PDA

View Full Version : What's all this about bad models?


Luminous_Reaver
May 22nd, 2007, 05:40 AM
I'm looking at previews and these things are great. :|

Except Groudon, his texture looks like it's too small for his body.

acrof
May 22nd, 2007, 12:56 PM
I will explain, some old pokemons (slowbro, exeggutor, arcanine, typhlosion, etc) were not remodeled in Battle Revolution, so they are using the same models from Stadium 1 and 2 (yes, nintendo 64 graphics for these pokemons), however, some of the old ones were remodeled, like scyther and scizor, Charizard, Blastoise, Venusaur, and all the legendaries, like mewtwo, mew, moltres, zapdos, and articuno, were also remodeled

RSL
May 22nd, 2007, 02:19 PM
If I'm not mistaken, Typhlosion's neck flame looks different; something tells me it was remodeled.

And technically speaking, they actually don't use the "old" models, they just reduce the vertice count on them to make them smoother.

Gary, the Magic Fairy
May 22nd, 2007, 02:20 PM
I don't get it either. People just like to complain. It makes them think people care about them & their opinions, or something. It's sad, really :(

I looked at all the ones people complain about, and they look fine, just as they did when they were allegedly in Pokemon Stadium 1 & 2. Y'know, just because they look the same doesn't mean they weren't remodeled. They could just look very similar.

acrof
May 22nd, 2007, 02:38 PM
You see, I´m the nº1 typhlosion fan, do you have any idea of how ridiculous "my precious" (lord of the rings XD) is in this game?
It´s flames looks like paper!
http://i49.photobucket.com/albums/f293/acrof/typhlosion.jpg
And I get extremely angry for that, Charizard was remodeled, Moltres was remodeled, their flames now are just amazing, Infernape too, but 2 of my favorite pokemons are just the same from stadium 1 and 2:
Typhlosion and Arcanine.
And technically speaking, they actually don't use the "old" models, they just reduce the vertice count on them to make them smoother.
It´s just a special light effect, but the models are the same, belive me,I compared them with Stage6 videos and my N64 with Stadium 2 on it.

~*!*~Tatsujin Gosuto~*!*~
May 22nd, 2007, 04:11 PM
You see, I´m the nº1 typhlosion fan, do you have any idea of how ridiculous "my precious" (lord of the rings XD) is in this game?
It´s flames looks like paper!
http://i49.photobucket.com/albums/f293/acrof/typhlosion.jpg
And I get extremely angry for that, Charizard was remodeled, Moltres was remodeled, their flames now are just amazing, Infernape too, but 2 of my favorite pokemons are just the same from stadium 1 and 2:
Typhlosion and Arcanine.

It´s just a special light effect, but the models are the same, belive me,I compared them with Stage6 videos and my N64 with Stadium 2 on it.



Yea I can tell, what you mean about the flame. It looks like it was just placed there. This is the wii Nintendo should know better, it still looks like it was from XD and colossuem


:t354:~*!*~Queen Boo~*!*~

Gary, the Magic Fairy
May 22nd, 2007, 05:41 PM
I can't recall seeing a typhlosion in Colosseum, but wasn't it like that in those games too? It's not supposed to be a big flame, it's thin. Like paper.

That still looks awesome, even though that's not a good pic. If it had visable eyes and teeth, it would be even better.

Got a pic of Arcanine?

~*!*~Tatsujin Gosuto~*!*~
May 23rd, 2007, 02:59 AM
bad pic or not, the flame still looks horrible. you dont have to see typhlosion in colossuem. But you can upload your team on it and see how horrible typhlosions flame is. Also evolve Quilava you'll see


:t354:~*!*~Queen Boo~*!*~

Adamant Linoone
May 23rd, 2007, 04:27 AM
I would think the Typhlosion looks better from other angles.

Ichida
May 23rd, 2007, 10:59 AM
I like the way Typhlosion looks there, even if it is poorly rendered. Makes it look cartoony. (y)

parallelzero
May 23rd, 2007, 12:25 PM
Oh no. One Pokemon out of nearly 500 looks bad. Whatever shall we do!!!! =o

...Seriously, its not that big of a deal. XD

ShadowTails
May 23rd, 2007, 12:36 PM
you guys can't even start to complain, if you think that those little thing makes the game unbearable, you obviously haven't visited the hacking forums. This game is amazing compared to the 95% rubbish that most people make their hacks into. You guys have no right to complain about this, there are 493 Pokemon, that would just take FOREVER to remodel 386 Pokemon and then remodel others again, and again, and again.

