Nintendo Pokemon Sword and Shield - Information Thread (Launching 11/15/19)

[johnny]

I agree with Xbob. The wild Pokémon system in Let’s Go was so much better. I thought it would suck but it worked so well. I was hoping they would adopt it for their mainstream games but maybe for the next one. It takes out even more of the grind. I hated having to walk through grass and encounter a pidgey every time. At least in let’s go if I wanted to encounter a bunch of pidgeys I can get an XP bonus and raise the likelihood of a rare Pokémon showing up. 

 

Im still 100% in for this. 

[Chris-]

14 minutes ago, Xbob42 said:

 I mean you're the one who called the battles in the JRPGs you play meaningless like it was a good thing. My point isn't even that random battles are meaningless, it's that Pokemon running around the overworld is both more interesting and fits the theme better, and allows you to hunt select Pokemon more efficiently, without losing anything that makes Pokemon fun.

 

And further, that unless changed significantly, battles with wild Pokemon are supremely unfun because they are not challenging in any way, but also aren't so fodder-fast that you can just breeze through them and feel powerful. They're full of long, unskippable animations and slowly draining health bars and it just breaks up the pace in a way that I think most people agree isn't very satisfying. If the wild battles were more challenging (and thus there would likely have to be less of them) then I'd be fine with it. As it stands, just hunting down the Pokemon and figuring out the best way to catch it with just Pokeballs and items feels much more streamlined, in a good way, and also separates the act of a trainer battle from the act of catching a Pokemon, which in Eevee/Pikachu felt like very distinct things and kept both avenues of gameplay feeling fresh for much longer.

 

That's not even getting into the fact that I think the Pokemon battle system even at its best feels rigid and stale and in dire need of a shakeup. All but the highest-end battles feel like a joke because the difficulty is so low and everything moves so slowly. But that I can see being a much bigger sticking point for not changing to a lot of people.

 

I’m glad you got that out of your system. Good job. 

[RedSoxFan9]

Let’s Go Pikachu is a very good remake. The random battles had pretty much killed the series for me

[Ghost_MH]

Here's my solution for wild Pokemon. Just get rid of the bringing them close to death mechanic. It would make battles far less tedious if you could just one hit KO weaker Pokemon and then throw a pokeball at them. Also, give us the option to skip battle animations. Do that in combination with good level scaling on a per area basis and you could get a pretty good challenge. Also, getting rid of random battles is a must. It was a mechanic that existed only to save on memory. There's no need for it anymore.

[Xbob42]

4 minutes ago, Ghost_MH said:

Here's my solution for wild Pokemon. Just get rid of the bringing them close to death mechanic. It would make battles far less tedious if you could just one hit KO weaker Pokemon and then throw a pokeball at them. Also, give us the option to skip battle animations. Do that in combination with good level scaling on a per area basis and you could get a pretty good challenge. Also, getting rid of random battles is a must. It was a mechanic that existed only to save on memory. There's no need for it anymore.

I think that would go a long way towards making the battles more fun. Hell, that's what you do in Eevee/Pikachu, you just KO the legendary Pokemon and then can catch them after. It's much less convoluted.

 

I still think the overall battle system could be a lot more fun and fast, though. Hell, if they just made it as fast as, like, FFX, that'd be incredible. (With a slower option for people who don't get bothered by it/prefer it to stay the same, since it wouldn't functionally change how battles work.)

[Bacon]

Wow... It's just basic pokemon that hasn't changed since 1996. Yay.

 

And Oh boy, was that "not in-game graphics" part in the end a slap to the face. That IS how a console Pokemon title should look like. Not an HD 3DS game.

 

Still, once again, Water starter = best starter.

[Ghost_MH]

3 hours ago, Xbob42 said:

I think that would go a long way towards making the battles more fun. Hell, that's what you do in Eevee/Pikachu, you just KO the legendary Pokemon and then can catch them after. It's much less convoluted.

