Is it realistically viable to have a modern game with hundreds of heavily polished playable characters?

by Under_Sycamore_Trees. Posted on Jul 01, 2020    0    92

A little late to the Sword & Shield debate, but maybe it's a better time now that things are less heated.

I kinda want this to be about development scale in general, not about '[company good/bad]'

Sometimes I still see things like 'if only S&S had the animations of [insert new game here]'

The problem is, I don't think some of those are fair comparisons at all due to the huge difference between the number of playable characters plus movesets

Are there any modern games with hundreds of unique playable characters, each one capable of hundreds of different moves, and still everything looking polished as some of the big-budget only-a-few-protagonists games from Sony/Nintendo/Microsoft games?

Is such a thing even possible? Will things scale indefinitely if you just throw enough money at it?

Disclaimer: I'm a Switch-only player but still didn't buy S&S. Not trying to defend any billionaire company, my intention is to reflect about what to expect from games that actually have a comparable scale to it, like maybe the upcoming SMT V


HopOnTheHype 1

Yes, literally they were doing it before sword and shield, the animations were lower quality than they were before.

Also let's not act like we're talking about uncharted or something here, pokemon games are indie scaled games. Anyway Persona 5, World of Final Fantasy, etc did it better than Pokemon Sword and Shield, and are infinitely better games.


You just have to accept that pokemon sucks now and that sword and shield was trash tier, we a temtem nation now bois.

Elzam 1

An issue I've seen a lot regarding S&S is that many of the animations are reused assets that have hardly been touched up. This along with the last-gen visuals on the overworld led a lot of people to wonder if GameFreak had mismanaged their resources and franchise. There hadn't been a core console Pokemon game well... ever, and the leap from a handheld released in 2011 to the Switch seemed to not be much of a leap forward at all.

I don't expect every 'mon or character in incredibly massive games to have full articulation, lip syncing, etc., but if you're interacting with a character for an extended period of time, they probably need some sort of extra work.

For Pokemon specifically, your main way of interacting with the world are the Pokemon. Most humans in the world could be replaced with wooden signs or computers and most players wouldn't bat an eye (other than to notice how bizarre it is to not have people around). If they aren't up to snuff and are using 3-frame animations from nearly a decade ago, it reflects poorly on the entire game.

Tonkarz 1

The reality of development is that every single thing in a game is constructed. And that takes time. And people have to be paid for that time.

Therefore, the more characters you have, the less detailed each one can be. That means simpler character models, fewer animations, fewer unique animations, fewer attacks, less dialogue and so on and so on.

If we're talking about Pokemon specifically, it does seem like the Pokemon could be more detailed given that this is one of the most profitable franchises of all time.

Kingbarbarossa 1

Sure, not for 60 bucks though. There's tons of different game concepts that are mechanically possible, but economically impossible in today's market. Shattering that requirement would open up a kaleidescope of possibilities.

Zodrex54 2

Huh. Thought this post would be about the next Watch Dogs game.

But yeah it depends what you mean by heavily polished, you could have the character reuse an animation a lot but then you'd have to make it look really good. Pokémon however, reuses a lot of animation that look pretty subpar.

BelovedApple 2

What about world of final fantasy. How many monsters were in that. Personality I found it to be a much better gane. That sword or shield

homer_3 2

>and still everything looking polished

The problem was, the S&S animations were still laughably bad. They weren't trying to reduce the scale to make something of higher quality. They were just trying to save money/rush the game out the door so they could sell it.

ropahektic 1

You make a very valid point and I always thought Gamefreak's argument in this regard was legit. There are no other examples of games that attemp this without very heavy compromise (Persona series, per example, only have like one animation per monster).

I think it's one of those things where technology will have to step in - procedural animation and the such.

Emperor_Z 31

Their argument would have been fine if they had actually delivered on what the compromise was allegedly for. Instead they recycled the animations from previous games

ropahektic 3

Yeah I worded that wrongly, their argument was legit, their actual actions weren't.


It depends. Maybe far in a future we can't even fully comprehend yet but I doubt we'll get that anytime soon. It's why we're not going to get a game like Street Fighter with the entire series' cast any time soon. Money only does so much; that cash is still going towards a work force and talent which A. needs to be available, B. not in such great quantity that there are too many cooks, and C. given enough time to work on each character.

