57 replies to this topic

[3Dude]

No I just lay off the arguments I don't care about, for me if there is an argument here, the only one worth looking at is about the original post.  There is a 70 Pokemon, right now forget everything else.  I am saying that is nowhere near enough for a game produced with a lot of funds and is a major franchise for Nintendo.  Now I am getting people trying to justify it with loads of irrelevant arguments.  I'm giving my opinion and you're calling it a weak argument? The weak argument is the ones put to me to argue my opinion.  If you want facts then here they are - major franchise, huge investment, 15 years of work, very familiar with Nintendo's architecture, has a pattern of releasing more than 100 new monsters.  So for me, it is illogical to defend it but that is me, someone else can come along and say that's dandy.  It is an opinion.  And that is why my argument probably seems work cos it isn't one.  I was just saying I don't think it is a lot.

Calling out your broken logic and poor arguments and attempts at justifying a video game are seperate subjects.

Your being dissapointed in only 70 pokemon is an opinion. Cant really touch that. Unfortunately, you are prone to utilizing kettle logic, instead of just leaving it at your opinion, and your myriad of supporting 'facts' are provably false, as you are arguing from ignorance of the process you are complaining about.

pokemon x and y have not been in development for 15 years like you claimed.

Pokemon is well known for having hilariously tiny budgets, near every single spin off pokemon game has higher budgets than mainline series entries. While X/Y very obviously has the largest budget of any gamefreak mainline title, its also very obviously microscopic compared to the budgets of similar offerings of both genre, and title/franchise power.

There is no 'nintendo architecture'. The game boy, game boy advance, ds, and 3ds are all unique custom built entirely seperate arm processors, a very different situation than the home console scene which has been steadily upgrading a single processor architecture for its cpu. Nintendo handhelds mantained backwards compatability by actually including the processor of the previous device in the system. for example, there is a gba cpu in every ds, and a gbc cpu in every gba. Aside from that, game freak isnt very well versed in any architecture really.They arent very talented on that front at all. In fact, most all of the spin offs, always far mor technically demanding than main entries, are done by other developers, for example, pokemon colleseum, was done by genius sonority. Game freak just isnt very talented at programming. Hell, they couldnt even get the overworld to run in 3d on this mainline pokemon game.

Your argument that they typically release over 100 monsters is false equivilance. It relies on the false presumption that the same amount of work is required to make 100 still sprite drawings as it takes to make 100 monster models, texture 100 monster models, rig 100 texture models, and provide animations for 100 texture models.

Okay, this is just getting weird. Time to dump some info.
 
I think the tl;dr problem here is that fans sort of took for granted that the hardware leap would cause a graphically superior game, like it always has, but this is the first time that we're getting below 100 new pokemon. I don't see why it's any surprise that this is disappointing. Players obviously expected both.[/quote]

Dont really care if people are dissapointed, when they make factually false claims because they dont understand creating a functional 3d mario takes more time, human resources, and money, than a still sprite drawing, thats when I step in.
 

Both Serebii and this event claim grid based diagonol movement http://ds.mmgn.com/A...-and-y-revealed 

8way digital movement and gridlocked are entirely seperate things. Just because something is not analog does not mean it is gridlocked. This is the very reason appeal to authority is considered a logical fallacy.

 

As for the battle animations, there hasn't been enough footage uploaded to suggest that they're not going the old way of having one animation per attack like every game, and about 5 different unique animations per pokemon, to properly illustrate physical, special, damage, etc, like the 3D console ones. So there's not too much uncharted territory here. They're not gonna make individual animations per attack, would both be insane and prevent special move event pokemon without patching.

Rudimentary design knowledge answers this. Only pokemon with the same animation skeleton can share the same animations. ie, humanoids get a certain animation for a certain move, quadrapeds, small bipeds, snake likes, flying, etc. This is an automatic garuntee of a large increase in variety of animation, even if its predecessor its increasing over was basically nothing. Dont confuse a characters animation, as in the character itself moving, with a battle effect, like a laser blast.

Furthermore, there was nothing forcing Pokemon to release this year. It could have easily been pushed forward to keep up with general expectations.

Released earlier? I guess, seems rushed enough as is to me.

Of course fans are going to feel that using something expected as an excuse for the lack of 30 pokemon is... an excuse. What's another 150 animations on top of 3600?