Luminous_Reaver
May 23rd, 2007, 01:31 PM
Oh god they used the same sprites for Mega Man 2 as they did for 1. And then on 3, 4, 5, and 6.

Really though, the models are fine.
Now if they went and re-used textures... That would be absolutely horrible.

And I hope Typhlosion's flames aren't actually paper. Or I'll die. ;~;

~*!*~Tatsujin Gosuto~*!*~
May 25th, 2007, 03:14 PM
you guys can't even start to complain, if you think that those little thing makes the game unbearable, you obviously haven't visited the hacking forums. This game is amazing compared to the 95% rubbish that most people make their hacks into. You guys have no right to complain about this, there are 493 Pokemon, that would just take FOREVER to remodel 386 Pokemon and then remodel others again, and again, and again.


Thats because they suck but game freak has more experience at this then amatures


:t354:~*!*~Queen Boo~*!*~

Ayano Katagiri
May 25th, 2007, 03:19 PM
http://i49.photobucket.com/albums/f293/acrof/typhlosion.jpg

OMG... that's the first time I've seen that. And I must agree, it isn't great. The fire doesn't look real enough, too paper-like.
you guys can't even start to complain, if you think that those little thing makes the game unbearable, you obviously haven't visited the hacking forums. This game is amazing compared to the 95% rubbish that most people make their hacks into. You guys have no right to complain about this, there are 493 Pokemon, that would just take FOREVER to remodel 386 Pokemon and then remodel others again, and again, and again.
You can't compare hacks to a console game. Time and money spent on hacks is nothing compared with what is done on these kind of game. Hacks are completely separate, also on a different console to what the hacks would be on.

acrof
May 25th, 2007, 05:39 PM
You see?
Most of the people that were saying that I was crazy for complaining of Stadium=PBR 3D models, did´t even know about them.
Oh no. One Pokemon out of nearly 500 looks bad. Whatever shall we do!!!! =o
If I were to say how many not-remodeled pokemons are in PBR, I would say it´s something about 290 out of 493 pokemons, because a good amount in the first generation was not upgraded, the same goes for G/S/C generation, and only Groudon, Deoxys, and Kyogre were remodeled from the R/S/E generation (for the first preview video of course).

Got a pic of Arcanine?
http://i49.photobucket.com/albums/f293/acrof/arcanine.jpg
As you can see, sharp corners forming a squarey Arcanine, just the same from Stadium.

Gary, the Magic Fairy
May 25th, 2007, 09:55 PM
That's all? Seriously? The way you make it seem is like it's horribly disfigured or something... you're whining about square-ish feet? That's crazy.

"Oh my gosh, let's take another half a year to round out all these feet so a few people who are going to buy the game anyway will be happy!" I'm sure that's exactly what they should have done ;)

Are you going to be staring at it's feet, 2 centimeters from the TV screen every second you're playing the game?

Also, would you quit calling them 'pokemons'? Please, they're 'pokemon'.

Eirikr
May 26th, 2007, 01:41 AM
People are defending this? Dear god. They are using graphics from TWO generations ago, I would like to see what you'd do if each pokemon had it's original generation's sprite, you'd call blue murder.

Fact is, this was rushed and obviously not planned well, I hope after this, abomination, this amaglimation of N64, NGC and Wii, they spend time on remodeling those they didn't redo. Also the "contact" is sloppy at best. I guess it's the best Genious Senority could pull out. >_>

acrof
May 26th, 2007, 07:33 AM
You can´t see the rest of it, it´s squarey too, also if you can notice it´s feet like that in a small pic, imagine in a big TV screen.