Those characters, depending on the game, can require so many things; models, rigging, moves, intros, outros, custom interactions with other characters, balancing, artwork, voice over, chat animations etc., and the quality of all this stuff is only gonna bump up the time and resources required.

I remember watching an Overwatch video of a guy making Doomfist's select screen idle animation and I think it took him about 5 days to complete. Depending on the game and how much work the characters take the time and money required can vary wildly; but hundreds of high quality animations for hundreds of characters with high quality detail? We're a ways away from that, I feel. Obviously this all varies a bit if you look at Pokemon specifically but you get what I'm saying.

not_so_creative_name 5

There's a video about the legacy of animations in the Pokemon franchise in New Frame Plus. Daniel Floyd talks about how the battle animations have changed throughout the series, and in his "best of 2019" video, he tells how the focus of the franchise shifted from battles to the world shared with pokemon. I'd recommend watching it, cause it explains how Game Freak reusing battle animations is not really a terrible thing.

I still don't get why they would make up an excuse about having "better battle animations" to make up the cut pokemon though. Why haven't they just said it was development limitations or something?

Noobie678 4

Link for the lazy, 5:08 timestamp

This makes way too much sense when you think about it. Fans (including me) can disagree on the direction Pokemon is heading but they can't deny the effort and creativity that goes into making Pokemon "believable" in their world.

Battle difficulty, battle animations, story, sounds (no voice acting), lore, even just fleshing out the actual world itself comes second (or not at all) to making sure the player can interact with their virtual pets in the most immersive way possible. People forgot about the unique petting (and feeding?) animations for each Pokemon when it was introduced in X/Y and probably don't care about the camp in Sword/Shield.

While I disagree with this direction, I at least hope we get more ways to interact with our Pokemon in future games

not_so_creative_name 2

Yeah, I was really impressed how the region portrays everyday lives of people with pokemon. Having differently sized water fountains. Baristas having milk blob or cream girl as a companion. Dialogue describing the littlest things one would encounter while living with pokemon. I really enjoy a world where I can imagine living as just normal folk. It's the same reason why I enjoy Splatoon's world as well.

iceburg77779 5

If given the proper budget and time, polishing multiple characters (at least for animation and modeling) is possible. Doing 880 highly animated characters is not possible if they all have the same deadline, but a gradual change would allow for it over the period of multiple years. The Pokémon company definitely has the budget, but does not give the teams the time. For SwSh and even when the 3d models were originally made in 2013 for XY, the time given has not been enough. GameFreak uses creatures inc to create and animate the models, but creatures is not a major studio, and has other projects like the detective pikachu games. Still the models made are treated with sprite-like animation standards. All of them have two attack animations, a death animation, and a walking and running animation, unlike games like Pokémon stadium where many moves are animated for each Pokémon (even though there is a smaller move pool for each Pokémon and less Pokémon overall). With only breaks between major games being a year or less for GF and Creatures, they don’t really have the time to change many animations or models, causing infamous models like typhlosion to remain the same for over 5 years. Even though the models were made to be future-proofed, I do believe that the models will eventually be overhauled (or possibly are now being overhauled) for HD systems, but it would most likely be done gradually, with each gen being worked on in order.

momsaTigrex 3

digimon. Each digimon has it moves fully animated and there is 240 digimon in it.

For pokemon what can be done is each mon having a set of animations for different types of attacks. Punches, kicks, tackles, beams, status etc. This was the cause for pokemon battle on the wii if im not wrong. I do recall kicks, punches and the pokemon moving for flare blitz and such.

MajinTa 3

Warriors Orochi 3 Ultimate has 130+ characters. Most have unique movesets. It's a dynasty warriors gane though. Don't know if that's considered polished or not.

Charliejfg04 6

Isn’t that what WatchDogs Legion is trying to do?

Admiral_Raven 3

I legit thought this was about Legion.

Smart_Ass_Dave 17

Given that all the NPCs in Legion are people (and not say...rabbits and/or corgis that shoot lightning) I think they're using the equivalent of hitting random on the character customization screen. Procedurally generating character models by algorithm rather than hand-animating each one the way SwSh had to.

Also, its not out yet so we can't really compare the results of both approaches.

PositivePelican 3

It is possible if it wasn't tied to a massive multimedia franchise with deadlines to meet that churns out games for pure profit at this point and it's working. The writing has been on the wall for some time now, this was just a wake up call because its finally a mainline console game.

