• Hey everyone, staff have documented a list of banned content and subject matter that we feel are not consistent with site values, and don't make sense to host discussion of on Famiboards. This list (and the relevant reasoning per item) is viewable here.
  • Do you have audio editing experience and want to help out with the Famiboards Discussion Club Podcast? If so, we're looking for help and would love to have you on the team! Just let us know in the Podcast Thread if you are interested!

Reviews Pokémon Scarlet & Violet | Review Thread

Well, that's worse than I expected. I am still looking forward to tomorrow, but it seems that, once more, the takeaway is that Game Freak needs to get their shit together. And I am not blaming the developers here, because they have to work with whatever they are given, which does not seem like it's enough; I am blaming the company's leadership.
 
0
At least, given the recent job listings, they seem to already be preparing for the "Switch 2", so that's a mistake they won't make for next gen. I also don't think they're using the in-house engine Nintendo uses for most of their games, maybe that'd be a good idea to switch to that ? I suppose Nintendo would be more than happy to send them some technical support rather than have a game be released in a poor state like that.

In the end Gamefreak is a third party dev. Moresoe than, say, Intelligent Systems, as those are really only doing Nintendo games (and the FEH mobile one) and iirc don't even have a single IP that isn't co-owned by Nintendo.

I just don't see Nintendo giving them access to their in-house engine.

They should look at UE, it's the most mature one and should be adaptable enough for their needs. Plus they'd have a stellar support.
 
Ok now tell me where I said Pokémon is shit, thank you :)
You never did. It's basically the implication of your post.
Pokémon was never a masterpiece. Deal with it.
There are very good Pokémon games, but they lack in almost everything compared to other games.

But Pokémon is still fun today, so let’s have fun

Edit: And I now see that you've added a "And, where I said that I play / everyone play Pokémon just for the creatures. Thanks again!" to your second post. These are not words I put into your mouth, this is just the sentiment your post conveyed to me given that some people share this sentiment of "pokemon sucks but I can't leave it". I'm not saying this is how you necessarily feel. Though your post is ambiguous enough where I can't tell with certainty.

I hope I made myself clear. My post wasn't meant to be insulting if a bit harsh.
 
Last edited:
In the end Gamefreak is a third party dev. Moresoe than, say, Intelligent Systems, as those are really only doing Nintendo games (and the FEH mobile one) and iirc don't even have a single IP that isn't co-owned by Nintendo.

I just don't see Nintendo giving them access to their in-house engine.

They should look at UE, it's the most mature one and should be adaptable enough for their needs. Plus they'd have a stellar support.
If they go for UE, which would also be a good idea, they'll have to drastically increase their number of employees. It really feels like they're too short-staffed to release so many games on the Switch hardware. They either need help or more people, preferably both.
 
If they go for UE, which would also be a good idea, they'll have to drastically increase their number of employees. It really feels like they're too short-staffed to release so many games on the Switch hardware. They either need help or more people, preferably both.

I agree, this isn't a "one or the other" situation, it's a "everything needs to be done" one.

Like i posted on page 1, there's two options GF / TPC have. It's more dev time at the cost of less frequent new Pokemon generations, or it's an internal overhaul GF needs to do.

Option 1 seems like it's about the same chance of happening as Sony releasing GoW on Switch.

But the issue with Option 2 is that we're talking about a fundamental overhaul, which takes years, so it would likely mean GF would have to skip a full mainline Pokemon gen for it.
 
For God's sake, Nintendo Life gave these a 7. The same guys who dared to give Sword&Shield an 8!

(They probably thought: "Oh, sh*t. We need to give some validation to our reviews. Let's make this lower no matter if the result is better!)
 
That Pokemon metacritic so far...

Either Gamefreak needs more dev time or they need more technical people to optimize their games. Nothing to do with the Switch hardware.

I'll get Violet one day......maybe.
 
0
I read that this game performs better on portable instead of docked, which sounds strange but I guess it makes sense since it's pokemon.
I wonder if they'll do a big patchwork in the coming weeks or if they're going straight to the expansion pass.
After the reviews I decided to buy the copy from amazon fr that will arrive next week since it costs 50€ and I'm not dying to play this game day 1.
POKEMON HYPEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE
 
0
I don't think they necessarily need to switch to UE or some third party engine. But they do need more dev time, at least to fix up their tech debt. More people working on their internal engine wouldn't hurt either, they can afford them just fine.
 
this game doesn't look like anything that shouldn't run 100% flawlessly on switch. the fault here is with gamefreak, not the switch hardware.
While this is true, there's no denying that framerate and popins are becoming a widespread issue on Switch this late in its lifetime. Even this year alone, games like Sonic Frontiers and No Man's Sky suffered from same problems. I don't blame the devs for prioritizing better resolution as the mainstream cares about that more but with a more powerful hardware, they could have had both.
 
