• 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!
  • General system instability
    🚧 We apologise for the recent server issues. The site may be unavaliable while we investigate the problem. 🚧

News Nintendo Apologizes for Pokemon Scarlet + Violet Performance Issues, 1.1.0 Patch Coming 12/1

Honestly this kind of acknowledgement I didn't expect for another month and a half, so I am glad to see it. That being said, I'm waiting for the [real] patch notes from OatmealDome given Nintendo's propensity for vagary and DF to properly measure the changes from 1.0.1 to 1.1.0 because this will certainly be a months long story to tell if SV can be salvaged in a meaningful way, or if we just need to wait for the ILCa remake on Switch 4.
 
I have to imagine that, regardless of huge sales success, Nintendo isn't super-happy that one of their biggest franchises is becoming known for technical issues. Of course they will have to actually give Game Freak time to develop HD games properly, and GF needs to become serious about the realities of making HD games and do the hiring that requires
 
Not expecting anything huge in this patch given the timespan since release but it’s nice to know complaints haven’t been falling on deaf ears. I’m thinking I’ll probably pick the game up later in December.

It would’ve been hilarious if Nintendo tweeted an image of text as is so common nowadays.
 
0
catonkatonk said:
It's senseless.
The game went through Nintendo's QA and Nintendo released it. There's a reason it's Nintendo apologising and not Game Freak. Rightly so imo.
Click to expand...
It not making much sense is the entire point. It's a coping mechanism.

Brofield said:
Honestly this kind of acknowledgement I didn't expect for another month and a half, so I am glad to see it. That being said, I'm waiting for the [real] patch notes from OatmealDome given Nintendo's propensity for vagary and DF to properly measure the changes from 1.0.1 to 1.1.0 because this will certainly be a months long story to tell if SV can be salvaged in a meaningful way, or if we just need to wait for the ILCa remake on Switch 4.
Click to expand...

1.1.0 is most likely not going to have any measurable changes in performance.
 
With this tweet, it seems like Gamefreak and Nintendo are actually aware that the final state of this game was unacceptable even by Gamefreak standards.

Maybe just maybe there will be a push for gen 10 to actually be polished maybe even give devs more time.
 
0
Dardan Sandiego said:
It not making much sense is the entire point. It's a coping mechanism.



1.1.0 is most likely not going to have any measurable changes in performance.
Click to expand...
I mean I'm fully expecting to measure the changes in millimeters instead of metres, so to speak, but I am interested to know how much has been changed between the patches and how likely this patch has been worked on if it was before or after the game's initial release
 
Brofield said:
I mean I'm fully expecting to measure the changes in millimeters instead of metres, so to speak, but I am interested to know how much has been changed between the patches and how likely this patch has been worked on if it was before or after the game's initial release
Click to expand...
by that I mean that the 1.1.0 patch isn't supposed to address performance issues based on their wording.
 
I see this tweet as an attempt to not lose potential customers who are Pokémon fans, but not necessarily Nintendo fans. There are a lot of people who are not interested in the Switch or Nintendo games in general, but they are willing to buy one just to play Pokémon (same thing with Animal Crossing).
 
0
Isn't it always Nintendo that post about patches in Pokémon games? I don't think I remember the Pokémon account posting anything about patches in previous games.
 
0
I can give you the view of someone with a little knowledge about versioning.

GF uses a three tier one: 1.0.0. You go from big to small.

First number is used for big version jumps.
Using an example, MonHun Rise on this versioning, the base game would be 1.x.x until Sunrise dropped, which introduced changes, new systems and a shitload of content to the game, making the jump to 2.x.x

Second is for bigger changes to the game as it was before, but not on the level that warrants a full version jump. Using the MonHun example again, this would be the version number change for the free DLC updates that brought a new monster.

Third number is for smaller things, small bugfixes, hotfixes and so on.

So that means GF jumping from 1.0.1 to 1.1.0 has likely a good chunk of stuff, though that can mainly be about the unlocking of ranked multiplayer. Though it could also mean that the patch brings quite some fixes and maybe even the first (little) improvements.

E:
I feel urged by myself to add: No, this patch won't solve all issues and/or get the performance into a better state at once. That is a long term process done over a number of patches. Maybe even with the (expected) DLC.
 
0
Vernal said:
Eh, it's a little embarrassing more than anything.

Seeing people say that Ninty is eating GF alive after this feels like the modern equivalent of people blaming Nintendo for GF's schedule.
Click to expand...
It's not that serious, or maybe I should say that I hope people aren't that serious.
 
Dardan Sandiego said:
It's not that serious, or maybe I should say that I hope people aren't that serious.
Click to expand...
I wasn't really addressing your comment per se. Just that SOME people are definitely being serious about it.

Which goes back to my previous point. But then again discourse around such a big franchise is bound to be full of misinformation.
 
the biggest takeaway from this for me is that the haunting and unpleasant elite four music I experienced was not at all intentional
 
At the end of the day they've apologized for the performance issues and promised to work on improving them in upcoming patches. It's far more then people were expecting and it's a step to make things right by the fans.
 
As a side note, consoles really need to start making patch notes accessible from the system itself. It’s very annoying to pull a patch and then have to go to twitter or steam to figure out what changed. I even think the ps4 did this and then sony removed it with the ps5.
 
Branduil said:
I have to imagine that, regardless of huge sales success, Nintendo isn't super-happy that one of their biggest franchises is becoming known for technical issues. Of course they will have to actually give Game Freak time to develop HD games properly, and GF needs to become serious about the realities of making HD games and do the hiring that requires
Click to expand...
Nintendo doesn't make the schedule for Game Freak. GF makes their own schedule
 
I feel like it wouldn't solve all of their problems, but in addition to longer dev time I think it would help if Game Freak expanded their studio more to allow for more hands to work on the games.
 
