TPC: Ultra Sun and Ultra Moon are 3DS exclusives, not due for Switch

Red Devil

Member
Not unexpected given history but it's still sad that Ultra isn't coming to Switch. A good hd port would have sold extremely well while there are still literally millions of people who would buy on 3ds.

Other than that they already said it's 3DS exclusive?
 
Sun/Moon would have been an embarrassment simply ported to the Switch. Yes, HD resolution and all. Nintendo knows this. Gamefreak knows this. They're most likely working on the next mainline game to actually take advantage of the Switch's horsepower from the ground up as we speak.

An up-rezzed 3DS game with an extra fart is certainly not how they want to make they're hardware debut on the up and coming Switch, that's for sure.
 

Puruzi

Banned
Sun/Moon would have been an embarrassment simply ported to the Switch. Yes, HD resolution and all. Nintendo knows this. Gamefreak knows this. They're most likely building a game to actually take advantage of the Switch's horsepower from the ground up as we speak.

An up-rezzed 3DS game with an extra fart is certainly not how they want to make they're hardware debut on the up and coming Switch, that's for sure.

I don't really care about Stars not happening but have you seen Sun and Moon in HD with the no lines hack? It's an extremely good looking game under the shitty 3DS resolution imo
 

ZeoVGM

Banned
Sun/Moon would have been an embarrassment simply ported to the Switch. Yes, HD resolution and all. Nintendo knows this. Gamefreak knows this. They're most likely working on the next mainline game to actually take advantage of the Switch's horsepower from the ground up as we speak.

An up-rezzed 3DS game with an extra fart is certainly not how they want to make they're hardware debut on the up and coming Switch, that's for sure.

This just isn't true. It would look just fine, as has been known for a while.
 

LotusHD

Banned
Sun/Moon would have been an embarrassment simply ported to the Switch. Yes, HD resolution and all. Nintendo knows this. Gamefreak knows this. They're most likely working on the next mainline game to actually take advantage of the Switch's horsepower from the ground up as we speak.

An up-rezzed 3DS game with an extra fart is certainly not how they want to make they're hardware debut on the up and coming Switch, that's for sure.

I guess not, but I feel that people that keep repeating this take are vastly overestimating how much people actually care. Pokemon isn't exactly a franchise known for having a reputation to uphold in regards to its appearance.
 
I don't really care about Stars not happening but have you seen Sun and Moon in HD with the no lines hack? It's an extremely good looking game under the shitty 3DS resolution imo

no, it looks awful with no lines hack
why do people think this looks good?
 

Terrell

Member
My point is the problem with rumours is that theyou are just that: rumours. It only takes one person in the chain to get a fact slightly wrong and it alters the rumour, which may get altered again along the way.

I'm not making any leaps. I'm explaining a potential reason for such a time gap. I'm not saying that's the reason, just showing that a reasonable explanation for that could exist. We do know that the next mainline Pokemon game after Stars/USM will obviously come to the Switch though, and that there will be one, unless Nintendo announces USM will be the last one (doubt it).

Saying they wanted to piss off buyers of Sun and Moon by releasing another version less than a year later to make room for a hypothetical Gen 8 Pokemon game that doesn't yet exist is not "reasonable" by any stretch. Hell, they're a year apart and people are less than pleased with it.

Eurogamer made the very specific claim that a solitary Sun and Moon 3rd version was being developed for the Switch. Now that the actual third version has been announced for 3DS as Gen V-stlye sequels, I see little reason to continue to entertain a rumor which got both the platform and the 3rd version style wrong.

Yes, because "clerical errors" that were denied to have any meaning by the company making the game have never EVER turn out to be more than that. Nope. Never. Not even once. /s
For all we know, Ultra Sun and Moon are getting a Switch version, too, and this was an oopsie that they had to clean up.

In short, there's nothing about this announcement that either proves or disproves Eurogamer until the end of the year happens and we have no announcement to show for it.

