>>48413870The problem is that if a team of 40 can do better than a team of 150 on those details, AND have far less funding, then it makes no fucking sense.
Think of it this way:Imagine if your favorite franchise got a spinoff. The spinoff, although limited in scope thanks to funding limitations and team size, was well put together and was a critical success for the team.
Now, the franchise didn't want to change because it had traditionally done it X way all this time, and you were fine with that anyways. Finally, they decide they'll go Y way, which the spinoff had done with limited funding and a smaller team. Imagine the possibilities, all of the improvements that could be brought to the franchise by doing it Y way instead of X! You've already seen some of it in action.
Then they give you a pretty terrible game. To be fair, it's clear that it had a rocky development, and they struggled with the implementation of Y way, so you take the game and enjoy it just the same, waiting for them to improve.
But they never improve, despite this new game being a financial success, and they continue giving you terrible games with low quality. Over time, this begins to crush you, because you've seen what a smaller team was able to do, and by now this larger team not only has the funding, but also the experience to do better than the smaller team, but they just don't.
That is the Pokemon 3D problem, and why we keep referring to these smaller games.
