• 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

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.

I had two teams on SwSh and that still wasn't enough lol So I was thinking of going a bit more radical this time.
 
I had two teams on SwSh and that still wasn't enough lol So I was thinking of going a bit more radical this time.
There's more than enough dope new Pokemon to fill 3 teams so it might be fun to tackle the game that way.
 
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?
I imagine what happened is that they planned Arceus as the usual November title, but the sheer extent of its iconoclasm led to upper management having no faith in it, and as such it got delayed into the dumpster month of January and farmed out BDSP to ILCA, asking them to make it hyper-faithful so they could shit it out by November.

On topic wow I did not expect this game to get reamed for performance as hard as it's been. Nice to see even reviewers are yelling at execs to give GF more time and resources.
 
I imagine what happened is that they planned Arceus as the usual November title, but the sheer extent of its iconoclasm led to upper management having no faith in it, and as such it got delayed into the dumpster month of January and farmed out BDSP to ILCA, asking them to make it hyper-faithful so they could shit it out by November.
No, whats basically happened is something called COVID19.

Its a good guess to say that originally BDSP games were scheduled to be release on september, in time for 15th anniversary of original release, and Legends Arceus was going to be the november title.

With COVID they needed to delay both titles 2 months.
 
I imagine what happened is that they planned Arceus as the usual November title, but the sheer extent of its iconoclasm led to upper management having no faith in it, and as such it got delayed into the dumpster month of January and farmed out BDSP to ILCA, asking them to make it hyper-faithful so they could shit it out by November.

On topic wow I did not expect this game to get reamed for performance as hard as it's been. Nice to see even reviewers are yelling at execs to give GF more time and resources.
I have similar thoughts, but they would be less "It was kicked to January because of lack of faith" and more "because of Covid making both games take a wee bit longer than planned".

Anyway none of these reviews sound unreasonable or nitpicky, so it is a shame to hear about the shortcomings, but also it's... what everyone expected anyway, isn't it? If a game performs badly even in cherrypicked marketing-driven trailers you can presume they perform badly in general.
 
Surprised the scores are so low. The performance issues are pretty bad but this is definitely the best mainline game not including Legends or Let's Go in over a decade.
 
I'm just tired of the "Monolith makes good games, give xyz to monolith" take. Also I really don't care for Xenoblade and I wouldn't like to see what their take on Pokémon is.

I mean I don't want to see it either (mainly because I would rather monolith work on thier own ambitions) but you can't really deny their world design is about a billion times more interesting than game freaks.

Their environment and topography work would definitely add a lot to an open world pokemon game.
 
I was quite excited for this generation, I did not play sword and shield and sun and moon so this was a nice opportunity to try a bunch of new Pokemon.

I will skip these at launch, it helps that I have Gow Ragnarok, Bayo 3 and Plague tale to finish, after that I hope it already got a patch or 2 to iron out some problems
 
0
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?
I assume it has to do with the anime ? Keeping the games in sync with the anime is one of Pokémon strengths and a way to keep the game relevant to young audiences.

Failure to keep up with the anime is probably one of the main reasons of the huge drop in sales of the Yo-Kai Watch games, so it’s understandable that TPC would be afraid of delaying/skipping a gen, but imo they should trust their brand more, the IP is strong and wouldn’t die because of that.
 
0
You've played the game? I assume so given you regard it so highly.
I understand that review threads have a tendency to put people on edge, but c’mon, theres no reason to get snarky.

Anyway, i think this is a sign that something needs to change within game freak. Whether its that they need more time, money, or experience developing hd open world games. Very dissapointed with the visuals and performance on display here. We should expect and want more from pokemon. I was willing to give game freak a pass for sword and shield, but we are past that point now.
 
75-79. Performance related.
Quoting myself from the prediction thread. I was spot on....but this was a bit biased becauase I listened to youtube reviews. People said they loved the game but performance was bad even for ambitious Switch games.
 
0
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.
I see an open world, which was always going to present challenges on hardware with this kind of memory bandwidth

obviously it isn't entirely up to the hardware as we've seen open world games perform better but "100% flawlessly" is an unrealistic expectation for a game like this on switch
 
Looking at some video footage over my lunch break ... i definitely think there's going to be a patch soon.

