- 4
- Posts
- 112
- Days
- US
- Seen Apr 10, 2024
is it a poor generalization or what?
are pokemon fanboys are blinded by the flaws of newer pokemon games?
- Thread starter tetrahedronX901
- Start date
- 24,751
- Posts
- 3
- Years
- Any pronoun
- Online now
A poor generalization. (Presumes a decent chunk of users who come here could be considered fans.) Mentions graphical issues here quite frequently. Ran into save corruption issues for a handful of people. Remembers the same RNG for online battles. Complained about the lack of postgame. Terastallizes Pokemon on the first possible turn, as well as saving them for last. Only covers (some of) the things surrounding Scarlet/Violet. Can still have fun, despite all that.
For other generations: Lots of negativity for BDSP (often on looks, sometimes on not being Platinum), Sword/Shield's trees, Dynamax, Sun/Moon's tutorials, the power of Z-moves, X/Y's Elite Four and general ease, the power of Megas, and so on.
Suspects harsher criticism of newer games, honestly. (And a small honeymoon period too, in fairness.) Fades as the memory grows more distant. Often views older games with some rose-colored glasses. Like...have you tried to go back and play Generation 1? Replayed it. Contains limited inventory, a few weird sprites, no (good) Experience Share, tons of low-level and repetitive trainers, how unbalanced Psychic is, poor move options for some Pokemon, taking Counter damage from a different battle, Wrap+Toxic stuff, using HMs from the menu, no Move Deleter, the grind for Porygon, and plenty more. Could come up with things for other old games too. Do people often remember that, or the fun they had? Seems to be the latter. (Did not say they still cannot be fun. Certainly can be, despite all that, just like Scarlet/Violet.)
Mentions some possible first-game bias in play too. Ran a poll (before the Scarlet/Violet DLC): "Is the first Pokemon game that you completed also your favorite Pokemon game?" Split 6 Yes and 11 No. Is that a big sample size? No. Expects a smaller Yes vote, though, given nine generations of games.
Some other indications:
Favorite and least favorite generation. Answered Generation 4 or 5 as the favorite quite a bit.
Best and Worst Things about the SV DLC. Clearly identifies some flaws.
Scarlet/Violet ratings (pre-DLC). Some high numbers, some low numbers.
For other generations: Lots of negativity for BDSP (often on looks, sometimes on not being Platinum), Sword/Shield's trees, Dynamax, Sun/Moon's tutorials, the power of Z-moves, X/Y's Elite Four and general ease, the power of Megas, and so on.
Suspects harsher criticism of newer games, honestly. (And a small honeymoon period too, in fairness.) Fades as the memory grows more distant. Often views older games with some rose-colored glasses. Like...have you tried to go back and play Generation 1? Replayed it. Contains limited inventory, a few weird sprites, no (good) Experience Share, tons of low-level and repetitive trainers, how unbalanced Psychic is, poor move options for some Pokemon, taking Counter damage from a different battle, Wrap+Toxic stuff, using HMs from the menu, no Move Deleter, the grind for Porygon, and plenty more. Could come up with things for other old games too. Do people often remember that, or the fun they had? Seems to be the latter. (Did not say they still cannot be fun. Certainly can be, despite all that, just like Scarlet/Violet.)
Mentions some possible first-game bias in play too. Ran a poll (before the Scarlet/Violet DLC): "Is the first Pokemon game that you completed also your favorite Pokemon game?" Split 6 Yes and 11 No. Is that a big sample size? No. Expects a smaller Yes vote, though, given nine generations of games.
Some other indications:
Favorite and least favorite generation. Answered Generation 4 or 5 as the favorite quite a bit.
Best and Worst Things about the SV DLC. Clearly identifies some flaws.
Scarlet/Violet ratings (pre-DLC). Some high numbers, some low numbers.
Last edited:
- 1,778
- Posts
- 15
- Years
- Age 30
- Ireland
- Seen today
Poor generalisation, and kind of annoying and tired by now. The TLDR of this is: "The games clearly run like crap, and we all know it, but they're still quite fun to play at the end of the day."
What the latest generations of Pokemon games have lacked, is polish.
They have never been at the peak of performance or graphics, ever. Back when the games were mainly sprite-based on consoles like GB/GBA/DS, things ran a bit more smoothly, and it seemed like the developers managed their resources to some extent extent. The gameplay of catching Pokemon, training them, fighting battles, was easily represented in 2D. During this time, the games generally worked quite iteratively; meaning to say, it was clear that Gen 3 was working off of Gen 2, Gen 4 worked closely off of Gen 3 as a template, and so on.
Ever since the leap to 3D, it seems they've been in a perpetual loop of finding their feet, and they keep trying to reinvent the wheel each generation with core gameplay mechanics, which doesn't help either.
Scarlet and Violet are genuinely very close to being their best games; I say this honestly. The story, new characters, world and mechanics all come together in an excellent way…
…but it loses so many points because of how badly it runs.
