During the Pokémon Presents broadcast this week, The Pokémon Company announced remakes of the Nintendo DS games, Pokémon Diamond and Pearl. While Game Freak normally handles games like this, right now, it's busy with the open-world prequel Pokémon Legends: Arceus, which is due out next year.
This leaves the release of Pokémon Brilliant Diamond and Shining Pearl in 2021 in the hands of a Japanese studio called ILCA. Game Freak's Junichi Masuda will oversee the project as a director, alongside ILCA's Yuichi Ueda. If you're not familiar with this studio, here's a quick rundown:
Who is ILCA?
ILCA, Inc. is a Japanese studio headquartered in Tokyo, with other offices located in Shinjuku, Nagoya and Kyoto. It was established on 1st October 2010 as a CG-based video production company focused on animation, movies and television, and eventually incorporated video game development. As of 1st December 2020, it has 288 employees.
What does the ILCA logo look like?
Here it is in all its glory (without those lovely walls):
So who is in charge?
ILCA is led by CEO Takuya Iwasaki and the director Satoshi Takamori.
What does ILCA stand for?
According to the company's website, ILCA is named after the acronym "I Love Computer Art".
"I LOVE COMPUTER ART"
Has the studio worked on any Pokémon projects before?
Yes - before the Diamond and Pearl remakes it was responsible for the cloud-based storage app, Pokémon HOME.
What other games has it worked on?
As we previously mentioned, ILCA is a support studio. As a result, it's worked on all sorts of games including regular ones, augmented reality titles, virtual reality games, and various other stuff including a Domino's pizza app featuring Hatsune Miku.
Some more serious projects it's assisted with include Yakuza 0, Dragon Quest XI, NieR: Automata, Naruto Shippuden: Ultimate Ninja Storm 4 and more recently Ace Combat 7: Skies Unknown.
What will ILCA's Diamond and Pearl remakes be like?
Here's what you can expect, according to the announcement PR:
"Pokémon Brilliant Diamond and Pokémon Shining Pearl enable fans to experience the original story and game features from Pokémon Diamond and Pokémon Pearl in a fresh way. The original games have been faithfully reproduced and colourfully revitalized for Nintendo Switch.
"The sense of scale of the towns and routes has been carefully preserved, and fans who played the original games will recognize many familiar places. These games are updated with the easy-to-understand, player-friendly conveniences introduced in recent Pokémon core series video games, in addition to up-close-and-personal Pokémon battle scenes."
Want to know more about ILCA?
Sure, head over to the company's official website - it's even hiring! There are also official Twitter and Facebook pages.
So, there's your crash course in ILCA - the team behind Brilliant Diamond and Shining Pearl. Think it's got what it takes to remake the Generation IV Pokémon games? Share your thoughts down below.
[source ilca.co.jp]
Comments 54
To be honest, the Gen 4 remakes look great so far. Love that they (seemingly) followed the original game tile by tile and that the game (currently appears to) have no visible encounters. Literally made me eat my own words that I wouldn't ever buy another Pokemon game.
Then again... Snap 2 looks good as well... Maybe I should just ban any game made by GameFreak at this rate.
So we finally have the Treyarch to Game Freak's Infinity Ward? Or is it the other way around (I don't play COD, but I thought the comparison was warranted.)
@Liam_Doolan Okay, real question coming 100% out of curiosity, because I am dumb and know nothing of this.
Do you guys ever work directly with Nintendo and get suggestions from them for posts like this article? The way it's structured and such looks like something was given, rather than something that was written. I don't mean that in a bad way, and I'm not accusing you of anything. It would be kinda neat if it were the case, like Nintendo sent you guys some kind of email saying, hey, explain this to the userbase so nobody gets worried. That sort of thing.
Or are you just that good?? LOL Please don't take any of this the wrong way, the article just looks so well-structured.
NINJA APPROVED
@BloodNinja I'm pretty sure that's not the case. I don't think Nintendo Life is affiliated with Nintendo at all.