A lot issues aren't directly performance, but downright glitches and errors. Definitely looking like "fuck, no time left, we gotta ship it".

The fact they seem obligated to crank out these games so quickly can't be helping.

I don't think it's GF feeling obligated, but rather TPC and Creatures making them feel obligated, if you understand.

There's likely not a single developer on this world who wouldn't want more time to edge out their product some more before launch.
 
the game runs noticeably better in handheld mode thanks to reduced resolution but somehow the issues are completely divorced from hardware?

like I understand that they should be capable of more with what they have but the "better hardware would do nothing" takes confuse me. is the assumption that they would increase scope further until it barely runs there, too?
 
I'm surprised this scores so low. I've been of the opinion for a while that the underwhelming graphics of Pokémon games on Switch have been more the fault of the artstyles than of rendering difficulties, but SV sounds like it'll give my stance a run for its money.

Did any of the reviewers use the co-op feature? Skimming through I can't find any who did, which is a shame, because I'd like to know how much of a mess that's going to be when I try it out tomorrow.

Even on a technical level, Scarlet and Violet struggle in ways that I’ve never seen in a Pokémon title before. Even after installing a stability patch my game crashed three times in various different places for no obvious reason. I found multiple items which couldn’t be picked up, slipped through solid walls, got stuck in positions which I could only escape by turning my console off, and encountered more visual glitches than I can describe.
I'd guess this stuff is gonna be patched, but, my god. Is the speedrun for this gonna be faster than BDSP?
 
Did any of the reviewers use the co-op feature? Skimming through I can't find any who did, which is a shame, because I'd like to know how much of a mess that's going to be when I try it out tomorrow.
I would say no, that's why IGN has delayed their review from my understanding. That and waiting for a patch like Arceus got.
 
Just saw another gif on twitter, that looked like there was a memory leak going on or about to happen.

Similar to Xenoblade 3, where NPCs and other surrounding stuff suddenly pop in due to loading issues.

Yep, i'm fully convinced there will be a patch.
 
Quoted by: Leo
1
the game runs noticeably better in handheld mode thanks to reduced resolution but somehow the issues are completely divorced from hardware?

like I understand that they should be capable of more with what they have but the "better hardware would do nothing" takes confuse me. is the assumption that they would increase scope further until it barely runs there, too?
A lot of the issues seem to stem from a general lack of polish and quality control. Having better hardware would alleviate some of this but it won't fix Game Freak's approach to game development.
 
the game runs noticeably better in handheld mode thanks to reduced resolution but somehow the issues are completely divorced from hardware?

like I understand that they should be capable of more with what they have but the "better hardware would do nothing" takes confuse me. is the assumption that they would increase scope further until it barely runs there, too?
My take is that Sonic Frontiers runs like poop on everything from Switch to PS5. Would S/V run better on more powerful hardware? Yeah absolutely, would they run at a stable 30/60fps with no pop in or other weird graphic issues? Probably not.
 
the game runs noticeably better in handheld mode thanks to reduced resolution but somehow the issues are completely divorced from hardware?

like I understand that they should be capable of more with what they have but the "better hardware would do nothing" takes confuse me. is the assumption that they would increase scope further until it barely runs there, too?
From what I've seen it's not just issues in terms of frame rates, resolution, and pop-in, but also a malfunctioning camera, game-crashing bugs, and various other glitches seem to be more abundant here than in other recent Pokemon titles. This is their fourth game on the Switch and yet it sounds like the performance at launch is worse than ever, which to me suggests that it's reasonable to be concerned that even with better technology available, the production line approach to Pokemon is going to continue to cause problems to emerge because Game Freak can't scale with and adjust satisfactorily to the timeframes demanded by these development cycles.
 
I can't speak to the development cycle for Game Freak but it is slightly disappointing to hear about the performance issues. I will still play it, but it will be unfortunate to play this immediately after Ragnarok.
 
the game runs noticeably better in handheld mode thanks to reduced resolution but somehow the issues are completely divorced from hardware?
Of course more powerful hardware would iron out the performance issues. Even homebrew overclocking fixes it. Better hardware can 'brute force' better performance out of any poorly performing game, but the game's technical shortcomings should still be noted and we shouldn't have to rely on a device that doesn't exist yet when there are millions of Switches out there that can run this game.