Kinda interested to see the DF analysis of the game. I'm sensitive to low performance (I find Age of Calamity to be unplayable, for instance), but I'm hoping that not being an action game will mean I can ignore it more easily.

That said, at the end of the day Game Freak are, technically, middling at best. I'm used to their games not performing well since they went to 3D: Gen 6 was awful if you enabled 3D, Gen 7 double battles ran like molasses on an o3DS, SwSh wild area was a stuttering mess if you went online.

It shouldn't be acceptable and criticism is deserved but it doesn't seem like GF have the ability or will to optimise properly and I'm not sure how you get them to do it. Maybe Switch 2 can brute force it.

They probably can't brute force it.

The trouble gamefreak has is they can't (1) release almost every year, (2) Keep adding new features needed to keep the audience excited like moving to an open world game properly (3) maintain all the features from the past games and (4) meet the graphical standards people want from them.

If we're lucky they could maybe manage two, the big problem they have is the games sell way too much to be able to cut back the release schedule so (1) is non negotiable. So instead, we've ended up with products that have massive cutbacks in both features, like no real interactivity between games in the same gen (BDSP and SWSH would have been able to trade and battle directly were they 3DS or earlier games) and the pokedex having massive cutbacks (...arguably also done deliberately because one of the most practical ways to sell DLC a year later is "look we brought back a bunch of additional pokemon!"), longstanding features that should be somewhat trivial to implement going awol, like the Set battle option this time, and graphical knocks like are being mentioned in the reviews.

But until it actually hurts the sales of the games in a significant way [unlikely!], they've got their hands tied.
 
I don't think they necessarily need to switch to UE or some third party engine. But they do need more dev time, at least to fix up their tech debt. More people working on their internal engine wouldn't hurt either, they can afford them just fine.

I mean there are reports / rumors that even huge 3rd parties like EA have issues in maintaining their in-house engines ... i feel like maintenance of an engine has become so bloated that it's just a bad idea to keep doing it unless you're having technical wizards like Monolithsoft or the teams that maintain Nintendo's own in-house stuff.

Go with a third party one and adapt it to your needs.
 
The core game itself must be very good. I'm gonna wait and see if GF iron out these issues until the game is hopefully in an acceptable state.
 
For God's sake, Nintendo Life gave these a 7. The same guys who dared to give Sword&Shield an 8!

(They probably thought: "Oh, sh*t. We need to give some validation to our reviews. Let's make this lower no matter if the result is better!)

A lot of people really enjoy Sword and Shield. Ultimately that review is one person's opinion.
 
It’s wild that they got an external dev to help them with yearly releases and instead decided to squeeze another game in there. It’s becoming harder and harder to take the excuses about "release schedules" serious.
 
It was very clear to me that the games were gonna score lower than Sw/Sh. After all what happened with those reviews and their scores, it was safe to assume that most reviewers were going to be "more severe" to reassure their credibility.

It's a bit unfair as everybody seems to agree on that these games are miles better than Sw/Sh, and some put them among the best in the series. I never care about scores, and much less about Pokémon games ones. I just can't wait to play them, even if they are going to be my Christmas gif and I'll have to wait some more time.

Every picture I see I have to remind myself that I'm seeing a Pokémon game picture. I still can't believe it. My most waited game of the year, and even one of the most waited of the generation since I saw the first trailer.
 
I mean there are reports / rumors that even huge 3rd parties like EA have issues in maintaining their in-house engines ... i feel like maintenance of an engine has become so bloated that it's just a bad idea to keep doing it unless you're having technical wizards like Monolithsoft or the teams that maintain Nintendo's own in-house stuff.

Go with a third party one and adapt it to your needs.
Sure, more and more studios are dropping their internal engines but as you've said, this is not the case with Monolith or EPD, as they've got people with the chops to maintain their engines just fine.

