Official Pokémon Sword and Shield speculation thread (Updated June 5th, 2019)

[Oriden]

Gamefreak could easily outsource the development of the models and animation to another company or developer to make that happen or even with another of their smaller Gamefreak owned companies like Genis Sonority again if they had more numbers . Something like this dramatically changes the outlook of the game in a huge way. They have the money, name and power to make this happen.

Don't they already do that, since Creatures makes the models, not Game Freak?

 

[William-Jdubz]

Don't they already do that, since Creatures makes the models, not Game Freak?

Im not sure who does the move animations however, but why they changed from the BR style must have been a limitation of the 3ds im assuming.

 

[William-Jdubz]

This is a very fair point, but what seems to be the case is that Game Freak has/will be slow to the uptake when it comes to graphics because I don't think that's so much a priority for them. They'll make the graphics nice but that's about as far as they're willing to go since I don't think there's a huge incentive to dump a ton of resources into making things super pretty (yet).

Yeah this has never been a strength of GF or something they seem interested in. Would be nice to have something a lil more flashier or vibrant.

 

[prog rocker]

Im not sure who does the move animations however, but why they changed from the BR style must have been a limitation of the 3ds im assuming.

Sincerely, I don't think there's a reason why they couldn't use them. They used what I think were HAL's models in Colosseum and XD with no problems, so I don't see why they couldn't use them again (modernized, of course).

 

[TechSkylander1518]

When we see the mc in front of the grass gym, there are fences there. The ropes of the fences have not shadows only the wooden stakes do.

Small objects sometimes don't have shadows, because it's not worth the time to put in a shadow that size.

Spoiler

To the right, the town casts large, prominent shadows. To the left, the cacti cast barely any shadow at all, because they're too small to cast a particularly noticable one.

You can actually see part of a rope's shadow in this shot, too.

Spoiler

the texture of the side wall in the red city where the female mc crosses the bridge is low-res:

It looks pretty on-par with other building textures on the Switch to me.

Spoiler

the texture of the symbol on the mc shirt in the last scene is low-res

It appears for one second in a cutscene-it's not surprising that they wouldn't make a high-resolution version of something that's generally going to be seen at a distance.


Even taking all these as flaws, these are pretty minor things. We have

• Some ropes on fences don't have shadows
• Background trees don't have shadows
• A dirt and grass path is low-res
• A logo on a shirt is low-res

Is this really the difference between good and bad graphics? If these were fixed, would you consider SwSh to have impressive graphics? You haven't said anything about shots without these issues, like the indoors or icy locations.

Smash doesn't need a moving camera (I mean, why?), Xenoblade has a moving camera, not a perfect one but hey

Doesn't really change my point.

 

[William-Jdubz]

Sincerely, I don't think there's a reason why they couldn't use them. They used what I think were HAL's models in Colosseum and XD with no problems, so I don't see why they couldn't use them again (modernized, of course).

Exactly my thoughts. Just slap a new render, Just BR alone has done 50% of your pokemon already with Gens 1-4, so they could easily go about this if they wanted.

 

[Knightwolf09]

Small objects sometimes don't have shadows, because it's not worth the time to put in a shadow that size.

Spoiler

View attachment 117126

To the right, the town casts large, prominent shadows. To the left, the cacti cast barely any shadow at all, because they're too small to cast a particularly noticable one.

You can actually see part of a rope's shadow in this shot, too.

Spoiler

View attachment 117128

It looks pretty on-par with other building textures on the Switch to me.

Spoiler

View attachment 117122View attachment 117123View attachment 117124

It appears for one second in a cutscene-it's not surprising that they wouldn't make a high-resolution version of something that's generally going to be seen at a distance.


Even taking all these as flaws, these are pretty minor things. We have

• Some ropes on fences don't have shadows
• Background trees don't have shadows
• A dirt and grass path is low-res
• A logo on a shirt is low-res

Is this really the difference between good and bad graphics? If these were fixed, would you consider SwSh to have impressive graphics? You haven't said anything about shots without these issues, like the indoors or icy locations.

Doesn't really change my point.

All those flaws sounds like stuff that'll be fixed by the finished product. I want to bring up the first X and Y trailer. Look at how the gamepaly looked then compare to the final product. Huge difference in the end, looked much better.