Right now, on the current Switch I'm holding in my hands, my expectations for first-party open-world games have been calibrated by XC3, BotW, etc. Neither of those games run 'perfect' but they look and run better than these titles. I don't want to lower my expectations.

More time and patches would also fix performance issues, zero new hardware needed. The most drastic example is Ark which got a complete overhaul, but there are others like Witcher 3 and DOOM which got patches. My line of thinking is "until new hardware exists, fix the game as it is".
 
Last edited:
I've not read that many of the reviews, but oof, if the game really has significant crash bugs that's going to look poorly way back when we were all assuming the standards would be at least a little higher than BDSP on the stability front, with a lot of us assuming that was largely a result of the outsourcing.
 
0
Glad that the reviews echo my own thoughts from the spoiler thread after I beat it. Was worried I'd look like an idiot, lol. In particular Eurogamer (edit: it was Polygon) calling out that Arceus was superior feels like vindication.

One thing I'll say is that all the (rightful) focus on visuals, performance and glitches means that perhaps not enough has been put on the game design side. There's a lot to love here, but the games needed another year in the oven in terms of design just as much as they did with visuals / performance.

I'm talking about issues with the way pokemon spawn, issues with gyms and star bases being rushed / poorly designed, the fact that exploration is danger-free because trainers can't challenge you and pokemon rarely charge at you, the lack of side-quests, the lack of interiors to buildings in towns (or anything to do in towns), poorly designed map, poorly designed battle UI and pokedex etc etc.

It just feels like a rushed, empty game in ways that go beyond mere technical issues.

When you're out in the fields running around and filling out your pokedex it's great, and you can tell that open world is fundamentally the correct call for pokemon. But they haven't figured out how to take the traditional pokemon elements of moving from town A to town B while battling trainers and wild pokemon and make it work with that freedom. It feels like an early proof of concept.

That said, if your expectations are suitably lowered by the reviews I think you'll have a good time. Especially since the pokemon designs are great and the game sticks the landing in the last couple hours.
 
Last edited:
My take is that Sonic Frontiers runs like poop on everything from Switch to PS5. Would S/V run better on more powerful hardware? Yeah absolutely, would they run at a stable 30/60fps with no pop in or other weird graphic issues? Probably not.


The pop in LoD solution for Sonic Frontiers is poor. But I mean, the actual performance on Xbox Series X amd PS5 seems pretty good.

to be fair, even game freak better than sonic team lol

Sonic team may kinda suck at game design but they make great visuals.
 
Great that more reviewers are not skipping performance mentions in their reviews. Gamefreak needs to be taken down a peg and let known how worst and worst their games countinues to get from a technical standpoint.
 
0
game freak needs to improve their game those technical problems are embarrassing, but at the same time.... do they? the game will still sell a lot and kids won't even care about those issues and that's the only thing that matters to them.

so, they won't do anything and money will keep flowing into their wallets.
 
Honestly, I’m glad it scored lower to hopefully give Gamefreak a (minor) wakeup call. And don’t blame the hardware, friggin’ Red Dead Redemption came out 12 years ago on roughly equivalently capable hardware. Yes, there are a lot of Pokemon and moves to animate but these games are so fully lacking in all other presentational aspects to make that excuse hollow.
 
Just saw another gif on twitter, that looked like there was a memory leak going on or about to happen.

Similar to Xenoblade 3, where NPCs and other surrounding stuff suddenly pop in due to loading issues.

Yep, i'm fully convinced there will be a patch.

Well I guess that's the silver lining of having to wait two weeks after release so my copy gets delivered to me lol hopefully until then we will have another patch
 
0
Sounds about as I expected, with major sticking points being:

  • poor performance (not to be blamed on hardware)
  • poor open world design (lacking character + landmarks)
    • sad to hear this extends to the towns too, the copy paste restaurant example in the eurogamer review is laughable
  • fairly linear / basic story progression

I suppose this is all offset by the fact that this is a huge step forward for the series to me though! Similar to diamond and pearl being a bit more basic with its use of 3D, I expect the next generation to blow my mind like black and white did. Well, at least to be a step up. Looking forward to jumping in tomorrow.
 
0
I never put much stock in Pokémon reviews. I remember some outlets heralding Sw/Sh as the best the series has ever been!

