Search results for query: *

....okay? guess actively sabotaging your brand is admirable now? work.

Final Fantasy was, at its core, a very "stagnant" and similar series until 10. sure, different story. sure, some different mechanics. but the root of the games were still the same.

evolution is good, but it's also dependent on growing and developing what is already being done successfully. to further the comparison: Pokemon has been growing and developing even though it still feels the same. Final Fantasy has been chasing fads rather than focusing on doing what they do...

so if you don't want to play a Pokemon game....then don't play it. there's a reason why Final Fantasy has been in the shitter for eons and why Pokemon is still around. the fundamental problem Pokemon fans have is they keep expecting Pokemon to be something it's not. it's like walking up to a...

because i don't play pokemon for the graphics? the graphics are stylized enough that in a couple generations no one will care. like rule #1 of graphics: the more effort you put into realness, the worse your game is going to look over time. further, i would say the whole notion of the graphics...

that would certainly be very on brand for the fans.

i don't get how "going back to 2D" would be an acceptable solution when the biggest beef people have with the 3D isn't the quality in and of itself so much as the fact that "but pokemon has tons of money and this is what we get"? which like, playing Pokemon for the graphics? weird flex, but okay.

so going against the grain of a few others here, i don't think they'd've made that decision, however i also don't think that the games would have significantly changed. you know, other dimension where XY and SM are in 2D instead of 3D and considering Game Freak's past games.....yeah they're...

i feel that's kind of subjective. especially considering the fact that they'll improve with time anyways and the fact that they're probably going to be shooting for longer development cycles anyways (based off of some of their statements).

i don't understand the 'fixation' of returning to 2 or 2.5D. it just seems like a double-standard and nostalgia-baiting.

for what it's worth, that's kinda predicated on the game's pokedex being "small," meaning that patching pokemon in after launch (and making announcement) would be an effective form of damage control. for all we know Game Freak may have cut like, 100-200 pokemon, so from their perspective saying...

the number of cutscenes was normal, the only problem is that it constantly had to load a different perspective for them (whereas most prior games just kept with the top-down perspective). one can only hope that SwSh handles the dialogue perspective better this time.

i doubt SwSh will reduce the number of cutscenes or make them skippable. it'll probably even be about the same as SM, although it might feel better because everything isn't islands.

i mean, if i browse reddit the bulk of the comments are going to be negative. quick browsing of matome and the reception seems a bit more mixed. has the culling been officially announced in Japan?

nah the comment was clearly written in English; in the replies he says so himself by saying that his English is so good because he lived in, not the US or the States, but "the United States." but there's a fundamental problem as a whole though: they're clearing overcorrecting throughout the...

are we basing this off of that one YouTube comment? because that comment is very questionable to me.

when the backlash hasn't hit the point of "any [brand] content gets bombarded," then it's not quite the large-scale backlash one may think. don't forget, it's an echo chamber in here. i suppose David did beat Goliath. (in this case, the few hundred comments on Pokemon's Tweets are certainly the...

you all are severely overestimating the backlash. the hashtag isn't even a big splash anymore and wasn't even much of a splash to begin with. the only video with a significant like to dislike ratio (lol at using that as a metric) is the Treehouse video, which is still sub-1m views. this is in...

i mean, the op of the original post already explained that numbers wouldn't directly match-- compression. which, yeah, with compression there shouldn't be any huge barriers to size, but the more you compress something and the more that compressed something is used, the more performance issues...

that would depend on whether or not the freed up resources can actually be used or be useful. if you're inefficiently using disk space and it forces you into a 32GB cart but having efficient or more efficient usage could push you back into a 16GB, then yes. if it drops you down a couple of gigs...