Topic: Pokemon Legends Arceus

@jump You're playing a dangerous game mentioning 2D sprites here. You know what some people are like.

@jump Wouldn't mind having 2D sprites back. the 2D-3D aesthetic is pretty good in Gens 4 and 5, and the dev team's strongpoint is sprite art, but eh.

As for the one city, it's legit a fighting game reference. No joke. The trainers stand in your way, with obstacles blocking your path, with it supposed to represent something like the fighting game stopping the screen from scrolling until you beat the enemies, for the path to unlock afterwards. It's not the best puzzle in the world, but better than the Dragon gym, where you could tell they either didn't have enough time to make a puzzle for it, or they just ran out of ideas.

The only time pokemon could do a heavier story is if they did something with Zygarde and AZ, but even then, they'd probably screw that up, since they're scared of making a game that's not suitable for young children that can barely read.

@Snaplocket Sorry, I was being sarcastic. I really should be using italics more, sorry for the confusion!

Did you ignore like 90 percent of my post on purpose or…?

I mean like… that is your opinion, but your opinion doesn’t invalidate my point.

As Void pointed out earlier Legends bad graphics are intentional as it’s a PS1 reference ;p

Am I bad for actually liking the style/graphics? I can understand if you don't like it, but I think it looks quite pleasant.

Again, animations are not graphics.

Four words that may be enough to handle differing opinions about graphics that should help some people avoid headaches: "Let's agree to disagree."

I do not agree with that. Ignoring the boring debate about how pretty Legends is or isn’t, generally computer animation is a sub-category of computer graphics so animations are apart of graphics technically and would be generally be accepted by the average person’s lexicon anyway.

I disagree, it’s 5 words as it’s “let us agree to disagree” “p

I don’t treat graphics as a catch all term for everything my eyes can see, because it isn’t. If people want to use it that way, it is technically incorrect, but I guess fair enough. I do, however, address that in the originally quoted comment, already.

@Pizzamorg nah, from wiki;

‘A broad classification of major subfields in computer graphics might be:

2 Animation: ways to represent and manipulate motion’

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Computer_graphics_(computer_s...

Again, as said in my original post, lazily writing ‘graphics bad’ is unhelpful and useless. Talking about specifically animations, but using the term ‘graphics’, is simply misleading. This was the core point of my original post.

Imo the game looks good enough, if graphics end up being the only complaint people have, then we are in for a treat.

I am waiting for some reviews though, Pokemon is one of the most uninspiring series, selling basically the same game over and over. Should have been reimagined after the GBA era really. The only reason I have some hope for this one is because it looks like they are trying something new. Plus they finally added doing battles in place instead of teleporting to an arena.

@Pizzamorg I don’t really care about the debate of Legends. I’m just pointing out the irony of you saying something is technically incorrect when you are actually technically incorrect yourself making me technically correct.

If that makes you feel better, then Happy Three Kings Day. My gift to you.

I'm not tech-savvy.

Can somebody dumb-down all of this tech talk for me?

@Silly_G it’s not even tech talk, it’s just dumb talk.