>>59660541
Because instead of fully focusing on the graphics, they focus on the amount of content the game has, even if that doesn’t quite count in ZA’s case.

>>59660541
Because people will buy it anyway. Stop financially enabling less and less.
>>59660546
>Scrap content out at new console gen
>Add it back through season pass
Nice new content.

File: DokeV.jpg (3.46 MB, 2750x1534)

3.46 MB JPG

>>59660541
because tpc, nintendo, lamefreak and creatures are only willing to have around $15 million budget for their games
za had lower budget than its own super bowl advertisement
and as if that wasn't embarrassing enough, they also don't give the developers more than 3 years of development time
meanwhile, this is what monster tamer games look like when they are given more budget and time

File: Roco Kingdom.png (3.89 MB, 1920x1080)

3.89 MB PNG

>>59660583
both dokev and roco kingdom have nearly 10 years of development time
dokev was announced in 2019 and looked ready for release back then, which means it was already in development for a few years
roco kingdom was first announced in china around 2020, which means that one was also already in development for a couple years
good games need decent budget and time
pokefags aren't even willing to wait one year
they threw a toddler tantrum over za being pushed forward a year

File: 1642637684355.gif (2.56 MB, 190x200)

2.56 MB GIF

>>59660546
>they focus on the amount of content the game

>>59660589
>>59660583
even with budget it's never going to looks good, gamefreak are shit

>>59660541
because they are incompetent

>>59660589
>>59660583
China mogs japan nothing new

Muh graphics fagging thread

Grumpy grandpas

>>59660589
If pokemon looked like this you pokecels will still get mad.

>>59660541
>games on the left have 50+ hours of content, replayable until the end of time
>games on the right have maybe 10 or 20 hours of content at most, maybe good for a single replay and that's it

>>59660759
I can zoom through every GBA pokemon game in under 10 hours, what 50+ hours of content are you talking about here?

>>59660589
And it still looks shit, imagine that.

>>59660546
Pokemon has been steadily cutting content in every game since the switch era started and even before then. Now they just have a 30 hour campaign and then shove you off to the online skinnerbox, we don't even get battle towers anymore.

>>59661643
Yeah, because fuck all kids played them back in the day and we're now in an era where the baseline Nintendo handheld that can run pokémon ALSO happens to be a unit grunty enough to run 1080p/60FPS, meaning the games need to grow to that standard.
And outside the plot of OoT. there was fuck-all to do in the game (as it was nintendo's baby steps into 3D) but with BotW and TotK, there was a whole country to explore and thiings to do. Because they had 20 years under their belt. I know it took you more than one go to wipe your arse and a fair while before you learned to stop pissing and shitting yourself when mummy put you in big boy pants. So why do you expect a studio who only got their first devkit of a console powerful enough to create a big game world in 2015 to match what devs who've been doing it since the day they first launched pokémon full stop?

>>59661650
>meaning the games need to grow to that standard.
But the games aren't growing, they're arguably getting smaller, especially next to their other Nintendo franchises. SV for example has a completely barren open world, the kind of empty that people like to say BOTW is, except it's actually true. No sidequests of any kind to populate the world, no dungeons or gauntlets, interesting traversal or even interiors to any houses. No voice acting, broken leveling system, and more on top of the game itself running horribly on Switch while being broken and buggy as hell on release with a launch so disastrous that Nintendo reversed their "one digital game refund per account" policy so people could return their SV digital copies.
> So why do you expect a studio who only got their first devkit of a console powerful enough to create a big game world in 2015 to match what devs who've been doing it since the day they first launched pokémon full stop?
Because they're charging the same as other games on the same console despite delivering an objectively worse product. Xenoblade, Dragon Quest, Tales Of, Ys, those fuckass HD2D square games, all of them have better production quality and full length JRPG adventures than the entire switch era Pokemon games combined. And if you want to "erm acksually" the genres, then so has Digimon.

