-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Is gamefreak the least competent developer for Nintendo?
- Thread starter Clefargle
- Start date
I know this is low on most people's complaint list, but gosh dang shiny pokemon could be so much cooler than they are. Most are super lame color filters rather than a new color scheme and only a couple have unique geometry.
I know they can do better. It's just a daunting task with so many models to maintain.
I know they can do better. It's just a daunting task with so many models to maintain.
My favorite part is that the "mods, please" shit shows that this dude doesn't even want OP to have the opportunity to criticize them at all.
Well it's also unfair to compare an open world 3d game with complete freedom to a basically 2.5d game with no real movement freedom...
I think GF do good games, their problem is 1-bad framerate games 2-no real new features...
But point 2 it's probably because the franchise is so big and their team so small that it would need too much effort...
Many people would like to see finally a more free Pokèmon game, and no more the 2.5d one that is out there by the start.... but probably GF is not the right choice to do it.
I get that there are lots of fans of the current pokemon system and that new people are hopping in all the time and such. That being said I don't get why some fans are so antagonistic towards fans of the series wanting GF to at least attempt a more drastic change (be that a console game, or even just an overhall to the combat system). There are about 14 pairs of pokemon games out right now, and I feel like if I ever wanted to go back and experience the old version's of a series after GF tried something new then I'd have nearly 24 different games I could choose from.
I guess an example would be looking at the mario series. From super mario bros on nes to super mario bros on snes there were a fair amount if changes. However none of those were on the level of changes that mario 64 introduced to the series. Nintendo took a risk with the mario franchise and it paid off, but the older 2d mario games are still master pieces that I could enjoy even after mario moved to a 3d environment.
I wish I could think of a serious jump for the pokemon franchise like from 2d mario to 3d mario, but off the top of my head I can't. Sun and moon had the most changes in series history and are my favorite pokemon in years because of the risks they took.
I just wish we could see pokemon expand and try something besides the formula they've stuck to for the past 20 years or so. Or at least not get told "if I want GF to try
something new" than I should leave.
(A bit sleepy so hopefully this makes sense/isn't too rambly)
/endramble
I guess an example would be looking at the mario series. From super mario bros on nes to super mario bros on snes there were a fair amount if changes. However none of those were on the level of changes that mario 64 introduced to the series. Nintendo took a risk with the mario franchise and it paid off, but the older 2d mario games are still master pieces that I could enjoy even after mario moved to a 3d environment.
I wish I could think of a serious jump for the pokemon franchise like from 2d mario to 3d mario, but off the top of my head I can't. Sun and moon had the most changes in series history and are my favorite pokemon in years because of the risks they took.
I just wish we could see pokemon expand and try something besides the formula they've stuck to for the past 20 years or so. Or at least not get told "if I want GF to try
something new" than I should leave.
(A bit sleepy so hopefully this makes sense/isn't too rambly)
/endramble
Oh hell no.
Pokémon games are not basic.
No. The Pokémon games are not "basically 2.5D". They are 3D. Actually play them and you'd see.
And 2. They add LOTS of new features.
Have you even played a Pokémon game?
I've said this for years.
GF are one of the shadiest and most incompentent successful developers out there.
We all know why they keep these games basic and remove features they once had and made sequels featurewise more lacking than the games before.
Because they get away with it, and not only that they are fucking successful.
I've played Sun and Y and was confused how these games got any praise? Meaning a game should be basic and easy to get into juat because the main target group are kids doesn't mean there should be no postgame or challenging stuff at all.
My 8 year old daughter beat moon so fast and she said it was way too easy... why is there still no hardmode at the beginning?
GF are one of the shadiest and most incompentent successful developers out there.
We all know why they keep these games basic and remove features they once had and made sequels featurewise more lacking than the games before.
Because they get away with it, and not only that they are fucking successful.
