Predictions I am dreading the Pokemon Black and White remakes...

[Phosphorescent Skeleton]

Speaking of gen 5 vs nu-pokemon* games, I saw a recurring image on an infamous online website which I will not name (which coincidentally happens to host the worst kind of opinions on the franchise). That image helped me better understand the utter fallacy that nu-pokemon enjoyers live on: the idea that more features alone somehow improve the experience rather than the game design basis, the soundtrack, the plot development, the aesthetics and whatnot.
*any mainline game past gen 5

The image in question:

As someone who not only has played every single mainline pokemon game up until legends arceus but actually OWNs multiple of these titles, I can easily read through the fallacy presented in the image above.

While it is true that gen 6+ brought a lot to the table in terms of features, everyone who's a gen 5 lover and gets it when it comes to what makes a good pokemon game realizes that the problem with every. single. gen. after 5 boils down to things that games before gen 6 nailed down just fine:

• the OST
• the game design (routes and their enemies and available pokemon, quests, etc...)
• the pacing and interruptions (cutscenes, roadblocks, etc...)
• the aesthetics (specially how gen 5 sprites made mons feel "alive" and pop out of the screen despite the game being mostly 2d)

Even if old pokemon indeed had some shortcomings when it came to the aforementioned topics, the overall quality of each was definitely higher.
*Eg: the pokestar studios arc, the men blockade on certain routes, etc...

But going back on topic: the clueless people who look at the image above may think that the poster indeed had a point and I'll use theirs to further explain the (same) problems that happen on gen 7 and 8:
They claim the animations and 3d models that came with gen 6 was a great addon despite however, the fact that nearly EVERY single 3d model suffers from a lack of saturation so severe that certain pokemon's shiny versions are nearly indistinguishable from their non-shiny counterpart. Not only that, but the idle animations for many pokemon are so devoid of soul that it makes the characters look more static than the 2d sprites in previous titles.
Some of the easiest examples that come to mind are typhlosion's 3d model and scarmory.

The poster also boasts about battle BGs despite the fact that on his own image, two of the presented backgrounds are as plain and uninteresting as gen 5's. An issue that later games like SWSH didn't address. In fact, they made it worse: not only plain backgrounds are a thing (eg: team yell hotel fight) but the game sometimes even loads a background that has barely anything to do with the cutscene that precedes it (eg: iirc, a certain fight vs hop at a bridge).

Now, I will not comment on the bottom screen minigames and widgets as well as the added online functionalities as those are indeed uncontestable improvements. But I still think it's kinda dumb things like customization in gen 6 being mentioned considering most of the cosmetics in gen 6 are recolours/reskins. This issue still happens on sword and shield albeit I think customization in that game improved coming from X and Y.

Lastly, one thing that certainly got my attention: the cherry-picking with route design. Not only they ignore how every game after gen 5 feels cramped to walk around (due mainly to the distance between route limits but also the route design itself) but they also picked some of the most unfair comparisons between routes: one of the smallest map sections in BW: the cold storage instead of say, pinwheel forest.
This is something recurrent with nu-pokemon simps who like to shit on gen 5: they often present extreme cases of shortcomings in previous gens to try and invalidate claims from old fans that their games were better whilst completely ignoring flaws on their own titles.


I know I made a very expansive post and probably didn't get my point across to many people ITT yet, so I'll try to sum it up as best as I can:
The mainline franchise under new management is imo, incapable of presenting a new game up to the standards of the old titles. This isn't because GF isn't capable of doing so. It's a problem that comes down to development time and management. Even though BW2 released about only a year before X and Y, the original game was released way earlier and many of the assets were re-utilized (unlike gen 6) as the map, sprites, scripts, music, etc... are essentially the same

So in reality, gen 6 despite the massive paradigm shift was possible due to how GF had a wider time gap between a big release compared to say, pokemon moon vs ultra moon or even USUM vs SWSH.
I think that a nearly 3 or 3.5 year gap would be ideal between generations and I'm glad that at the very least, GF is done with mid-gen rehashes like USUM.


On my ideal world, a perfect gen 5 remake would basically come down to:

• a game with environment and character designs for 3d models reminiscent of SWSH* but improved upon, fixing idle animations for certain mons and their texture colours
• animations on par with legends arceus with ideally, graphical effects up to the standards set by pokemon battle revolution on the wii
• following pokemon as well as non-instanced battles like on legends arceus although I'd be completely okay with instanced battles as long as the legwork for battle BGs is present
• KEEP the game's content intact and maybe even expand upon it (no, a warning sign saying that "the black city project has started!" is NOT acceptable)
• don't mess with the game's difficulty
• don't downgrade the OST

*main town aesthetics, not the wild area and emphasis on aesthetics as routes even for the main towns are pretty mediocre

Well, this was one hell of a post. And I didn't even get into details such as my hate boner for gen 6's melodically uninspiring OST (hell, the elite 4 theme alone made me lose all hope with it's awful buildup with a techno bgm that ends up resulting in the most boring climax ever. And I'm not even going to get into how NONE of the people who I spoke with who defend the game could name a single piece of the OST that wasn't: lumiose or the bike theme.