I'm glad Game Freak is recruiting another developer to assist with developing the main games. They seem to have been stretched thin with the last few games and the quality of the games has suffered as a result, handing off some of the smaller projects could really help them make the games better. If BDSP and Legends Arceus do well (and I think they will), then I think we could see ILCA handle the smaller projects revolving around past regions such as traditional remakes and Let's Go games while Game Freak works on the bigger projects such as new generations and Legends games. That is just what the doctor ordered.
I'm going to get the game, I want to see what makes it so legendary.
@BloodNinja I always appreciate getting approved by a ninja, so thanks!
This was an article I thought might be of interest to the community.
To my knowledge, this is the first time in the history of the Pokemon series that Game Freak hasn't handled a mainline remake.
ILCA isn't exactly a household name (compared to certain other developers and publishers), so hopefully, this particular release makes everyone a little more familiar with the studio.
As mentioned by @VoidofLight, we have no official affiliation with Nintendo. Nintendo Life is a partner of the Gamer Network and has sister sites like Pure Xbox and Push Square.
Whenever we work with a publisher or developer or have any correspondence with them, we normally mention it in the text.
I honestly hope Gamefreak does more outsourcing to other companies, in order to help with development.
I actually feel relieved after reading this article. Even though they are relatively new to the scene they have a lot of experience.
Great article, btw.
Diamond and Pearl remakes are the worst of the worst!! I can't believe they ruined my favorite set of Pokémon games... they should at least change the overworld sprite and make it look like omega ruby and alpha sapphire models..
@Beatrice you must be joking, Diamond and Pearl are literally the best generation and culmination of what makes classic Pokémon great!! until gamefreak decided to hand over the remakes to an even more incompetent developer than themselves and butchered one of the most anticipated remakes in Pokémon history..
@Beatrice I'm literally depressed because of this, like is this how they're gonna end the legacy of Diamond and Pearl? I know there's legends Arceus and I like it overall but I feel like it's a different game and I wanna see the original DP remake end on a high note since we probably won't see another Sinnoh remake ever again..
I can’t even believe how some people wanted these games to follow SW/SH’s Art direction when those games are utterly horrendous to be honest.
Id rather have something akin to a retro style than a half assed 3D pokemon game.
Those are some top, top tier games they've worked on. Looking forward to seeing what the final products look like.
Looks cute.
Gonna wait til June 2021 to see the progress.
@Liam_Doolan That’s awesome! Well, it’s extremely well put together, I thought it was a Nintendo PSA, keep it up!
NINJA APPROVED
@VoidofLight Thanks!
NINJA APPROVED
On one hand, I really do not appreciate the chibi style (sorry to keep going on about it) but another part of me really likes that they have a variation of art styles to differentiate all the different games, generations and regions. I still think Let's Go has the best art style - I was gutted it was one of the easiest games in the franchise because it was over before I could even truly enjoy the art.
I appreciate the way D/P remaked, follow original with 3d battle animation and i don't have any problem with chibi-style, but to be honest, 3d model, color, graphic and texture not good enough for me. They look kind of "cheap" and ugly, really, it's very "cheap" and battle animation look like rework from old version. Yes, we don't expect much if GF handle Gen IV remake to another studio but I hope ILCA looked at The Legend of Zelda: Link's Awakening graphic and improve BD/SP graphic in final version.
If they entirely redesign the overworld sprites, sure. The rest is looking great, but the overworld looks like a cheap mobile game rip-off, which is a massive shame.
@BloodNinja Nintendo will send out press releases as a press kit to news outlets.
Usually you can spot one when everyone writes about the same thing
@fafonio My son and I thoroughly enjoyed Sword and Shield. So suit yourself.
Got to say, that was an interesting read. This was the first time I've heard of the company so it was interesting to learn a bit about them.
Holy crap, they did the Hatsune Miku Domino’s Pizza app. I did not expect that one.
"These games are updated with the easy-to-understand, player-friendly conveniences introduced in recent Pokémon core series video games"
This concerns me...Please don't force exp. share and other restrictive gameplay mechanics.
If they helped out with Yakuza 0 and Nier Automata, then they're alright in my books.
