[Megathread] Nintendo Switch

[Tech614]

My only opinion on the game is looks ugly as fuck, when people say looks like a PS2 game its usually in bad faith but its kind of legitimate here. Comparing it to the new 3D open worldish Kirby game coming out, by Hal a very small team and its quite comical. Lets not even bring Xenoblade and SMT into the mix lol. Why is the game so fucking ugly? People shit on Sw/Sh and the D/P remake graphics but both are easier on the eyes then this washed out trying to look like BoTW while not looking anywhere near as good as BoTW trash.

I had no interest in the game either way so my opinion means nothing here, but they sure didn't do anything to make me even attempt to care about it.

[Video Games]

My worry with kirby is that it will be so easy it'll be boring

[Jester Joe]

This is what I'm talking about though. It doesn't matter if it's Pokemon's first attempt at something like that. It doesn't mean it gets to be mediocre. SMT V had the series first open world areas and it was far more successful and satisfying to traverse. That series also gets a fraction of the sales that Pokemon does, so it feels even worse. Like I said, people praise Game Freak for doing a mediocre job just because they're "innovating." Breath of the Wild also innovated but did it in a waaaayyyy more successful way that is actually deserving of praise. BotW also kinda looks like wide open plains but there are so many secrets and puzzles to find in the world.

Where do you expect them to get experience from if not through trial? You're tacking on "mediocre" but I never said it was mediocre, I had a blast with the Wild Area. It wasn't some giant failure you're making it sound to be, just because you liked other ways. And it seems as if you yourself admit you've heard praise for the wild area since you're trying to downplay it so much and you're saying people are wrong for praising it.

Jester are you approaching this discussion in bad faith? Because it really seems like you are. The HM obstacles served as a metroidvania type mechanic on seeing areas blocked off and becoming accessible later. Also you didn't address the fact that most routes are just straight up linear paths. There was very little exploration to be found. No caves to travel through, no dungeons to explore in the post game. Likely due to the fact that effort was put into the Wild Area.

Disagreeing with you isn't bad faith, ya know.
Calling HM puzzles was pretty faulty, hence why you've already backed on calling it obstacles. I mean, I still don't know what games you guys were playing coz even through BD/SP all I did was walk down a path and get to the next city, there is none of this exploring routes or hidden mysteries that seem to exist in your copy of the game. A minor detour for a TM that I'll never use? Maybe, by using cut on a single tree that was behind some tall grass.

And massive caves are trash. They were never fun, they were "Either bring a bunch of repel or run into Zubats every 5 steps". There were caves to travel through in Sword and Shield overall, they just weren't massive pieces of trash.

They literally say: People who live with Pokemon are rare, people who lead their Pokemon in battle (Trainers) are even rarer. If you can't see how I would interpret that as thinking that trainer battles will be limited or nonexistent, then we're just both wasting our time. I did forget about the Wardens when I made my first post, but my worry still stands that there will not be as many Pokemon trainer battles and every single bit of marketing about this game is pointing to that being the case.

I didn't say you couldn't interpret it that way, I pointed out that we don't know it yet. But you're insisting everything is pointing towards it despite there being multiple ways to interpret their statement, which just feels like pessimism to me.

- - - Updated - - -

My only opinion on the game is looks ugly as fuck, when people say looks like a PS2 game its usually in bad faith but its kind of legitimate here. Comparing it to the new 3D open worldish Kirby game coming out, by Hal a very small team and its quite comical. Lets not even bring Xenoblade and SMT into the mix lol. Why is the game so fucking ugly? People shit on Sw/Sh and the D/P remake graphics but both are easier on the eyes then this washed out trying to look like BoTW while not looking anywhere near as good as BoTW trash.

I had no interest in the game either way so my opinion means nothing here, but they sure didn't do anything to make me even attempt to care about it.

Xenoblade 2 in handheld should be considered warcrimes on eyes.

[Jtbrig7390]

I liked the wild area in Sword/Shield and Arceus seems to be expanding on that greatly so its likely ill enjoy it as well.

[Video Games]

Xenoblade 2 in handheld should be considered warcrimes on eyes.