I've played Sun and Y and was confused how these games got any praise? Meaning a game should be basic and easy to get into juat because the main target group are kids doesn't mean there should be no postgame or challenging stuff at all.
My 8 year old daughter beat moon so fast and she said it was way too easy... why is there still no hardmode at the beginning?
The HD-level models are already in the games, that's why they run so poorly
Valkerionseven
Member
I mean its opinion on the features for the most part.
But I whole heatedly agree about performance of their games. There really is no reason for one of the worlds most prominent games, closely linked with the console manufacturer, and what not to perform the way they do.
Sun and Moon, X and Y, Omega and Alpha, all run like crap in battles, in a good number of other places too. And why? Is Nintendo just really that stingy with helping other devs, I mean we know they are pretty incompetent in many ways like all companies, but it always boggles my mind how the pokemon titles turn out in terms of quality control.
No matter how much I like them, especially recent years have been a sliding slope of performance quality.
But I whole heatedly agree about performance of their games. There really is no reason for one of the worlds most prominent games, closely linked with the console manufacturer, and what not to perform the way they do.
Sun and Moon, X and Y, Omega and Alpha, all run like crap in battles, in a good number of other places too. And why? Is Nintendo just really that stingy with helping other devs, I mean we know they are pretty incompetent in many ways like all companies, but it always boggles my mind how the pokemon titles turn out in terms of quality control.
No matter how much I like them, especially recent years have been a sliding slope of performance quality.
Silvawuff
Member
You make some good points, OP. I think it's arguable GF does a better job than Niantic, though!
The core design of Pokemon is one of the reasons the games fell off the radar for me, as much as I enjoy them. Same deal with Animal Crossing; fun premise/characters/world, horrid, sloggy execution.
The core design of Pokemon is one of the reasons the games fell off the radar for me, as much as I enjoy them. Same deal with Animal Crossing; fun premise/characters/world, horrid, sloggy execution.
1) Tajiri being autistic is an unsubstantiated claim
2) The wiki says he's an executive producer post Ruby/Sapphire
3) Even if he was, these are some backwards ass assumptions made on a profound misunderstanding of autism and how game company's are run in general
4) Seriously, what the fuck man?
Outside of the horrendous performance in battles in recent games, I wish Gamefreak would include some quality of life adjustments to the game. I'm so sick of picking up a random item and having to mash A through 'you picked up a potion, potion was put in the items pocket of your bag'. Just let me pick up items seamlessly without interrupting gameplay.
Catching Pokemon too is another example. So many boxes of text to get through at the end of a battle. I just wish the games were snappier and less tedious in this manner.
Gamefreak games definitely lack the polish that Nintendo's games are generally known for. But like many have said here, they don't need to improve them because the games sell well regardless.
Catching Pokemon too is another example. So many boxes of text to get through at the end of a battle. I just wish the games were snappier and less tedious in this manner.
Gamefreak games definitely lack the polish that Nintendo's games are generally known for. But like many have said here, they don't need to improve them because the games sell well regardless.
Now THIS is a critique I can get behind. Anything that gets in the way of playing the game like this should be excised from it. I mean, I don't need to know an item is going in a bag, it can go up the character's nose for all I care, so long as it can fit in my inventory.
Ryouji Gunblade
Member
The trend is for the games to get more convenient. Alola has the most quality of life improvements I have seen yet. So here's hoping.
They also remove LOTS of established features of previous games.
Pokemon games are basic in the sense that they never go deeper or amp up the difficulty in a big way for some areas, Sun and Moon was the first time they didn't do the same "storymode" like always(8 gym leaders etc).. and the game still felt short
Playing Pokemon since it released over here, just more objective it seems.
Huge Succeeded
Banned
problem is Game Freak has some strange ideas as to what constitutes QOL improvements sometimes. Pokemon's core systems might not be basic, but Game Freak is trying their hardest to make everything surrounding them basic. Well, basic, or needlessly obtuse.
Similar threads
- Poll