 

I still think the overall battle system could be a lot more fun and fast, though. Hell, if they just made it as fast as, like, FFX, that'd be incredible. (With a slower option for people who don't get bothered by it/prefer it to stay the same, since it wouldn't functionally change how battles work.)

 

There's only so much Nintendo can tweak the core gameplay mechanics without messing with the competitive scene, but an easy change would be just that. Skip animations or just make everything run like 50% faster.

 

The problem with Gamefreak is that they know they can't mess with the battle engine, but they've convinced themselves that means they can't mess with anything. As more of the game gets revealed, I really hope they get creative with more of the game and take some risks.

[Keyser_Soze]

8 hours ago, Chris- said:

I can see why it would be underwhelming to someone who’s followed the series, but given that I haven’t played a Pokémon game since Yellow, I’m all about it. 

 

Well you're not missing much, you might as well replay Yellow, it will be the same thing.

 

It's super effective!

[crispy4000]

2 hours ago, Bacon said:

And Oh boy, was that "not in-game graphics" part in the end a slap to the face. That IS how a console Pokemon title should look like. Not an HD 3DS game.

HD 3DS:

Switch:


I'm quite happy with the upgrade.  Not all of it looks as good as say, DQXI, but there's moments for sure.

[Brick]

I'm looking forward to it, but I do hope they have some cool changes. Take advantage of the Switch's power, and really give us a big upgrade. 

 

Visually it's clean, but I did expect a little more. Maybe it's because GameFreak is so used to handhelds. 

[Bacon]

I have seen better graphics upgrades in the same console generation. And it still looks really close to a 3DS game. 

 

They could have at least let us fuck the Pokemon! NSFW

Spoiler

Spoiler

Because of who I am, I feel that I need to clarify that I am just joking. 

 

 

But that is some ugly shit. Wii Tier. 

[Keyser_Soze]

1 hour ago, Bacon said:

 

They could have at least let us fuck the Pokemon! NSFW

 

Rule 34 that shit bro! 

[Bacon]

8 minutes ago, Keyser_Soze said:

 

Rule 34 that shit bro! 

It this a joke agreement like "Yeah! R34 is great woo!" or do you mean something else? Cuz I totally read it differently at first. 

[crispy4000]

6 hours ago, Bacon said:

I have seen better graphics upgrades in the same console generation. And it still looks really close to a 3DS game. 

 

They could have at least let us fuck the Pokemon! NSFW

  Reveal hidden contents

  Reveal hidden contents

Because of who I am, I feel that I need to clarify that I am just joking. 

 

 

But that is some ugly shit. Wii Tier. 

I could point out some BoTW rock and tree textures that look much the same.

I won't deny there are some leaps within the same generation to similar effect.  Some launch PS2 games, for example, looked especially shit and obviously wouldn't hold a candle to GoW2.  Even still, the clouds here might be a stretch:

 

Your hyperbole is tiresome.  Switch is still a portable console.  We haven't seen enough of how DQXI will be scaled back to know how a similar looking game would compare.  Could be much more of a performance/resolution hit.

 

[Bacon]

2 minutes ago, crispy4000 said:

I could point out some BoTW rock textures that look much the same.

And of course, there are some leaps within the same generation to similar effect.  Some launch PS2 games, for example, looked especially shit.  The clouds here might be a stretch though:

  

All in all, your hyperbole is just that.

 

We aren't in the launch stage any more. And it fucking does look like a Wii game. It isn't hyperbole just because you don't like it. 

Here is SS in 1080p

Here is some HD sun and moon

And I don't think BOTW looks great either, but at least that is a fucking open world game. This game looks like it came out 2-3 generations ago. So, maybe it looks a bit better than an HD 3DS game, but it is easily on par with SS, a Wii title. 

