Game Freak doesn’t get a pass with players
Two new mainline Pokemon games are out, but Pokemon fans aren’t talking about these games’ vast new open worlds. They’re not discussing the colorful cast of characters, nor the adorable starter designs. Nobody seems to be talking about how, at their cores, “Scarlet” and “Violet” are fun games to play.
Understandably, the thing fans and critics alike are buzzing about is how awful the games look and perform, especially on older Nintendo Switches.
In our review of the games, my colleague Alyse Stanley and I noted that while the game-play loop in “Scarlet” and “Violet” is addictive and fun, it’s undeniable that the bevy of graphics and performance concerns constantly took us out of the world. Assets clip into each other, models pop in and out seemingly at random, and huge frame-rate issues are present even during the simplest of animations.
“This game can be very clunky in a way that’s almost painful, because I want to ignore it since the rest of the game is so good,” Alyse wrote.
“I can excuse bad graphics once, but how many times can you excuse it in a series before you have to stop giving the developer passes?” I responded.
The reality is, this isn’t the first time Game Freak has had performance and graphics problems. After more than a decade and five generations of Pokemon games, Game Freak finally switched its graphical style from a top-down 2D viewpoint to a more modern 3D look. That transition hasn’t been without its
growing pains.
“Pokemon X” and “Y,” which debuted in October 2013, mixed the top-down 2D viewpoint with a 3D perspective. Upon release, fans criticized the muddy colors and jagged textures, so much so that several fan mods were created, drastically upgrading the resolution and textures found within game.
In the next generation, “Sun” and “Moon,” Game Freak transitioned into full 3D and improved the overall color palette of the world. But fans had concerns with the outrageously simplistic animation of several Pokemon attacks and how the jagged, muddy resolution remained. Again, fan mods and emulators were the games’ saving grace.
Next came “Pokemon Sword” and “Shield,” the first games to arrive on a home console, the Nintendo Switch. Game Freak came clean, stating that it simply couldn’t include all Pokemon in the games — a first for the series — because of technical limitations. This controversy, known as Dexit by the fans, might have prompted less blowback if Game Freak could show that its decision led to better graphics and performance. But players immediately noticed what they saw as lazy texturing — particularly with objects in the background — and found frequent problems with draw distance and pop-in from models, Pokemon and interactable objects.
Finally, there’s “Pokemon Legends: Arceus,” a game released earlier this year and Game Freak’s first attempt at a true open world, albeit on a smaller scale than “Scarlet” and “Violet.” Again, players noticed performance and graphics issues, with fans harping on terrible background textures — making a particularly big deal of the game’s trees. Draw-distance problems, random pop-in and muddy color palettes returned.
Since the 3D games came out, there has been a noticeable division in the Pokemon community. There are those who say: Performance and graphics don’t matter. What matters is that the games are fun to play! Then, there are those who argue: Game Freak is way behind the times! These technical issues are inexcusable and take us out of the games!
With each passing Pokemon title since the transition to 3D, the “performance doesn’t matter” group of Pokefans has given Game Freak a pass — which, to a degree, could be understood. Game Freak was attempting to evolve its series after a decade of stagnation. Some leeway was warranted. And with each generation, the Pokemon games have inched closer to what those fans have wanted from the series all along: a true open world experience, akin to a “Legend of Zelda: Breath of the Wild” adventure. Alyse and I consider ourselves part of this group of fans.
But after “Scarlet” and “Violet,” it’ll be almost impossible to defend the “performance doesn’t matter” argument.
With this latest batch of technical woes, the games’ historically bad graphics may have finally crossed a line. Fans’ patience with the developer seems to be growing thin — and that’s probably a good thing. Even if “Scarlet” and “Violet” are fun to play, both are in an inexcusable state: They’re barely playable, with graphical issues popping up virtually everywhere.