Ok

 

[BGBW]

It's funny because the Diamond/Pearl remakes aren't the only games on the Switch that stick closely to the 2D aspect of the source material - we also have Link's Awakening. So the idea that a Black/White remake sticking to this model it would automatically be bad just because of one example when we have a perfectly good counter example is just total fear mongering.

The real fear is if they get rid of the low health music. That was great and should never have disappeared with the later titles.

 

[Aether]

I could name multiple gen v sprites that aren't animated through just tweening and actually have more going on than you think. Flying pokemon alone are an example but here: https://www.pokencyclopedia.info/en/index.php?id=sprites/gen5/ani_black-white
go look for yourself.

• the way pikachu opens his mouth and moves his arms
• literally every pokemon with wings
• moltres' flames
• kecleon's tongue*

etc...
*which was completely drained out of it's soul in xy, he just stands there now, barely even moving. same goes for many of the flying pokemon and even non-flying ones.
But sure, keep telling yourself that "it's just tweening" and that 3d models look better.

Also, like I said: I'd rather take 2d sprites than some boringly undersaturated blastoise that is barely even animated. And yes, I said it: BARELY. Like, have you ever seen pokken's animations? pokemon colosseum? battle revolution? all of these SHIT on entirely animation-wise on any gen 6+ game.

"But sure, keep telling yourself that it's just tweening" after linking me an entire page with countless examples that prove me right is, again, a bit hilarious. Absolutely funny that Pikachu opening his mouth and flipping its arm is PEAK ANIMATION while Pikachu having physical attack, special attack, damage, sleeping, eating, happy, sad, walking, running and more animations is "barely animated" (and this is not getting into indirect visual improvements that 3D models allowed in battle, like dynamic camera movement and animated trainers in-battle) because... a different game had better animations? Sounds like BW loses this comparison too, due to not having any outside of monsters vibrating and tweening in place, which is a thing that various other RPGs on the GBA and NDS had already managed to include.
You'd rather take the 2d sprites anyday? Why, I'd insist that you take 'em keep 'em.

To me the comparison is like FE in 3D and the GBA sprites:
the sprites hafe an inherent snapyness, an energy, that many of the 3d animations cant match. And they deliver that with almost nothing. While tere are a ton more 3D animations for the characters.

3D is the right way, the improved a lot over time, but the point of lackign contrast and some rather lifeless animations stands.
and i prefere snappy boring sprite movement to lifeless borign animations.

Its kinda weird... great 3D animations are the way to go. heck, even medium grade 3D animation that hase some soul.
But as mentioned, Pokemon fing Stadium has more expressive animations then some of the pokemons in newer games.

Also, some designs really did not make the switch to 3D that well. Typhlosion is a great example, blastois to. Those look better in 2D in my opinion. Other look better in 3D. But with the move to 3D i feel like the roundness of many pokemon got emphasized. Eve works like a charm in 3D, and has many expressive animations.

 

[Aether]

It's funny because the Diamond/Pearl remakes aren't the only games on the Switch that stick closely to the 2D aspect of the source material - we also have Link's Awakening. So the idea that a Black/White remake sticking to this model it would automatically be bad just because of one example when we have a perfectly good counter example is just total fear mongering.

The real fear is if they get rid of the low health music. That was great and should never have disappeared with the later titles.

... i was anoyed that its an 1:1 remake that in my opinion is asidegrade to the original game...
(it ruined the surreal creepy atmosphere of the original for cutesy stuff, and even when they used the buttons to not have the menu open all the time...they still did not use all of them, and i had to menu dive more then was needed...... then i feel like the screen transitions where not needed, and the game was to short/simple for the 60$ price tag...and could not keep 60fps)

(Still a good game thou, just not the definitive way to play the game, more of a side by side thing for me)

 

[Sheldon]

To me the comparison is like FE in 3D and the GBA sprites:
the sprites hafe an inherent snapyness, an energy, that many of the 3d animations cant match. And they deliver that with almost nothing. While tere are a ton more 3D animations for the characters.

The sprite work of classic Fire Emblem is in a whole different league. I truly think anything that came before and after it was better than the pixelated, coiling blobs of Black & White. They mark an unfortunate transition phase between 2D and 3D marring an otherwise exceptional entry in the Pokemon series.

 

[Aether]

The sprite work of classic Fire Emblem is in a whole different league. I truly think anything that came before and after it was better than the pixelated, coiling blobs of Black & White. They mark an unfortunate transition phase between 2D and 3D marring an otherwise exceptional entry in the Pokemon series.

Yeah im not gona pretend that the pokemon sprites are on the same level as GBA FE, far from.
But it still benefits from the smearing and Squash and stretch that they just dont do that much in 3D (probably because its more work to have the models still look good). many pokemon just looked sleaker during their B&W sprite days.
and with te zooming i felt like the battles in BW felt snappier and more dynamic then XY. Legends is the first time where i feel good about 3D pokemon battles, and it also solved the boring background problem.

