into Blender and going "LOOK, THEY'RE THE SAME"

[Drak3]

13 minutes ago, spartaman64 said:

 

did you guys read my post thats not the problem here

Yeah until something official comes out, I don't care. What we have is speculation based on questionable leaks and a translation of a blog post, whose entire newsworthiness seems to be that the fans are upset and not the supposed thing they're specifically upset about.

[Drak3]

Just now, Mira Yurizaki said:

The problem is is that the only "proof" is some Blender modeler somehow importing static models from the game into Blender and going "LOOK, THEY'RE THE SAME"

No, we also have them importing some animations and saying "LOOK, THEY'RE THE SAME."

 

Which I can't trust until the game is out and a few other parties verify. Wouldn't surprise me if they remade all the models and animations with the intention of refining them along multiple releases.

[CyanideInsanity]

12 minutes ago, Mira Yurizaki said:

The problem is is that the only "proof" is some Blender modeler somehow importing static models from the game into Blender and going "LOOK, THEY'RE THE SAME"

At the end of the day they've had months to clarify exactly what was meant, and exactly why pokemon were cut. They should know why people are upset by now, but we still have yet to receive a direct answer.

[Drak3]

Just now, CyanideInsanity said:

we still have yet to receive a direct answer.

You really aren't owed an answer.

[Mira Yurizaki]

2 minutes ago, CyanideInsanity said:

At the end of the day they've had months to clarify exactly what was meant, and exactly why pokemon were cut. They should know why people are upset by now, but we still have yet to receive a direct answer.

Companies don't owe us answers, no matter how much we want them to give them to us.

 

If you're upset with them, the only way to make them listen is to vote with your wallet and make them irrelevant. (and even then it takes a lot of people to do that)

[CyanideInsanity]

2 minutes ago, Drak3 said:

You really aren't owed an answer.

 

1 minute ago, Mira Yurizaki said:

Companies don't owe us answers, no matter how much we want them to give them to us.

 

If you're upset with them, the only way to make them listen is to vote with your wallet and make them irrelevant. (and even then it takes a lot of people to do that)

Fair enough but I didn't actually say they did. However not having an answer doesn't stop speculation, or people looking to prove their point.

[Drak3]

Just now, CyanideInsanity said:

 

Fair enough but I didn't actually say they did. However not having an answer doesn't stop speculation, or people looking to prove their point.

Yeah Game Freak might lose a few sales due to speculation and this debacle, but it's unlikely that those lost sales will be meaningful.

[spartaman64]

1 hour ago, Mira Yurizaki said:

Companies don't owe us answers, no matter how much we want them to give them to us.

 

If you're upset with them, the only way to make them listen is to vote with your wallet and make them irrelevant.

 

1 hour ago, Drak3 said:

No, we also have them importing some animations and saying "LOOK, THEY'RE THE SAME."

 

Which I can't trust until the game is out and a few other parties verify. Wouldn't surprise me if they remade all the models and animations with the intention of refining them along multiple releases.

i dont think you guys understand. this isnt like buying a vacuum cleaner for us where if a company doesnt make a vacuum cleaner i like i buy another one. its not about the money. it doesnt matter if they are charging 200 dollars for the game or giving it away for free. its like when my cat got lost outside my parents told me they can get me another one. they are not something you can easily replace for me. but yeah you are right im waiting for the release before i pass any final judgement

[Drak3]

5 minutes ago, spartaman64 said:

i dont think you guys understand.

I understand.

 

I.

Just.

Don't.

Care.

 

 

 

 

And the chances are, most people don't.

 

Assuming that the speculation based upon iffy leaks is correct.

[spartaman64]

1 hour ago, Drak3 said:

I understand.

 

I.

Just.

Don't.

Care.

 

 

 

 

And the chances are, most people don't.

 

Assuming that the speculation based upon iffy leaks is correct.

ok and i do care and i understand that most other people dont like pokemon and dont care so whats your point?

[Drak3]

Just now, spartaman64 said:

ok and i do care and i understand that most other people dont like pokemon and dont care so whats your point?

That, so far, the supposed issue seems to be used almost exclusively as an excuse to bash the new games, and that only a small portion of the potential audience really cares, and an even smaller portion will care enough to affect their buying decision.

[spartaman64]

1 hour ago, Drak3 said:

That, so far, the supposed issue seems to be used almost exclusively as an excuse to bash the new games, and that only a small portion of the potential audience really cares, and an even smaller portion will care enough to affect their buying decision.

you can say that about any game issue though. im sure plenty of people bought fallout 76 despite its issues and plenty of people buy COD year after year despite its issues so should we just never talk about issues in games and let the devs do whatever. in fact you can say that about any product issue pretty much. people still buy intel cpus despite all the security flaws and people still buy macs even with the butterfly keyboard

[Drak3]

Just now, spartaman64 said:

im sure plenty of people bought fallout 76 despite its issues

Fallout 76's issues did affect sales and the reputation of Bethesda and the franchise.