Also, would you quit calling them 'pokemons'? Please, they're 'pokemon'
Well it depends, here in my country the plural of pokemon is "pokemons". The same goes to the word "animal" if you can use the word "animals" for more than 1 animal, why not use the word "pokemons" for more than 1 pokemon? OK? ^^

Gary, the Magic Fairy
May 26th, 2007, 01:25 PM
Well it depends, here in my country the plural of pokemon is "pokemons". The same goes to the word "animal" if you can use the word "animals" for more than 1 animal, why not use the word "pokemons" for more than 1 pokemon? OK? ^^Sorry, didn't look at the location. ^^;

You can´t see the rest of it, it´s squarey tooOk... then show me a pic of the rest of it to prove it.

People are defending this? Dear god. They are using graphics from TWO generations ago, I would like to see what you'd do if each pokemon had it's original generation's sprite, you'd call blue murder.That is completely different. 3D models =/= Sprites. The differences are far less noticable between 2 generations of sprites and of models.

Abomination? LMAO.

Eirikr
May 26th, 2007, 04:56 PM
That is completely different. 3D models =/= Sprites. The differences are far less noticable between 2 generations of sprites and of models.

Abomination? LMAO.They are not all that differant, and yes thet are. Sorry, have to be horribly cliche'd here, but, FF7, 8, 9 to 10 and especialy 12 are are enough of a differance to notice the time span, and they are all a disc medium, and only 1 gen differance, this is carts/Imo, nintendo's mistake/to MiniDisc to DVD. Even Shadow Hearts to Shadow Hearts Covenant, both on PS2, has a massive graphical upgrade. Sorry, but if you think any franchise can get away with this, other than pokemon, heck, even new games not from a franchise, with N64/Early PSOne graphical standard for some characters, you are fooling yourself. This thing on the DS I could see, but not on a home console. Why pokemon fans would put up with this is beyond my comprehension.

I could play my N64 on the N64 or the VC, but not on the Wii as a normal bought at shops game. Again, my sprite referance holds, as it is the same circumstances. You are way too forgiving of sloppy work, just because it's "POKAMANZ"

acrof
May 26th, 2007, 05:33 PM
Some people say that pokemon can´t have better graphics because they would probaly not look like pokemon anymore.
I disagree with that, other franchise, Bandai decided to give it´s pets (digimon)real textures, like fur, etc, in their last movie.
Here is the result:
Here you can see a Dorumon, cartoonish, just like pokemon:
http://content.answers.com/main/content/wp/en/e/e0/Dorumon.gif
And here you can see the same digimon, but now with the textures:
http://i49.photobucket.com/albums/f293/acrof/doru.jpg
IMO, with the realistic textures it looks much better, and I know a Wii is capable of doing so with pokemons too.
They will still look like pokemon if they keep their original form.

~*!*~Tatsujin Gosuto~*!*~
May 27th, 2007, 04:16 AM
that last 2 pictures are broken


:t354:tatsujin gosuto

Forci Stikane
May 27th, 2007, 07:30 AM
*WHOOSH*They are not all that differant, and yes thet are. Sorry, have to be horribly cliche'd here, but, FF7, 8, 9 to 10 and especialy 12 are are enough of a differance to notice the time span, and they are all a disc medium, and only 1 gen differance, this is carts/Imo, nintendo's mistake/to MiniDisc to DVD. Even Shadow Hearts to Shadow Hearts Covenant, both on PS2, has a massive graphical upgrade. Sorry, but if you think any franchise can get away with this, other than pokemon, heck, even new games not from a franchise, with N64/Early PSOne graphical standard for some characters, you are fooling yourself. This thing on the DS I could see, but not on a home console. Why pokemon fans would put up with this is beyond my comprehension.

I could play my N64 on the N64 or the VC, but not on the Wii as a normal bought at shops game. Again, my sprite referance holds, as it is the same circumstances. You are way too forgiving of sloppy work, just because it's "POKAMANZ"

You're forgetting something: in those other games the graphics are more likely than not using the same basic models for the characters and just changing the appearance. With Pokemon the creatures are so different that you pretty much have to make a model for each seperate one. AND you have two different color schemes AND the gender differences. All that combined equals quite a bit of memory usage, certainly more than characters from one of the Final Fantasy games.

Also on the point of Final Fantasy, let us keep in mind that games earlier on in a system's life tend not to push the system to its peak, but get much stronger as the system's life goes on (just look at FF7 vs FF9). Who knows what we'll get in the future.

