Thread: Gen III Graphics

Ruby and Sapphire: Pokémon games that looked like EarthBound. What's the problem, exactly?

You just said it, they look liked Earthbound.

That game sucks.

Aiko-kun, you are the one who sucks.

I will not start a flamewar, but Earthbound was quirky, cool, and epic. R/S/E are automatically awesome due to the resemblance.

*restarts Emerald and names trainer Ness*

Gen III and Gen IV feel like completely different worlds.

On Gen 3, the game feels crisp and responsive.

Gen 4, good graphics, but feels sluggish, especially in battles.

Originally Posted by Vraell

Gen III and Gen IV feel like completely different worlds.

On Gen 3, the game feels crisp and responsive.

Gen 4, good graphics, but feels sluggish, especially in battles.

Gen 3 graphics were hard to go back to after playing Gen 4. I disagree about the responsiveness, I find it odd to move in Gen 3 after playing Gen 4 games, especially HG/SS as they seem to be very responsive in my movements and actions. The battle animations in Gen 3 are more responsive, I will agree with that.

Originally Posted by Tsuness

Gen 3 graphics were hard to go back to after playing Gen 4. I disagree about the responsiveness, I find it odd to move in Gen 3 after playing Gen 4 games, especially HG/SS as they seem to be very responsive in my movements and actions. The battle animations in Gen 3 are more responsive, I will agree with that.

As for responsiveness, it used to be slower in D/P, but Platinum and on fixed that.

The battle animations and shorter back in Gen III, making for faster-paced battles, but there's a lot of room for improvement for graphics. (Golden Sun and a lot of other RPGs says hi, and no, I don't really care for FPS as long as it's just the animation. I can stand single-digit framerates if it gives me something awesome for turn-based games.)

There's something about the art style of Gen III that I dislike. What's up with the lightning on the Pokémon? It looks rather unnatural to me. Good thing they spiced it up in Gen IV and things look crisp and clean.

As for Gen IV, it really improved the graphics. Transparency spam makes attacks look extremely nice! However, some attack animations could be shortened more.

I never minded the graphics. As I never played them before D/P/Pt, I don't know about their initial release.

I actually enjoyed the Gen III graphics more than Gen V... Gen IV was sort of okay...

Originally Posted by Kumo

I actually enjoyed the Gen III graphics more than Gen V... Gen IV was sort of okay...

I couldnt said it any different ha. i like how clean gen 3 looked, despite it being slightly "outdated". the new graphics look rough with the "3d" and misplaced pixels as u move around in the overworld

I personally prefer Gen IV battle graphics to Gen III, but the actual overwold looks so much cleaner in Gen III.
I cant really compare to Gen V, but Id say Gen III has the best graphics so far.

Originally Posted by Chao-der!

Gen II, Blocky, Loved it. No colour. NOOO!

hey now! every sprite got FOUR colors, tyvm! there was black, white, and two other colors! well, three really because black is technically not a color

I like Gen V graphics more then them all, but Gen III graphics are a lot better then Gen IV graphics imo, and because Emerald is my favorite game.

Originally Posted by Life Alert

Second line.

The drops in framerate in Hearthome, Goldenrod, Vermillion, and Saffron were rather annoying as well. Generation 3 did certainly run a lot "smoother" than Generation 4.

Not only that the 4th Gen needed alot of Guard Houses while R/S/E didn't need ANY. Those north of Slateport don't even count as real Guard Houses, as it was still the same exact route. Why the 4th Gen was so technically inferior to the 3rd Gen other than just framerate is what I want to know. 5th Gen seems alot better in this case though.
And you're forgetting Hearthome in D/P/Pt for the slowdown problems.

Originally Posted by Shiramu Kuromu

Not only that the 4th Gen needed alot of Guard Houses while R/S/E didn't need ANY. Those north of Slateport don't even count as real Guard Houses, as it was still the same exact route. Why the 4th Gen was so technically inferior to the 3rd Gen other than just framerate is what I want to know. 5th Gen seems alot better in this case though.

It was due to the 3D engine as opposed to 2D sprites. I personally didn't mind the guard houses, but the low framerate did get infuriating at times, especially in locations such as Hearthome, Vermillion, and Goldenrod, where the framerate would slow down considerably.

And you're forgetting Hearthome in D/P/Pt for the slowdown problems.

No, I didn't. I specifically pointed out how Hearthome, among other cities, had framerate problems.

Originally Posted by Life Alert

It was due to the 3D engine as opposed to 2D sprites. I personally didn't mind the guard houses, but the low framerate did get infuriating at times, especially in locations such as Hearthome, Vermillion, and Goldenrod, where the framerate would slow down considerably.



No, I didn't. I specifically pointed out how Hearthome, among other cities, had framerate problems.

Woops, must've misread your post. x-x