Either way works (3rd party engine reworked - internal engine updated) but I feel like the problem lies within the time GF gives themselves (apparently) to update their tools and ship their games. 3 years. How many AAA RPGs that don't reuse many assets (like GF games) are on a 3 year turnaround, especially when they've got internal staff on their Gear Project as well.

Who can say if this is all gonna get fixed magically on its own with this trajectory.
 
0
Gen 1 and 2 in particular are games held together by duct tape and sticks. They are extremely unbalanced gamed with so many glitches and half baked ideas that only got away with it due to the era in which they were made. What's your favorite gen 2 feature? The fact most of Kurt's special pokeballs don't work? That a good chunk of the new Johto Pokémon are in the Kanto half of the game only? The fact that the game still has barely any dragon or ghost pokemon despite having multiple trainers that specialize in the type? Or the fact that a ton of the new Johto pokemon are really bad and wouldn't be salvaged until gen 4 when they got evolutions like Murkrow, Misdreavus, Aipom, Togetic, Yanma, Gligar, or Sneasel? Rip to all the gen 2 Pokemon that still completely suck like Dunsparce, Delibird, Sunflora, Ledian, Ariados, or Macargo.

This is a very reductive take, you're looking at the games retroactively and only through the perspective of a dedicated Pokémon fan who has already played several subsequent games that improved on them. And these things aren't even important at all for the average player, in the grand scheme of things it doesn't detract from the fun of the game if Togetic isn't viable in competitive or if the type distribution in the game isn't balanced, especially at a time where the single player experience was the priority over competitive (and I honestly sorely miss that).

Gen 1 and 2 are by all means masterpieces considering what they brought to the table at the time and on the Game Boy. They redefined the monster collecting genre and were leagues and bounds more popular than even big established names in that same genre (Dragon Quest Monsters and SMT for example). It was one of the very first games in the industry to have strong social interaction elements in a time when we didn't even had internet connection, Pokémon influenced trends that are still extremely popular and expanding today. They are also still extremely encompassing games to this day due to the sheer amount of party combinations, Pokémon RBY is one of the RPGs with the biggest amount of party members to this day (if it isn't the biggest only losing to subsequent Pokémon games) and it's insane that that was on the Game Boy in 96. GSC was one of those sequels that hugely improves on the foundation and elevates it to its full potential. The real time clock system was revolutionary at the time and is another thing that is still present in the industry full force more than 20 years later. Visiting Kanto in the post game is one of gaming history most memorable moments and a huge ambition to fit in a Game Boy cartridge. It was also one of the very first "open world" RPG experiences we had even if very rudimentar and yeah, even if long time fans of the franchise nowdays can see it has technical balancing problems.

RBY and GSC are absolutely masterpieces, their importance, influence and enduring power in the industry not to mention pop culture is only paralleled by greatest. Subsequent games obviously improved on them, it would be ridiculous if they didn't, but they wouldn't even exist without the GB games.

I don't think anyone would deny Zelda 1 was a masterpiece because it has problems and limitations in comparison to modern Zelda games, that's a phenomenon I only see in the Pokémon fandom, like the franchise's legacy should stop being celebrated in order to enhance perception of the more modern games.
 
You never did. It's basically the implication of your post.


Edit: And I now see that you've added a "And, where I said that I play / everyone play Pokémon just for the creatures. Thanks again!" to your second post. These are not words I put into your mouth, this is just the sentiment your post conveyed to me given that some people share this sentiment of "pokemon sucks but I can't leave it". I'm not saying this is how you necessarily feel. Though your post is ambiguous enough where I can't tell with certainty.

I hope I made myself clear. My post wasn't meant to be insulting if a bit harsh.
You are wrong man. I love Pokémon because like I said it’s still fun to me. But I really think, compared to a LOT of games, they’re just ok.

I play Pokémon because i like the gameplay structure, even if it’s the same as always. I like Pokémon because of the creatures, characters, region and more things. Just saying that they aren‘t masterpiece doens’t mean that they’re shit.

Fun games that I still enjoy with my old and new friends. I hope it’s clear now what is my vision about the brand.
 
As for the performance issues, I guess I'll wait until I play the game to judge. It's impossible to gauge performance these days taking on accounts on the internet, whenever I see people talking about performance problems like it's a disaster it's usually something I can barely notice.

I'm sure there are problems, but that won't stop me from greatly enjoying the game, just like what happened with SMTV. It's a shame SV ended up getting lower scores than SwSh, but I guess that problem was that that one had way higher scores than it should have.
 
