- Nintendo contracted a third-party developer and forced them to work under horrible crunch conditions.
- Nintendo is charging $60 for a fifteen-year-old game that doesn't have any substantial changes aside from its updated graphics.
- Nintendo has made a few questionable decisions about how this game fits into competitive multiplayer tournaments. I haven't played Pokémon competitively in almost ten years, so I'm not sure I understand what people are saying here. But they sure are saying it.
My own impression is that it's a cute game that took me right back to 2006. It's a bit uncanny to see the polished graphics transposed against the super-retro gameplay, especially after playing Sword and Shield, and I think Let's Go Pikachu and Eevee were much better remakes. Nintendo really shouldn't have charged $60 for Brilliant Diamond and Shining Pearl, but what can you do. They were fishing for people who have more nostalgia than sense, and they got me.
no subject
Date: 2021-11-20 01:52 pm (UTC)- Nintendo contracted a third-party developer and forced them to work under horrible crunch conditions.
- Nintendo is charging $60 for a fifteen-year-old game that doesn't have any substantial changes aside from its updated graphics.
- Nintendo has made a few questionable decisions about how this game fits into competitive multiplayer tournaments. I haven't played Pokémon competitively in almost ten years, so I'm not sure I understand what people are saying here. But they sure are saying it.
My own impression is that it's a cute game that took me right back to 2006. It's a bit uncanny to see the polished graphics transposed against the super-retro gameplay, especially after playing Sword and Shield, and I think Let's Go Pikachu and Eevee were much better remakes. Nintendo really shouldn't have charged $60 for Brilliant Diamond and Shining Pearl, but what can you do. They were fishing for people who have more nostalgia than sense, and they got me.