I have faith in this since GameFreak didn’t make it
It's super peculiar that they've only ever "assisted" with game development before, yet are the main developer for a re-make of one of Nintendo's lead franchises.
The initial disappoinment you'll see some "fans" expressing stems from the inevitable and completely expected response of those fans never being satisfied with anything, even when they get what they ask for. Those people suck at managing their expectations. But just like with SWSH, none of it will matter, because the game looks amazing and is going to sell well regardless of the negative Nancy's. The faithful recreation is exactly what I'd expect from the Gen 4 remakes. I love Pokémon in every art style, and I'm very pleased with the 3D sprite aesthetic they're going with. It's going to feel very fresh yet nostalgic at the same time. I was starting to not expect any Gen 4 remakes at all, and I couldn't be more excited with what we're getting.
@LUIGITORNADO Cool, thanks!
NINJA APPROVED
@LordGeovanni People like the random encounters?
@Beatrice What's wrong with Black and White? People say that was the peak.
@Liam_Doolan This breakdown on ILCA is much appreciated! I'd never heard of the studio until Friday's announcement.
I think it's good for a diversity of experiences on Switch. Now we'll have 4 different play experiences on Swith from mainline Pokémon games (Let's Go! plays differently from Sword & Shield plays differently from DP remakes plays differently from Legends). This makes the play through the games less repetitive and thus more interesting.
@Lanmanna
Certainly. I will agree that a majority of gamers seem to hate them, but they are a much healthier mechanic than Visible Encounters. (The entire rest of this post goes really in-depth on this, it may seem boring, but it actually is a deep dive into why Visible Encounters suck)
Random Encounters actually have a psychological benefit to players. With them, players have no control over when they battle (outside of mechanics like Repel). With that, choosing to enter a battle is not really in the player's hands. This in turn becomes the game "forcing" the battles and makes the game experience "challenging" to the player - they don't have a way to select the difficulty of the battle (which pokemon they are fighting), they don't have the ability to "farm" specific pokemon for rare Held Items or to capture specific pokemon (which is mediated through things like Shiny Hunting already, but leaves the Random aspects for things that need them like Nuzlockes), and they don't control the frequency of battle which is a major aspect for teaching gamers to prepare in advance rather than hoarding and waiting for when you Have to use stuff. That last part is quite crucial, so what does it exactly mean? Games are actually teaching players some life skills. Things like preparing in advance for adversity is something that people in general tend to fail for. For example, how often does a player purchase Burn Heal or Ice Heal? In comparison, higher level Pokemon Gameplay actually has those items purchased just in case you need them. This actually extends down to regular item usage as well, using items like Potions and berries to maintain your HP after a battle rather than just dodging battles, if you can't choose when the battle is you have to at last be ready for the battle when it does occur.
As for Visible Encounters, there are three versions that many people don't know the full details for, but each have their own positives and negatives. You have Symbol Encounters, Static Encounters, and Visible Encounters.
Continued in the next post...
Concluded in the next post...
Another major aspect of the difference is the psychological affect onto the players. A player will strip down the difficulty (and fun) of any game. Giving players the "option" of encountering Wild Pokemon also gives them the responsibility to fight them. If the game is balanced so that you have an expectation of fighting ~10 wild battles while going through a dungeon, Visible Encounters causes the player to avoid those battles because it feels better to them. As if they are getting one up on the game by dodging those battles. But this also causes those players to be under leveled for their next areas and then make the game seem "unfair" when their next boss curbstomps them. Random Encounters don't allow you to choose, they just happen. They don't allow you to dodge, they happen and then you have a risk to run or fight. The game takes away the choice to avoid combat, and by participating in the combat you grow stronger - strong enough to take on that Boss coming up soon. Even the whole concept of "grinding" is caused by players trying to make a game easier - either through trying to force battles, or by trying to avoid battles. If a player is dodging battles, they are lacking in experience they should have and are weaker than they should be, if they are hunting something specific down (like a rare pokemon or shiny) they tend to be stronger than they are expected for their point and make the difficulty of the next battles vanish. That last point is actually why the dynamic exp started occurring in Black & White... GameFreak wanted to prevent players from Grinding one pokemon and ignoring the balanced team. By forcing players to grind a team they reduced the ability to grow one pokemon to 20+ levels above the competition. Grinding after you get through the area is also an aspect of Visible Encounters. If a player doesn't gain the expected exp in a dungeon they are now below the proper challenge of the next boss, but at the same time they got to that boss without challenge as they dodge all that challenge. Now they are "forced to" grind where if they didn't have the ability to dodge they wouldn't "Have to" grind in the first place.