If Pokemon is such a low level developer then they should charge $50 like how Star Fox and Splatoon Raiders were. If they want to sell a game for $60/$70 (+DLC) then it's fair to compare them to other games that sell for just as much. Not even getting into how every Pokemon game sells quadruple any other franchise I've listed barring Zelda, which is the other reason people have expectations for these games.

>>59661669
But they are, every release (even the shat-=out memebox efforts) are all means to an end. But that end is making sure kids get into pokémon to grow up continuing to enjoy it. Not "make each and every spastic adult child online so orgasmically happy, they spunk themselves dry over it". GTA6 is dropping soon, aimed right at your kind. I suggest fucking off when it drops and never returning.

>>59661669
And Nintendo sets the prices for the games. Game Freak aren't independent when it comes to Pokémon, it's developed specifically for Nintendo hardware and Nintendo order them to publish for their systems. And frankly, if they wanted to sell it at $100, they could and people would probably buy it (but again, they got the spirit of Pokémon without needing to be the be-all-and-end-all for Pokémon unlike you shits who just want it to go back to how it was when you were 7 and the one being shilled at by the big bad brand).

>>59661669
Dexitbros told us that 1 pokemon = 1 content so they are in fact getting bigger

File: 973.gif (1.87 MB, 498x386)

1.87 MB GIF

>>59661712
>But that end is making sure kids get into pokémon to grow up continuing to enjoy it.
And kids deserve better games. And honestly using kids as an excuse low quality doesn't really work either. Gamefreak loves pandering to the 25+ demographic who also grew up with Pokemon, I can't even imagine anyone under 18 playing a game like Masters EX which basically just exists to go "remember this game?" I think it's blatant denial to act like GF/TCPI somehow isn't aware of their adult fanbase, who they love to sell products to, to defend the games having such low production value.
Likewise it's also disingenuous to act like because a game can be played by a kid means it's okay for it to be an actual decade behind the rest of the industry. Imagine trying to apply that logic to something like Mario, Smash Bros, Splatoon, really anything Nintendo, it doesn't hold up under any real scrutiny.
It's fine if you're okay with buying anything made by TCPI, regardless of quality, but getting upset and telling people to gtfo over it just reeks of being upset some people need more than a brand name to convince them to buy something.
>>59661716
> Game Freak aren't independent when it comes to Pokémon, it's developed specifically for Nintendo hardware and Nintendo order them to publish for their systems
I don't see how this is relevant to the lack of quality and content in the games. It's a reasonable defense as to why SV ran so terribly, but considering GF had been making games on Switch for nearly 4 or so years by SV's release, I don't see how the fault would lie at Nintendo and not GF for being poor developers.
>they got the spirit of Pokémon without needing to be the be-all-and-end-all for Pokémon unlike you shits
I don't know who or what you're talking about here, my initial point was talking about how the games keep losing things to do while being unimpressive games by their own merits. Also
>spirit of Pokemon
Lost with Natdex, I'm afraid.

>>59660541
Comparing JRPGs with action-adventure games is disingenuous. And these Switch images are just vistas. The BotW one isn't even from the actual game, but the first trailer.

You people are so obsessed with graphics it's unreal.

>>59660546
>admitted that one pokemon = one content
You've just owned yourself.

>>59660546
>they focus on the amount of content the game has
Yeah, as in reducing it.

>>59661806
Yeah? I never disagreed with this, if you think I was.
>>59661643
Yeah that is a good point, battle towers used to be a good stepping stone towards competitive, and now they’re non existent, I would live if they weren’t actively treating champions like it’s a game that’s a battle tower instead of a game for vgc where people who like comp pokemon actually play, but uh…at least it exists I guess?

File: Comparison.jpg (2.54 MB, 3264x2448)

2.54 MB JPG

>>59661756
>And kids deserve better games
They didn't want them, considering Hamtaro sold about 500k worldwide, Minish Cap anout 1.7m and Ruby/Sapphire sold 16m. If "kids" deserve better, why do kids ignore better for the magical elemental cartoony monster game?
It's to do with the cost of Switch 2 games published by nintendo, you dumb cunt. Nintendo set the prices so bitching about the cost of Nintendo games while crying about Game Freak just highlights how fucking thick you are. Which goes back to my original point of you being too fucking thick to understand they don't need effluvia like you, which is why they're doing what they're doing.