3d animation doesnt work like that at all. After the framework has been completed,As long as they made models that could be rigged with an existing skeleton, there really wouldnt be any extra animations. The bulk of the work problems with that is model creation and texturing. Im guessing dlc is the most likely reason here.


[quote] Especially when combined with the fact that there will be no 3D overworld on a 3D system, it just seems rushed in general.[/quote] Ha, I brought this up in another response. Game freaks really just not that talented in the coding department.

[quote]
Of course, this is all assuming you don't count the mega evolutions as new pokemon. While they do not have separate dex entries, nor specific movesets, and therefor do not officially count as new pokemon in game, there has been over 20 found to exist so far by leakers.
http://i.imgur.com/X6GVi7F.png
http://i.imgur.com/jGHpqv9.jpg
So there may very well be 100 new pokemon forms total.

Thats more time money and hr for every model.

[JoshZebra]

Calling out your broken logic and poor arguments and attempts at justifying a video game are seperate subjects.

Your being dissapointed in only 70 pokemon is an opinion. Cant really touch that. Unfortunately, you are prone to utilizing kettle logic, instead of just leaving it at your opinion, and your myriad of supporting 'facts' are provably false, as you are arguing from ignorance of the process you are complaining about.

pokemon x and y have not been in development for 15 years like you claimed.

Pokemon is well known for having hilariously tiny budgets, near every single spin off pokemon game has higher budgets than mainline series entries. While X/Y very obviously has the largest budget of any gamefreak mainline title, its also very obviously microscopic compared to the budgets of similar offerings of both genre, and title/franchise power.

There is no 'nintendo architecture'. The game boy, game boy advance, ds, and 3ds are all unique custom built entirely seperate arm processors, a very different situation than the home console scene which has been steadily upgrading a single processor architecture for its cpu. Nintendo handhelds mantained backwards compatability by actually including the processor of the previous device in the system. for example, there is a gba cpu in every ds, and a gbc cpu in every gba. Aside from that, game freak isnt very well versed in any architecture really.They arent very talented on that front at all. In fact, most all of the spin offs, always far mor technically demanding than main entries, are done by other developers, for example, pokemon colleseum, was done by genius sonority. Game freak just isnt very talented at programming. Hell, they couldnt even get the overworld to run in 3d on this mainline pokemon game.

Your argument that they typically release over 100 monsters is false equivilance. It relies on the false presumption that the same amount of work is required to make 100 still sprite drawings as it takes to make 100 monster models, texture 100 monster models, rig 100 texture models, and provide animations for 100 texture models.

My logic is broken? You're using this again.  Pokemon as a franchise has been developed for over 15 years, the core of the game is the first level and it has been worked on for 15 years.  Secondly a system has an architecture, Nintendo systems all share the same.  If CoD was to develop for the system they would not knows the ins and outs, Game Freak however do know, they have built on Nintendo systems for a long time.  And alas no matter how many models they make, animations, textures, vertices, polygon warriors whatever, none of that also affects the lack of numbers in the game.  Only so many are loaded in at once.

[3Dude]

My logic is broken? You're using this again. Pokemon as a franchise has been developed for over 15 years, the core of the game is the first level and it has been worked on for 15 years. Secondly a system has an architecture, Nintendo systems all share the same. If CoD was to develop for the system they would not knows the ins and outs, Game Freak however do know, they have built on Nintendo systems for a long time. And alas no matter how many models they make, animations, textures, vertices, polygon warriors whatever, none of that also affects the lack of numbers in the game. Only so many are loaded in at once.

No, nintendo systems do not all share the same architecture, ,particularly the ones gamefreak has been involved with. I would ask you to provide proof for this absurd claim, but I would be begging the question, so I will provide the information.

Gameboy/gbc: Custom 8-bit Sharp LR35902

Gba: Custom ARM7TDMI with on board LR35902 for original gb games

DS custom ARM946E, along with an Arm7tdmi to play original gba games.


The reason they included the old processors was because the chips were not compatable with each others code base.

After arm9 arm added bc extentions so that there newer processors could emulate older ones (starting at arm 9) and accept most older code.

However,

3ds: Dual arm11 with vfp coprocessors, AND a pica200 gpu. First nintendo handheld with dual core architecture, floating point co processors, AND first with a gpu. Massive, massive, massive architecture change.

You are on an entirely seperate subject on the numbers. You, somehow, have changed the subject to system power, whilst the actual subject was talking about human resources, as in the sweaty little meatbags who have to make the polygon models and zpaint the textures. Whiny lottle meatbags who are not advanced cybernetic killing machines and thus whine about things like food, water, money, and time to spend with their families.