Gabev said:
I feel like it wouldn't solve all of their problems, but in addition to longer dev time I think it would help if Game Freak expanded their studio more to allow for more hands to work on the games.
Click to expand...
I think they really need a shakeup in management.
Who really needed 3 different mainline Pokémon releases in the span of a year?

Of course BDSP was another studio, but it just doesn't make sense to me.
I think people wouldn't have conplained if they had spread out the releases more.
Like seriously the 2 Game Freak games were really promising, they just needed more time in the oven and perhaps they would have been higher quality.
 
ILikeFeet said:
Nintendo doesn't make the schedule for Game Freak. GF makes their own schedule
Click to expand...
Basically this, as far as I've read. This game was always going to come out this year. Game freak decided that a long time ago and that's kind of the problem. These execs, who I have no respect for really, gave their devs a time limit and didn't care about the state of the game. Maybe it's wrong of me to say they didn't care but when you've played their games for the last year it's hard to not come to that conclusion. BDSP should've never come out when it did. Legends needed more optimization and now this. You can make the argument that all 3 games should've been delayed 1 year.
Gabev said:
I feel like it wouldn't solve all of their problems, but in addition to longer dev time I think it would help if Game Freak expanded their studio more to allow for more hands to work on the games.
Click to expand...
I think we can all agree they are under-resourced. They simply bite off more than they can chew.
 
On one hand, i get that factors such as gamefreaks inexperience with large 3d open worlds, bad crunch to meet merchandising deadlines, and maybe even dated hardware, have played a role in this game releasing the way it did. I really wish game freak had more time. They could have continued to support legends arceus this year and give s/v the extra year in the oven it needed, but i get it, you have to match the anime. ,cards, and plushies.

On the other hand, pokemon is massive brand. A game releasing in this state is almost as unacceptable as a mario game releasing in a poor state
 
0
As has been pointed out before, this has to be the wake up call. The games have never been in a worse state than BDSP and SV. Unless they change their approach and give their devs the time to address the tech debt they have accumulated over the years it's only going to get worse until they have a game they straight up cannot release on time.
 
Last edited:
Dardan Sandiego said:
As has been pointed out before, this has to be the wake up call. The games have never been in a worse state than BDSP and SV. Unless they change their approach and give their devs the time to address the tech debt they have accumulated over the years it's only going to get worse until they have a game they straight up cannot release in time.
Click to expand...
This time around should be 4 years at least, just to correspond with the 30th anniversary in 2026 :d
 
0
I think something we need to keep in mind that if they do change how long games are in development for, then we won't actually know that until the year the next gen is 'supposed' to come out.
They won't come out and say that they will take longer to develop the games. So we won't know if they will until 2025.
 
AllEchse said:
I think they really need a shakeup in management.
Who really needed 3 different mainline Pokémon releases in the span of a year?

Of course BDSP was another studio, but it just doesn't make sense to me.
I think people wouldn't have conplained if they had spread out the releases more.
Like seriously the 2 Game Freak games were really promising, they just needed more time in the oven and perhaps they would have been higher quality.
Click to expand...
I keep forgetting Arceus released this year!
 
I’ve said it elsewhere but while yes, AAA games come out in buggy states all the time, this the worst performing NINTENDO game ever released. Nintendo has never released a game this broken before. Even games that are overpriced and content starved like Mario Tennis Ultra Smash were playable. S/V are straight up unplayable at times. BOTW dropped frames, even Mario Odyssey dropped frames, but it never hampered the experience. S/V made me nauseous lol.
 
Hocot8 said:
Basically this, as far as I've read. This game was always going to come out this year. Game freak decided that a long time ago and that's kind of the problem. These execs, who I have no respect for really, gave their devs a time limit and didn't care about the state of the game. Maybe it's wrong of me to say they didn't care but when you've played their games for the last year it's hard to not come to that conclusion. BDSP should've never come out when it did. Legends needed more optimization and now this. You can make the argument that all 3 games should've been delayed 1 year.

I think we can all agree they are under-resourced. They simply bite off more than they can chew.
Click to expand...

It's not like the execs have had any reason to change tact though. Over the switch generation, they've made what should have been fairly big concessions of taking away features the series had been supporting practically since inception, like the loss of being able to use all your Pokémon in any given game, interoperability between games of the same generation, and lets be frank, probably the weakest map and single player campaign the series ever had with Swsh, an out sourced remake which ended up needing several patches ,and a bunch of other problems, because of how under resourced they are, but despite obvious problems with the games, they've been rewarded with record breaking sales pretty much every step of the way.

The execs won't really care until it actively decreases game sales, and this is probably lip service unless sales actually drop off a cliff, unlikely, they won't actively change anything.

I'm sure development on the games will continue, but that was already going to be the case because of almost inevitable DLC for next year.
 
Dardan Sandiego said:
As has been pointed out before, this has to be the wake up call. The games have never been in a worse state than BDSP and SV. Unless they change their approach and give their devs the time to address the tech debt they have accumulated over the years it's only going to get worse until they have a game they straight up cannot release on time.
Click to expand...
Ironically, a bunch of BDSP's problems stem specifically from not reusing the typical engine these games are built with.
 
Pokemaniac said:
BDSP are seemingly the result of trying to get a small, inexperienced studio to make a game on a Game Freak schedule, or potentially even worse. The specifics are a bit different, but some of the root causes are similar.
Click to expand...
Yeah, didn't BDSP have some extremely unrealistic development time?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.


Back
Top Bottom