• Our software update is now concluded. You will need to reset your password to log in. In order to do this, you will have to click "Log in" in the top right corner and then "Forgot your password?".
  • Forum moderator applications are now open! Click here for details.
  • Welcome to PokéCommunity! Register now and join one of the best fan communities on the 'net to talk Pokémon and more! We are not affiliated with The Pokémon Company or Nintendo.

[Discussion] What would you like to see in a Pokémon fangame?

185
Posts
12
Years
  • Seen Apr 7, 2014
Who says that level 100 HAS to be the limit for leveling up? Originality is what I want to see. While I think that all regions would be too amibitious to put in a single Pokemon fangame, nobody has done it, and it is a good idea. It is very possible to raise the level cap from 100 to 500.
That brings its own problems, though. Unless you want to change everyone's evolution level, almost all your evolve-by-level-up Pokemon are going to be fully evolved after the first region. And what about level-up move learning? You'll have to either space the moves out a heck of a lot more or make the list huge. It's not as simple as just bumping up the level limit.
 

pkmn.master

Hobbyist Game Developer
299
Posts
15
Years
  • Age 28
  • USA
  • Seen Jun 7, 2022
That brings its own problems, though. Unless you want to change everyone's evolution level, almost all your evolve-by-level-up Pokemon are going to be fully evolved after the first region. And what about level-up move learning? You'll have to either space the moves out a heck of a lot more or make the list huge. It's not as simple as just bumping up the level limit.


I thought when I made my post that these would be pretty obvious changes, as did every other member here, but thanks for pointing it out. You didn't actually think that you could make a fangame with all regions without doing a bit of work, did you? Either way, you don't even have to do any of that. You don't have to have your Piplup evolve at level 100, or learn watergun at level 50. It makes more sense that you have your Pokemon evolved by the time you head out to the next region, and I see no problem with this, since all of the trainers on the next region will have their Pokemon fully evolved and match your level. So, actually, it is as simple as bumping up the level, if you don't want to put that much work into it. Not only that, but increasing the amount of exp gain to the next level could easily throw that problem away.
 

WackyTurtle

Developer
124
Posts
13
Years
I still don't really see the whole point in the regions idea. Isn't it really boring to play through the environments you already know all about? Basically just reliving old games of Pokémon? Why not just go and play the actual Pokémon games? There's a plethora of directions you can take your fan game in, and to just revisit old material would be unimaginative, in my opinion.
 

Dragonite Ernston

I rival Lance's.
149
Posts
13
Years
  • Seen Jun 15, 2016

What's so good about this?
You really want to battle with your 100 levels against trainers' level 100s?
If you think you won't have level 100s, you will ;)

Allow levels to go above 100. Problem solved.

That brings its own problems, though. Unless you want to change everyone's evolution level, almost all your evolve-by-level-up Pokemon are going to be fully evolved after the first region. And what about level-up move learning? You'll have to either space the moves out a heck of a lot more or make the list huge. It's not as simple as just bumping up the level limit.

I don't see why not, really. Most Pokémon stop learning moves at about level 75 or 80 anyway (Venusaur stops learning new moves as early as level 53, for example), so it's not like the move list doesn't have that problem already. Secondly, evolutions stop way before level 100 anyway. The highest it's ever gone is 64 with Hydreigon, and 59 with Volcarona if you're thinking first-stage evos. Most stop around the 20s and 30s.

And if you really are making a game where monsters could reasonably go above level 100 in the first place, it'll probably have enough plot and variable battles to be interesting on its own without all the move-learning.
 
Last edited:
185
Posts
12
Years
  • Seen Apr 7, 2014
I don't see why not, really. Most Pokémon stop learning moves at about level 75 or 80 anyway (Venusaur stops learning new moves as early as level 53, for example), so it's not like the move list doesn't have that problem already. Secondly, evolutions stop way before level 100 anyway. The highest it's ever gone is 64 with Hydreigon, and 59 with Volcarona if you're thinking first-stage evos. Most stop around the 20s and 30s.