*WHOOSH*

acrof
May 27th, 2007, 07:51 AM
that last 2 pictures are broken
fixed! ^^

Who knows what we'll get in the future.

Well I hope it´s not a game just like PBR with 2 new features, and a different name (like Colosseum and XD)

parallelzero
May 27th, 2007, 07:56 AM
I still can't believe people are moaning about this. Seriously. Nintendo isn't god, Gamefreak isn't god. They don't have an infinite amount of time or money to make the models for new Pokemon, and redo models for all of the old ones each time.


If I were to say how many not-remodeled pokemons are in PBR, I would say it´s something about 290 out of 493 pokemons, because a good amount in the first generation was not upgraded, the same goes for G/S/C generation, and only Groudon, Deoxys, and Kyogre were remodeled from the R/S/E generation (for the first preview video of course).
Doesn't mean the older models are all going to look bad. There is honestly no need to redo the R/S gen, and the Stadium and Stadium 2 models have been used forever with minimal complaints. The older models hold some form of nostalgia for most, and like I mentioned, Gamefreak doesn't have the money or time to redo everything.

At the Dorumon point: To make this short and sweet, Pokemon =/= Digimon. Digimon became more realistic because they wanted to make it available to a teen audience instead of kids. However, Pokemon is for the kids, and will always be for the kids. A drastic change in Pokemon appearance would indefinitely kill the franchise.

Corona
May 27th, 2007, 03:04 PM
I am confused someone explain

Luminous_Reaver
May 27th, 2007, 03:24 PM
That's all? Seriously? The way you make it seem is like it's horribly disfigured or something... you're whining about square-ish feet? That's crazy.
I don't know, those feet are pretty bad.

RSL
May 27th, 2007, 05:18 PM
Don't look that bad to me; sometimes you have to make with what's available.

Luminous_Reaver
May 27th, 2007, 06:35 PM
Don't look that bad to me; sometimes you have to make with what's available.

It's not too bad, but next to the really polished new models, it's looks terrible.

BUT it's not too bad.

~*!*~Tatsujin Gosuto~*!*~
May 28th, 2007, 01:21 PM
I still can't believe people are moaning about this. Seriously. Nintendo isn't god, Gamefreak isn't god. They don't have an infinite amount of time or money to make the models for new Pokemon, and redo models for all of the old ones each time.

Well that is true




Don't look that bad to me; sometimes you have to make with what's available.


true again, next time they can fix there mistakes and learn from them


:t354:tatsujin gosuto

wmoor0826
May 28th, 2007, 07:55 PM
.... I think i just discovered something that no1 has noticed...... THEY'RE JUST GRAPHICS! THEY R NOT THAT IMPORTANT!

Luminous_Reaver
May 29th, 2007, 05:23 AM
.... I think i just discovered something that no1 has noticed...... THEY'RE JUST GRAPHICS! THEY R NOT THAT IMPORTANT!

Yeah they are.
I mean sure, lot's of people say things like that, but graphics do make a difference.

Like when I was playing Ruby the other day, it didn't look as good, or feel as fun.
Because I've been playing Pearl for a hundred and twenty-four hours.

Sure I still play Ruby, and even (especially) Crystal, but after seeing some better looking games, they don't feel as cool as they did then.
Also the nostalgia makes them cooler still.

acrof
May 30th, 2007, 04:27 AM
At the Dorumon point: To make this short and sweet, Pokemon =/= Digimon. Digimon became more realistic because they wanted to make it available to a teen audience instead of kids. However, Pokemon is for the kids, and will always be for the kids. A drastic change in Pokemon appearance would indefinitely kill the franchise.

But what will happen when the pokemon fans become older?
They will simply forget about it.
And without those fans, I know that pokemon will lose popularity.

You see, when I became a fan I was 9 years old, and now I´m 17!
People like me, who were there when red/blue came out, will surely lose interest in the franchise if they insist in that "pokemon is for children" idea.