 

[niconiconick64]

"But sure, keep telling yourself that it's just tweening" after linking me an entire page with countless examples that prove me right is, again, a bit hilarious. Absolutely funny that Pikachu opening his mouth and flipping its arm is PEAK ANIMATION while Pikachu having physical attack, special attack, damage, sleeping, eating, happy, sad, walking, running and more animations is "barely animated" (and this is not getting into indirect visual improvements that 3D models allowed in battle, like dynamic camera movement and animated trainers in-battle) because... a different game had better animations? Sounds like BW loses this comparison too, due to not having any outside of monsters vibrating and tweening in place, which is a thing that various other RPGs on the GBA and NDS had already managed to include.
You'd rather take the 2d sprites anyday? Why, I'd insist that you take 'em keep 'em.

What part of the word "just" from that sentence you couldn't understand?
Also, I find it funny how to better prove your point, you completely ignored the examples in which I stated how some 3d models like kecleon's were ripped out of their idle animations entirely. Whilst completely ignoring my point on flying pokemon's animated sprites vs 3d models where they just glide around or instances where they just stand still on the fucking ground until issued an order.

Also, all those examples I cited on better animated games are SPINOFFS, not mainline. I merely cited them to prove a point that GF's OVERALL animation in mainline games still has lots of work to be done to reach a point where it can actually be considered good. Key word here OVERALL, since I KNOW that GF has actually brought out decent/good animations in mainline games before (eg: z-moves) but I'm talking about the general animation quality, not specific cases.

"b-but muh different animations for attack, damage, sleep and poke amie!!??"
I already said how those widgets/minigames introduced in XY/ORAS were actually uncontestably good additions, yet you ignored that. Besides, those are animations that you don't see in battle anyways, only poke amie interactions.

Btw, are we just going to ignore how tacky certain moves where contact is supposed to happen like double kick which in gen6+ is a mere TEENY TINY hop animation followed by a sprite of two feet stamped on the enemy target? like, I could give a whole set of examples similar to this in gen6+ games but I'd rather not, considering how you'll probably follow up with the dumbass argument of "but gen 5 tho" as if a 35$ game* where the actual gameplay content is solid should've been a production where animations and graphics are the focus of investment instead.

*And before you point out how XY, SM and USUM were about the same price as BW/BW2, I'd like to make my point clear once again:
I'd rather have a game (BW/BW2) with a WAY better OST, better gameplay, better late game, better aesthetics, colorful and good looking sprites and a more interesting plot than the shitshow that is gen6+.

 

[niconiconick64]

It's funny because the Diamond/Pearl remakes aren't the only games on the Switch that stick closely to the 2D aspect of the source material - we also have Link's Awakening. So the idea that a Black/White remake sticking to this model it would automatically be bad just because of one example when we have a perfectly good counter example is just total fear mongering.

The real fear is if they get rid of the low health music. That was great and should never have disappeared with the later titles.

The difference here being that the link's awakening remaster doesn't have the MC chibi character running around like he pooped his pants.

 

[Sheldon]

Yeah im not gona pretend that the pokemon sprites are on the same level as GBA FE, far from.
But it still benefits from the smearing and Squash and stretch that they just dont do that much in 3D (probably because its more work to have the models still look good). many pokemon just looked sleaker during their B&W sprite days.
and with te zooming i felt like the battles in BW felt snappier and more dynamic then XY. Legends is the first time where i feel good about 3D pokemon battles, and it also solved the boring background problem.

It'd be a different proposition with sprites on the level of Fire Emblem. I'd take that. And prinicples like squash and stretch aren't incompatible with 3D models. I'd take more of those, too. But also it's not like the Pokemon games haven't progressed in the post X/Y era as the designers learned to take advantage of new possibilites. Aegislash, Toxapex, Salazzle, Passimian, Turtonator, Mimikyu, Cramorant, Falinks, Urshifu aren't the same characters without their defining animations and a gimmick like that of Polteageist wouldn't happen at all with 2D graphics.

 

[Aether]

It'd be a different discussion with sprites on the level of Fire Emblem. I'd take that. And prinicples like squash and stretch aren't incompatible with 3D models. I'd take more of those, too. But also it's not like the Pokemon games haven't progressed in the post X/Y era as the designers learned to take advantage of new possibilites. Aegislash, Toxapex, Salazzle, Passimian, Turtonator, Mimikyu, Cramorant, Falinks, Urshifu aren't the same characters without their defining animations and a gimmick like that of Polteageist wouldn't happen at all with 2D graphics.

I did not say they are incompatible (we have enough examples even in the games i asume), but that its semingly harder with 3D animation and some animations for some moments are clearly lacking them, maybe because it wouldbreak theyr "cuteness" expectation or something.
It did improve, some pokemon animations from the 3D games would on the other hand be almost inposible to translate well to 2D. They did improve, i did mention that Legends if already far above what we got in X/Y.