And if you really are making a game where monsters could reasonably go above level 100 in the first place, it'll probably have enough plot and variable battles to be interesting on its own without all the move-learning.
Most of the time you're not going to get anywhere near level 100 before the credits roll, though- I don't think there's an E4 with Pokemon higher than level 60-something on the first battle, is there? But with a game where once you beat that first E4 you go on to another one, and another one, your Pokemon are going to stop learning moves, and thus stagnate to some degree, long before the game could be said to be over. If you think you've got enough going on that that's not a problem, then fine, but it seems a bit shortsighted to not consider it at all.

Not to mention I'm not sure many of these "go to all the regions in one game!" people are putting much thought into the plot, but that might just be me.
 

Dragonite Ernston

I rival Lance's.
149
Posts
13
Years
  • Seen Jun 15, 2016
Most of the time you're not going to get anywhere near level 100 before the credits roll, though- I don't think there's an E4 with Pokemon higher than level 60-something on the first battle, is there? But with a game where once you beat that first E4 you go on to another one, and another one, your Pokemon are going to stop learning moves, and thus stagnate to some degree, long before the game could be said to be over. If you think you've got enough going on that that's not a problem, then fine, but it seems a bit shortsighted to not consider it at all.

That's certainly true; simply cramming more monsters in without anything else new will get boring fast.

Although as time goes on, even in the official games there's more and more post-game stuff, and the closer and closer monsters will get to reasonably reaching and even surpassing level 100, as well as stopping learning new moves (which gets tiring after a while, to be honest).

And by the same token, just because monsters can go above level 100 doesn't mean they'll go much further above. You might argue that in such a situation simply tweaking the formula should be a better option, but again, the ceiling shouldn't be so easily reached in my opinion.
 

RaulCortez

Maybe active...sometimes?
96
Posts
12
Years
If a Pokémon game raised their level limit to 500 and had all the regions(5), to get their to their max capabilities would be to train them to gain eh...100 levels per region?

Plus the fact that, not only trainers, but wild Pokémon should increase their levels, because honestly, by the time you get to Unova, your Lvl. 360 Pikachu will exterminate that poor little Lvl.5 Patrat with a Growl.

It's not credible at all. At least not for me.

When developing a game it's not only about stats or levels or tweaking anything to make it work. It's about a storyline and making the story credible to the player so that they can have enough of it and not get bored or say "The hell, how is this possible?"

I personally wouldn't play a game where you have to go through this infinity of places to finish it. A game with two regions and many fun, challenging events like puzzles, searching for an specifical Pokémon, and new features and places when you finish the E4 sounds ideal for me.

Matter of tastes, i guess?
 

pkmn.master

Hobbyist Game Developer
299
Posts
15
Years
  • Age 28
  • USA
  • Seen Jun 7, 2022
But with a game where once you beat that first E4 you go on to another one, and another one, your Pokemon are going to stop learning moves, and thus stagnate to some degree, long before the game could be said to be over.

Not to mention I'm not sure many of these "go to all the regions in one game!" people are putting much thought into the plot, but that might just be me.

Not necessarily. If you mean that the whole game would stagnate, reconsider. Although it is an RPG, and leveling up and gaining new abilities is one concept of an RPG, it isn't the only one. The moves and evolutions attained by a Pokemon throughout a playthrough of a Pokemon game isn't actually a selling point of the games. The actual story matters more to most people. If you have a long and engaging story that makes players feel like they are a part of the Pokemon world and can go anywhere they would like, as if they were a real Pokemon trainer, then you have yourself a game, without worrying about what the Pokemon can learn. Ash's Pikachu doesn't learn that many new moves in the newer seasons, since we all assume that he must be at level 100 by this time, and Ash seems to still have fun. But it is just as you mentioned in that last sentence, most newbies here would jump right to saying that their game will have all regions, without any consideration of the plot. And a stale plot on a long game isn't going to be successful. However, if you just make some modifications that would double the amount of EXP needed to proceed to the next level, you wouldn't have to do any spacing of evolutions or moves.