There are workarounds, it's not really a question of scope but more of quality, it's one thing to come up short but clearly have some passion, they kinda just looked like phoned in 3ds models.

MadnessBunny 2

I guess it also comes down to what animations are they putting more effort. I still can't get over that one gif that shows one of the legendary dogs in a cutscene turning around and running away, specially when, iirc, they said the reason for the dex cut was higher quality animations.

Chrono_199X 6

I believe that it's a letdown precisely for the fact that it's Pokemon and GameFreak. Because if anyone could do it, it's them in that franchise, you know? Like CDPR with Witcher 3. People always said you couldn't have deep and well developed npcs and sidequest in a big open world RPG of that scale. And they did it.

Flipiwipy 26

Dragon Quest XI has about the same number of monsters as Pokemon, and the game looks significantly better on Switch than the Pokemon games. It is possible. It is viable. The problem is not with the game making, it's a management problem. It's about deadlines to coincide with the anime, and keep up churning the games out.



8dev8 9

The monsters all have an attack, any spells or abilities, a getting hit, a dying, a movement, a sleeping and I think a poisoned animation, So all in all a pretty decent amount

  Under_Sycamore_Trees 1

True enough. It's a massive feat. And all of those animations are pretty more expressive too. Those animations are surely comparable and it's unfavourable to S&S

One disadvantage that S&S has though are the multiple possible attacks, so they all look kinda weird with energy beams, scratch marks and whatnot randomly popping up in front of them while some generic attack animation plays out. With only one attack for DQ monsters, they will never look bad performing their moves

Edit: removed the previous comment as in retrospect it sounded dismissive of the scope of DQXI

AwesomeManatee 9

I think it's worth pointing out that the Switch port of DQXI (not the game, just the port) had nearly as much dev time as Sword and Shield. It was originally announced in 2016 for a simultaneous launch with the PS4 version that got delayed over two years. So they probably began working on the Switch version before Sun and Moon had even come out. Even with all the stuff that XI's definitive edition added, that is still a lot of time.

charcharmunro 26

Dragon Quest XI also has a LOT of palette swaps, though. Not knocking it, that's DQ's deal, but it's not like there's TOO many unique models going around.

brutinator 4

Depends on how you go about it. In Pokemon's case, they supposedly created very high res models of all the Pokemon up to X/Y, meaning that each new game only needs to do the work for what it adds.

Theoretically, animations can be broken up into segments, and many of the segments would work for multiple pokemon. for example, you'd only need to do a few unique frames for each pokemon that can learn the various punch attacks (fire/ice/mach/drain/focus etc.), then have a reusable "impact" animation, and then the various effects. I'm sure that enough Pokemon have similar enough skeletons that you could swap animations as well.

At the end of the day, while it is daunting, it's doable for a AAA budget and good planning.

That being said, I'd be a lot happier if Gamefreak put out "mid gen" games. Like, say, a Gen 8 full game that doesn't add any new pokemon, but does take place somewhere else, with a fleshed out map and story (not just a remake or one of their "Third version" games, but something totally different). That way they can have a "B team" creating a basically asset flip of a game, which shouldn't be hard, while they have an "A team" designing the next pokemon and upgrading the underlying engine/framework.

I mean, there are some phenomenal romhacks out there; using developer tools, I'm sure they could make something great with what they already have.

enesup 16

The Digimon in Cyber Sleuth look way better than the Pokemon, not to mention each one has their own unique signature move that it is highly choreographed. And that was on the Vita.

Arren07 6

You might find this video by New Frame Plus interesting. It talks about the evolution of pokemon battle animation. It came out before Sw&Sh, but it really illuminates the expansion problem the series inherently has.

Raikaru 19

I think it's possible but you would probably need more time than Pokemon games usually get and you would need a bigger budget

Gale47 3

You're saying that one of the biggest media IPs in the world doesn't have a big enough budget?


Raikaru 2

I said the games. Read. As in they need to allocate more money. No one is talking about how much money they have

areyoustarting 2

I imagine most of that money is in toys and licensing, not the games.

momsaTigrex 7

They have the budget. Pokemon is a highly grossing IP.

Hudre 3

Yes, but they would need time and budget.

momsaTigrex 2

And they have that. Pokemon is one of the highest if not the highest profitable brand.