It runs like shit because there's actually stuff on the screen

[Jester Joe]

It runs like shit because there's actually stuff on the screen

Like all the plot.
( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)

But I meant more of how pixelated it became. No complaints for it docked though, it was great there.

[Darththeo]

I am going to say there is literally nothing that Pokemon can do to appease their fanbase.

If they were to do high graphic stuff, people will likely complain it isn't Pokemon like that that Pokemon lost its charm or something to that end.

[Yunru]

I am going to say there is literally nothing that Pokemon can do to appease their fanbase.

If they were to do high graphic stuff, people will likely complain it isn't Pokemon like that that Pokemon lost its charm or something to that end.

It doesnt need high end ones. Just something that was put effort in. Skybox is a good start.

[Darththeo]

It doesnt need high end ones. Just something that was put effort in. Skybox is a good start.

That's fair, but doesn't really discount what I said.

Like literally on twitter right now people are complaining that Legends is the first game that Game Freak bothered to be a ceiling in the game and that is ridiculous that games didn't have ceilings prior (ignoring ceilings have appears in several other games.)

I don't know what Game Freak could do that wouldn't have someone complaining about it.

[Poppincaps]

Where do you expect them to get experience from if not through trial? You're tacking on "mediocre" but I never said it was mediocre, I had a blast with the Wild Area. It wasn't some giant failure you're making it sound to be, just because you liked other ways. And it seems as if you yourself admit you've heard praise for the wild area since you're trying to downplay it so much and you're saying people are wrong for praising it.

In the 13 minute video they posted the other day it seemed the Pokemon got a lot of experience from catching wild Pokemon. It seemed like more than usual because they caught a Psyduck and their entire team leveled up, but we'll have to see. I know you didn't say it was mediocre, I am saying it was mediocre. Also several people have made essays on Youtube saying that it was mediocre, so it's not like I'm the only one. Regardless, like I said before we should just agree to disagree, there's nothing really to argue about here because we already both have our opinions on the Wild Area.

Disagreeing with you isn't bad faith, ya know.
Calling HM puzzles was pretty faulty, hence why you've already backed on calling it obstacles. I mean, I still don't know what games you guys were playing coz even through BD/SP all I did was walk down a path and get to the next city, there is none of this exploring routes or hidden mysteries that seem to exist in your copy of the game. A minor detour for a TM that I'll never use? Maybe, by using cut on a single tree that was behind some tall grass.

And massive caves are trash. They were never fun, they were "Either bring a bunch of repel or run into Zubats every 5 steps". There were caves to travel through in Sword and Shield overall, they just weren't massive pieces of trash.

Yeah, I didn't really know what to call them. Some of them are puzzles, others are just like cutting down a tree. Also, I could use the same argument you used for the Wild Area, people generally liked the exploration in the older Pokemon games, they weren't a failure just because you like it the new way.

The routes in Sw/Sh are way more linear than in previous games. The Wild Area is just a wide open area with TMs and items tucked away in the corner seemingly randomly. Plus, like I said there aren't any dungeons to explore in the post game. Gen 1 had the Cerulean Cave, Gen 2 had Mt. Silver, Gen 3 didn't have a whole lot of post game specific areas but it had the abandoned ship, all of the areas you can dive into, meteor cave had some optional areas. There's no new areas to explore after beating the main story of Sw/Sh. You've already been to all of the areas of the game, including the Wild Area. The DLC fixes this and the Isle of Armor and Crown Tundra are a lot better, but obviously having to shell out more money for a post game when other games included it in the original purchase doesn't seem like something they should be applauded for.

I didn't say you couldn't interpret it that way, I pointed out that we don't know it yet. But you're insisting everything is pointing towards it despite there being multiple ways to interpret their statement, which just feels like pessimism to me.

I'm sorry, I really don't like to call people fanboys but this is just straight up fanboy behavior. This is why I said you're approaching the discussion from bad faith, because you're placing these labels on me that make no sense. If the OFFICIAL website says that trainers are rare and you don't somehow believe that means there will be less trainer battles than previous games or you somehow think that my interpretation is pessimistic, then there is honestly no hope for you. I am not being pessimistic. The only thing I'll admit to perhaps being pessimistic about is people's behavior towards the Pokemon games and heaping praise around certain areas of the game when other games with far less budget do things way better than they do. I am being very fair. When Game Freak does good, I praise them, as I did when I praised their improved Wild Area design in the Sw/Sh DLC. I also in my original post praised the new designs of the Pokemon. I think they look great. I'm especially excited to see the Hisuian Arcanine design as it's my favorite Pokemon. But if anything you are being overly optimistic if you don't think trainer battles will play a less significant role in this game. Like it's simple logic. If trainers are rare in Hisui and not rare in the other games, then obviously there are going to be far less of them. There's no other way to reasonably interpret that.