There are a whole lot of issues I have with Visible Encounters and I basically only listed out the major issues above, however I additionally don't want to spend hours typing this out. I do admit that this is a persuasive comment, and that I haven't gone into the positives of Visible and negatives of Random, but that can always be discussed later. I also want to make certain that I make it known I am always open for discussion, I do understand that other players enjoy different things. I actually REALLY like the idea of making Visible or Random Encounters a toggle in the Settings Menu as that would allow the best of both worlds, but alas game devs seem to ignore this option.
Feel free for yourself, or anyone else, to continue the discussion. I am trying to make my own games as well and discussions like this are always helpful in understanding how players view game mechanics.
I respect the opinion of whoever is happy with the remakes but these are definitely not what I wanted. I actually liked the graphical direction pokemon took with Sword and Shield (excluding the wild area and the out of place berry trees) and especially Let's Go Pikachu/Eevee. I was hoping they'd make it in at least the graphic style of the Let's Go games. Other than the catching mechanic, graphics wise those games were solid. Or maybe even the ORAS style of chibi models, those were detailed, expressive, and looked good close up, just anything but these weird, expressionless, poorly shaded lego/roblox people. In the battle scenes the trainer models also look bad, the shading looks terrible and I feel like they just don't match the pokemon models.
Also, what's the point in a 3d remake if everything looks almost exactly like the original models? Its so easy to just download a rom of Pokemon Platinum and an emulator for free. I think there's even an emulator that lets you play it on your phone! IF it's a 1:1 remake like they're making it sound, there's literally no reason why I should buy this. Especially if its 60$ like the Let's Go and Pokemon Mystery Dungeon remakes.
I've also seen a lot of people saying that graphics don't matter its the gameplay that matters, but every pokemon game literally has the same exact gameplay with very few changes so the only thing they have going for them at this point is graphics. If gameplay matters so much over graphics, you might as well just replay the original Diamond and Pearl. If you dont want to replay the same game, you could download one of the several FREE fan games or rom hacks and get the same gameplay experience, just with pixel art.
Unless its like ORAS where they add cool things flying on Latios and Latias and story changes, walking with pokemon like in HG and SS, or even entirely new areas to explore I just don't see a reason to buy these.
It comes down to it cost a lot cheaper to make the game looking like this instead of doing something like the 3DS games or Sword and Shield. The Switch games were so small in comparison because it cost money to pay people to create large environments like those of the previous games. Just look at the Harvest Moon games on Switch the look bad but they sell, only a few people know of the Story of Seasons series.
@LordGeovanni I think you made a lot of good points for your assertion. I see too that you yourself pointed out that your argument here didn't include the positives of visible encounters, or the negatives of random encounters. You seem like a very level-headed individual, so I'm sure you'll understand that I also appreciate debating in order to learn rather than to "prove who's right" or whatever, haha.. That all being said, I'd like to give you some reasons why I prefer visible encounters.
1. Random encounters feel cheap. Nothing more annoying than being forced into a fight I didn't want to get into, especially if I'm low on health and trying to get to a save point or healing area/item, even more especially if the game forces you to randomly fight super strong enemies every so often. The absolute worst is when dying means loss of progress. It can very be frustrating to lose 15-20 minutes of game time - enough even to turn off the game for good.
2. Random encounters feel outdated. They present an old-fashioned mechanic initially implemented based on limitation rather than choice. Whenever I see them in a modern game, I can't help but feel like the dev took the easy way out, or, is stuck in the past.