I'm right there with you in believing their information was accurate at the time. Hell, I still think we'll end up with some kind of entry by Spring of next year. But for what it's worth, they also had this to say at the time, based on their sources:

At the moment there is no reason to believe a Switch version of gen 7 is coming other than a bunch. I'll be excited as anybody if we do get surprised and get Stars exclusively on Switch this year, but there's no sense in arguing about it.

I already addressed that Eurogamer's credibility comes into question when verifying Emily Rogers' rumours, it's a bit of a pattern for them.
 
Sun/Moon would have been an embarrassment simply ported to the Switch. Yes, HD resolution and all. Nintendo knows this. Gamefreak knows this. They're most likely working on the next mainline game to actually take advantage of the Switch's horsepower from the ground up as we speak.

An up-rezzed 3DS game with an extra fart is certainly not how they want to make they're hardware debut on the up and coming Switch, that's for sure.

They did barely anything to take advantage of the 3DS's horsepower. Why would they change now?
 
I don't really care about Stars not happening but have you seen Sun and Moon in HD with the no lines hack? It's an extremely good looking game under the shitty 3DS resolution imo

This just isn't true. It would look just fine, as has been known for a while.
Yes I've seen it emulated. It looks just okay, certainly no replacement for a built from the ground up Switch title, which I imagine they far prefer.

The sheer amount of work that would have been required for an acceptable Switch upgrade simply makes no sense when they could instead devote that time to the next mainline title. If the same game with a higher res and additional content is all you want, buy your copy and simply play it emulated. Gamefreak knows better than to muddy the waters with a handheld-to-switch port.
 

Puruzi

Banned
no, it looks awful with no lines hack
why do people think this looks good?

Looks good to me dude
 

K' Dash

Member
Sun/Moon would have been an embarrassment simply ported to the Switch. Yes, HD resolution and all. Nintendo knows this. Gamefreak knows this. They're most likely working on the next mainline game to actually take advantage of the Switch's horsepower from the ground up as we speak.

An up-rezzed 3DS game with an extra fart is certainly not how they want to make they're hardware debut on the up and coming Switch, that's for sure.

Have you seen Majoras Mask 3DS in 4K?

Nintendo works with high quality assets that nobody will ever have the opportunity to see in action.

I would say a 60fps HD Ultra Sun/Moon would look really nice.
 

Champion

Member
I think this was a great idea
Nintendo are going to have major issues for stock all year as it is. They need to get their shit together and announce this when supply is fixed.

This is very smart.
I'm willing to bet production for this game started before Nintendo knew they were going to have stock issues.
 
They did barely anything to take advantage of the 3DS's horsepower. Why would they change now?

I guess not, but I feel that people that keep repeating this take are vastly overestimating how much people actually care. Pokemon isn't exactly a franchise known for having a reputation to uphold in regards to its appearance.
So on one end, the emulated 3DS game in HD looks good enough to pass as a full blown Switch game.

Now I'm hearing that their games didn't take advantage of the 3DS' hardware and don't look good enough for people to even care about the visuals. Which is it?

If people think a GF game that barely took advantage of the 3DS' power is already bad, could you imagine the bloodbath had they ported a Stars edition to the fucking Switch?
 

Red Devil

Member
Yes, because "clerical errors" that were denied to have any meaning by the company making the game have never EVER turn out to be more than that. Nope. Never. Not even once. /s
For all we know, Ultra Sun and Moon are getting a Switch version, too, and this was an oopsie that they had to clean up.

In short, there's nothing about this announcement that either proves or disproves Eurogamer until the end of the year happens and we have no announcement to show for it.

The denial is real.
 

Cleve

Member
Some of the sun/moon base assets look amazing at higher res, some just look terrible though. A straight port would not be great. Pokemon themselves look pretty good, but some of the environment textures are really low res in a bad way. Look at the drawers in that comparison pic. They don't want to release something that unpolished.
 

Puruzi

Banned
looks emulated and they kind of blend into the background because of it
what about HD with lines intact?

HD just makes the textures look horrific too

Yeah I already posted about how the textures look fucked in the other thread but tbh I don't mind. I really like how the character and Pokemon models look in HD without the lines.

