In case you haven't heard, a new Pokemon game just came out. And if you weren't aware of that, you probably aren't aware that it doesn't look very good. It has a few defenders, of course, but as our own Eric Switzer has already written about, Pokemon makes vastly more money than every other game ever, and we should be able to hold it to a higher standard than this. No one expected it to look better than Red Dead Redemption on the highest of high end PCs, or better than Ghost of Tsushima: Director's Cut on PS5. In fact, 'expected' is the wrong word. No one even expected it would look as good as it does - it's the best looking Pokemon game ever, stylistic preferences for yonder days of sprites aside. And it’s still a bit rubbish. It doesn't matter how it looks though, right? I mean, who plays Pokemon games for the graphics?
Here's a better question, hotshot. Who plays any game for the graphics? How many of you have ever looked at a trailer and thought, 'that's not a genre I enjoy, the characters are unlikeable, the story seems boring, nothing in the gameplay excites me, but I'll be there day one because it looks pretty!'? That just isn't how games work, and it's a feeble defence of Pokemon, and of any game that may be criticised for its graphics. I love Pokemon, I think I've written over 200 Pokemon articles for TheGamer, tackling the base games, anime, Go, Let's Go, Unite, Park, BDSP, Snap, Crackle, and Pop. Legends: Arceus might be the best Pokemon game since HeartGold & SoulSilver. Certainly it's the best core game since then, if you count it as a core game and conversely do not count Let's Go. I'm not saying this to attack Pokemon. It's because I want Pokemon to be better.
Let's revisit those expectations. Given the money it makes, Pokemon should be the best looking game on the Switch. But, given the lack of energy Pokemon typically puts on its visuals, I was never expecting it to compete with Breath of the Wild or Super Mario Odyssey. I wasn't even expecting it to be better than Snap, given that the photography sim has the considerable advantages of being a) shorter, b) on rails, and c) not developed by Game Freak. In terms of expectations, Legends: Arceus has fulfilled them. I expected it to look pretty average, even for the Switch (which can never hope to compete with the best-in-market visuals today). Isn't that kind of sad though? Pokemon is the biggest game on the planet and it phones in a core area of game development every time. That, added to the lack of voice acting, belies the series position as one of the most profitable in the world across all mediums.
But of course, you don't play a Pokemon game for graphics. I get that. But what games do you play for the graphics then? They've been mentioned as a selling point for both Red Dead Redemption 2 and The Last of Us Part 2, but how many times have you thought about the horse balls in Red Dead since playing it. If the number is higher than zero and you don't work for Rockstar, I think you’re a very weird individual. The rope physics in TLOU2 seem to get a bit more chatter, but I think you're all odd too - and both of those are examples of active graphics working within the engine through very complex computer processes I do not understand, rather than just passive, sitting-there-being-a-tree stuff. Pokemon struggles even with the latter.
I love when a game looks good, but I never buy a game for that reason alone. None of you do. I use photo mode a lot, and I resent that Shadow of the Tomb Raider can't match up to Horizon or Spider-Man. Graphics are important, but I've still played Shadow twice, and even as a paid up member of the I-will-always-defend-Tomb-Raider club, I will admit Shadow is one of the series' weaker offerings. Pokemon Legends: Arceus would have had my money even if it looked a damn sight worse, and it probably wouldn't have raised my anticipation that much higher if it was on BOTW's level. It's (kinda) open-world Pokemon. Of course I'm there day one. But it's daft to pretend that I think it looks amazing, or that how a game looks is an entirely trivial factor because it wasn't the sole motivator behind my purchase.
None of you buy games for the graphics. You buy the game, and the graphics are a nice cherry on top. Pokemon's cherry is made of wax, and I don't know why you all keep biting into it and telling me it tastes delicious.