 

 

[crispy4000]

Skyward Sword is a hard comparison, since there’s a heavy depth of field effect that works better at native res (480p) than upscaled.  It also masks a lot of texture resolution issues, as does the stylistic choice to give everything a watercolor-like blur.

 

The new Pokemon, at worst, looks like a 1st party Wii U game.   Sun and Moon looks good in an emulator, yes, scaled up way beyond what the 3DS hardware is capable of. So do many Wii games.  I’d put it closer to those on the spectrum.  The geometry is still is a generation behind what we’re seeing here.

 

Also, 3 generations ago is ps1/n64.  You really want to go there with it?

[Bacon]

13 minutes ago, crispy4000 said:

Also, 3 generations ago is ps1/n64.

Switch > Wii U > Wii > Gamecube > N64

[Bacon]

14 minutes ago, crispy4000 said:

Skyward Sword is a hard comparison

It is a literal Wii game. A Switch game should blow it out of the fucking water.

[Bacon]

20 minutes ago, crispy4000 said:

The new Pokemon, at worst, looks like a 1st party Wii U game.

Nah

 

[Keyser_Soze]

1 hour ago, Bacon said:

It is a literal Wii game. A Switch game should blow it out of the fucking water.

 

It's a wii game but like he said you can't talk about texture quality with skyward sword because it was intentionally going for a watercolor look.

[Bacon]

6 minutes ago, Keyser_Soze said:

 

It's a wii game but like he said you can't talk about texture quality with skyward sword because it was intentionally going for a watercolor look.

I mean, there is also Xenoblade. 

[Keyser_Soze]

1 minute ago, Bacon said:

I mean, there is also Xenoblade. 

 

Well that works!

[crispy4000]

2 hours ago, Bacon said:

Switch > Wii U > Wii > Gamecube > N64

 

I wouldn't consider Wii U a generation proper.  Like the Dreamcast, it kind of sits in a no man's land between generational shifts.  It also died too early to be thought of as one, IMO.

But even with the Gamecube, here's a reminder of what Pokemon looked like on that:


 

2 hours ago, Bacon said:

Nah

[Wii U videos]

The new Pokemon looks just fine compared to those IMO.




I don't see the big issue here.
 

1 hour ago, Bacon said:

I mean, there is also Xenoblade. 

X?  Fantastic looking game, perhaps the Wii U's strongest visually, albeit at 720p.  It still holds up well compared to many current gen games on Xbox One S hardware.

But I wouldn't expect a Pokemon game to best it.  Honestly though, this already looks much more attractive than Xenoblade 2 and its noticeable resolution dips / ugly sharpening filter.

[Bacon]

16 minutes ago, crispy4000 said:

I don't see the big issue here.

The issues is that it looks dated and shitty. I honestly didn't expect the first Home Console proper Pokemon to just be the same HH shit we have been getting since 1996.  There are bigger and better looking RPGs on the switch and yet this looks like crap. I mean, it had nice colors, and serviceable character/Pokemon models, but the environment looks like poo. 

 

EDIT: Like the HD Wii games look really nice, but there is still a lot of ugliness due to old textures. And this Pokemon game is like that to me. It looks like a Nice HD Wii game. 

Quote

I wouldn't consider Wii U a generation proper.  Like the Dreamcast, it kind of sits in a no man's land between generational shifts.  It also died too early to be thought of as one, IMO.

It had 5 years of life. That is enough for it to be a generation in my book. 

 

Quote

But even with the Gamecube, here's a reminder of what Pokemon looked like on that:

And RE4 and Twilight Princess looked much better. I don't even know what game that is. 

[crispy4000]

1 hour ago, Bacon said:

The issues is that it looks dated and shitty. I honestly didn't expect the first Home Console proper Pokemon to just be the same HH shit we have been getting since 1996.  There are bigger and better looking RPGs on the switch and yet this looks like crap. I mean, it had nice colors, and serviceable character/Pokemon models, but the environment looks like poo. 

Let's unpack that statement.