All im saying is that its not a clear cut "one is better then the other", and i can still se some prefering sprites overall, depending on what they aprechiate more and how much of a turnoff some models/animations are to them (and the 3D games had a lot of stinker animations, derpy looking mons that lost all their charme, etc)

I get it. movign so many monsters to 3D was hard. Not nailing the style and animation from the start, shure.
them having to go high on poly count so that they dont have to rework everything every time...yeah, get that (even if the 3DS battle animations where really slide shows in some moments...that was to low)

Its just, its the biggest franchise in the world, the move to 3D was a decade ago, and then when i compare how full of character some SMT5 demons are, and how tiny the franchise and budget is in comparison... my patience is wearing thin, even if legends was OK. (still, the story segments fellt so stiff and barebones...seing what games like Xenoblade can do...)

In short: 3D is fine and the right direction, biggst problems did get rectified, still not where it has to be, some sprite animations still fit the pokemon better then the 3D stuff they got.


Oh, and while im at it: its okay to have clean flat shaded pokemon, but some would benefit from some more details and grit. not every pokemon needs to be cute. Either go full on cartoon artstyle or add some texture and shading to some, but the current trajectory is kinda neither for me.
Example outside of pokemon: mario. His Brawl textures where to much. but his odyssey model is great, keeps the cartoon style, but ads the right amount of details.

 

[Deleted member 3315]

I really think the "remake series" should just end with BDSP. Clearly, GF didn't want any more of that, and TPC didn't afford ILCA a lot of resources either.

Let's continue with the Legends series instead.

 

[Bonejack]

I wonder if they're doing it "traditional" like BD/SP or if they try to remake them in ScarVio style.

 

[Bowser Sr.]

What part of the word "just" from that sentence you couldn't understand?

'pokemon'

Also, all those examples I cited on better animated games are SPINOFFS, not mainline. I merely cited them to prove a point that GF's OVERALL animation in mainline games still has lots of work to be done to reach a point where it can actually be considered good. Key word here OVERALL, since I KNOW that GF has actually brought out decent/good animations in mainline games before (eg: z-moves) but I'm talking about the general animation quality, not specific cases.

"b-but muh different animations for attack, damage, sleep and poke amie!!??"
I already said how those widgets/minigames introduced in XY/ORAS were actually uncontestably good additions, yet you ignored that. Besides, those are animations that you don't see in battle anyways, only poke amie interactions.

Btw, are we just going to ignore how tacky certain moves where contact is supposed to happen like double kick which in gen6+ is a mere TEENY TINY hop animation followed by a sprite of two feet stamped on the enemy target? like, I could give a whole set of examples similar to this in gen6+ games but I'd rather not, considering how you'll probably follow up with the dumbass argument of "but gen 5 tho" as if a 35$ game* where the actual gameplay content is solid should've been a production where animations and graphics are the focus of investment instead.

*And before you point out how XY, SM and USUM were about the same price as BW/BW2, I'd like to make my point clear once again:
I'd rather have a game (BW/BW2) with a WAY better OST, better gameplay, better late game, better aesthetics, colorful and good looking sprites and a more interesting plot than the shitshow that is gen6+.

Wut? Going on a sudden meltdown about things like videogame prices out of nowhere with the addition of various imaginary preemptive arguments that you're invested in assuming I was going to make makes it clear to me that this is a subject that frankly gets you bent out of shape and makes you unappealing to talk to, so again, keep your tweening idle sprites and your grudge too.

To me the comparison is like FE in 3D and the GBA sprites:
the sprites hafe an inherent snapyness, an energy, that many of the 3d animations cant match. And they deliver that with almost nothing. While tere are a ton more 3D animations for the characters.

3D is the right way, the improved a lot over time, but the point of lackign contrast and some rather lifeless animations stands.
and i prefere snappy boring sprite movement to lifeless borign animations.

Its kinda weird... great 3D animations are the way to go. heck, even medium grade 3D animation that hase some soul.

'pokemon'

'pokemon'

The models can (and likely will be one day since we already saw tweaks being made in recent games) be improved but I still prefer them to static sprites. My Excadrill should sharpen it's claws during it's idle, not just keep waving its limbs slowly.

 

[Derachi]

You’re allowed to feel however you like about Pokémon animation styles, but let's keep the conversation civil. -Derachi, Harina, PixelKnight

 

[Aether]

Wut? Going on a sudden meltdown about things like videogame prices out of nowhere with the addition of various imaginary preemptive arguments that you're invested in assuming I was going to make makes it clear to me that this is a subject that frankly gets you bent out of shape and makes you unappealing to talk to, so again, keep your tweening idle sprites and your grudge too.

The models can (and likely will be one day since we already saw tweaks being made in recent games) be improved but I still prefer them to static sprites. My Excadrill should sharpen it's claws during it's idle, not just keep waving its limbs slowly.

pokemon? im confused.

Yeah. Since legends i would say im okay. Sw/Sh was still a tad to... not happy. And its fine to have your preference. I was just in defence of the sprite fans (and im still one), that 3D is (still) not universally better for every pokemon. Overall i would say yet it is (especially since many pokemon now never had sprites... (we had 650 back then, we are reaching 1k...)