[Jastall]

My only opinion on the game is looks ugly as fuck, when people say looks like a PS2 game its usually in bad faith but its kind of legitimate here. Comparing it to the new 3D open worldish Kirby game coming out, by Hal a very small team and its quite comical. Lets not even bring Xenoblade and SMT into the mix lol. Why is the game so fucking ugly? People shit on Sw/Sh and the D/P remake graphics but both are easier on the eyes then this washed out trying to look like BoTW while not looking anywhere near as good as BoTW trash.

I had no interest in the game either way so my opinion means nothing here, but they sure didn't do anything to make me even attempt to care about it.

Pokemon is going to sell like hotcakes no matter what they do, so why bother trying?

[Poppincaps]

I am going to say there is literally nothing that Pokemon can do to appease their fanbase.

If they were to do high graphic stuff, people will likely complain it isn't Pokemon like that that Pokemon lost its charm or something to that end.

I can't speak for the entire Pokemon fanbase but I still feel like what I want isn't even that crazy. Add more post game content and add a higher difficulty mode. They literally did it in Black 2 and White 2 and I think that game is near perfect. If you want extra credit, make an open world Pokemon game where the game scales based on your gym badges and you can tackle the gyms in any order and it'd probably be my GotY.

[Darththeo]

I can't speak for the entire Pokemon fanbase but I still feel like what I want isn't even that crazy. Add more post game content and add a higher difficulty mode. They literally did it in Black 2 and White 2 and I think that game is near perfect. If you want extra credit, make an open world Pokemon game where the game scales based on your gym badges and you can tackle the gyms in any order and it'd probably be my GotY.

I feel the same way, it is just literally everything Game Freak does and does not do gets crap on. It is like everything is bad or not good enough. It's just tiresome at this point. I just hate that franchises I like are at the point where their fanbase is never pleased.

I would love a built in difficulty setting (not like B2W2 did where it was locked to a key system).

[Jester Joe]

In the 13 minute video they posted the other day it seemed the Pokemon got a lot of experience from catching wild Pokemon. It seemed like more than usual because they caught a Psyduck and their entire team leveled up, but we'll have to see. I know you didn't say it was mediocre, I am saying it was mediocre. Also several people have made essays on Youtube saying that it was mediocre, so it's not like I'm the only one. Regardless, like I said before we should just agree to disagree, there's nothing really to argue about here because we already both have our opinions on the Wild Area.

You also could do the same in Let's Go, but there was still quite a lot of trainer battles.

And what people rant on Youtube about is hardly a way to show an argument, negativity always brews more attention. And you can hardly claim "Agree to disagree" if you're going keep stating it as if it was matter of fact.

Yeah, I didn't really know what to call them. Some of them are puzzles, others are just like cutting down a tree. Also, I could use the same argument you used for the Wild Area, people generally liked the exploration in the older Pokemon games, they weren't a failure just because you like it the new way.

Roadblocks. They were never on the level of being puzzles because you knew exactly what you needed to get it done. Aside from a few "make sure you push the right boulder!". And again, I never said old paths were failures, just that they're not some massive mystery that people are making it sound like, they were rather linear themselves. Having a point where there's two directions to head isn't exactly some huge deal when you still have to pick the one that's the direction you want to head in.

The routes in Sw/Sh are way more linear than in previous games. The Wild Area is just a wide open area with TMs and items tucked away in the corner seemingly randomly. Plus, like I said there aren't any dungeons to explore in the post game. Gen 1 had the Cerulean Cave, Gen 2 had Mt. Silver, Gen 3 didn't have a whole lot of post game specific areas but it had the abandoned ship, all of the areas you can dive into, meteor cave had some optional areas. There's no new areas to explore after beating the main story of Sw/Sh. You've already been to all of the areas of the game, including the Wild Area. The DLC fixes this and the Isle of Armor and Crown Tundra are a lot better, but obviously having to shell out more money for a post game when other games included it in the original purchase doesn't seem like something they should be applauded for.