It’s wild that they got an external dev to help them with yearly releases and instead decided to squeeze another game in there. It’s becoming harder and harder to take the excuses about "release schedules" serious.
Yeah I doubt people are gonna forget about pokémon if they go from a 3 to 4 year new gen cycle. Both their new gen game and their mid-gen one get more dev time and they can always outsource something to a 3rd party if they want an holiday game a year.
Every picture I see I have to remind myself that I'm seeing a Pokémon game picture. I still can't believe it. My most waited game of the year, and even one of the most waited of the generation since I saw the first trailer.
Kind of feel the same. Though I'm still bummed out by the performance ahah
You are wrong man. I love Pokémon because like I said it’s still fun to me. But I really think, compared to a LOT of games, they’re just ok.

I play Pokémon because i like the gameplay structure, even if it’s the same as always. I like Pokémon because of the creatures, characters, region and more things. Just saying that they aren‘t masterpiece doens’t mean that they’re shit.

Fun games that I still enjoy with my old and new friends. I hope it’s clear now what is my vision about the brand.
Your original post, especially the "they lack in almost everything compared to other games." simply gave me the idea for my reply. You just worded it poorly I imagine.

Of course now I get how you feel about Pokémon. It's cool, no problem.
 
I guess that problem was that that one had way higher scores than it should have
No, the problem is that we shouldn't be scoring media in the first place. The numbers become unreliable because there's no real consensus on what a 7 means, nor is a 7 always better than a 6.

So basically I have no problem with SwSh scoring higher than S/V, because the scores are largely arbitrary in the first place.

I have a gut feeling that if you're giving Nintendo and/or TPC the legal plans that would allow them, they'd happily ditch Gamefreak
Honestly, yeah, just let Game Freak handle the art and the Pokemon, get another dev to actually do the coding.
 
0
Just give Pokemon to Monolith Soft
Please don't.


Lower than Sword&Shield!

These games can't be worse than that can't they?

(Seriously though, Gen 8 has cursed the franchise)
Sword and shield are fine, actually.


The reviews are disappointing, and it does seem like the technical issues are harming the enjoyment of the game even if the core gameplay is as good as (or better than) other entries by the looks of it.

Still excited to try out Paldea, though.
 
I have a gut feeling that if you would give Nintendo and/or TPC the legal plans that would allow them to, they'd happily ditch Gamefreak.
Nah. they won’t.

You don’t dump a team that reliable that’s able to realize titles consistently. Even with current performance issues. 4 titles in 5 years of switch.

tho, Technically I think TPC is Nintendo. Since it was created by them, Creatures and Gamefreak themselves.
 
Starting to believe that GF removing options with every entry has little to do with some mysterious design ethos but is just something they do out of necessity in a desperate attempt to cut down QA time. And now it’s caught up with them.
 
I honestly don't get it... was it so so so important to launch S&V this year? Arceus dropped in January, a fairly surprising move for everyone, and that game could have also been substantially benefited with some more dev and polish time. Looking at the situation now, it is still surprising to me that they didn't push Arceus as this hollyday game and S&V for next year. And yes, I know, other factors push decisions too - marketing, merchandising, anime... but Arceus had its own anime, it had its own share of new Pokemon, and it could have just expanded a little bit, right?
 
Reading some of the reviews, it basically seems like an enjoyable game with blatant technical issues. Isn’t that pretty much what everyone was expecting?
 
Wow those are some consistent performance complaints

At least it seems to be better in handheld, wasn't going to play this docked anyways. And I'm practically performance immune myself
 
0
Legends Arceus proved to me GF still got it, somewhere in there there still exists that great developer that is capable of making those amazing magical adventures I grew up with. But it seems they're buried under corporate decisions that stops them from having the time they need to be ambitious and perfect their vision. And I don't mean TPC, I mean the higher ups at GF itself, it's more more and more clear GF does make most of the decisions regarding the games, and the problems we have are simply due to those decisions following the opposite path of what hardcore fans want.
 
This is a very reductive take, you're looking at the games retroactively and only through the perspective of a dedicated Pokémon fan who has already played several subsequent games that improved on them. And these things aren't even important at all for the average player, in the grand scheme of things it doesn't detract from the fun of the game if Togetic isn't viable in competitive or if the type distribution in the game isn't balanced, especially at a time where the single player experience was the priority over competitive (and I honestly sorely miss that).