I would suggest stepping back, looking at the situation, and asking questions.

sprite portraits=3d models is obviously a bad argument. They take more time, people, and money... and since they couldnt reuse old sprite portraits, all the old pokemon had to be done from scratch as well.... But....

Does that verify x and y didnt have enough time/human resources to add more than 70 new pokemon?

No, it does not....

[JoshZebra]

---

The compiler used by GameFreak will be similar to that of the DS's.  And even then they would of had access to the 3DS way before the release so they should be able to push it.  If it was about human resources then why is the game out now? What was wrong with waiting? And there is no question that it would be harder and a longer process creating and loading in 3D meshes but it wouldn't be too much for the 3DS to handle as it only loads in so many at a time as I said earlier.

Just going back to the human resources.  As said above, maybe the game was rushed.  If that is the case, why couldn't they of delayed the game? Maybe they feel 70 is enough, but I do not but again that is just my opinion.

[Ixchel]

when they make factually false claims because they dont understand creating a functional 3d mario takes more time, human resources, and money, than a still sprite drawing, thats when I step in.

 

 

That's true of still sprites, but sprites have had detailed "idle" animations. Just no attacking animations. Redrawing or otherwise manipulating frames of sprites twice per pokemon (back and front) to get fluid movement takes a bit more time than just jiggling like in Gen3. I admit that I have no idea how the time compares between designing 2 animated sprites so that they match up and designing 1 3D model to manipulate the skeleton of, but I just wanted to inform you that the sprites have decent animation now, so the time difference isn't as drastic. Also, since you brought this up, most gens include a redrawing of older sprites because of graphics updates. The only exception appears to be 4>5 because they're on the same hardware. Even then, not 100% have been imported without small changes.

 

8way digital movement and gridlocked are entirely seperate things. Just because something is not analog does not mean it is gridlocked.

 

 

Yes, they're separate things, which means diagonol movement can exist in a gridlocked game, and the dev states it's gridlocked. The video shown shows off a lot of straight lines, smooth diagonols and fancy camera work, but I don't see any obvious points of free movement. I'm leaning towards believing it's gridlocked until I can play the game myself.

 

Rudimentary design knowledge answers this. Only pokemon with the same animation skeleton can share the same animations. ie, humanoids get a certain animation for a certain move, quadrapeds, small bipeds, snake likes, flying, etc. This is an automatic garuntee of a large increase in variety of animation, even if its predecessor its increasing over was basically nothing. Dont confuse a characters animation, as in the character itself moving, with a battle effect, like a laser blast.

 

 

I have considered applying the same movements to similar models in the past. Although it's a good idea, GF seems insitant on the idea that pokemon should have individual reused movements. Perhaps to reinforce their differences in species. Anyways, moves have always had individual "battle effects", while movements have always been near nonexistant (simple pushing the sprite forward etc) or less than 10 in 3D. So I don't really get the point you made about "not reusing 10 battle effects such as laser blasts", they never have, at least not for the past majority of years. Did you perhaps mean, not resusing the same 10 battle movements, then? In that case, it's still about the same as the 3D games. Although they were done by Genius Sonority, it stands that they have accomplished similar to what this game is doing. I can't really be blamed for being confused when you're either switching the terms yourself or unfamiliar with the games.

 

Released earlier? I guess, seems rushed enough as is to me.

 

 

Lol. Are you really gonna poke at my choice of wording? I know you're old enough to understand context clues because of COPPA, so please don't sidetrack into passive aggressive areas. I'm not poking at your misspellings and pretending not to understand. You're a mod, so please remain respectful. Or even as a normal user if you feel your status does not apply to conversation. Thank you.

Yes, they should have pushed the date forward in time to a later date. And yep, it's totally rushed. It's unfortunate that this time, Gamefreak's lousy coding will probably not result in glitches fun enough to offset the lack of 3D.

 

Thats more time money and hr for every model.

 

 

Your quoting failed here, not sure which you're applying too. Assuming the Mega Evolutions, yeah it's more time/money/etc on the models, but as I said, they could have pushed the date to a later date, and Pokemon makes enough money to fund it. Especially considering they're going to charge for extra storage. There really is no reason to rush pokemon unless it ties in to some Wii U boost somehow, the 3DS can wait a year, it has enough momentum and doom predictions have stopped beyond the occassional handheld vs. tablet stuff. At the same time, the argument could be made that GF knows the game would be bought regardless, but that just is more of a reason to be disappointed at the lack of 100.