Those were all really one off things though, and they were rather limited themselves. Cerulean Cave and Mt. Silver weren't massive, and once you were done you had no real reason to go back. The Wild Area at least had a core gameplay feature tied to it, being the Max Raid battles.

I'm sorry, I really don't like to call people fanboys but this is just straight up fanboy behavior. This is why I said you're approaching the discussion from bad faith, because you're placing these labels on me that make no sense. If the OFFICIAL website says that trainers are rare and you don't somehow believe that means there will be less trainer battles than previous games or you somehow think that my interpretation is pessimistic, then there is honestly no hope for you. I am not being pessimistic. The only thing I'm admit to perhaps being pessimistic about is people's behavior towards the Pokemon games and heaping praise around certain areas of the game when other games with far less budget do things way better than they do. I am being very fair. When Game Freak does good, I praise them, as I did when I praised their improved Wild Area design in the Sw/Sh DLC. I also in my original post praised the new designs of the Pokemon. I think they look great. I'm especially excited to see the Hisuian Arcanine design as it's my favorite Pokemon. But if anything you are being overly optimistic if you don't think trainer battles will play a less significant role in this game. Like it's simple logic. If trainers are rare in Hisui and not rare in the other games, then obviously there are going to be far less of them. There's no other way to reasonably interpret that.

Sir, this is exactly what arguing in bad faith looks like, not I.

You're insulting me instead of actually hearing what's said, you're denying any explanation that could be another interpretation than your own, and you're acting as if what you say is the truth and there's no other way.

You yourself even used the label of being overly pessimistic, which is what you're doing in general.

[Poppincaps]

I knew you were going to bring up the overly pessimistic part, which is again you seemingly purposely misinterpreting what I was saying. I said I might be overly pessimistic in regards to feeling like Pokemon fans praise Gamefreak for minor innovations that other studios did years ago. I do not think my interpretation of what Pokemon Compnay has said about the game is pessimistic as I am not attributing any personal feelings to the statement they made. They said trainers are rare, or if you want to be super literal, they said people that lead their pokemon into battle are rare. I did not say that. If you can find me another Pokemon game where they said trainers are rare and yet there were actually a lot of trainers, then feel free to post it. I'll retract my statement.

I would love to be wrong. If there are a lot of trainer battles in Legends Arceus I think it could shape up to be a really great Pokemon game. But if they say that trainers are rare, then I am going to take them at their word. Doing anything else shows an insane amount of bias.

Also, I never said my opinion about the Wild Area was fact. The only thing that's a fact is that the routes of Sw/Sh are more linear than older Pokemon games. Whether that's a bad thing is up to opinion. I think it is, but if you don't then that's fine.

[Darththeo]

I knew you were going to bring up the overly pessimistic part, which is again you seemingly purposely misinterpreting what I was saying. I said I might be overly pessimistic in regards to feeling like Pokemon fans praise Gamefreak for minor innovations that other studios did years ago. I do not think my interpretation of what Pokemon Compnay has said about the game is pessimistic as I am not attributing any personal feelings to the statement they made. They said trainers are rare, or if you want to be super literal, they said people that lead their pokemon into battle are rare. I did not say that. If you can find me another Pokemon game where they said trainers are rare and yet there were actually a lot of trainers, then feel free to post it. I'll retract my statement.

I would love to be wrong. If there are a lot of trainer battles in Legends Arceus I think it could shape up to be a really great Pokemon game. But if they say that trainers are rare, then I am going to take them at their word. Doing anything else shows an insane amount of bias.

Also, I never said my opinion about the Wild Area was fact. The only thing that's a fact is that the routes of Sw/Sh are more linear than older Pokemon games. Whether that's a bad thing is up to opinion. I think it is, but if you don't then that's fine.

Based on what is said, and the fact Legends doesn't have online battles, I think trainer battles are rare (we know they are in the game as one is shown).

But, there is a lot of other stuff. Like the Noble Pokemon battles actually involving you the trainer.