Gen 1 and 2 are by all means masterpieces considering what they brought to the table at the time and on the Game Boy. They redefined the monster collecting genre and were leagues and bounds more popular than even big established names in that same genre (Dragon Quest Monsters and SMT for example). It was one of the very first games in the industry to have strong social interaction elements in a time when we didn't even had internet connection, Pokémon influenced trends that are still extremely popular and expanding today. They are also still extremely encompassing games to this day due to the sheer amount of party combinations, Pokémon RBY is one of the RPGs with the biggest amount of party members to this day (if it isn't the biggest only losing to subsequent Pokémon games) and it's insane that that was on the Game Boy in 96. GSC was one of those sequels that hugely improves on the foundation and elevates it to its full potential. The real time clock system was revolutionary at the time and is another thing that is still present in the industry full force more than 20 years later. Visiting Kanto in the post game is one of gaming history most memorable moments and a huge ambition to fit in a Game Boy cartridge. It was also one of the very first "open world" RPG experiences we had even if very rudimentar and yeah, even if long time fans of the franchise nowdays can see it has technical balancing problems.

RBY and GSC are absolutely masterpieces, their importance, influence and enduring power in the industry not to mention pop culture is only paralleled by greatest. Subsequent games obviously improved on them, it would be ridiculous if they didn't, but they wouldn't even exist without the GB games.

I don't think anyone would deny Zelda 1 was a masterpiece because it has problems and limitations in comparison to modern Zelda games, that's a phenomenon I only see in the Pokémon fandom, like the franchise's legacy should stop being celebrated in order to enhance perception of the more modern games.
There is a very big difference between limitations at the time they were released like Zelda 1 or Metroid 1, and games that flat out didn't work as they were intended to. The worst thing you can say about Zelda 1 is that it's localization lead to either incorrect clues like "Eastern Peninsula has a secret" instead of "you won't be able to use the bow if you have no money", or mechanics that don't exist on the nes like "pols voice hates loud noise" but no famicom controller 2 mic to use.

Pokemon Gen 1 had a ton of issues that even as a kid I realized something was wrong. Like how characters in game and in the anime say "use ghost Pokémon against psychic types" only Psychic types were immune to ghost by accident. Or the fact that "moves that can't miss" could easily miss, or that you could surf/fish in statues, or invisible pcs you could access. Even as a kid the bizarre distribution of pokemon (like only 3 ghost pokemon, 3 dragon pokemon, or 5 ice pokemon pokemon vs 33 poison pokemon and 32 water pokemon) or how psychic types were comically unbalanced, or how charmander is a horrible starter that a lot of players will get stuck at Brock because there's virtually no wild pokemon before his gym that can beat rock/ground.

These aren't just looking at gen 1 or 2 with modern lens, these were issues that impacted players from day 1 even if they didn't fully understand what the problem was. What you won't see me do is criticize gen 1 for things like the lack of qol improvements like the running shoes, the limited battle animations, the general slowness of battles, the primitive story, the lack of a way to rematch npcs, etc. Those are all actually improvements made in later generations that make Gen 1-2 harder to go back to but are forgivable for the time they were released.
 
Welp, I guess the Pokémon Company/Gamefreak etc. really need to think about their development pipeline in the future. I know yearly/bi yearly releases are a thing, but with their current goals with the games these games need more time in the oven.

I mean I enjoyed Sword and Shield, but it also left me wanting more from the franchise; I think they are on the right path, but they need time to produce something that really propels the franchise in the right direction.
 
0
There is a lot to manage in a franchise where the number of models and attacks keeps grwoing at such a pace. The technical issues here are pretty bad though. They look like they needed more time.

The games look a lot more basic than other open world games on Switch. Something like Xenoblade 3 looks a lot better while seemingly having less technical issues. Honestly I dont know why they decided to push 3 main line pokemon games out within a 12 month period. Really feels like overkill.

I would note though that there are way more models involving animation in pokemon than any xenoblade game. Xenoblade 3 does not have many unique enemy models compared to Xenoblade 2. The idea monolith could jump from that to the type of volume in pokemon without a hitch seems misguided.

Game Freak really needs to expand their technical chops though. They aren't close to where they need to be for a Switch game
 
So far looks like reviewers have been less enthusiastic about this one. Not super surprised, generally the vibes have turned against Gamefreak in the broader gaming community.