[3Dude]

The compiler used by GameFreak will be similar to that of the DS's.  And even then they would of had access to the 3DS way before the release so they should be able to push it.  If it was about human resources then why is the game out now? What was wrong with waiting? And there is no question that it would be harder and a longer process creating and loading in 3D meshes but it wouldn't be too much for the 3DS to handle as it only loads in so many at a time as I said earlier.

Just going back to the human resources.  As said above, maybe the game was rushed.  If that is the case, why couldn't they of delayed the game? Maybe they feel 70 is enough, but I do not but again that is just my opinion.

Now youve started cooking.

Im not necessarily saying human resources IS the reason there are only 70 new pokemon, just that the human resources information defeats your argumant because it was an argument based on false equivilancy.

Maybe it was rushed. Maybe game freak just had trouble making a game far more advanced than any pokemon they ever worked on... But..... That really doesnt seem to be the case, nor would it really affect the art team, especially since theyve made brand new 3d models, textures animations etc, for near all of the old pokemon, so people can bring teams from past games to x and y... There doesnt seem to be any trouble in the content creation pipeline, theyve been pumping the models out.

I heavily suspect there is another reason there are only 70 new pokemon. A reason that permeates the entirety of the pokemon franchise.... And its not because i feel they couldnt make more than 70 new ones. In fact, id bet anything they did...

Care to take a guess what I think they are doing?

That's true of still sprites, but sprites have had detailed "idle" animations. Just no attacking animations. Redrawing or otherwise manipulating frames of sprites twice per pokemon (back and front) to get fluid movement takes a bit more time than just jiggling like in Gen3. I admit that I have no idea how the time compares between designing 2 animated sprites so that they match up and designing 1 3D model to manipulate the skeleton of, but I just wanted to inform you that the sprites have decent animation now, so the time difference isn't as drastic. Also, since you brought this up, most gens include a redrawing of older sprites because of graphics updates. The only exception appears to be 4>5 because they're on the same hardware. Even then, not 100% have been imported without small changes.

That animations actually not much work at all, theres only around 3 actual frames of animation in that drawing, and its only applied to a small part, the fire. These are called key frames. The rest is done by rotating and translating body parts. you can very easily take any still image off the internet and quickly rig it to animate this way.

 

 

Yes, they're separate things, which means diagonol movement can exist in a gridlocked game, and the dev states it's gridlocked. The video shown shows off a lot of straight lines, smooth diagonols and fancy camera work, but I don't see any obvious points of free movement. I'm leaning towards believing it's gridlocked until I can play the game myself.

No, a translation used the word 'grid'. Grid locked does not mean no analog movement via 360 degrees... its more than that.It means the players movement,as in where they can even stand, is locked to a 2dmatrix, what the game 'sees' as the area. Typically this is aligned with the tilesets, or texture tiles for the incredibly rare 3d game that uses it. A very famous gridlocked game was the original legend of zelda. The player character is always locked to the center of the tile, no matter how lightly you tap a direction, the character moves to the center of the next tile in that direction.
 

 

I have considered applying the same movements to similar models in the past. Although it's a good idea, GF seems insitant on the idea that pokemon should have individual reused movements. Perhaps to reinforce their differences in species. Anyways, moves have always had individual "battle effects", while movements have always been near nonexistant (simple pushing the sprite forward etc) or less than 10 in 3D. So I don't really get the point you made about "not reusing 10 battle effects such as laser blasts", they never have, at least not for the past majority of years. Did you perhaps mean, not resusing the same 10 battle movements, then? In that case, it's still about the same as the 3D games. Although they were done by Genius Sonority, it stands that they have accomplished similar to what this game is doing. I can't really be blamed for being confused when you're either switching the terms yourself or unfamiliar with the games.

Im pretty sure i explicitely stated that the previous games had pretty much 0 character movement. Yup I did.

large increase in variety of animation, even if its predecessor its increasing over was basically nothing."

