Dont even mention commission, just that word has gotten people banned off there before, at most say "good" or something if you absolutely must type something

but the budget stagnated and didnt match what they needed, meaning cuts had to be made to keep the game on time and in budget, if management hired more people or extended the dev cycle Id think all the switch games would probably be solid 9/10s (besides let's go and bdsp for creative decisions)

Id personally say the handheld games took full advantage of their platforms, but their budgets were definitely what management had in mind when budgeting their switch games, since the creative scope IMO matched a home console after the switch, hence the swap to more open world design

Please! We can't let the last game for this be a failed Kinect game

honestly, I think the switch was the Lets Go games, while their actual dev quality was good, it was very much just a nonfaithful (catching mechanics) 151 only G1 remake that clearly was just there for the gen 1 nostalgia and capitalising on Pokemon Go rather than actually try to improve on G1 (FRLG)

My bet is a mix of gamefreak knowing theyll profit anyways, hence ZA only meeting launch switch 1 quality marks (though Id bet they also know another SV would be a disaster for the games), but also PKMN Co as a whole knowing really the money is in merch, the games just market the merch