And to be honest, from the static sprites in W/B, its hard for me to think of any pokemon where i disliked the sprite compared to its artwork design, while there are a bunch of 3D models that still bother me. Other did get much more life since they are 3D.
All im saying for who they are they did do a bad job initially and took really long for the transition.

 

[niconiconick64]

filler

Meltdown about video games pricing? strawman much? my collection of switch titles alone would like to have a convo. with you

So far, the best result we got regarding animation improvements was legends arceus.
And while I do appreciate the extra effort on animation, that game turned out uglier than SWSH within towns. Plus, the open fields had worse looking water than the previous games. Let alone the snowy fields and some of the ground textures. And let's not even talk about the piss-colored bosses, or the boring sidequests of catching x pokemon, the disappointing fights with dialga's and palkia's special forms, etc...

A game is a collection of qualities and features under a pricetag. If we try to separate individual qualities (3d models, animations, poke amie etc...) and focus on them while ignoring the whole (pricing included), the analysis becomes insincere. And while you may fool the clueless, the more well-educated listeners will pick up on your bullshit.

Keep that in mind before doing a mid attempt at poor shaming someone who owns a large collection of video games and has all the right to complain about things he paid for.

 

[SammyJ9]

I have nothing much to add here other than that I LOVE the animated B/W sprites and think they’re leagues better than anything we’ve had since. They’re still the peak of the series IMO.

 

[Zellia]

I kinda love Gen 5's weird twitchy amphetamine Pokemon. It's stylised, sure, but it looks good more often than not.

 

[Bowser Sr.]

pokemon? im confused.

Yeah. Since legends i would say im okay. Sw/Sh was still a tad to... not happy. And its fine to have your preference. I was just in defence of the sprite fans (and im still one), that 3D is (still) not universally better for every pokemon. Overall i would say yet it is (especially since many pokemon now never had sprites... (we had 650 back then, we are reaching 1k...)

And to be honest, from the static sprites in W/B, its hard for me to think of any pokemon where i disliked the sprite compared to its artwork design, while there are a bunch of 3D models that still bother me. Other did get much more life since they are 3D.
All im saying for who they are they did do a bad job initially and took really long for the transition.

I was confused too, it seems that a Chrome Extension I'm using to block spoilers of upcoming games acted up when it saw the word "Pokemon" and tried to censor text within a post that was being written, along with straight up deleting the entire first part of my reply to you so I guess I have to rewrite it? Oh well.

I meant to say that I agree with the idea that 2d animated sprites can have flair that 3d animations fail to replicate like in Fire Emblem, but that I just straight up disagree heavily that Pokemon is the same case since Pokemon simply... lacked animations, period. We are not looking at a genuine trade-off, we are looking at a thing that the games just straight up didn't try to do. By the end of the 2d era the evolution was still bare to the point where Black and White NPCs are still just little dolls that walk and stand by as dialogue text rolls and Pokemon tweening in battle doesn't really serve as much more than just a reminder that Dragon Quest already had lots of charming contextual animations while Pokemon was lagging behind (in full honesty, Dragon Quest STILL serves as a reminder of how bad Gamefreak is at their job and will likely stay that way).

The expression and visual fidelity are greatly improved by 3D models, and if the price for it is the occasional Typhlosion situation then I'll take it anyway, because 2D sprites had their own Typhlosions too ( As a child I straight up thought Swampert, Banette and more sucked because their sprites were bad and it took their appearances in other media and official art for me to get a proper look at those characters, and in BW's case I was not a fan of having the monsters becoming pixely messes as they twirl and tween like Flash animations. Shout to Red Blue's hilarious sprites though, they were amusing back in the day.) and also because the 3d models allows the game to show off planned behaviorial concepts that the 2D games were unable to display like the way Garchomp runs or Inteleon's freaky eyelids and frills, which may seem like a small things but I think they do add appeal and personality to the creatures, and the appeal of the creatures is a big part of the series.

All In all, I don't disagree Gamefreak has ways to go when it comes to presentation in 3D games, I just found silly to see someone no-selling the 3D models while talking up something far more primitive that also compared negatively to other games made at the time, though now I can see that the person who made that claim is just nutty and hysteric in general so I should not have bothered.

 

[Aether]

I was confused too, it seems that a Chrome Extension I'm using to block spoilers of upcoming games acted up when it saw the word "Pokemon" and tried to censor text within a post that was being written, along with straight up deleting the entire first part of my reply to you so I guess I have to rewrite it? Oh well.

Oh, okay, to bad.

I meant to say that I agree with the idea that 2d animated sprites can have flair that 3d animations fail to replicate like in Fire Emblem, but that I just straight up disagree heavily that Pokemon is the same case since Pokemon simply... lacked animations, period. We are not looking at a genuine trade-off, we are looking at a thing that the games just straight up didn't try to do. By the end of the 2d era the evolution was still bare to the point where Black and White NPCs are still just little dolls that walk and stand by as dialogue text rolls and Pokemon tweening in battle doesn't really serve as much more than just a reminder that Dragon Quest already had lots of charming contextual animations while Pokemon was lagging behind (in full honesty, Dragon Quest STILL serves as a reminder of how bad Gamefreak is at their job and will likely stay that way).