File: gengar-pokemon.gif (716 KB, 498x372)

716 KB GIF

>>59660546

>>59661827
>Yeah that is a good point, battle towers used to be a good stepping stone towards competitive, and now they’re non existent
That's because to multiplayer you needed a cable or a friend code and going to IRL tourneys was a ways and means of getting folded by some sweaty nolifer as there was no official segregation of age rages bar maybe junior (7-12/13" and senior (14+), while today, you need an internet connection (and frankly, you cunts are posting here, which means any cunt has an online connection for pokémon battles) and a desire to jump in and try it (aided and abetted by pokétubers, comp pokétubers and other miscellaneous mindrot on yt/tiktok/whateverthefuck). The world has evolved and crucially Nintendo have modernised the hardware Pokémon runs on to afford this method of comp-focused gameplay, than setting an rng hall while also putting an online in yadda yadda.

>>59661882
>why do kids ignore better for the magical elemental cartoony monster game?
Probably because Pokemon enjoyed an exceedingly aggressive marketing campaign that propelled it to the biggest media franchise of the 90's and beyond. But we don't even have to look at RSE, even on Switch alone there are a mountain of objectively better games that are lucky to sell a fraction of a fraction of even the shittiest Pokemon titles.
But that's not what this discussion is about, we could get lost in the weeds and ask ourselves and each other why X game or Y franchise never met Pokemon's peaks till bump limit, but that's beside the point. The point was always "why are you using children as an excuse to justify low quality"? and "Why is it that something being a game that kids can play make it fine for it to be so much worse than other games kids can also play?" to which you haven't actually given me an answer.

Why is Pokemon allowed to set the bar so low, while Zelda and Mario spend years on development to push the envelope with every major release, despite both targeting the exact same demographics? Why is that Smash Ultimate was a knock out homerun that made the effort to appeal to both little kids playing Smash for the first time and greasy 35+ year olds who started playing games on the PS1? Why do the games cost more but have less in them?
>>59661892
Why haven't they added anything to the games to replace the battle tower? Objectively speaking, there's nothing to do after you complete the main story besides go online. If we remove battling, older games at least had contests or some other side mode like Pokeathelon for you to spend time in. If online battling has removed the need for the Battle Tower/Frontier, then that's fine, but how come the only not battle content in the game anymore is the fractured remnants of Amie, or a photo mode?

And why is it that every excuse for why something is removed from the game conveniently lines up with less effort on GF's part?

File: 1780500668102661.jpg (17 KB, 250x250)

17 KB JPG

>>59661920
>>59661892
>>59661882
And cont. Why the anger? Why is saying "these games should have more to do in them relative to their price point" met with such vitriol?
No one is asking for the ultimate Pokemon game with all regions and all Pokemon anymore, people don't even really want the battle frontier back either. But these games have become such a wasteland of half baked ideas and almost good 6 out of 10 games. Where's the quality? Where's a reason to like these games past the brand name or tradition? Why is this series so utterly stagnant with its only attempts at innovation being poor attempts at copying the latest gaming trends like open world, and throwaway battle gimmicks that are replaced in the next generation?

Do you people even like Pokemon, or do you just defend it because of sunk cost? Why is wanting a better game a bad, unrealistic thing? Where's the soul, man?

>>59661934
There's endless content in multiplayer battles in this multiplayer franchise.

>>59661937
Older games also had mutliplayer and more single player content than modern games. Gen 5 for example had nearly all the modern online features we have today while still having a robust postgame campaign and a proper battle tower, actually we had a battle tower up till gen 7 (gen 8's was a joke).

So again I ask why the games cost more but have less.

>>59661944
>Gen 5 for example had nearly all the modern online features we have today while still having a robust postgame campaign and a proper battle tower
Only in BW2. In BW the postgame is three towns in eastern Unova, Elite Four rematches, chasing the Seven Sages, and the Abyssal Ruins.