 

[prog rocker]

Exactly my thoughts. Just slap a new render, Just BR alone has done 50% of your pokemon already with Gens 1-4, so they could easily go about this if they wanted.

You know, now that I think about it, I wonder if anything happened to those models. Is there a chance they got lost or something.

 

[Joker901]

Small objects sometimes don't have shadows, because it's not worth the time to put in a shadow that size.

Spoiler

View attachment 117126

To the right, the town casts large, prominent shadows. To the left, the cacti cast barely any shadow at all, because they're too small to cast a particularly noticable one.

You can actually see part of a rope's shadow in this shot, too.

Spoiler

View attachment 117128

It looks pretty on-par with other building textures on the Switch to me.

Spoiler

View attachment 117122View attachment 117123View attachment 117124

It appears for one second in a cutscene-it's not surprising that they wouldn't make a high-resolution version of something that's generally going to be seen at a distance.


Even taking all these as flaws, these are pretty minor things. We have

• Some ropes on fences don't have shadows
• Background trees don't have shadows
• A dirt and grass path is low-res
• A logo on a shirt is low-res

Is this really the difference between good and bad graphics? If these were fixed, would you consider SwSh to have impressive graphics? You haven't said anything about shots without these issues, like the indoors or icy locations.

Doesn't really change my point.

Sorry but your point is that since Mario does have some flaws, Pokemon is allowed to have them too? Or that since people play pokemon on handheld we have to assume no one is ever gonna see these graphics on a big fhd tv?
And by the way, can we now compare Pokemon to Zelda or Mario about the flaws but if we just mention them for other stuff they did good people start screaming that Pokemon is not Breath of the wild? The graphics have flaws, not the worst thing in the world, right? Let's just not act as if we have to like them no matter what.

Gamefreak could easily outsource the development of the models and animation to another company or developer to make that happen or even with another of their smaller Gamefreak owned companies like Genis Sonority again if they had more numbers . Something like this dramatically changes the outlook of the game in a huge way. They have the money, name and power to make this happen.

It's a possibility, but honestly, what makes you believe they will/want to ask for help to another company? Cause it doesn't seem the case...

 

[TechSkylander1518]

I don't think that's possible-even if they were lost somehow, it wouldn't be hard to get a copy of BR and get them back.

 

[Synthaphone]

Those models would need to be completely redone- they’re super low poly, PBR reuses the same models from Stadium 1. I agree that it was really nice to see all the unique attack animations, but most of those models unfortunately don’t hold up, and I don’t think upgrading the textures and renderer would do much to disguise their age on the Switch like how it kind of did for the Wii.

 

[prog rocker]

Those models would need to be completely redone- they’re super low poly, PBR reuses the same models from Stadium 1. I agree that it was really nice to see all the unique attack animations, but most of those models unfortunately don’t hold up, and I don’t think upgrading the textures and renderer would do much to disguise their age on the Switch like how it kind of did for the Wii.

Yeah, but on the other hand, it would be kind of better than seeing a Salamence or a Xatu that looks like it's hanging from the ceiling.

 

[William-Jdubz]

Sorry but your point is that since Mario does have some flaws, Pokemon is allowed to have them too? Or that since people play pokemon on handheld we have to assume no one is ever gonna see these graphics on a big fhd tv?
And by the way, can we now compare Pokemon to Zelda or Mario about the flaws but if we just mention them for other stuff they did good people start screaming that Pokemon is not Breath of the wild? The graphics have flaws, not the worst thing in the world, right? Let's just not act as if we have to like them no matter what.


It's a possibility, but honestly, what makes you believe they will/want to ask for help to another company? Cause it doesn't seem the case...

I mean the LOZ team has on multiple occasions and even Xenoblade 2 incorporated multiple artists from a wide range of different video game and manga franchises. Not saying its impossible, but Pokemon likely never would anyway but they more than have the capability of doing so.

 

[William-Jdubz]

Yeah, but on the other hand, it would be kind of better than seeing a Salamence or a Xatu that looks like it's hanging from the ceiling.

Yeah this, a lot of Pokemon with their 3ds models look just really whack, some are quite lifeless. Just a lil fixing here and there could transform that.

 

[Synthaphone]

Yeah, but on the other hand, it would be kind of better than seeing a Salamence or a Xatu that looks like it's hanging from the ceiling.