Very fucking excited for this, might even stay up to play at midnight.
 
There is a very big difference between limitations at the time they were released like Zelda 1 or Metroid 1, and games that flat out didn't work as they were intended to. The worst thing you can say about Zelda 1 is that it's localization lead to either incorrect clues like "Eastern Peninsula has a secret" instead of "you won't be able to use the bow if you have no money", or mechanics that don't exist on the nes like "pols voice hates loud noise" but no famicom controller 2 mic to use.

Pokemon Gen 1 had a ton of issues that even as a kid I realized something was wrong. Like how characters in game and in the anime say "use ghost Pokémon against psychic types" only Psychic types were immune to ghost by accident. Or the fact that "moves that can't miss" could easily miss, or that you could surf/fish in statues, or invisible pcs you could access. Even as a kid the bizarre distribution of pokemon (like only 3 ghost pokemon, 3 dragon pokemon, or 5 ice pokemon pokemon vs 33 poison pokemon and 32 water pokemon) or how psychic types were comically unbalanced, or how charmander is a horrible starter that a lot of players will get stuck at Brock because there's virtually no wild pokemon before his gym that can beat rock/ground.

These aren't just looking at gen 1 or 2 with modern lens, these were issues that impacted players from day 1 even if they didn't fully understand what the problem was. What you won't see me do is criticize gen 1 for things like the lack of qol improvements like the running shoes, the limited battle animations, the general slowness of battles, the primitive story, the lack of a way to rematch npcs, etc. Those are all actually improvements made in later generations that make Gen 1-2 harder to go back to but are forgivable for the time they were released.

To me, these still seem like very small and technical issues that only matter if you're putting the game under a magnifying glass. Balancing wasn't that important at the time because, like I said, the priority was the single player adventure, competitive Pokémon wasn't a real life sport like it is today. I think for most kids the balance issues were never a problem, but I can only speak for myself - they weren't, the game was what it was, I didn't have a similar more balanced game to compare them to because Pokémon was totally unique at the time, and therefore what I was playing always felt right. Even today, as someone who never gave a hoot about competitive, the balance in the GB games don't bother me, on the contrary, even with psychic pokémon and whatnot their difficulty was way batter balanced than modern games. The game was much bigger than its balance problems, and it's good that they were good and successful enough that they spawned sequels that could correct these problems. Considering the points I made in my previous post I'd say the games not only work as they intended to, but are much bigger than the sum of their parts.
 
Anything mentioned about the difficulty/challenge of the game?
There's challenge to be found in some parts but you have to go explicitly go out of your way to look for it and maintain it yourself. There is no challenge if you play "normally" and don't restrict yourself somewhat, but that is true for most Pokemon games.
 
There's challenge to be found in some parts but you have to go explicitly go out of your way to look for it and maintain it yourself. There is no challenge if you play "normally" and don't restrict yourself somewhat, but that is true for most Pokemon games.

I'm thinking about having three different teams, one for each challenge. How feasible do you think that is? Are the challenges similar in lenght?
 
And this time they've removed the set/shift style and option to turn off battle animations! Can't have too many options! Geez...
The franchise has been ruined for me sadly and it hurts because it used to be so beloved
 
0
There's challenge to be found in some parts but you have to go explicitly go out of your way to look for it and maintain it yourself. There is no challenge if you play "normally" and don't restrict yourself somewhat, but that is true for most Pokemon games.
Still the same as lgpe and sw/sh it seems.
 
0
I'm thinking about having three different teams, one for each challenge. How feasible do you think that is? Are the challenges similar in lenght?
One path is structured a lot differently and can be done a lot earlier so 3 teams might be a bit much. What I ended up doing was having a rotating team of about 10 Pokemon and the levels kind of worked themselves out.

This wasn't so bad because the new Pokemon in this are really coo land I wanted to use most of them anyways lol.
 
The lead paragraph from Eurogamer feels like exactly what I would have said after seeing any of the trailers:

An interesting reworking of the traditional Pokémon gameplay for an open-world setting brought low by its lifeless environments and graphics.

I'm glad they are doing something really different, and I hope they will be able to realize it better on the next iteration. It would be disappointing to see them return to the older formula after this, so I hope the games sell well despite the technical issues (and acknowledge that some would get very angry at me for saying this).
 
0


Back
Top Bottom