>>49034397>Crystal did it betterThis one just confuses me.
Crystal doesn't have constant animations, and it also didn't have as many to deal with.
It also was on the Gameboy Color, a system that was building off of another platform that released 9 years ago.
That's like saying a Wii U game better did X technological feat better than an N64 game. Yeah, no shit, the Wii U is 100% hardware compatible with a system released 11 years ago, all of the tricks and knowledge built off from that system and its successor meant that developers had more time to squeeze extra performance out of the same hardware. Compare that to the N64, which didn't have that kind of experience built up because it's too unique from all others where such hardware trickery wouldn't be known.
>>49033215I never made this argument, I find this argument shit. There's so much to improve.
>>49034096>the models shit on the spritesYes, the models themselves are fantastic. I'm not disputing this in the slightest. The Gen 5 sprites do not compare to the models themselves.
HOWEVER, their animations are fucking atrocious and stiff, and they're somewhat ruined by modern Pokemon's art style.
Gen 5's animations for the previous 493 Pokemon shit on Gen 6's animations for all 649 previous Pokemon.
>>49034100>It really wasn'tCare to show me another game where they have animations for sprites on 2 sides, across 649 different creatures? Not even counting animations, that's 1298 different perspectives they had to animate.
>nothing wrong with the animationsWith the original Pokemon, they simply sit there, swaying back and forth. This is fine if you're just doing tweens on a budget with sprites, but this is not okay if you've got brand new models and want to animate them properly. You've literally just wasted your budget making great models and then animating them poorly.
It's even worse because they didn't even bother revisiting the animations afterwards, when they clearly had a chance to do so.
