Nintendo charges 70 dollars for this

Nintendo charges 70 dollars for this

Attached: full price.png (396x549, 235.22K)

this is actually fucking embarrassing. the directors of this game should resign.

>2022
>there are still "people" who don't know that nintendo is actually a scientific study branch of the US government hired to test the limits of stockholm syndrome

Why does everyone want Nintendo's new console to be the Performancebeast 9000 with 120 fps 4k gameplay?
why is the myth of Nintendo + super-high-end-console and next gen games so alluring to people?

It's been going on for more than a decade

Attached: 1653354159498.jpg (600x894, 405.84K)

yes i'm sure nintendo is selling that tree model for 70 dollars.
link the model store page of gtfo

that tree is an asset I wouldn't expect to see in the cheapest steam shovelware, let alone from the developers of the highest grossing media franchise in existence

When designing a game, you can use high demand graphics to make a good looking game, but this requires strong performance, so you typically use creative aesthetics to mask lower demand visuals with a nice art style.

What they did here was pure laziness with no thought put into an appealing art style

When you're charging an arm and a leg for a product, it better excel in every single area possible. I'm talking 50 years of free DLC, permanent free upgrades to all future consoles, 60 FPS minimum (with upgrades that let you go up to 6000 FPS) and that's just for starters. Nintendo isn't a small indie company, and I expect them to use their money to make ME happy.

No one wants Pokemon to look like the SUPER REALISTIC Sony template. People just want the games not to look like someone's first attempt at making a 3D game.

Attached: xenoblade-e-6.jpg (1920x1080, 377.12K)

Big if true. In the 80s though? What would possess the USA back then to do such a thing?

because thats how much they charge for their products and how much they profit off them

Please provide the full, uncropped image.

Nintendo always used to had good graphics and performance, or at least graphics and performance that kept up with their competitors. This changed with the Wii and they’ve never been able to catch back up since.

IT'S FUCKING POKEMON, NOT A GODDAMNED ACTION GAME. THERE'S NO ACTION TO KILL THE FRAMERATE, SO WHAT'S THE EXCUSE FOR USING ASSETS WITH GRAPHICS THAT ARE BARELY ABOVE THE WII? HELL, YOU CAN'T EVEN POINT AT THE FUCKING BATTLE ANIMATIONS BECAUSE THEY TOOK THEM AWAY. THIS A MULTIBILLION DOLLAR FRANCHISE REFUSING TO SPEND MORE A HUNDRED GRAND TOPS ON A MAINLINE ENTRY.

Attached: 159269481.jpg (500x803, 154.13K)

>Nintendo charges 70 dollars for this

Attached: soyjak29.png (645x770, 33.53K)

>70 dollars
but this isn't a ps5 game

It was a long-term investment. It's an important study.

nintendo =/= gamefreak/ pokemon co.

How did they get Japan on board?

how many times must it be explained that nintendo and game freak are different entities

Proof or go take your pills and go to bed

Nintendo games are $60 though

of course, PS5 games don't look like N64 shovelware