Not finding any images in HD without it having the no lines hack.
 
Yeah I already posted about how the textures look fucked in the other thread but tbh I don't mind. I really like how the character and Pokemon models look in HD without the lines.

Not finding any images in HD without it having the no lines hack.

I just mean it was clearly designed intentionally to have outlines. Its an illustration technique to separate elements and it works well for a game that has such simple lighting and texture.
 

LotusHD

Banned
So on one end, the emulated 3DS game in HD looks good enough to pass as a full blown Switch game.

Now I'm hearing that their games didn't take advantage of the 3DS' hardware and don't look good enough for people to even care about the visuals. Which is it?

If people think a GF game that barely took advantage of the 3DS' power is already bad, could you imagine the bloodbath had they ported a Stars edition to the fucking Switch?

I didn't say they don't look good enough. They do imo, and a theoretical Ultra S/M/Stars port would've likely looked more than fine as well.At least, there's no reason for me to think otherwise. But at the same time, it's not exactly cutting edge either...

I just take issue with the assumption that people would be more outraged at a Stars port as opposed to not getting a game at all. The whole notion of GF needing "to do it right" when it comes to their first mainline title on the Switch is just something I don't think the average consumer would actually care about. They'd just be happy to get a new mainline Pokemon game for the Switch. From my perspective, this assumed outrage would only be justified if the eventual Gen 8 game (If we assume it's developed exclusively for the Switch) didn't look good enough.

Now obviously some people in the thread would rather the first entry not be a Switch port, but I'm just simply saying that I believe the majority would be more than satisfied with it.
 
I just hope this shit has a proper
Elite 4
and post-game (I'd kill for a Battle Frontier) this time 'round.

Facing the former was a huge disappointment for me,
Kahili and Acerola were great E4 members, but facing the Rock and Fighting kahunas again really bummed me out, especially when they had a lot of people
to pick from. They could've just removed Molayne's battle from the early parts of the game and added him and Ryuki/Burnet to make things more interesting.
 
I just hope this shit has a proper
Elite 4
and post-game (I'd kill for a Battle Frontier) this time 'round.

Facing the former was a huge disappointment for me,
Kahili and Acerola were great E4 members, but facing the Rock and Fighting kahunas again really bummed me out, especially when they had a lot of people
to pick from. They could've just removed Molayne's battle from the early parts of the game and added him and Ryuki/Burnet to make things more interesting.

what wasnt proper about them? they were far more unique in that they came up with a makeshift new league. So it kind of made sense to see them again rather than just some completely new random people.
 

LotusHD

Banned
I just hope this shit has a proper
Elite 4
and post-game (I'd kill for a Battle Frontier) this time 'round.

Facing the former was a huge disappointment for me,
Kahili and Acerola were great E4 members, but facing the Rock and Fighting kahunas again really bummed me out, especially when they had a lot of people
to pick from. They could've just removed Molayne's battle from the early parts of the game and added him and Ryuki/Burnet to make things more interesting.

I didn't see the big deal. Truthfully, I don't remember any
of the past Elite Four members I've fought in past games outside of like everything Gen 3 and before. Honestly only the Champion really sticks in your head, or at least that's how it is for me. The E4 are often always just these random people you're seeing for the very first time that you have absolutely no reason to care about, and will likely never see again anytime soon. It made sense what they went for Alola, where the people you meet are constantly supporting you in your journey, so of course some of them would be a part of the E4. At the very least, it was refreshing to see old faces.
 
I didn't say they don't look good enough. They do imo, and a theoretical Ultra S/M/Stars port would've likely looked more than fine as well.At least, there's no reason for me to think otherwise. But at the same time, it's not exactly cutting edge either...

I just take issue with the assumption that people would be more outraged at a Stars port as opposed to not getting a game at all. The whole notion of GF needing "to do it right" when it comes to their first mainline title on the Switch is just something I don't think the average consumer would actually care about. They'd just be happy to get a new mainline Pokemon game for the Switch. From my perspective, this assumed outrage would only be justified if the eventual Gen 8 game (If we assume it's developed exclusively for the Switch) didn't look good enough.