I’ll wait until the fans bust it open.
 
Glad that the reviews echo my own thoughts from the spoiler thread after I beat it. Was worried I'd look like an idiot, lol. In particular top lads Eurogamer calling out that Arceus was superior feels like vindication.

where did they say this?
 
But they haven't figured out how to take the traditional pokemon elements of moving from town A to town B while battling trainers and wild pokemon and make it work with that freedom. It feels like an early proof of concept.

Well they hadn't figured out how to make that even with extremely linear design either, so I'm not sure the problem is the open world.
 
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!)
Personifying an entire outlet is an extremely broken way of viewing things. Different strokes for different folks. Look no further than their 4/10 rating for Frontiers followed up by a video from two other editors who liked the game.

NL is actually one of the better outlets in this regard since their video reviews are often compiled by a different person who doesn't shy away from tucking their own perspective in at the end of the video, no matter how different it is.
 
I mean I don't want to see it either (mainly because I would rather monolith work on thier own ambitions) but you can't really deny their world design is about a billion times more interesting than game freaks.

Their environment and topography work would definitely add a lot to an open world pokemon game.
That's fair, I guess. A more engaging and better designed open world would be cool. Then again, I think GF's map/route/whatever designed has gone worse since the jump to 3D and I don't know if this is intentional because it's easier to navigate for younger players, or if it's a lack of time or what exactly. Not sure changing devs would be the solution
 
0
I'd guess this stuff is gonna be patched, but, my god. Is the speedrun for this gonna be faster than BDSP?
There's a glitch where your trainer can position themseves inside an object after a battle. Opening the map can fix this by repositioning you into a safe position.

Idk I feel like combining those two things could potentially lead to something stupid lmao
 
0
where did they say this?
checks again, confused

Shit, they don't. I got the Polygon and Eurogamer reviews confused when I went to write my post. Sorry! I do like Lottie's review for EG. Only things I disagree with her on are the gym tests being good (they're terrible), and that the level scaling works well. But she doesn't mention Arceus. Whereas Polygon really nails how I felt about the two games compared to each other.
 
Age of calamity broke me and lowered my expectations for non-first party developed games. Logically my brain says that shouldn't be the case, but emotionally I feel different since I had to power through that one as a huge fan of the first HW.

checks again, confused

Shit, they don't. I got the Polygon and Eurogamer reviews confused when I went to write my post. Sorry! I do like Lottie's review for EG. Only thing I disagree with her on is the gym tests. But she doesn't mention Arceus. Whereas Polygon really nails how I felt about the two games compared to each other.
Haha no worries, I was just confused as to if I missed a video or different article!
 
GF will likely improve on the open world and the gameplay loop for it with the DLC, latest with the next mainline game.

I don't think it's exaggeration when i say that BotW, with it's sublime open world, would've been very different if it didn't have the luxury of at least 5 years of development and constant refinement.

Heck, i was even sure the next mainline Pokemon game wouldn't even have anything open-world or even open-segments like Arceus.
 
dont waste your time, they won't.
Probably, but for the long term health of the franchise it should. I doubt an slow, small attrition of players after sequential games with technical comprises will be noticeable to the bottom line, but I can’t imagine it being healthy for the francise.


I recently got an Analogue Pocket and have been playing Pokemon Crystal on it. It’s incredible how that game has all the hallmarks of a developer at the top of their craft and getting the most they can out of the hardware. The whiplash between that and the recent Pokemon games is honestly just a little sad.
 
0
Personifying an entire outlet is an extremely broken way of viewing things. Different strokes for different folks. Look no further than their 4/10 rating for Frontiers followed up by a video from two other editors who liked the game.

NL is actually one of the better outlets in this regard since their video reviews are often compiled by a different person who doesn't shy away from tucking their own perspective in at the end of the video, no matter how different it is.
If the review was actually read by the poster above (which I’m doubting), Alex has an interjection in the review that talks about his complaints. Then the review goes into lots of performance issues. It’s actually focused and lays out differing perspective. The videos usually have this happen at the end of reviews once the adapted review is done. I will agree that NintendoLife scoring is not great, but that’s another reason not to look at the scores. I think their written reviews are usually well written and lay out the ups and downs of a game.

Stop looking at scores folks!
 


Back
Top Bottom