This isnt a 'good idea', its simply the way things are done, you seem to give the impression that you dont understand the difference between an animation, and a skeleton to be rigged to models to use animations... You can already see multiple models in x and y sharing the same skeleton. A model that shares the same skeleton CAN use the same exact animations, but its not required too. They simply can because they posess the same joints and bones in the same places. Bones can even be lengthened and shortened. Many, MANY moves and animations will be shared between same skeleton types, and it will have no bearing on individual pokemons having unique animations for special moves, as an animation is seperate from the skeleton, its simply a subroutine thats called upon. In monster hunter ultimate, Deviljho and Durambos share the same skeleton. While they share some animations, most are unique. Lagiacris and ludroth also share the same skeleton.

Lol. Are you really gonna poke at my choice of wording? I know you're old enough to understand context clues because of COPPA, so please don't sidetrack into passive aggressive areas. I'm not poking at your misspellings and pretending not to understand. You're a mod, so please remain respectful. Or even as a normal user if you feel your status does not apply to conversation. Thank you.

If you havent noticed I respond to your points chronologically as i read them. You mistypped and used incorrect wording and sent out the incorrect message, make your clarification and get over it. When i poke fun at something, it wont be a guessing game.

Yes, they should have pushed the date forward in time to a later date.

The term people familiar with being part of a creation pipeline is push back or down for a delay, push forward or up moves the deadline closer. Also left and right, where right is a delay, and left releases soner.

And yep, it's totally rushed. It's unfortunate that this time, Gamefreak's lousy coding will probably not result in glitches fun enough to offset the lack of 3D.

Im not entirely sure any amount of time would have allowed game freak to clean that up... They just arent that good at this kind of stuff.
 

 
Your quoting failed here, not sure which you're applying too. Assuming the Mega Evolutions, yeah it's more time/money/etc on the models, but as I said, they could have pushed the date to a later date, and Pokemon makes enough money to fund it. Especially considering they're going to charge for extra storage. There really is no reason to rush pokemon unless it ties in to some Wii U boost somehow, the 3DS can wait a year, it has enough momentum and doom predictions have stopped beyond the occassional handheld vs. tablet stuff. At the same time, the argument could be made that GF knows the game would be bought regardless, but that just is more of a reason to be disappointed at the lack of 100

Every model is an increase in hr time and money. Although thats a direct response the the train of thought of 1 still sprite portrait= a fully modeled textured annd animated 3d character model. I dont really think a delay would be necessary for them to have made more models. In fact, im pretty confidant they MADE more new models, they just arent on the game cartridge... purposefully.

[Mewbot]

Is DLC a possibility here?

 

I can see them adding more Pokemons later on.

 

And anyway, only 70? That doesn't even sound THAT bad to me. They're still returning many of the older pokemons, and they're 3D now.

Most games don't even have 10 playable characters...

 

 

(I'm counting Pokémon as playable characters because you control them in the battles, even though you're technically controlling the trainer to tell the Pokémon what to do)

In fact, im pretty confidant they MADE more new models, they just arent on the game cartridge... purposefully.

You mean DLC?

 

They would make a truckload of money with that.

[TheUltimateWaddleDee]

I'm pretty sure if there was DLC, it would be free. It would be just like event pokemon. People would be pissed off to all hell if they charged for pokemon.

I don't see why people are complaining about only 70 new pokemon. That brings the grand total over 700, and you will most likely only use a small fraction of them.

[3Dude]

Is DLC a possibility here?
 
I can see them adding more Pokemons later on.
 
And anyway, only 70? That doesn't even sound THAT bad to me. They're still returning many of the older pokemons, and they're 3D now.
Most games don't even have 10 playable characters...
 
 
(I'm counting Pokémon as playable characters because you control them in the battles, even though you're technically controlling the trainer to tell the Pokémon what to do)


You mean DLC?
 
They would make a truckload of money with that.

When its done like this, if its done like this, i think monetization is a more fitting term.

[Azure-Edge]

I think you guys are drinking up the dlc idea way too quickly. Look, there are only 70 new pokemon. Get over it. Move on. As 3Dude has pointed out throughout the whole page, they had to literally come back in and create 700 (read this again: SEVEN HUNDRED!!!!!) 3D models complete with a variety of animations as well as all the different attack animations. That's. A lot. Of work. Way more work than sprites could ever be. Is THIS the reason why there are 70? Maybe. Maybe not. It's probably part of it.

 

A big part of it is that they obviously wanted to spend more time on each individual pokemon so they went for a lower number and aimed to level out the amount to an even 700 or so. But this goes way further than just designing each pokemon which takes a high level of creativity. They also had to work on properly balancing these pokemon with all the rest, taking time in to thinking up a balanced moveset and stats. Not to mention that they're also adding in another new type this gen which just adds even more work in to the balancing equation.

