Okay well could you elaborate on that? I don't think it's that wild to see pushback when you compare something from the gamecube that worked to the closest thing a Nintendo exclusive has gotten to Cyberpunk at launch
First of all, i'll adress the bolded: In more than 100 hours of gameplay i've played my copy of Pokémon Scarlet, the bugs i've found amount to getting stuck on the geometry twice and my Wooper sliding down a pond, that's it. SV's glitch reports are incredibly exaggerated, and most of them happen in cooperative gameplay.
That said, the key here is expectations.
With Colosseum, the hype was focused in two factors:
- The first ever home console Pokémon RPG
- Its developer, Genius Sonority, Ex-Enix developers and a studio dedicated exclusively to Nintendo home consoles
The headlines wrote themselves: Ex-Dragon Quest devs working on an exclusive Pokémon RPG! Of course, as details started getting revealed the expectation got tempered, screenshots didn't help, either - even less compared with PS2 exclusives - but there was still the promise of a groundbreaking story and an extensive, well developed world.
It didn't deliver on any front, in my opinion, and graphically was even more underwhelming when seen in movement because the character animations were rough af.
As for SV, this may be because i'm older and more jaded, but this is Gamefreak who we're talking about, after the SwSh DLC the promise of having a full open world Pokémon game with bigger scope in the same time frame was a big enough red flag to know what to expect. Indeed, the game dissapointed by being somehow techincally worse than i expected and dumbing down the cities, but in the end it was
Wild Area 2.0: The game just like i personally expected.
Now, is Colosseum better or worse than SV? If you ask me, it's worse in everything but render and texture resolution relative to the console it runs in, as well as battle spectacularity. Personally? I don't like it, and the funniest thing about it is that i've 100% it thrice already as part of my Gen 3 playthroughs, but it's precisely because of that why i feel like i can talk properly about it.
What do you mean isn't supposed to be seen up close? Bloopers are one of the more common enemies in sunshine and are by any reasonable definition "seen upclose" on a significant number of occasions, including at several points being used as a mount for mario, which is pretty much as "upclose" as anything could get.
I don't think anyone could reasonably say that isn't upclose. Of course, that picture is either from the switch remaster or an emulator, because that's far higher res than any gamecube game, the original game looked a lot worse.
...I have no idea how you can think "the game that was far bigger and ambitious" than the game you're complaining about still having to settle for models like that is anything but an argument that it was basically standard for the era. In any case, Pokemon Colosseum definitely made far more models than sunshine did, so...
I... don't think that showing them as a mount, when you're only seeing the back of the model and you're focusing on the course, helps your case at all.
In Sunshine, Bloopers are mere obstacles you take out fast and easy with the ACUAC, in the area of the stage they're more prominent camera is zoomed out by default. On top of that, despite the final result we're speaking about a game designed to run at 60 fps, so the polycount budget is limited.
On the number of 3D models made for the game, for the Stadium series HAL managed to make 251 amazing 3D models given the system. Particularly, the Gen 2 Pokémon models were really stunning.
Taking in account that GS reused all these for Colosseum, strictly speaking about Pokémon they had a lot less to do, and they leave a lot to be desired taking in account the system they're running on, wich has a much heftier polycount budget
Reminder: These modes are to be used ONLY in battle.