I booted up the Indigo Disk DLC on the day it released. My character eventually makes it to the Terarium, the entire selling point for the DLC. I was treated to establishing camera shots of the various locations throughout the dome… and witnessed a ridiculous amount visual glitchery. Mountains would flicker in and out of existence, and the shadows they'd cast were also flickering, and that… just shouldn't be happening. There is just no excuse for your landscape not rendering properly when you're trying to create a big sweeping sense of wonder - it's poor optimisation.
That's just my one big example that kind of encapsulates the experience, and most of us have our own examples.
But, despite this, it's still fun. And I think a lot of people have a hard time accepting that this *can* be the case - if they sat down and actually played the games they'd probably come around at least to some degree, but people base their opinions on screenshots and YouTube videos rather than their own experience (which is fair, don't spend the money if you really don't feel like it).
People love to kick up a fuss now and again as if to say "Why is nobody talking about this?!". It's always being talked about lol, it's just not going to change anything. I have always, and presumably will always, find the games quite fun, even if they look kinda crappy.
Most comments I see nowadays come from people touting Palworld as obviously/infinitely better, but these are PC gamers who usually tend to quantify the experience in terms of framerate and pixel density. Looks are a component of games, for sure, but not the only one.
What the latest generations of Pokemon games have lacked, is polish.
They have never been at the peak of performance or graphics, ever. Back when the games were mainly sprite-based on consoles like GB/GBA/DS, things ran a bit more smoothly, and it seemed like the developers managed their resources to some extent extent. The gameplay of catching Pokemon, training them, fighting battles, was easily represented in 2D. During this time, the games generally worked quite iteratively; meaning to say, it was clear that Gen 3 was working off of Gen 2, Gen 4 worked closely off of Gen 3 as a template, and so on.
Ever since the leap to 3D, it seems they've been in a perpetual loop of finding their feet, and they keep trying to reinvent the wheel each generation with core gameplay mechanics, which doesn't help either.
Scarlet and Violet are genuinely very close to being their best games; I say this honestly. The story, new characters, world and mechanics all come together in an excellent way…
…but it loses so many points because of how badly it runs.
I booted up the Indigo Disk DLC on the day it released. My character eventually makes it to the Terarium, the entire selling point for the DLC. I was treated to establishing camera shots of the various locations throughout the dome… and witnessed a ridiculous amount visual glitchery. Mountains would flicker in and out of existence, and the shadows they'd cast were also flickering, and that… just shouldn't be happening. There is just no excuse for your landscape not rendering properly when you're trying to create a big sweeping sense of wonder - it's poor optimisation.
That's just my one big example that kind of encapsulates the experience, and most of us have our own examples.
But, despite this, it's still fun. And I think a lot of people have a hard time accepting that this *can* be the case - if they sat down and actually played the games they'd probably come around at least to some degree, but people base their opinions on screenshots and YouTube videos rather than their own experience (which is fair, don't spend the money if you really don't feel like it).
People love to kick up a fuss now and again as if to say "Why is nobody talking about this?!". It's always being talked about lol, it's just not going to change anything. I have always, and presumably will always, find the games quite fun, even if they look kinda crappy.
Most comments I see nowadays come from people touting Palworld as obviously/infinitely better, but these are PC gamers who usually tend to quantify the experience in terms of framerate and pixel density. Looks are a component of games, for sure, but not the only one.
- 41,365
- Posts
- 17
- Years
- She/Her
- Australia
- Seen today
^that
The newer games run poorly and have a lot of bugs, yes. I completely understand that. But nonetheless, I am still allowed to enjoy the game - and I do. Scarlet/Violet had very poor performance and I've commented on it many times, but I have thoroughly enjoyed it and label the story as my all-time favorite from the series. We can enjoy a game but still want it to improve, after all; it seems like some people miss or don't want to accept that this can be the case.
- 4
- Posts
- 112
- Days
- US
- Seen Apr 10, 2024
"Most pokemon fans are mindless consoomers who will defend their beloved series to their dying breath while they fail to realise that they are the reason that the quality of the games only get worse each time. Also, they tend to be the most insufferable, chronically online people in the world, akin to disney adults or twitter weebs."
i portrayed you as soyboy.
pokemon fans can critical and not be a soyboy comsoomer.
i portrayed you as soyboy.
pokemon fans can critical and not be a soyboy comsoomer.
- 24,751
- Posts
- 3
- Years
- Any pronoun
- Online now
(^ Merged those, for the sake of other readers' context.)
...Why would you pay any mind to someone who uses the term "soyboy" and "consoomer" as their go-to insults? Wants to feel superior to others by putting them down. Stop bothering with this person (or people).
Recognizes your posts as venting, which is fine. Please try not to regularly spread their hate further, though. Deserves no wider audience.
Last edited:
- 13,273
- Posts
- 6
- Years
- Seen today
New games are fun. But I don't think it's too much to ask for a game sold at full retail value to run properly. Or to be patched for improvements.
I don't think anybody should be criticized for enjoying these games. I also think the constant complaining is valid.
I don't think anybody should be criticized for enjoying these games. I also think the constant complaining is valid.