 

I really don't think most people realize how much work is actually put in to these games. They don't just draw a bunch of pokemon, scan them in to the computer and the game is ready to go. 

[JoshZebra]

Now youve started cooking.

Im not necessarily saying human resources IS the reason there are only 70 new pokemon, just that the human resources information defeats your argumant because it was an argument based on false equivilancy.

Maybe it was rushed. Maybe game freak just had trouble making a game far more advanced than any pokemon they ever worked on... But..... That really doesnt seem to be the case, nor would it really affect the art team, especially since theyve made brand new 3d models, textures animations etc, for near all of the old pokemon, so people can bring teams from past games to x and y... There doesnt seem to be any trouble in the content creation pipeline, theyve been pumping the models out.

I heavily suspect there is another reason there are only 70 new pokemon. A reason that permeates the entirety of the pokemon franchise.... And its not because i feel they couldnt make more than 70 new ones. In fact, id bet anything they did...

Care to take a guess what I think they are doing?

I'm just saying if it is human, they delay, if it is limitations, fair enough I can't argue with that.  I doubt it is limitations thou.  And if you are referring to DLC, then that is just disappointing.  Not DLC but withholding some just to be released at a price, I've never really agreed with DLC thou.  Partly the reason is because I feel a game should be a full game before they add to said games and most games these days aren't.

- - -

And if the two replies below are aimed at me, I am not complaining, I said that in my third post, and I said again and again I was just expressing my opinion.  Flipping heck.

[3Dude]

I'm just saying if it is human, they delay, if it is limitations, fair enough I can't argue with that.  I doubt it is limitations thou.  And if you are referring to DLC, then that is just disappointing.  Not DLC but withholding some just to be released at a price, I've never really agreed with DLC thou.  Partly the reason is because I feel a game should be a full game before they add to said games and most games these days aren't.
- - -
And if the two replies below are aimed at me, I am not complaining, I said that in my third post, and I said again and again I was just expressing my opinion.  Flipping heck.

Ive never agreed with dlc either. I prefer the term monetization, as thats pretty much what it is. I cant say for sure, but i just have this feeling, looking at where the signs are pointing.

[JoshZebra]

Ive never agreed with dlc either. I prefer the term monetization, as thats pretty much what it is. I cant say for sure, but i just have this feeling, looking at where the signs are pointing.

 

Hmm, I hope they don't go that way but I wouldn't blame them if they need, I could see them making a lot off of it.

[Ixchel]

Im pretty sure i explicitely stated that the previous games had pretty much 0 character movement. Yup I did.

 

 
Yeah, I restated it. Not sure why it's worth pointing out but okay lol. I saw you wrote it, no big deal.
 
 

This isnt a 'good idea', its simply the way things are done, you seem to give the impression that you dont understand the difference between an animation, and a skeleton to be rigged to models to use animations...

 

 
I do understand the difference, and although you're more knowledgable about this area, that paragraph was mostly aimed to clarify on the "10 animations" thing. I don't know why GF chooses to go the route that it does.

 

Spoiler

If you havent noticed I respond to your points chronologically as i read them. You mistypped and used incorrect wording and sent out the incorrect message, make your clarification and get over it. When i poke fun at something, it wont be a guessing game.

 I didn't wanna write a novel, but it was sort of required just to show evidence. :/

It'd be wise to read a whole novel before writing an essay. Regardless of the fact that I used irregular and possibly unfamiliar wording (it is not incorrect, simply different vernacular), it does not excuse you when it comes one sentence after context. Since you read chronologically, you'd notice it right after "Furthermore, there was nothing forcing Pokemon to release this year". This topic is about being disappointed in only 70 pokemon. These are the expectations I referenced when I said "It could have easily been pushed forward to keep up with general expectations." And if that isn't linked enough, the beginning of the post states "but this is the first time that we're getting below 100 new pokemon. I don't see why it's any surprise that this is disappointing. Players obviously expected both".
 
Would releasing earlier or later give you more time to make pokemon? The meaning is obvious.
 
"get over it"
Really? I'm not saying this because I'm so bothered someone online thinks I'm wrong. I can own up to stating incorrect things. I'm saying this because I don't want to deal with passive aggressive attitudes simply for trying to give more info on a game. The forums should be a safe place to discuss topics.
 