Now obviously some people in the thread would rather the first entry not be a Switch port, but I'm just simply saying that I believe the majority would be more than satisfied with it.
I think you also need to look at it from GF's perspective too. Spend precious dev time scaling both texture and geometry on most assets to get it looking appropriate on a console on a game that already had it's grand reveal and sell-through on handheld hardware simply to satiate a fraction of their impatient Switch fanbase?

Or bust the doors down with a built-from-scratch Switch title that had all resources poured into one platform from the start, and will have the hype and anticipation only a debut title in a key pillar franchise can have, undampened by a port muddying the franchise's exposure on new hardware.

I think as a dev with limited resources already occupied with the Ultra edition and a new mainline title, it's clear where to place priorities.
 

LotusHD

Banned
I think you also need to look at it from GF's perspective. Spend precious dev time scaling both texture and geometry on most assets to get it looking appropriate on a console on a game that already had it's grand reveal and sell-through on handheld hardware simply to satiate a fraction of their impatient Switch fanbase?

Or bust the doors down with a built-from-scratch Switch title that had all resources poured into one platform from the start, and will have the hype and anticipation only a debut title in a key pillar franchise can have, undampened by a port muddying the franchise's exposure on new hardware.

I think as a dev with limited resources already occupied with the Ultra edition and a new mainline title, it's clear where to place priorities.

I don't really care what GF is doing, their decision has been made, they have limited resources/time to work with, etc. etc. I get that, I'm aware of it. All I've been saying is, I just don't think Pokemon fans care as much as you and others think they would about having a Switch port, and then having the "real" game/Gen 8 built for the Switch lol

That whatever potential bloodbath may have happened in that scenario, would likely pale to the current scenario we're in where Switch owners are upset that they aren't getting a game at all at this point in time. Obviously Switch owners have to get over it, but I'm sure if given a choice, they'd prefer that port that would've been an "embarrassment".
 

Terrell

Member
You're thinking of Laura Kate Dale.

No, I'm not.

The Legend of Zelda: Breath of the Wild, Nintendo's biggest Switch game, will not be available when the console launches in March.

That's according to a new report which details the game's current state of development, and which tallies with information provided to Eurogamer by sources close to Nintendo.

Last night, reliable Nintendo tipster Emily Rogers detailed the game's localisation schedule, which will now continue through until the end of 2016. "Four-to-six months of testing will follow" before the game launches.
 

Pokemaniac

Member
Yes, because "clerical errors" that were denied to have any meaning by the company making the game have never EVER turn out to be more than that. Nope. Never. Not even once. /s
For all we know, Ultra Sun and Moon are getting a Switch version, too, and this was an oopsie that they had to clean up.

In short, there's nothing about this announcement that either proves or disproves Eurogamer until the end of the year happens and we have no announcement to show for it.

Here's a new idea for you: sometimes mistakes are just that, mistakes.

Look, I get that that random mistake and that random 4chan post leave a slim possibility open that there's another game coming for Switch, but you're sticking pretty hard to a rumor that's on some pretty shaky ground right now. The far more reasonable read of the situation as it currently exists is that Game Freak has one team on Ultra Sun and Moon right now and the other on Gen VIII for the Switch.

Besides, when exactly would this theoretical Switch game even release? It'd pretty much have to be 2018 unless The Pokemon Company is in the middle of a pretty massive troll right now and is prepping to reveal it next week.
 

Terrell

Member
Here's a new idea for you: sometimes mistakes are just that, mistakes.

Look, I get that that random mistake and that random 4chan post leave a slim possibility open that there's another game coming for Switch, but you're sticking pretty hard to a rumor that's on some pretty shaky ground right now. The far more reasonable read of the situation as it currently exists is that Game Freak has one team on Ultra Sun and Moon right now and the other on Gen VIII for the Switch.

Besides, when exactly would this theoretical Switch game even release? It'd pretty much have to be 2018 unless The Pokemon Company is in the middle of a pretty massive troll right now and is prepping to reveal it next week.