Xenoblade 2: Has better art direction, graphical tech and larger landscapes.  But to make it work, the dynamic resolution scaling is super active (getting sub 480p at times in portable).  Much of the texture-work is also quite lo-res.

 

BoTW: Stylized and poorly aliased.  Still looks great, and like a proper big budget production.  But a lot of the textures scream 'Switch game.'  Or maybe even Wii U game.


Valkyria Chronicles 4:  Another a stylized approach.  Looks good, but if environment detail is your metric, the shading technique does most of the legwork.


Ys VIII:


Pokemon, for comparison:

I'm not arguing its the best looking game of the bunch. But the others don't make Pokemon look like it was produced for older hardware.  Pokemon seems to be prioritizing resolution by comparison.  Not enough Switch RPGs go for a clean look.  Although I would like to see more AA in there.

[Bacon]

I don't give a flying fuck about potable mode.

 

Xenoblade 2 isn't 100% open world but the areas are fucking massive and the game still looks that fucking good.

 

BOTW Looks 50% poop and 50% great because of the art direction. But that game is also fucking huge with a massive open world and only the shrines take you out of it. I fucking hate BOTW but it pulled of a lot.

 

The other two games aren't Nintendo games but I don't care for the look. Ys looks like crap but so do all the other Ys games I have played, and they don't really have Nintendo's budget. And Like, even on other consoles Ys looks like crap. Poor example. And I don't like the way the other game looks at all. I can't really tell if it is good or bad. I dislike the art style, that is for sure.

 

 

 

 

[crispy4000]

I feel like with Xenoblade 2 they overshot the hardware, or didn't optimize it very well. Their upscale/sharpening filter is nasty, even docked:

 

It's odd because of how consistently good XCX looked on Wii U hardware.  I'll always vouch for XC2 ahead of it, but damn could it get ugly when the resolution dipped.

[Brian]

We are about to enter Year 3 of the Switch and people are still bitching about graphics? I thought this conversation was put to bed during its first year when it was obvious it is more underpowered than initial Xbone comparisons. 

[crispy4000]

54 minutes ago, ManUtdRedDevils said:

We are about to enter Year 3 of the Switch and people are still bitching about graphics? I thought this conversation was put to bed during its first year when it was obvious it is more underpowered than initial Xbone comparisons. 

I got through the entirety of XC2 just fine, blurry as it got at times.  So on a personal level, I don't really have any major complaints about the Switch's power.  The worst of it is livable, and still much improved over the 3DS.

The conversation here was about the new Pokemon being dismissed graphically as an upscaled 3DS or Wii game, moreso than a ground-up Switch game.

[TheLeon]

After this announcement, I went back to Pokemon Gold on my 3DS. That was the last generation that I was really into. I think I would be cool with a game that plays more or less like this, just way faster. 

[Rodimus]

I saw the Direct and thought they are just porting over a 3DS game on the switch. I know it is a new game but that engine looks the same.

[CastlevaniaNut18]

For some reason, I don't give a shit about Pokemon having high powered graphics. It doesn't need to, imo.

[crispy4000]

5 hours ago, Rodimus said:

I saw the Direct and thought they are just porting over a 3DS game on the switch. I know it is a new game but that engine looks the same.

It's possible, but not without a good deal of updates to the bloom lighting, material shaders, shadows, etc.  I'd wager the 'look' has more to do with it being the same team of artists.
 

Besides, the look of an engine isn't as much of a thing these days.  You wouldn't say Titanfall 2 looks like a Source game, or Arkham Knight looks like an UE3 game.  Engines can be expanded on.

[Brick]

The trailer also said that the graphics aren't final, so some textures are sure to be touched up. 

 

I'm more concerned with gameplay, and while they said they're trying new things, I hope it's substantial things to really shake things up a bit. 

[Bacon]

I always thought a console Pokemon would kinda play out like this. Not exactly, but similar.