Look, if you're being truthful here (perhaps you're more gifted mathematically than linguistically, that's okay, I'm the opposite) then my apologies, but given how obvious my meaning was, my response was warranted. There's been enough questionable activity on site as it is.

 
 

Every model is an increase in hr time and money. Although thats a direct response the the train of thought of 1 still sprite portrait= a fully modeled textured annd animated 3d character model. I dont really think a delay would be necessary for them to have made more models. In fact, im pretty confidant they MADE more new models, they just arent on the game cartridge... purposefully.

 

 
Yeah, it's more resources. I never said it wasn't, just that you seemed to think that the sprites take less work than they do. You don't think a delay is necessary? I was under the impression you thought that it was the reason and was a good trade off? I'd dread the thought of paid for DLC characters. The moment that happens I'd probably jump ship. Hopefully they get enough cash from Pokebank to not ever go that route. :/ I'm fine with questionable things like Pokebank as long as they don't nerf ingame storage, but... Nope.

[Blake]

There's probably more, with the 3DS hardware they can distribute Pokemon without them being coded into the game.

So the "new" legendaries will actually be new.

[Auzzie Wingman]

Because having 719 Pokemon as opposed to 750 makes the difference between catching 'em all and catching 'em all without an argument.

[RiasRed]

The fossil lab in Ambrette town has a guy in it that asks to see a Genesect. I think this is where you get the plates but I'm going to hope for Genesectite! I found scyther on route 21 and I have Scizorite, now all I need to do is trade! Had a random encounter with Moltres...

[3Dude]

Yeah, I restated it. Not sure why it's worth pointing out but okay lol. I saw you wrote it, no big deal.
 
 
 

 
I do understand the difference, and although you're more knowledgable about this area, that paragraph was mostly aimed to clarify on the "10 animations" thing. I don't know why GF chooses to go the route that it does.
 

Spoiler

 I didn't wanna write a novel, but it was sort of required just to show evidence. :/

It'd be wise to read a whole novel before writing an essay. Regardless of the fact that I used irregular and possibly unfamiliar wording (it is not incorrect, simply different vernacular), it does not excuse you when it comes one sentence after context. Since you read chronologically, you'd notice it right after "Furthermore, there was nothing forcing Pokemon to release this year". This topic is about being disappointed in only 70 pokemon. These are the expectations I referenced when I said "It could have easily been pushed forward to keep up with general expectations." And if that isn't linked enough, the beginning of the post states "but this is the first time that we're getting below 100 new pokemon. I don't see why it's any surprise that this is disappointing. Players obviously expected both".
 
Would releasing earlier or later give you more time to make pokemon? The meaning is obvious.
 
"get over it"
Really? I'm not saying this because I'm so bothered someone online thinks I'm wrong. I can own up to stating incorrect things. I'm saying this because I don't want to deal with passive aggressive attitudes simply for trying to give more info on a game. The forums should be a safe place to discuss topics.
 
Look, if you're being truthful here (perhaps you're more gifted mathematically than linguistically, that's okay, I'm the opposite) then my apologies, but given how obvious my meaning was, my response was warranted. There's been enough questionable activity on site as it is.

 
 
 

Yeah, it's more resources. I never said it wasn't, just that you seemed to think that the sprites take less work than they do. You don't think a delay is necessary? I was under the impression you thought that it was the reason and was a good trade off? I'd dread the thought of paid for DLC characters. The moment that happens I'd probably jump ship. Hopefully they get enough cash from Pokebank to not ever go that route. :/ I'm fine with questionable things like Pokebank as long as they don't nerf ingame storage, but... Nope.

get over it already. You used backwords wording, along with already unnecessary bloated and increasingly verbose explanations, and as a result didnt communicate your intent. Just move on already.

Dont mistake the logical arguments I make with my personal opinions, they dont always line up, and often i just dont state my personal opinion. Also dont forget you jumped in on a conversation in progress with an already established context.

Spritework animation of the type game freak used for their idle animations is veeeeeeeeeery quick, cheap, and easy with modern animation tools ranging from flash to even the couple dollar inchworm animation studio available on the 3ds eshop. Do not confuse it with actual traditional handrawn animation like wayforward uses, its not.... its more like.... digital 2d puppets. Its not a fraction of the work that goes into making an actual model. Not even counting animating said model.

Also, do you see what I mean about no longer being gridlocked? Dpad (on foot) movement is 8 directional and gridlocked, but if you use the analog nub, its full free 360 degree movement.