Oh yeah, DQ is a good example as well, but at least thats a somewhat big series compared to SMT.
In regards to "animation"... yeah, if the question is simply more animation or barel / "none" animation... im not shure.
A dorky looking model and bad animation compared to a dynamic looking static pose... i honestly cant say that i will always prefere the animation.
Oh, trainer/character art is no contest for me, the shift to 3D was pure win. (even if many, really many of the animations are...crap...like Haus hand movement animation that got reused a lot is still just stupid to me), but the style and expressiveness and look of characters is just better, no question.

The expression and visual fidelity are greatly improved by 3D models, and if the price for it is the occasional Typhlosion situation then I'll take it anyway, because 2D sprites had their own Typhlosions too ( As a child I straight up thought Swampert, Banette and more sucked because their sprites were bad and it took their appearances in other media and official art for me to get a proper look at those characters, and in BW's case I was not a fan of having the monsters becoming pixely messes as they twirl and tween like Flash animations. Shout to Red Blue's hilarious sprites though, they were amusing back in the day.) and also because the 3d models allows the game to show off planned behaviorial concepts that the 2D games were unable to display like the way Garchomp runs or Inteleon's freaky eyelids and frills, which may seem like a small things but I think they do add appeal and personality to the creatures, and the appeal of the creatures is a big part of the series.

All In all, I don't disagree Gamefreak has ways to go when it comes to presentation in 3D games, I just found silly to see someone no-selling the 3D models while talking up something far more primitive that also compared negatively to other games made at the time, though now I can see that the person who made that claim is just nutty and hysteric in general so I should not have bothered.

You are again not contradicting me in any way... i did say, 3D is the way forward. I never implied anything. it opens up to many options.
I just think some pokemon lost a lot of their apeal with the move to 3D, and that it took gamefreak to long to get to an fine level.
Decade for the biggest franchise. Those never argue against 3D as the right way forward with more benefits then detractions.
And yeah, sprits had their ups and downs, and thats why B/W is such great in that regard, its for most pokemon their best sprite,
and its just almost universally good in the spritework.
And i also have to say i see a lot of trueth in many of his points. but thats a different topic altogether.

 

[Bowser Sr.]

Oh, okay, to bad.

Oh yeah, DQ is a good example as well, but at least thats a somewhat big series compared to SMT.
In regards to "animation"... yeah, if the question is simply more animation or barel / "none" animation... im not shure.
A dorky looking model and bad animation compared to a dynamic looking static pose... i honestly cant say that i will always prefere the animation.
Oh, trainer/character art is no contest for me, the shift to 3D was pure win. (even if many, really many of the animations are...crap...like Haus hand movement animation that got reused a lot is still just stupid to me), but the style and expressiveness and look of characters is just better, no question.


You are again not contradicting me in any way... i did say, 3D is the way forward. I never implied anything. it opens up to many options.

I am not contradicting you because I'm not even trying to contradict you, I think we more or less agree on most points I think with the major diference being just how ideal one finds the BW Pokemon sprite work or not. Again, my point was just that I found it weird for that member to no-sell the 3D Models while talking up something that is also primitive and also gets mogged by contemporary games like the BW sprites. Gamefreak is consistent in the department of looking like scrubs, the only major difference here is that now they're on a console so they get owned harder than before.

 

[Heron]

The cool thing is that after B/W we won't have to worry about this any more - I can't see them remaking X/Y.

There's just not enough to remake / improve. It would be more of a port / remaster than anything, and I'm not sure it's worth it. We're probably more likely to see "Let's Go Johto" (Marill / Pichu?) than 3ds remakes.

Unpopular opinon - Let's Go P/E was pretty damn good, the artstyle was perfect for 2d pokemon and it's my favourite way to play Gen 1. I'd welcome Let's Go Johto.

 

[Illucio]

I did not say they are incompatible (we have enough examples even in the games i asume), but that its semingly harder with 3D animation and some animations for some moments are clearly lacking them, maybe because it wouldbreak theyr "cuteness" expectation or something.
It did improve, some pokemon animations from the 3D games would on the other hand be almost inposible to translate well to 2D. They did improve, i did mention that Legends if already far above what we got in X/Y.

All im saying is that its not a clear cut "one is better then the other", and i can still se some prefering sprites overall, depending on what they aprechiate more and how much of a turnoff some models/animations are to them (and the 3D games had a lot of stinker animations, derpy looking mons that lost all their charme, etc)

I get it. movign so many monsters to 3D was hard. Not nailing the style and animation from the start, shure.
them having to go high on poly count so that they dont have to rework everything every time...yeah, get that (even if the 3DS battle animations where really slide shows in some moments...that was to low)

Its just, its the biggest franchise in the world, the move to 3D was a decade ago, and then when i compare how full of character some SMT5 demons are, and how tiny the franchise and budget is in comparison... my patience is wearing thin, even if legends was OK. (still, the story segments fellt so stiff and barebones...seing what games like Xenoblade can do...)