They can skip a year or two without games for time but they won't.

Paladia 1

> They can skip a year or two without games for time but they won't.

To make more animations? I didnt even notice the lack of animations, so for me that would be a huge waste of time and resources.

momsaTigrex 1

How you didn't notice it? Animations are so bare bones and hardly passable and are reused. Beam attacks aren't even attached to points of source. Like Blastoise cannons. The cover pokemon itself doesn't have a proper turn animation. Flying pokemon for example don't flap their wings as well.

Compare SnS to pokemon battle revelation on the Wii and other console games from the past. These all had proper animations. They differ punches, kicks and tackles from each other for an example and pokemon have ideal animations. There is some few animations like pyro ball but that is like a drop in an Ocean.

And not just animations, content, balancing, story, visuals and features are all lacking.

Paladia 1

I think the story is lacking because it has no real villain and the game is too easy. The animations, I didn't notice one bit.

I can't compare it to Battle Revelations as I have not played it. But isn't that just a battle game with nothing else? As such I'd expect it to have more focus on the battle animations, just like I'd expect Mortal Kombat to have more focus on battle animations than Stardew Valley.

I recall playing Crystal and being happy to notice that it had animations instead of just static images when entering battle, so I suppose I'm not especially picky when it comes to graphics.

I think they should have spent more time on the story and the balance, I agree with that. But two more years on eye candy instead of gameplay would for me be a huge waste.

momsaTigrex 1

PBR is a battle game and nothing else and you are correct but pokemon is mainly an RPJ with a lot of combat itself. Why it can't have decent animations as well? PBR Differs the different animations and categories them correctly.

Let take Digimon. It half battles and half story and going around talking to people. Each 240 Digimon have all of their moves animated probably and it personalized to the Digimon itself. This gives an overall better experience.

This also applies to animations used in the story are half assed as well. Facial expressions are lacking, no voice acting and all. I recall a part where the small dog pokemon did a shit turn animation and just stood in place doing stuff to open a door or something. And the rival just reused animations from sun and moon.

Immersion also suffer from this since bird pokemon just fly without flapping their wings in the wild and in battle and pokemon aren't scaled right.

You can say it not important and that's fine but by the end of the day proper and varied animations add a lot of life, charisma, personality and excitement. Many little unimportant things do add a lot to the game and make an experience more special.

Hudre 1

Now compare SnS to pokemon battle revelation in terms of return on investment and revenue generation.

More animations will never equal more sales, at least not in a way where the return is guaranteed to be substantial. Pokemon has literally no reason to change their formula at all until sales decline.

momsaTigrex 1

And that sad. They can sell trash and get a lot of cash.

Hudre 1

Lol, Pokemon might not be your cup of tea anymore, but I don't think any of the games have ever been trash. They are what they are.

People grow out of Pokemon, it just happens. It's a game completely targetted for small children, it will never be deep or challenging unless you play competitively which is not remotely similar to the campaign experience people want.

momsaTigrex 1

Yeah no. I'm 25 years old and played them since I was a kid and still replay the older titles often like countless many other adults. DS ones and gba still pretty decent for adults since main game stories aren't dumbed down and hand holdy, games have decent difficulty to them, a lot of content and post game content and that why I enjoyed them when I was 9 and still enjoy them now. They are well made games that aged pretty well. There is also plenty of rom hacks that are harder to play with added new features. Pokemon is for all ages and not just kids.

A game can be for kids and still be engaging, fun, well balanced and have content and a story that isn't insulting your problem solving skills. I see this argument for content that is rated for kids and everyone. "It for kids it can be meh as fuck and the story bad lmao who cares." And that isn't wrong, but it also isn't right either and should not be an excuse for a rushed and badly made product. There is made for kids and is still good and everyone can enjoy and there is just simply bad. That latter is SnS.

But you are probably right. Where the games are going isn't for me I may just play older games, rom hacks, digmon, temtem and many other games that the same but just better with 1/4 the budget and staff.

Hudre 2

They have absolutely zero reasons to put more time into these games until people stop buying them in massive numbers. Which won't happen, because the main demographic for these games is small children and Nintendo isn't going to make some deep pokemon experience for the adult portion of the playerbase.

Because those adults always buy the new games anyways.

momsaTigrex 1

Yeah and that sadly the cause.

petemorley 16

It ‘only’ has 30-odd characters, but some of Tekken 7’s roster have 120+ moves, which is insanely impressive given the quality of the animation.

