Lazy?

>>29512220
If you seriously thought they were going to redo models that were so high detailed that the 3DS can't display them at proper resolution, that's on you. Seriously, the fact that they were future proofed should be common knowledge.

>>29512220
A lot of sprites were reused between gen 4 and 5.

Making new models is pointless. They COULD improve on some of the animations though, since the whole point of going 3D is that doing lots of animations is way easier.

>>29512220
These models are going to keep getting reused for a long time, just like the Stadium models. Less work for the developers.

>>29512220
The reason they make the models so high poly in the first place is so that they can re-use them forever. Get used to it fag.

>>29512275
Can they at least apply dynamic lighting and higher rez textures over all these models if they make a Switch Stadium or Gen 8?

>>29512254
Ya? Name one you idiot instead of just running your mouth

>>29512254
5 added animation to all of them, so they all got something "new".

>>29512384
That's all I'm asking for and I won't even get that. The same animations for my bros I've dealt with for 3 years. But somehow the Gen 5 sprites still stay impressive to me in 2016.

>>29512220
Pretty sure than Gen3 reused many back sprites from gen2, and gen5 use animated versions of gen4 sprites

>>29512471
>>29512254
The same poses or angles may have been used, but all sprites were redrawn between generations.

>>29512368
Charizard

>Wasting shitloads of time, effort, and resources to make nearly 1,000 new character models that are barely an improvement every game.

How to drive your company into the ground 101

>>29512368
Giratina both formes
Heatran
Palkia
Dialga
Shinx
Infernape
Typhlosion
Feraligatr though it looks like his sprite was recolored slightly
Swalot
Armaldo though the eyes were redone

>>29512220
>Anyone else feel this or only me?
You're part of a select group of people called retards. So no, you're not alone but that doesn't mean you aren't retarded as fuck for thinking they would redo 1000+ models just for your sake when no other game developer would ever do the same.

>>29512560
That's usually the case, but gen 5 literally reused gen 4 sprites; they just added animation.

>>29513307
Some*
I only mean that some were reused.

>>29512732

They literally did this for like 20 years before ORAS came out and they were one of the most profitable game companies in the world you retard

>>29513381
spritework is less of a drain on resources than rebuilding models you nincompoop

File: shiny xatu.jpg (284KB, 480x854px) Image search: [Google]

284KB, 480x854px

>>29512220
Did they fix him?

>>29512220
>>29512362
3D fag here
Yes, that's basically the point. The topology and poly count of the actual 3d models is future proof. People don't realise how stupidly high poly the models are because a) It's hard to tell on a jaggy 240p screen and b) They are using textures optimized specifically to look best at that resolution and screen size.

It's a major reason the 3d feature causes frame rate drops, and why it's been disabled altogether in SM. Game Freak made the highest poly models they could get away with on the 3ds system, and they didn't want to let such a feature compromise future proofing of the models.

The models are designed with future specs in mind, so in future generations we will see these same models, but you won't know any different with fresh textures and on a high res screen.

Also
>Especially after seeing all those models in Pokemon Go

Niantic were given those assets; they are using the exact same models as gen 6, but with different textures. People are just confusing the pixelation from the low res 3ds screen for low poly models. They are the same model; only one is displayed at 400x240 pixels (3ds) and the other is displayed at 1334x750 pixels (iPhone6)

Even though they were introduced in gen 6, the models shouldn't be thought of as "gen 6 models" but more as just "modern Pokemon assets" if that makes sense.

Sorry for the blog

File: 1468816202857.png (529KB, 600x780px) Image search: [Google]

529KB, 600x780px

>>29513976
Very nice explanation, this is for you, sir.