In short: 3D is fine and the right direction, biggst problems did get rectified, still not where it has to be, some sprite animations still fit the pokemon better then the 3D stuff they got.


Oh, and while im at it: its okay to have clean flat shaded pokemon, but some would benefit from some more details and grit. not every pokemon needs to be cute. Either go full on cartoon artstyle or add some texture and shading to some, but the current trajectory is kinda neither for me.
Example outside of pokemon: mario. His Brawl textures where to much. but his odyssey model is great, keeps the cartoon style, but ads the right amount of details.

I mean SMTV had 220+ demons (with another 230+) from DLC. Which is still half the amount of models Pokemon have to use. Not to mention Pokemon introduces at least 100 new models entirely each generation. Both games have around the same amount of staff and budget. Pokemon never really goes over budget because they want to maximize profits and they know how much they will sell.

For a quick take on Pokemon models: It took 9 years, count em 9 years just to fix Typhlosion's model to add his flames. I do agree my patience too is very thin for these very small tweaks and fixes. Especially when we get remakes or games focused on certain Pokemon that could. So far from the leaks of Gen 9 they are FINAAAALLY adding textures and shading that are fairly notable. (Looking at your Scyther-line my favorite line).
I think we are slowly getting there, but the notable steps back, rushed games and terrible decisions really hurt but we keep hoping they make up for it or fix things next time around. But sadly for some games, its the only games in that region/world for another 10-15 years when they will eventually remake the games.

And if we keep getting things like BDSP being arguably worse games then their 3rd game predecessors, rushed games like Sword and Shield or previous great working features being changed and becoming arguably worse over time. I can see the fan base being my frustrated and upset. And so far the Pokemon Company's only response to all of this has been: "Our workers are thick skinned" or "The reason this happened is because of X" and fans easily dig up the receipts and find out X isn't the reason. And the company refuses to acknowledge these problems, it's just so tiring. Especially when you get white knights coming in defending the practices, people who made their careers sharing Pokemon news, having dedicated channels playing the games or make content around the IP being quite about it because they don't want to anger the company that gives them exclusive access to things that affect their careers.
And when it comes to remakes, almost all of it would hurt less if you were even able to buy the older games again as ports. But Gamefreak doesn't even want to do that except for the extremely rare exception of RBGY and GSC being ported to the 3DS. Yet Gamefreak shuts down roms being shared despite for some people, being the only way to play these game.

The franchise just has so many unnecessary messes and yet they still manage to release so many games a year, so much artwork, trading cards, toys, merchandise and remaining the most profitable franchise of all time. And this is just the games, if you go into the trading card game, plushie collection, and so forth it amazes me just how many problems in just individual communities have alone that are some of the tiniest problems you can imagine go rampant for YEARS.

 

[Hocot8]

I mean after the disaster of BDSP I no longer care about remakes of old games.

I'm going to treat it like they treated BDSP essentially lol.

 

[Aether]

I mean SMTV had 220+ demons (with another 230+) from DLC. Which is still half the amount of models Pokemon have to use. Not to mention Pokemon introduces at least 100 new models entirely each generation. Both games have around the same amount of staff and budget. Pokemon never really goes over budget because they want to maximize profits and they know how much they will sell.

Oh im not saying it does the same. SMT5 definitely did not have as many assets as pokemon. but is is comparatively less when you JUST take game sales into acount? not even talking about all of the merch that gets made for pokemon. They could invest a lot more into the games and still come out with a hefty profit.

For a quick take on Pokemon models: It took 9 years, count em 9 years just to fix Typhlosion's model to add his flames. I do agree my patience too is very thin for these very small tweaks and fixes. Especially when we get remakes or games focused on certain Pokemon that could. So far from the leaks of Gen 9 they are FINAAAALLY adding textures and shading that are fairly notable. (Looking at your Scyther-line my favorite line).
I think we are slowly getting there, but the notable steps back, rushed games and terrible decisions really hurt but we keep hoping they make up for it or fix things next time around. But sadly for some games, its the only games in that region/world for another 10-15 years when they will eventually remake the games.

I mentioned in the other thread, but the review of laura kate dale mentioned that you can see the potential the series holds with the new title, but its not yet there.

I read that line since the jump to 3D. XY? had to make 3D models, so the game is still grid based and rather unfinished. Sun & moon? They moved away from the grid and to a freeer camera and bigger player characters, so it will take time to adapt the level design to that.
Sw/Sh -> we still havent figured out how to make a better city then XY central hub in 3D, and the open world is baren, the routes are straight lines, and the game is clearly unfinished...but..but...it had its first open area!
Now we had Legends: great bse for gen 9, but clear that it was a training ground how to make a more interactive open world pokemon game.
And with gen 9 thes semingly again made steps back.
There just wont be the pokemo game that reaches its potential on time.
And with evolving tech and gaming landscape the expectations also change.

