- Joined
- Oct 29, 2017
- Messages
- 5,343
- Reaction score
- 5,336
Because they... didn't. Plus, even in the sprite games the battle sprites were more detailed than the overworld sprites. It would just be ridiculous to change that.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
I’m not sure why you would quote what I said when you could easily have quoted the person who said graphics don’t matter.Except no one was making the distinction, just the statement in general that graphics don't matter. Which is a absolutely ridiculous statement in my opinion.
I'm hoping that they take the criticism to heart and improve the models. I enjoy chibi style, but it could be much better here. Better proportions and more detail for starters.
Just look at Gen 5. Prime example of a vindicated game.
It began as early as Ruby/Sapphire. Back when those got announced, reactions were similar to when SwSh got shown.
It's literally been around for years, even if we think it's only something from a couple of years back.
Quite funny really.
I used to believe in the cycle of "new game bad old games good", but then i noticed that it was something completely different. People just move on. The people that were criticizing what was the new game at the time moved on to the newer game, and the people that remain that talk about the previous game are probably the people that liked the game and are still talking about it.All of this talk about the graphics and the "golden age of pokemon" really does remind me of being a Zelda fan in the 2000's. Which is hilarious because everyone is drawing all of these comparisons to Links Awakening and Botw.
At least give a true analysis of why you like the graphics, rather than just saying, "I like it." Even though I'm not thrilled about the graphics, I thought my reasons of why were pretty thorough and reasonable:*sigh* This will be a long year... Also, love how not being displeased with the graphics is treated as being a sheep. Sorry for not hating the same things as you! Sorry for not doing the same thing I did back in 2014!
...Sorry for the rant, but I needed to get that out of my chest.
All of this talk about the graphics and the "golden age of pokemon" really does remind me of being a Zelda fan in the 2000's. Which is hilarious because everyone is drawing all of these comparisons to Links Awakening and Botw.
Respectfully, no one owes you an explanation of anything. People are free to express their like or dislike of something simply. Not everyone is comfortable with long analyses, and that’s ok.
Respectfully, no one owes you an explanation of anything. People are free to express their like or dislike of something simply. Not everyone is comfortable with long analyses, and that’s ok.
Right, I don't believe it's wrong to ask someone for their opinion or reasoning.Hey... I'm not saying they "owe" me an explanation - but the person complained that people being not displeased about graphics were being treated like sheep. How do you remove the stigma of being a blind follower, much of what the derogatory term "sheep" is given to? Show you have *some* reasoning about why you like/dislike something.
Just saying, "I like it" and just stopping at that isn't very good art critique, good or bad.
There are plenty of other people who have explained their reasoning for why they like the graphic style of the game. Just because someone doesn’t do so does not make it ok to label them as a sheep or maintain that stigma on them.Hey... I'm not saying they "owe" me an explanation - but the person complained that people being not displeased about graphics were being treated like sheep. How do you remove the stigma of being a blind follower, much of what the derogatory term "sheep" is given to? Show you have *some* reasoning about why you like/dislike something.
Just saying, "I like it" and just stopping at that isn't very good art critique, good or bad.
This isn’t what I said. What I took issue with was the demanding way in which the explanation was requested that made it sound like a requirement to avoid a label. See above post for a better way to ask someone for their thoughts.Right, I don't believe it's wrong to ask someone for their opinion or reasoning.
It's up to you to respond, though, not me. If you don't want to reply, that's fine - but it still tells me a lot about about your stance of such topics.That wasn't asking. Asking would be saying "Please tell me why you have that opinion?" or "Why do you have that opinion?" or some other similar sentence with a question mark on the end.
How can you say that when you don't know if they refused to answer someone's question?Just because someone doesn’t do so does not make it ok to label them as a sheep or maintain that stigma on them.
I said it because an explanation was demanded when one wasn’t initially given.How can you say that when you don't know if they refused to answer someone's question?
To me, it's most appropriate to say that when someone asks twice in a row, or, the person replied something like "Sorry, but I don't feel like answering your question." Neither of those happened.
Anyway, you just have to be careful not to make an argument for someone that someone could argue they did not make.
But, if it's just as principles, saying "nobody owes you an explanation" when nobody demanded it, is just as saying "it's okay to ask people for their opinion" when nobody was doing that either.
Not so. What it tells you is that I didn't answer your post. Who knows why I didn't do it. Maybe I logged off for the day. Maybe I didn't see it because my notifications are clogged. Maybe I'm kind of tired and can't think of a sufficient answer. Maybe I simply don't have an answer period. There could be any number of reasons I, or anyone else, didn't reply.but it still tells me a lot about about your stance of such topics.
Yea, I hope you're absolutely sure they were demanding an explanation. They could just as say "I wasn't demanding an explanation, but sorry you interpreted it that way."I said it because an explanation was demanded when one wasn’t initially given.
I used to believe in the cycle of "new game bad old games good", but then i noticed that it was something completely different. People just move on. The people that were criticizing what was the new game at the time moved on to the newer game, and the people that remain that talk about the previous game are probably the people that liked the game and are still talking about it.
This is why it seems that older games get more love, when they don't really. The group that criticized the game have moved on and the group that liked the game already just became extremely vocal about it.
This is also why it seems Gen 5 got "vindicated" when it didn't. The people that complained about the ice cream pokemon and the trash bag pokemon just moved on and no longer care to criticize them. And the only ones left are the people that already liked Gen 5.
So... there's a chance we could get CDI Pokémon games? If Pokémon is going to dabble in every video game genre...
Kidding, kidding.