>>39296822>Are you having a stroke? Nobody is going to prove a game that hasn't been released "is good'We got a demo to judge 4 months before release, clearly the game is lazy, cringy and mediocre at best. GF isn’t a new small limited company, they’ve been making games for 3 decades, and nothing will change in those 4 months, especially since you were kind enough to point out how much it takes to do a little thing
>The point is that every project has an output clearance and mission decided by it's directorWhich is clearly to get the most revenue with the less effort possible, how could you defend that?
>The game could have MORE CONTENT THAN IT HAS" is something you can say about literally every single game ever madeMost games ever made look their console generation, could you add more to twilight princess? Absolutely but the game is marvelous as it is and GameCube did not have switch capabilities
Pokemon, on the other hand, is barely pushing wii capabilities cutting half the pokemon and still delivering 2002 graphics
>some that outsell Pokemon and yet have cut content to get it done in timeBecause these games were great even after cutting some part, pokemon would still be barely okay if they didn’t cut any creature
Taking things away from a bad game isn't the same as taking things away from a game that will still be great afterward
>But that's just not how games are madeExactly! The difference between great and bad games is the effort pokemon clearly lacks
>The only difference between how Gamefreak and others do things is that Gamefreak adds shit later in a third versionSo we're supposed to pretend is a better version of itself because possibly maybe in the future they might perhaps fix things up in the meantime buy the mediocre game for the "better" versions price
>Which is scummy, but they've been doing it since the 90sBecause people like you keep making excuses for a company who sees no reason improve because shills will defend anything