Heck, just look at Zelda (SS -> BotW) or Kirby (a big send off to its old formula and one of the best games in the series with going Full 3D)
Feels like the franchise is just to profitable to either wait more time between installments to polish them, or to be bold with the decisions and not first testrun it in a game before commiting.

And when it comes to remakes, almost all of it would hurt less if you were even able to buy the older games again as ports. But Gamefreak doesn't even want to do that except for the extremely rare exception of RBGY and GSC being ported to the 3DS. Yet Gamefreak shuts down roms being shared despite for some people, being the only way to play these game.

Yeah, if we could get the classics, whatever, but those are in the vault, so bad remakes are a problem.

 

[Aether]

I am not contradicting you because I'm not even trying to contradict you, I think we more or less agree on most points I think with the major diference being just how ideal one finds the BW Pokemon sprite work or not. Again, my point was just that I found it weird for that member to no-sell the 3D Models while talking up something that is also primitive and also gets mogged by contemporary games like the BW sprites. Gamefreak is consistent in the department of looking like scrubs, the only major difference here is that now they're on a console so they get owned harder than before.

yeha, probably right.
I still stand by BW pokemon sprites is peak sprite art (at least at that resolution, SNK sprites where way bigger).
But yeah, im the most vocal on pokemon topics since a long time, because i was bombarded with hate on era back when Sw/Sh released. every point i mentioned i had to qualify with a good thing to not hear the dreaded line "you outgrew it" or "maybe pokemon just isnt anymore for you".

With that in mind i do get why some start to counter with ignoring the positive sides of new-mon when the discourse was often so anti nuance.

Im currently keeping myself from comenting to much on gen 9. The gameplay departure is far enough that i cant already see where it will have problems, arceus whilehaving a ton of problems was still so much fun that it revitalized my interest in the series (and my wish for it to try harder).

 

[GamerJM]

I will say that I love how gen 5's sprites look, but gen 3 and 4 are still what I picture in my head when someone mentions Pokemon sprites. That doesn't necessarily mean they're better, because I don't think they are (I agree gen 5 is probably the peak on a pure aesthetic level), but to me they're more iconic and capture the essence of what Pokemon are "supposed" to look like in my head.

 

[Tangerine_Cookie]

Well, this was one hell of a post. And I didn't even get into details such as my hate boner for gen 6's melodically uninspiring OST (hell, the elite 4 theme alone made me lose all hope with it's awful buildup with a techno bgm that ends up resulting in the most boring climax ever. And I'm not even going to get into how NONE of the people who I spoke with who defend the game could name a single piece of the OST that wasn't: lumiose or the bike theme.

 

[Phosphorescent Skeleton]

I think the obsession with Black and White is really revealing the age of posters here more than anything.

 

[niconiconick64]

I think the obsession with Black and White is really revealing the age of posters here more than anything.

By the time BW2 launched, I was nearly done with highschool. My first pokemon titles were GBA ones: FR, Ruby then Emerald (in order of playthrough).
If anything, I have more nostalgia for gen 3 than IV or 5 combined. But I completely sack nostalgia as a factor when considering what my favourite pokemon games are (BW, BW2 and HGSS).

I always liked the clothing shop theme in XY, it kinda reminds me a bit of something from P3 on the PS2 when I listen to the beat and the keyboard at the beginning. Power plant's theme though? doesn't do anything for me tbh.

My problem with the XY ost (and I'm generalizing here but bear with me) is how it's mostly orchestral pieces that don't really have a strong melodic hook to it. And out of the exceptions, some of them are techno tracks with a buildup that leads up to nothing enthusiastic (two of the most important themes for a pokemon mainline game in this gen suffer from this - the gym leader and E4 themes and to me, it's quite unfortunate).

I think many ITT got the wrong impression though... I have a love and hate relationship with X&Y. I love the added features, the minigames, most of the new designs and the fact it released on a console I already had access to at the time. I just really hated how the potential was through the roof after the paradigm shift to 3d but the gameplay itself just wasn't there for me compared to RSE, HGSS and BW2.

When I talked to friends at uni. back then on why they liked the title so much, they mostly referred to things like shiny hunting, online matches, breeding and the battle chateau. But none of them really said positive things about the main storyline gameplay (gyms + E4 and quests), nor did they praise the OST.
Don't get me wrong, I get the appeal of shiny hunting and online, but as someone who buys pokemon games mostly for the singleplayer experience*, I don't really see gen6+ as being that interesting.

 

[KingSlowpokebro]

I really like how Let's Go looks, other than the stiff animations. I was hoping future remakes would take that art style and improve on it and then BDSP was shown. I don't really care about Sinnoh so that doesn't affect me but it worries me for gen 5 remakes.

 

[Dardan Sandiego]

Pokémon sprites have been poop since they took fat Pikachu from us

gorgeous, iconic, an absolute unit

an imposter, ugly on the inside and the outside, an abomination and insult upon life itself