>>59661944
>>59661754

File: dayondekapanunamused.jpg (56 KB, 1100x720)

56 KB JPG

>>59661934
In case you haven't noticed, it's one person with an extremely noticeable posting style going on these schizo rants about how it's okay that the games are dogshit because they're for children every single day, multiple times a day, melting down at all criticism of this slop. I hope he's getting paid to shill like this, because if he's doing it for free, it's incredibly depressing.

>>59661995
Ohhh, I see. I haven't been on this board on a while, good to see nothing's changed.

>>59661995
Hey motherfucker, you ate the slop as a kid. I wanted evolyution in Gen 2, but cunt kids were more profitable to shill at, leading to you cunts getting to even see it as 7 year olds in later Gens. Do one. you got what you deserve - a kiddy series that focuses on selling to kids and ignoring adults, because it worked for them for 30 years. While deliberately lagging behind the entire rest of the gaming industry while doing it. Sorry you're not a child any longer, kill yourself and respawn if you need to be Pokémon's focus again.

>>59661995
If they were degshit they wouldn't sell anon.

Team Rocket runs TPC.

>>59660541
FRLG are the best games in that image. Sad.

File: sandboxlosses.png (41 KB, 1096x580)

41 KB PNG

>>59660541
Because their shitty games continue to sell so they have no urgency to properly improve. Imagine if all pokemon games were losses, Game Freak would piss themselves and dramatically change their tune/restructure and be FORCED to actually listen and improve instead of coast by.

I feel like everyone in this thread is basically admitting "Yea, Pokemon sucks and game freak is lazy but we love the games anyway."
Hell, I'd even argue the dual releases have always been a greedy way to make more money. Game freak is hella scummy

>>59660546
"You'll own nothing, and you'll be happy" mentality

>>59661892
Honestly this would make sense in practice if gamefreak didn’t also treat champions as an intro to comp. Especially with how the director talks about the game it feels less like it’s capitalizing on comp and more like it’s trying to introduce people to comp…when we already had something like that, and it also allowed for comp to not be babied for others.
Just don’t quite get the thought process but either way I had some fun with swsh’s dlc and the base game of sv despite it.
>>59662424
Ig, but you can always skip out or emulate it when things rub you the wrong way about it, I haven’t bought ZA at all, I also haven’t bought swsh or lets go. It’s a matter of self control.

>>59660541
focus, M

>>59660541
Gayfreak is lazy. Every other pokemon fan dev whether its a veteran, a vibe coder or a teenager making pokemon snakewoods gives a fuck so much more.

>>59660546
Pass me what you're smoking IMMIDIATELY

File: sdgba051.jpg (84 KB, 890x593)

84 KB JPG

I don't care about the discourse I'm just happy whenever Sword of Mana is mentioned

SwSh looked really good in the arenas and town squares.
I'm not sure why they struggle with environment.

>>59660864
post-game content, dex completion, and romhacks, of course

>>59660541
Theyre not lazy, youre just an entitled faggot.

>>59662427
Because it is? They have the numbers, the game sales, the VGC participation metrics and the GO audience (as in the faggots like me constantly playing it, as part of the greater "catch 'em all" mindset, I use it for casually shiny-hunting shit I'm not fucked wasting my free time hunting in currently released games). Going mobile's opening up a bigger market.
There's also the fact they're pushing it as VGC home until WW, as they never ran three years on any one cart, but kinda had to wait longer than three to launch the next new Gen. I'll believe Champions is all they say when WW launches and they update it to run a WW-centric meta with a yearly template similar to past cart-based years and VGC remains on it. But given it revealed itself with Mega vs Tera and we're still actually waiting fro Terastralisation to be added to the thing, I somehow doubt it's going to jump ahead so far (especially when they revealed Z-Moves and Dynamax to be added too) when it;s easier to keep Champions as its own separate comp and championship and run VGC on cart, particularly when locking VGC to the newest game ensures anyone entering needs to own a Switch 2.