I myself aren't a fan of the idea of all regions in one game. Mainly because most people who are new want to do it, but can't even contemplate how ambitious of a project it is. I have made a few games with RMXP before, and even I almost made my first project an ambitious one. They are always doomed to fail. Make some small games first, maybe two regions max, then go on to make a super project if you still think that you can do it. I am only defending the idea of all regions because I know that it has never been done before, and such a project with a dedicated developer would be popular if it were completed with a strong plot.
 

Dragonite Ernston

I rival Lance's.
149
Posts
13
Years
  • Seen Jun 15, 2016
If a Pokémon game raised their level limit to 500 and had all the regions(5), to get their to their max capabilities would be to train them to gain eh...100 levels per region?

Plus the fact that, not only trainers, but wild Pokémon should increase their levels, because honestly, by the time you get to Unova, your Lvl. 360 Pikachu will exterminate that poor little Lvl.5 Patrat with a Growl.

That's why you gradually increase the levels as you go along. :P

Also, who says that the limit of 500 has to be reasonably reachable? For example, the level 200 limit in Maple Story. Nobody's gotten past about 140 or so, from what I know.

And who says there needs to be a limit at all? The formulas that depend on the level are easily extensible to infinity. The advantage of using simple formulas like Game Freak did is that they scale pretty well.

It's not credible at all. At least not for me.

When developing a game it's not only about stats or levels or tweaking anything to make it work. It's about a storyline and making the story credible to the player so that they can have enough of it and not get bored or say "The hell, how is this possible?"

In the first place, what happened to give me the idea of removing the level cap was that somebody had created a story for a 16-city region that was so long and complicated that the levels would reach about 105 or so by the time you got through even half of it.

I personally wouldn't play a game where you have to go through this infinity of places to finish it. A game with two regions and many fun, challenging events like puzzles, searching for an specifical Pokémon, and new features and places when you finish the E4 sounds ideal for me.

Matter of tastes, i guess?

I've never played Chrono Trigger, but apparently it's about as complicated as you describe. And don't you think with that many challenging events, your levels would start racking up anyway?

However, if you just make some modifications that would double the amount of EXP needed to proceed to the next level, you wouldn't have to do any spacing of evolutions or moves.

One of the reasons I'm opposed to doing this (scaling back level gain speed) is because it would make levels go way too slowly. The speed they go at now is pretty good, and if you make levels go that slowly, every time you reach a new area, the monsters would only go up by level by maybe 1 or even not at all, and it would quickly seem like you're not making any progress.
 

RaulCortez

Maybe active...sometimes?
96
Posts
12
Years
That's why you gradually increase the levels as you go along. :P

Also, who says that the limit of 500 has to be reasonably reachable? For example, the level 200 limit in Maple Story. Nobody's gotten past about 140 or so, from what I know.

And who says there needs to be a limit at all? The formulas that depend on the level are easily extensible to infinity. The advantage of using simple formulas like Game Freak did is that they scale pretty well.

I don't think it wouldn't be possible or reasonable.

Like you said, the levels could be raised Ad Infinitum, but i'm talking from a designer's point of view to make a game you can actually finish, reason why i think the best thing to do is to keep it practical and under certain limits.

Even though level limits really have little to do for the main focus of the game, For me, as a Pokémon gamer, just feels strange to have a game in which i won't be able to feel i've taken my Pokémon to the maximum of their capabilities, simply because there isn't a "maximum". It kills the magic of it a bit for me of being "The Pokémon Master", call me a romantic :P

In the first place, what happened to give me the idea of removing the level cap was that somebody had created a story for a 16-city region that was so long and complicated that the levels would reach about 105 or so by the time you got through even half of it.

A story like that sounds reasonable, and if the plot justifies the level increase then it's perfect. I was talking about having these huge levels on a classic Pokémon plot.