I´m not against it though, but they should take this fact seriously.
Pokemon =/= Digimon
Everybody says that!:laugh:
But I´m NOT comparing the concept of Pokemon with the concept of Digimon, and yes, they do have a lot of similarities, belive me I´m a huge fan of them, but thats not the point of my topic.
The real point of that topic was to show how some textures would look amazing with pokemon, imagine a arcanine or other furred pokemon with fur textures in the games?
That would be amazing!:cool:

.... I think i just discovered something that no1 has noticed...... THEY'RE JUST GRAPHICS! THEY R NOT THAT IMPORTANT!I don´t care if the graphics are good or not either, BUT only when they are in their respective plataforms and are in their respective generation.
EX:
I can play Master System games with 8-bit graphics on it,
and I can play SNES with 16/32- bits graphics on it, and I also can play N64 with 64-bits graphics on it, But I can´t play a Wii game (wich should be around 512-bits graphics, however the term "bits" died with the Dreancast, so...) with 64-bits graphics on it, it´s simply ridiculous.

Midnight_Dragon249
May 30th, 2007, 08:31 AM
I've been lurking in this thread for awhile now, and I thought I'd throw in my two cents.

While the 1st/2nd gen graphics could use some updating, they're (probably) not bad enough to make a Pokemon fan not get the game. What Asch said is also true; Gamefreak and Nintendo don't have the time to remodel everything. Really, being a company, Nintendo's probably more concerned about making money than making the gamers really happy. They're probably thinking what I stated in the first sentence of this paragraph.

But what will happen when the pokemon fans become older?
They will simply forget about it.
And without those fans, I know that pokemon will lose popularity.

You see, when I became a fan I was 9 years old, and now I´m 17!
People like me, who were there when red/blue came out, will surely lose interest in the franchise if they insist in that "pokemon is for children" idea.

I´m not against it though, but they should take this fact seriously.

Keeping Pokemon 'for children' could be a good or bad thing. They could keep atracting the younger generations, which we will never run out of, which would mean their franchise would hopefully not die. If they did what Digimon's doing, maturing with the original audience, after several years, the original audience has either lost interest because of college/work/family/etc or still likes it because it's a mature enough franchise. Although, I think Savers is as mature as they'd get. (Right now, I'm actually for what Digimon's doing. I don't feel as stupid watching Savers as I do Adventure)

Of course, I've never been too harsh on graphics, unless they're so bad I think, "I could do a better job than that!" Obviously, the first/second gen graphics aren't that bad, as I remember sitting in my room playing the Stadium games for hours.

parallelzero
May 30th, 2007, 04:31 PM
But what will happen when the pokemon fans become older?
They will simply forget about it.
And without those fans, I know that pokemon will lose popularity.

You see, when I became a fan I was 9 years old, and now I´m 17!
People like me, who were there when red/blue came out, will surely lose interest in the franchise if they insist in that "pokemon is for children" idea.

I´m not against it though, but they should take this fact seriously.

Okay, its been over ten years, and Pokemon as a franchise is still holding strong, even stronger than it used to. That in itself is proof enough that keeping the children themed style is working. I became a Pokemon fan ten years ago, I'm still one now. That which makes Pokemon what it is is what draws me to it year after year. Obviously how kiddy-ish it is has little influence on who plays it.

acrof
May 31st, 2007, 06:31 AM
Keeping Pokemon 'for children' could be a good or bad thing. They could keep atracting the younger generations, which we will never run out of, which would mean their franchise would hopefully not die.
But remember that even the young generation is playing games like Black, Mortal Kombat, GTA, etc.
I think even maturing pokemon, they will not lose ANY oportunity to atract new fans, even the young ones.

If they did what Digimon's doing, maturing with the original audience, after several years, the original audience has either lost interest because of college/work/family/etc or still likes it because it's a mature enough franchise. Although, I think Savers is as mature as they'd get. (Right now, I'm actually for what Digimon's doing.

I think they are doing the right thing.
Just think about it, Spider Man, wich was created long ago is still very popular even to mature audience (my father is still a fan ^^) and even the new movies being more mature, I have no doubt that many children like it.

I don't feel as stupid watching Savers as I do Adventure)
Me too! XD
But I have to tell that I feel very stupid when I stop to watch those new generations of pokemon on TV.
However I´m still a fan of pokemon!
But I like just the concept of pokemon, because the games and the anime are looking too childsh for me, but I will still like it forever, even if the company dies,
the moments that I spent on playing, watching and having fun with pokemon will survive in my memory.