3. Taking away control from players, even if it's "for their own good," usually doesn't feel as good as giving the player the control to play in their own way. I understand your argument, and I believe in the end, there's pros and cons to both stances in this regard, its a give and take either way. However, in the end, I would rather have the choice than to not be able to make the choice all.
(Continued below...)
(...continuing from above)
4. In some games, such as EarthBound for example, visible enemies will chase you. I like this because while it feels like a non-random encounter, it essentially acts as one if the enemy is impossible (or very difficult) to escape from. Just an example of an encounter type not addressed in your assessment that works "both ways" in a sense.
5.You haven't accounted for players who will fight every enemy they see or are presented with (unless they'd be at a disadvantage to do so i.e. almost dead and no way to heal). For example, you said in one of your examples that a game may be balanced expecting you to have defeated ~10 enemies in a dungeon before fighting the boss to be leveled appropriately. If the dev put 10-12 enemies on the path to the boss, I believe more players than you are accounting for would actually fight them all, or at least most of them, even if technically they could just skate by them. I have no evidence if this, outside of anecdotal comments and such, but I believe it to be true. Gamers expect there to be combat in an RPG, and unless the player is very young, I feel like it's pretty unlikely they would just skip as much combat as possible just because it "feels good." Many modern RPGs are balanced (in my experience) so if you fight 95% of the enemies you see, you will not have to grind on the side.
6. I feel that random encounters often break immersion. The player says to themselves "ummm...okay, why am I fighting right now?" Or "WTF where did that guy come from?" Or "LOL yeah no way my character could've seen THAT coming.. 🙄" On the other hand, random encounters in Pokemon for example, don't work that way and I would not make that same argument there. Part of the fun is the surprise of what Pokemon could possibly be hiding in the tall grass. You might never know that there's actually a 1% chance of finding a Pikachu on Route X or whatever.
7. Visible encounters can sometimes allow for strategic mechanics impossible with random encounters. I'll use EarthBound as an example again: depending on your approach, you can sneak up on the enemy and move first in battle as a reward, and vice-versa. Additionally, being very strong and encountering a weak enemy causes an automatic win, which would not work (or at least would be very awkward) if it was a random encounter.
8. Allowing players to face the same enemy over and over in Pokemon to shiny hunt or increase chances of better stats is yet another example of how visible encounters are a quality of life feature that better respects the player's time.
@fafonio I liked the Sw and Sh art style. Could have used some tweaks, but considering they weren't even willing to do all pokemon, I wasn't surprised that they cut corners a bit on the models and textures.
@everynowandben
I appreciate your acknowledgement on my views, especially that I made apparent that I promoted positives of Random Encounters and highlighted negatives of Visible Encounters. I like keeping topics aware of what they are.
I also see your point in your responses. Please allow my direct responses to your points:
1) - I do agree that Random Encounters (RE from here out) are a mechanic that feels cheap. More to the point, it is also a mechanic uncontrolled by the player. As the player doesnt have a control in they system, it will by design feel cheap. It is the situations of low health and desperation that I feel really drives the game, if the game is just a simple stroll back into safe territory, what exactly was risked? These memories of overcoming adversity is what makes games so enjoyable. I do agree that perhaps less punishing methods should be implemented for failure, but reducing the difficulty isnt the answer in my opinion. (for example, instead of losing Half your money, maybe cap it at $5k loss, or 10% loss or such. Balance is needed).
2) - RE are considered "outdated" only because they were an early game design. And yes, they were used for limited computing design reasons, but that doesn't make them bad in themselves. Having the game utilize a random element of encounter is merely a way of creating a personalized playthrough. It is different from other players because of the random elements. And it is exactly that reason why Nuzlockes are so well prized: not allowing the run to be "the same as the last" while causing new adversities to challenge the player.
3) - "Given the opportunity, players will optimize the fun out of a game," is something that I took a very close look at. I do agree that players should have Some control, but allowing full control often allows players to make the game into a bland snorefest. I recommend looking at https://www.thegamer.com/players-optimize-fun-out-of-games for more on this topic. But I do agree that gamers need Some control. That is why I feel adding new Settings options for more things like RE or Visible Encounters should be considered.