I think the average Tekken moveset is 96

Spen_Masters 5

You also have to remember out of 49 players, 47 of the players are balanced rather well (sorry Gigas mains, and fuck you Leroy Smith mains)

Also to add Tekken was made on a lower budget compared to Pokemon, so Gamefreak could've added more than what they did for Pokemon Sw+Sh

TheJoo52 65

How about Dota?

Tonkarz 1

It's been in development for a long time.

Rammite 4

Dota doesn't quite hit the same as Sword and Shield, because Valve has had 10+ years to create all the animations. Even in the heyday of updates when we'd get something like 3 new heroes every month... that's still only several dozen new animations per month.

Meanwhile, the perfect Sword and Shield would have required somewhere in the ballpark of the same amount of animations, but they only had 2 years. That's an absolutely insane expectation.

Now, that being said, I'd accept the compromise if Game Freak didn't lie out the ass about all the other stuff, like reusing assets or phoning in the animations.

Game Freak said that the compromise was less animation quantity, more animation quality. Instead, we got less of both.

butterfly1763 3

I think the big problem is that everybody assumes they're talking specifically about battles. the animation quality bump they're referring to is regarding the Pokemon when they're idling on the world map or flying around or in the camp. the Pokemon genuinely look more lifelike than they ever have outside of battle - this is not a small thing to compromise for though because it still involves creating literal thousands of new animations.

the battles thing is probably never going to change because it's just plain unreasonable to have the attack animations not be separated from Pokemon on a purely technical level - as it stands they currently need to make thousands of animations - several different attacking and defending for each Pokemon (Already puts you at approaching 10,000) plus the actual moves (thankfully just a few hundred). if you needed to make a unique animation for each move for each Pokemon or even for half of them you would still be adding literal tens of thousands of animations to the plate.

like it or not it's going to have to be faked a little bit no matter what and I personally am fine with the extra time they have being spent on making the Pokemon move around in a more lifelike manner outside of battle instead of wasting that incredibly massive amount of time just so that fire actually comes out of charizard's mouth instead of spawning a foot away from it.

Rammite 2

That's fair.

Lowelll 12

Nobody is forcing gamefreak to put out a pokemon game every year, they do it because it makes money.

From their perspective, why should they try to actually design good games and move their franchise in an interesting direction, when rehashing and shallow gimmicks have made them one the most profitable companies in the world?

But it's absolutely fair for the fans who are craving for a well designed and produced Pokemon game to be pissed off.


it is definitely the Pokemon company and Nintendo you want to be critical of for the tight release schedule and lack of assistance. gamefreak is just a developer - they are far from perfect but I guarantee you that it really is not their preference to have things as they are right now. I can say this with confidence because ever since generation 5 attempts have been made here and there to solve this problem prematurely that never really stuck (limiting Pokemon availability, making future proof models, adjusting the data tables for smoother entry and organization, and reducing the number of new additions).

to me that's a pretty clear sign that game freak has known about this problem and has been trying to solve it unsuccessfully for a long time so I think you need to look a little higher to see the source of the problem.


Yeah, I don't know how the internal decision process is over there, lots of what I said could apply to the Pokemon Company as well. But it's not like Game Freak has done particulary interesting or masterfully designed games outside of Pokemon.

I'm not sure I'd blame Nintendo for much, seeing as the one thing they actually do really well is design and produce great first party titles. Like could you imagine something as exciting as Breath of the Wild or Mario Galaxy for the Pokemon franchise?

Hudre 2

GameFreak has been more egregious than any other company in terms of yearly releases, and no one seems to care. In fact most of the fans eat it up.

Imagine if Call of Duty released two extremely similar games at the same time, and said the only way to unlock all the guns was to buy both. People would shit all over them.

Game Freak has been doing exactly that for decades on end, way before CoD existed, and people have been buying it up since day one.

It's insane.

Paladia 1

> Imagine if Call of Duty released two extremely similar games at the same time, and said the only way to unlock all the guns was to buy both. People would shit all over them.

Not if the main game mode that everyone played was single player. It should be noted that you can trade pokemons, so you dont need both copies even if you for some reason wanted to collect every single pokemon.


Don't really understand what multiplayer or single player has to do with it. Especially when you then say you have to interact with others to bypass buying the second game?