I mean, the frustrating thing to me is that its not the models!! they have animations where both of those Pokemon (and Swellow, and all of the rest of the Eternally Flying Pokemon) are grounded and look normal, but they only show up in Pokemon Amie/Refresh. I’d love for them to fix that too, Sky Battles was a really silly reason to mess up how those Pokemon look in battle.

I really think the models are mostly (mostly...) solid, and that there are a lot of genuinely nice animations for them! But it does suck that most Pokemon get only 2 battle animations each, with only a select few having additional battle animations or idle animations. I’ve been longing for someone to document all the unique animations for each Pokemon in the 3D games for some time, just to be able to look at all of them.

I also think there are some animations that look like they were done by a beginner, so kind of stiff and lifeless, and that aforementioned decision to make some Pokemon permanently suspended in the air, and I’d love if they’d redo those... and completely remodel Butterfree, who lost all of its appeal in order to match the oldest, most lifeless piece of Sugimori art instead of all of its more recent sprites and Sugi artwork. That’s the one small thing that drives me bonkers, they ruined Butterfree for no reason!! Aaghh.

 

[Desdar300]

There is no hint of a mythical. I doubt they'd reveal them at the same time, for that matter.

Hi Silk

 

[TechSkylander1518]

Sorry but your point is that since Mario does have some flaws, Pokemon is allowed to have them too?

My point was that these issues that you have with it are so minuscule that they don't affect the overall quality of a game's graphics. Odyssey does not have bad graphics just because some cacti in the distance don't have shadows, or because a building doesn't have a super high-render building texture.

Or that since people play pokemon on handheld we have to assume no one is ever gonna see these graphics on a big fhd tv?

What? Literally nothing in my posts discussed these looking different on handheld.

And by the way, can we now compare Pokemon to Zelda or Mario about the flaws but if we just mention them for other stuff they did good people start screaming that Pokemon is not Breath of the wild?

1. Yes, people can think that comparisons don't always work. For example, someone could think it was fair to compare the animation style in Gravity Falls to that of the Simpsons, because both are cartoons, but that same person could also think it was unfair to compare the paranormal element in Gravity Falls to that of the Simpsons, because the Simpsons isn't primarily about the paranormal. It's not contradictory to look at multiple aspects of something.
2. These forums are not a hivemind. I am making my arguments independent of other people. Another user saying you shouldn't have compared Pokemon to BotW on one thing has absolutely no bearing on what arguments I make in a different discussion. (And nobody's "screaming that Pokemon isn't BotW"-don't assume bad faith)

The graphics have flaws, not the worst thing in the world, right? Let's just not act as if we have to like them no matter what.

Nobody said anything about you having to like them. The issue is that when Knightwolf asked what was wrong with the graphics (and when other users have asked in the past), you responded with these very specific issues, and used them to judge the whole game's graphics. You've even stated that your opinion of them is fact.

Guys, it's not like I'm the one not liking them, it's a fact, the graphics are not great.

I've said thousands of times, I've never stated these games will be bad. These just look like 3ds games on the switch. That's a fact.

And you've made several rude comments to other users for disagreeing with you.

This entire comment makes me realize we definitively have the games we deserve as a community.

About the engine, yes, my eyes told me so, you don't really need anything else.

If these graphics aren't to your taste, that's fine. You don't need a reason to personally dislike something. But when you're telling people that the graphics are objectively terrible because of minor flaws, you can't expect everyone to agree, and that doesn't give you a right to be rude about it.

 

[prog rocker]

I feel that the graphics discussion will keep going on and on until we get something else.

 

[Knightwolf09]

I feel that the graphics discussion will keep going on and on until we get something else.

We literally have nothing else, I'm bored out of my mind, and this wait is killing me

 

[Kit Chan]

Im not sure who does the move animations however, but why they changed from the BR style must have been a limitation of the 3ds im assuming.

I think they chose to to match the simple and fast style of the 2D main series games. I think it's good for the majority of single player, but I wish the more dynamic style would return for gyms, multiplayer, battle frontier, battle royal etc. With them using stadiums as gyms now, it would be very fitting. I also miss BR's water animations.
If they bring back physical contact animations from BR, I hope they touch them up, cos honestly, Stadium's air punches were much more compelling than my Lucario slowly walking up and gently kneeing the opponent with an "Iron Tail" (I also liked the way steel moves turned the pokemon completely metal for the attack in Stadium 2, as opposed to BR giving them a grayish tint)