Cont.
Continued...
4) - Unfortunately that actually doesnt portray the aspects of RE. While the spawns are random, so are the VE spawns. But the overworld characters just are aggressive and portray all the standards of VE. It might "feel" as if it isnt required, but it actually causes the player strife because now they have a psychological feeling that they don't "NEED" to do this battle and it is their own "fault" having to fight it, or even losing to it. REs in contrast are outside the player's control and dont place the "burden" of occurring on the player "allowing" the fight to happen.
5) - This plays more to the link I suggested above. On average, players actually avoid more VE than RE, to an extent that Devs have had to increase rewards (exp, gold, etc...) to actually balance the lack of players actually fighting. This isnt an increase to entice fighting... it is actually to try and fix the failure of the player 'not' fighting and being at a disadvantage going into the next boss. Take Pokemon Gen 1 for example. If you skip all the Zubat and Geodude REs, you are likely under leveled to fight Misty. And now, you have a small patch of grass to grind on if you cant beat the rival either. And we are talking a deficiency of more like 50% of the exp, not 10% or 20%. If devs have to boost the reward, that means the players are causing a conflict with the game already.
6) - This point I didnt find too clear. Sorry. What I take from it is that you disagree with RE because they dont feel fair as if you should have been able to see them. In a way, I agree. But there also needs to be a difficulty in games. Pokemon does a good job of it where it limits spawns in particular areas (like tall grass) and I commend them for that, but I do understand the irritation, I just do not see a better way to account for that.
Cont.
Continued.
7) - I do see your point here that VE allow strategic planning to a battle's start. As well as eliminating "weak" encounters without much effort... but I do believe that isnt something that RE excludes. Perhaps we could look into a way of scaling REs up in difficulty to the player's level (Why do starting routs ALWAYS have only weak pokemon?) Or maybe we could explore an internal value where the game makes "weaker" encounters rarer as you get stronger. (Wild pokemon avoid battles against stronger trainers). We could also explore strategies into how a player starts a battle (such as how Gen 2 Headbutting a tree had a chance of the pokemon being asleep). All these are effectively still possible without VE, but it doesn't exclude VE as a settings option as well. We could have both.
8) - Shiny hunting is a rewarding experience, that I do not diminish. However, I also must point out the ways that GameFreak have allowed shiny hunting before VE were an option. Things like the Pokeradar, Chain Fishing, S.O.S. Chaining, Hoard Encounters, and DexNav are all ways to improve Shiny hunting. Just understand that things like Shiny Hunting are either a "rare" reward of chance, or something that should take effort as well. Being handed a shiny isnt the same as taking time to hunt. VE showing the shiny means you could just hide in a corner and wait for the eventual spawn, a very boring action. While efforts can be made to make shiny hunting (and other 'optional actions') feel more rewarding, they still need to make the action 'challenging' more than sitting in a corner for an hour and waiting.
Kudos for Nintendolife giving this much detail to a company that a typical google research won't do!
@LordGeovanni
Yep, will buy one of them and Snap
Nothing out of the ordinary here, just a 3ds
or nds lite re-skin type of thing & not a remake. Dreadful if that is the final release.. any way 2022 i will anticipate for a proper Pokemon in arceus!
@Letzg077 go play the old one ?? it's a very easy solution to not liking the remake.
@Rpg-lover I think you need to look up the definition of "remake"
@fafonio This is a really excellent take!
@bahooney you need to go and see what they did with Xenoblade chronicles definitive edition, now that's what i call a proper remake. And not a 3ds upgrade for a console like switch. Not even close to links awakening.
Oh man, a support company put in charge of a full-fledged game. This can’t possibly turn out horrendously!
But I mean, couldn’t be any worse than if GameFreak did it themselves...right??
I guess people can only watch videos and dont know how to read..before and at the end of the announcement trailer its says this...GAME FOOTAGE IS NOT FINAL
Tap here to load 54 comments
Leave A Comment
Hold on there, you need to login to post a comment...