Without knowing the full 2017 lineup, I can't tell you when it would release. Not a clue.

The Eurogamer article, statements by TPC, the recruitment ad for positions on contract for a console Pokemon project ending in May 2018 at the latest? Lots of smoke for there to be no fire.

And before you counter "that could be for Gen VIII!", do you honestly think Gen VIII will be finished by next year to make sense of the contract end date? Because that seems impossible.
 
Game freak have just been too busy working on Red and Blue 2 for the Switch.

Engine built from the ground up to take full advantage of it's capabilities.

Pokemon will follow you everywhere.

Postgame will be strong.

Multiplayer matchmaking perfected.

And. No. Frame. Rate. Slowdowns.

Believe.
 

Oersted

Member
To be honest their entire report could be dismissed. Some things mentioned in that report:

Sun and Moon versions to Switch
Zelda to miss launch, coming later in the year
Mario is now a launch title

It's entirely off on everything

Zelda got rushed. Mario is basically done, they just delayed to have a big holiday title.
 
Also I don't understand why everyone is complaining about these being enhanced versions now (and we don't even know that for sure) and that they're a lazy cash grab when everyone and their moms kept saying Game Freak should do exactly that, stating those often had a higher amount of polish and ended up being among the best games in the series (Platinum, Black2/White2, or even Emerald). Just dig up some of the post SM threads if you don't remember.

I'm not too salty about the announcement, but Sun/Moon JUST came out in November, it's still selling well. We know GameFreak does third versions, but never THIS soon.
 
To be honest their entire report could be dismissed. Some things mentioned in that report:

Sun and Moon versions to Switch
Zelda to miss launch, coming later in the year
Mario is now a launch title

It's entirely off on everything

Don't forget Mother 3 and GameCube VC.

This is a good "note-to-self" moment for the future. Nintendo/Game Freak/TPC as companies are very set-in-ways. If a "credible" leaker hypes up something that flies in the face of their normal modus operandi, regardless of whether they got something else right, don't fall for it.
 
Game freak have just been too busy working on Red and Blue 2 for the Switch.

Engine built from the ground up to take full advantage of it's capabilities.

Pokemon will follow you everywhere.

Postgame will be strong.

Multiplayer matchmaking perfected.

And. No. Frame. Rate. Slowdowns.

Believe.

I know it's a meme but you do realize GSC are the sequels to RBY?
 
To be honest their entire report could be dismissed. Some things mentioned in that report:

Sun and Moon versions to Switch
Zelda to miss launch, coming later in the year
Mario is now a launch title

It's entirely off on everything

To play Devil's advocate:

- They reported on a single-game version of Sun/Moon coming to Switch, not a dual version
- Zelda potentially missing launch was sourced by a few different people. Due to the timing of that report it's very likely that plans changed
- Mario fed into the Zelda rumor above. It seems like the original plan was for Mario to be a backup launch game if Zelda wasn't ready.

I'm still in the camp that yesterday's Direct doesn't outright prove them wrong. It'd take Nintendo not announcing anything at E3 for me to question Eurogamer's sources on that one.

Before it gets said, I don't buy into the narrative that their source not mentioning 3DS games as a way to discredit their original report. IIRC, their reporting was exclusively about Switch.

Don't forget Mother 3 and GameCube VC.

This is a good "note-to-self" moment for the future. Nintendo/Game Freak/TPC as companies are very set-in-ways. If a "credible" leaker hypes up something that flies in the face of their normal modus operandi, regardless of whether they got something else right, don't fall for it.

I don't recall the Mother 3 and Gamecube VC rumors being proven false. We don't even have details on Switch's Virtual Console yet... Why do we feel the need to jump through hoops so we can start rumor-led witch hunts?
 
Again, Eurogamer reported that plans had changed and that Zelda would be a launch title after all a week before it was announced as such.
 

hank_tree

Member
There's still enough wiggle room in that statement for Pokémon Ultra Eclipse to come out on switch.

Maybe it's 2 games in one?Eclipse + Ultra Eclipse.
 
Top Bottom