 

1 minute ago, spartaman64 said:

plenty of people buy COD year after year despite its issues

Most of the "issues" are non-issues that the counterculture wants to be real, and what few legitimate issues it has are usually limited to a single release.

 

And that's completely ignoring Sledge Hammer's performance.

3 minutes ago, spartaman64 said:

we just never talk about issues in games and let the devs do whatever

No, don't talk about speculation as if it were fact and condemn/condone the devs when all that is available is speculation.

[amdorintel]

2 minutes ago, Drak3 said:

No, don't talk about speculation as if it were fact

amen to that

 

 

but ltt without drama is blah

[spartaman64]

1 hour ago, Drak3 said:

Fallout 76's issues did affect sales and the reputation of Bethesda and the franchise.

 

Most of the "issues" are non-issues that the counterculture wants to be real, and what few legitimate issues it has are usually limited to a single release.

 

And that's completely ignoring Sledge Hammer's performance.

No, don't talk about speculation as if it were fact and condemn/condone the devs when all that is available is speculation.

theres been lots of leaks from data mining and a lot of them have been confirmed. and lots of separate datamines confirm the same thing. could it be some big conspiracy to make nintendo look bad maybe but i dont get the point since the game is releasing in 2 days and anyone who datamined something different would have spoken out about it

my experience with datamines is in an mmo called bdo where at the beginning a lot of stats and stuff were hidden and a guy named bloo datamined and gave us some concrete numbers and then earlier this year the company decided to make the stats visible and a lot of what he datamine 2-3 years ago have been confirmed

[RonnieOP]

2 hours ago, spartaman64 said:

it doesnt have some of the pokemon that i like and their reason for doing it seems like bs

Theres 800 pokemon out there....do you really expect every single pokemon game to include all of them? and you said "some" so it also has some you do like.

 

Seems like you are nitpicking here. So even if its a great gameplay wise you review it negatively just because it doesnt have "some" of the pokemon you like?

[spartaman64]

1 hour ago, RonnieOP said:

Theres 800 pokemon out there....do you really expect every single pokemon game to include all of them? and you said "some" so it also has some you do like.

 

Seems like you are nitpicking here. So even if its a great gameplay wise you review it negatively just because it doesnt have "some" of the pokemon you like?

if they added 10 pokemon and removed 10 i would understand then even but they removed 55% of them and dont tell me they cant because they did it in all the other games

[RonnieOP]

4 minutes ago, spartaman64 said:

if they added 10 pokemon and removed 10 i would understand then even but they removed 55% of them

so that leaves almost 400.....is that not enough for you?

and what if the 10 they left out were the ones you liked?

Its really silly to expect every pokemon game to come out to include all 800. what happens when another gen comes out. then will games after that have to put 1000 pokemon in all the games?

 

I cant think of a single game that gives me anywhere near 800 choices in characters. i cant think of one outside pokemon that gives over 300.

 

edit: even if they can.....should they have to? is the game going to be unplayable for you if it doesnt have every single pokemon that you like?

 

[spartaman64]

1 hour ago, RonnieOP said:

so that leaves almost 400.....is that not enough for you?

and what if the 10 they left out were the ones you liked?

Its really silly to expect every pokemon game to come out to include all 800. what happens when another gen comes out. then will games after that have to put 1000 pokemon in all the games?

 

I cant think of a single game that gives me anywhere near 800 choices in characters. i cant think of one outside pokemon that gives over 300.

 

like i said before i know they eventually have to cut pokemon but i didnt expect them to do so many at once

[RonnieOP]

Just now, spartaman64 said:

like i said before i know they eventually have to cut pokemon but i didnt expect them to do so many at once

they can add more later. which they will probably do if they are smart.

 

Would you rather wait another 6 months and risk having less attention plaid to actual game play just so they can make sure to have all 800 pokemon? They are still giving you hundreds. again i cant think of a single game outside of pokemon that gives you hundreds of character to play as.

 

Time is money. Do you really think they are going to spend all that time/money and do 800 unique pokemons? if they did 800 theres a good chance alot of them are going to be basically reskins of the same thing.

[spartaman64]

1 hour ago, RonnieOP said:

they can add more later. which they will probably do if they are smart.

 

Would you rather wait another 6 months and risk having less attention plaid to actual game play just so they can make sure to have all 800 pokemon? They are still giving you hundreds. again i cant think of a single game outside of pokemon that gives you hundreds of character to play as.

 

Time is money. Do you really think they are going to spend all that time/money and do 800 unique pokemons? if they did 800 theres a good chance alot of them are going to be basically reskins of the same thing.

they said they did it so they can make new models except the models seem to be literally ported from sun and moon so whats their excuse now?

[Drak3]

3 minutes ago, spartaman64 said:

they said they did it so they can make new models except the models seem to be literally ported from sun and moon so whats their excuse now?

Again, speculation on a highly questionable leak.