>>42623236In terms of hardware resources? That argument was compelling back in the days of 66 MHz ARM9 shit, HQVGA displays and tiny expensive-ass flash memories, but none of these are problems on the Switch.
In terms of developer resources? That argument is flat out wrong. Good spriting takes a shitload of effort, especially at modern high resolutions, and is far less efficient than using 3D if you want any kind of dynamism or detail in your game. Game Freak spent 3 years building a pretty kickass portfolio of re-usable assets that can be (relatively) easily animated to fit just about any role and will arguably last them into the 2030s and beyond with minimal modification, they couldn't hope to get that kind of use out of sprites, which would need to be completely overhauled every few years at least and are also inherently more rigid and difficult to apply to certain roles. A lot of the modern comfy shit like camp and refresh would be pretty much impossible or otherwise just plain shitty with sprites, for example. And while you could probably template sprites to a limited extent, adapting them to new features and situations in a consistent way is *not* easy.
These efforts also aren't really "stealing" away from any other part of the game, animators aren't writers, managers or programmers. You might be able to argue that some of the funding that goes into animation and modeling could instead be diverted to those areas, but let's be real, if Game Freak actually gave a shit about better writing or cramming more features into their games, they could easily have it all and still print money. Not everything is a matter of sheer incompetence, but they don't entirely deserve a pass. They've always been retarded in one way or another.