It is hard to judge from the trailers how battles are going to be.

[Jester Joe]

I knew you were going to bring up the overly pessimistic part, which is again you seemingly purposely misinterpreting what I was saying. I said I might be overly pessimistic in regards to feeling like Pokemon fans praise Gamefreak for minor innovations that other studios did years ago. I do not think my interpretation of what Pokemon Compnay has said about the game is pessimistic as I am not attributing any personal feelings to the statement they made. They said trainers are rare, or if you want to be super literal, they said people that lead their pokemon into battle are rare. I did not say that. If you can find me another Pokemon game where they said trainers are rare and yet there were actually a lot of trainers, then feel free to post it. I'll retract my statement.

I would love to be wrong. If there are a lot of trainer battles in Legends Arceus I think it could shape up to be a really great Pokemon game. But if they say that trainers are rare, then I am going to take them at their word. Doing anything else shows an insane amount of bias.

Also, I never said my opinion about the Wild Area was fact. The only thing that's a fact is that the routes of Sw/Sh are more linear than older Pokemon games. Whether that's a bad thing is up to opinion. I think it is, but if you don't then that's fine.

I'm not purposely misinterpreting it. I'm acknowledging you said it about another statement, and saying that is how you are coming across in general though.

I gave you a few explanations as to how the statement can come across. I even said that it could straight up be less characters for trainers, but that you rechallenge them and they have different teams which they've done similar in the past with features like in Silver/Gold even.

But that doesn't inherently mean there's going to be less battles. You originally said

it definitely seems like there will be few if any trainer battles which is concerning to me.

If any, meaning possibly none at all. That would qualify as pretty negative considering they already said there will be trainers and have shown trainer battles.

You also compared it to Fallout 76 and NPCs which last I checked, the game had virtually none at the start which just reinforced that you're hearing a statement and taking it negatively.

At the end of the day, it's weird to tell someone else they're arguing out of bad faith when I've already said it's possible that there might not be as many trainers, but explained how I take it while also acknowledging that I see where you're coming from, but then you turn around and label my point as "fanboyism" and repeatedly refuse to see any other interpretation.

[Poppincaps]

I already stated that I had forgotten about the Wardens when I made the "if any" statement. I had forgotten because they weren't in the overview trailer. Also you've been attacking my interpretation from the jump. My comparison to Fallout 76 wasn't meant to be 1 to 1. I didn't really expand on it, so it's fair if you don't understand where I'm coming from. I simply meant that they removed NPCs in 76 only for the players to realize that the NPCs are what made Fallout, Fallout. I think it might be a similar situation in Legends where they add all these other mechanics only for people to realize that they don't wanna do all that stuff, they just wanna fight trainers like normal. I didn't mean that there would literally be no trainers.

At the end of the day Occam's Razor homie. The simplest answer is usually correct. If they say that trainers are rare, it's pretty safe to assume that fighting trainers isn't going to be a significant part of the game. I don't even really know why you're arguing with me. I've already said I've pre-ordered the game because I'm curious about this new direction they're taking.

Also let's not lie now. You never said you see where I'm coming from, in fact you basically said the opposite: "Despite the game coming out in 2 weeks we still barely have seen anything about it honestly, I'm really not sure how you're trying to draw conclusions from that." Also you said this after we just got a 13 minute trailer showing off what the game was about... like how much do they need to show before you're satisfied that we actually know what the game is about?

My whole issue in this conversation is that you're NOT seeing where I'm coming from and saying that I'm being pessimistic when I have a very rational interpretation of what was said. You're the one pulling out a bunch of hypotheticals that have no actual evidence to back them up. Sure, it's possible that we'll rematch the Wardens, but is that going to make up for the lack of the hundreds of random trainers you usually fight in these games? If there are less trainer battles will the Apex and Noble Pokemon be a suitable substitute? I don't actually know. That's why I'm buying the game to see for myself.

[Video Games]

It's pretty understandable to be pessimistic about a company that makes mediocre games just copying botw. Same with sonic frontiers

[jackofwind]

It's pretty understandable to be pessimistic about a company that makes mediocre games just copying botw. Same with sonic frontiers

Hot take: BotW was also a mediocre game.