Just change my example to Assassin's Creed, it doesn't matter what the franchise is, or if it's multiplayer or single player. To get all the pokemon content on your own you need to buy two extremely similar games, when it's quite obvious there's no reason to not make one, slightly larger game other than money.

Paladia 1

> Don't really understand what multiplayer or single player has to do with it.

I don't really care what other people get that I don't have if it is a single player game. It makes no difference to me. If it is multiplayer, they might get an advantage though which influences my gameplay.

Moveflood 8

Adding that Dota/LoL has the advantage of a fixed, zoomed out perspective, which can be a a little easier than a full 3d camera.

And also close to a decade of development on a single platform.

PuzzleheadedPut8 17

dota doesn't have a fixed zoom out perspective, it is adjustable, just not unrealistic amounts

ShemhazaiX 1

He means you can't change the viewing angle I think. It's just pan and zoom.

G3ck0 4

Dota has full VR support where you can walk around on ground level.

Warin_of_Nylan 1

Had. It broke barely a few months after release and Valve, being Valve, have never updated it since launch.

SilentKilla78 8

You can actually go into a "ground-level" third person angle, although of one ever plays like that

some_craic_dealer 17

You can enter showcase mode while in game, which has full 3d movement/rotation.

WildVariety 1

League isn't fixed either. plenty of zoom available.

Raidoton 3

Which is in development for how long now?

YimYimYimi 21

Yeah, pretty much any moba except for the "hundreds of different moves" part. Unless he means animations, which like there are a lot I guess.

Kraivo 3

Not any, it's basically Dota 2 having best quality in the genre.


I dunno. Smite is (or was when I last checked) a step below, but Dota, HotS and League are fairly similar in the animation/effect quality

Kraivo 2

Hots and lol just don't have that much of mechanics to have so many animations.

Eecka 1

Huh? LoL has 148 playable characters and the vast majority of them have multiple different skins with different animations

DeMZI 12

Why except "hundreds of different moves"? At least in Dota 2 there is a very little similar skills.

Tonkarz 1

Dota characters have 5 or 6 abilities each don't they?

ScipioLongstocking 6

I've never played DOTA 2, but as far as I'm aware, most characters only have one moveset. In Pokemon, each individual Pokemon can potentially learn over 100 different moves if you use TMs and HMs. This means each Pokemon had to have unique animations for each move. While DOTA has a similar number of skills, each character's moves are unique to the character, so they only have to create a few, unique move animations per character.

MadnessBunny 4

There's the Ability Draft game mode which let's you pick a character and then pick abilities for said character over a pool of moves (usually like 15? 20? Characters). They all use the same animation as the original character they belong to though.

Lamedonyx 27

Sure, but no one is asking for an unique animation for every single move.

No one would really complain if Thunder Punch, Flame Punch and Drain Punch used the same animation with effects. It is possible to recycle animations while still putting in effort.

It would be a huge improvement over each Pokemon having basically 3 animations for combat (physical, special, status moves).

Chillingo 61

I think it depends what you consider to be heavily polished. One thing is definitely true in my opinion. Gamefreak is phoning it in and not spending as much money/time/love as a multimedia franchise like Pokemon deserves. I don't require heavily polished animations, but the reality of Pokemon games is, that they barely have animations. And everything else is also subpar on a technological level.

Frostfright 13

Pretty much. Their animations just...aren't very good. Even in the context of how many they have to make, they're subpar no matter how you look at it. You could outsource animations entirely to some Chinese or Indian studio and probably get better for cheaper, if we're being 100% honest.

Rayne_Storm 42

Each pokemon only has a handful of animations for ALL of it's moves.

For example Water Gun or Waterfall each use their one respective animation that's the same no matter which pokemon is using those moves. Whichever pokemon happened to be using those moves would just do a little "hop forward" animation regardless of which one it's using.

lordchew 2

Each Pokemon has a few different attack animations, it’s just not realistic to have more than that, especially when some Pokemon do have extra animations.

This doesn’t even begin to mention all the interactions in Pokemon Camp.

Fire Emblem only has a handful of attack animations too, but with a smaller pool of both attacks and characters, each one’s much longer and detailed.

cdiganon 6

Reminds me of... Was it dunkey's video? Where he shows the sheep pokemon doing kick animation when using body slam and hopping on the ground when doing double kick.