• Ever thought it'd be cool to have your art, writing, or challenge runs featured on PokéCommunity? Click here for info - we'd love to spotlight your work!
  • Our weekly protagonist poll is now up! Vote for your favorite Trading Card Game 2 protagonist in the poll by clicking here.
  • Welcome to PokéCommunity! Register now and join one of the best fan communities on the 'net to talk Pokémon and more! We are not affiliated with The Pokémon Company or Nintendo.
    Register

Chit-Chat: Pokémon General Daily Chit-Chat. Join in.

Status
Not open for further replies.
Haha I do agree that Houndoom is very dark but my stance still remains the same for Luxray. To each their own I suppose.

Edit: No offence taken :p

I hated facing against that card back in the day.
 
Last edited:
Yoshikkko said:
Well there's a lot of type combinations that don't exist yet but there's also gonna be more gens so I mean, we might see them later on, or not, it doesn't really matter either way. And I don't think Pokémon should be dark type only because they are dark coloured. Luxray looks dark but his concept isn't really, it's about the concept mostly, not the colours.
Click to expand...
I concur just cause a body color constrasts with a general typing color it shouldn't necessairly be that type. Like for instance all Yellow Pokemon don't need to be predominately Yellow even though there are a lot of yellow colored electric types. Whereas with the case of Houndoom the name of it's species is Dark Pokemon, and the horns and tail are very indicative of that.
 
Kenshin5 said:
I concur just cause a body color constrasts with a general typing color it shouldn't necessairly be that type. Like for instance all Yellow Pokemon don't need to be predominately Yellow even though there are a lot of yellow colored electric types. Whereas with the case of Houndoom the name of it's species is Dark Pokemon, and the horns and tail are very indicative of that.
Click to expand...
Exactly, Houndoom's concept is a hellhound, Tyranitar's concept is a tyrant wreaking havoc in the mountains or something, all those things are dark natured. Dark type is my favourite type btw, together with bug.
 
Drakow said:
Conceptually I will agree with you. But just look at that cold, murderous stare Luxray has in that card.
Click to expand...

I can see it too. However, I do see another thing... off-modelness. :x Maybe I'm just not used to TCG art.
 
That's 3D for you. I never was really fond of 3D pokemon models (even back at Stadium days), and I would prefer cell-shaded art instead on the newer models. Just me, perhaps.
 
Unfortunately, I have a feeling we'll be seeing some sort of 3D modeling when we get the first 3DS Pokemon game... hopefully it'll at least look better than the horrendous "3D-ized" sprites they used for B/W that were so ugly and pixelated...

Nothing beats classic old-school 2-D sprites. IMO, the designers have to take some liberties when converting a 2D sprite or Sugimori drawing to 3D...
 
Well Sabre, have you seen the 3D models for the Pokedex on the 3DS yet? I'm assuming they'll be similar to that.
 
Elite Overlord LeSabre™ said:
IMO, the designers have to take some liberties when converting a 2D sprite or Sugimori drawing to 3D...
Click to expand...
I don't know what kind of improvement those liberties would bring if some people don't like the 3D style in the first place.

If anyone has played some 3D Naruto games, you'll see how they use a 3D style that is actually something like a vivid 2D imitation. Now that's the 3D I'd like to see on Pokemon.
 
The 3D Pokedex models are pretty good in my opinion. I do question whether they will be able to successfully implement similar models into the 3D Pokemon games without making them appear too "bad" though.
 
The biggest issue I foresee is that they'll be much, much smaller which could be a problem. :x
 
Toujours said:
The biggest issue I foresee is that they'll be much, much smaller which could be a problem. :x
Click to expand...
How so? As far as depth (or visual bulkiness goes) the 3D make up for it better than the 2D models, although lacking in other fields. So what exactly do you mean by 'small'?

Note I haven't seen the 3D pokedex yet
 
Well the 3D pokedex models are quite large indeed. So the dimension will have to be modified appropriately to actually be used in any future Pokemon games. This scaling factor has the potential to distort the models perhaps?
 
No, I haven't gotten a 3DS yet... still working with my old Lite, lol.

The problem with scaling that I've seen (just from scaling photos) is that sometimes details like thin lines or dots disappear completely. That could be a problem with a lot of Pokemon mouths and some styles of eyes as well (Chansey and Cyndaquil perhaps who have thin lines for eyes).
 
Well, for reference, here are some of the models. I just don't really feel like they'd translate as well to a sprite-sized image. xD

Hydreigon
Spoiler:


Zekrom
Spoiler:


Axew
Spoiler:
 
(So it seems I've been coaxed into posting here xD)

Since I do not own a 3DS, the only 3D models that I've game experience with is in Pokemon Battle Revolution on the Wii. Personally, I'm neutral on having 3D models but from seeing some Pokemon in three dimensions, I have to say that issues such as distortion and looking unrealistic may arise. Sometimes 3D Pokemon look uglier and slightly "messed-up" compared to 2D sprites(which has a lesser margin for errors). For example, the Bronzong here looks too cubic and stiff instead of having a curved outline like a bell. In 2D, I infer that it would look very off.

Spoiler:
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top