I've never played Chrono Trigger, but apparently it's about as complicated as you describe. And don't you think with that many challenging events, your levels would start racking up anyway?
Never played Chrono Trigger either, but take a look at GSC (Which apparently has become my main referent...I just think it was the perfect balance between Pokémon number, areas to explore, tasks and all that):

- Two Major Legendaries (Mainly because two versions were released
- Legendary trio
- Two Regions, with their Pokémon nicely divided
- Unown Puzzles that took you to this completely different task on the game ( Pretty useless in the end, but whatever, it was a good idea)
- Evil Organization, just a little of it so it doesn't get awfully tiring

And all that between sane standards that almost everyone enjoyed.
 

Satoshi Ookami

Memento Mori
14,254
Posts
15
Years
Yeah, why not? Have Pokémon over 100 level... destroy the only one concept that's in every Pokémon game from the beginning...

Move the evolutions and movesets to higher levels.
Yeah, why not? I'm soooo sure that everyone will be overjoyed to use Scratch/Tackle to beat everything and on level 50 they get the first elemental attack.
Then they will have to wait for evolutions to another region because they wouldn't be able to evolve their Pokémon in the first because of high level? Yeah, so promising...

Sorry guys, but I'm not buying the fact that this would be enjoyable for anyone.
 

pkmn.master

Hobbyist Game Developer
299
Posts
15
Years
  • Age 28
  • USA
  • Seen Jun 7, 2022
One of the reasons I'm opposed to doing this (scaling back level gain speed) is because it would make levels go way too slowly. The speed they go at now is pretty good, and if you make levels go that slowly, every time you reach a new area, the monsters would only go up by level by maybe 1 or even not at all, and it would quickly seem like you're not making any progress.

Yea, that's the idea. But if you doubled the exp required, as I mentioned, you see more level gain than 1. You are thinking about ridiculously increasing the amount of exp required, but that wouldn't be necessary for just five regions...

Either way you do it, you want it to seem like you are making not a lot of progress, but not in a ridiculous manner, because this would make level gaining all the more rewarding. Getting from level 19 to 20 would more better be like getting from level 49 to 50, not really all that hard to do, and you still see the progress while knowing that you won't break 90 until the fourth or final region.

Yeah, why not? Have Pokémon over 100 level... destroy the only one concept that's in every Pokémon game from the beginning...

Move the evolutions and movesets to higher levels.
Yeah, why not? I'm soooo sure that everyone will be overjoyed to use Scratch/Tackle to beat everything and on level 50 they get the first elemental attack.
Then they will have to wait for evolutions to another region because they wouldn't be able to evolve their Pokémon in the first because of high level? Yeah, so promising...

Sorry guys, but I'm not buying the fact that this would be enjoyable for anyone.

Let me just stop you there and make a few comments. "Destroy the only one concept that's in every Pokémon game from the beginning"? Why would you consider the bettering of an idea to be the destruction of an idea? It is called originality. Why would scratch and tackle even have to be learned? Why not start off with watergun at level 5? This is the problem with a lot of new fangames, too many of their developers are afraid to try something new. It is like almost every game here has to do with starting off on your tenth birthday and you are going to get your Pokemon from Professor (insert random name here).
 
Last edited:

Dragonite Ernston

I rival Lance's.
149
Posts
13
Years
  • Seen Jun 15, 2016
I don't think it wouldn't be possible or reasonable.

Like you said, the levels could be raised Ad Infinitum, but i'm talking from a designer's point of view to make a game you can actually finish, reason why i think the best thing to do is to keep it practical and under certain limits.

From a designer's point of view myself, I like games than scale well at any scale. The limits and constants are still there, but sometimes, it's better to have a wide-open game than a closed one, know what I mean?

Even though level limits really have little to do for the main focus of the game, For me, as a Pokémon gamer, just feels strange to have a game in which i won't be able to feel i've taken my Pokémon to the maximum of their capabilities, simply because there isn't a "maximum". It kills the magic of it a bit for me of being "The Pokémon Master", call me a romantic :P

I suppose you could say that. But the level cap of 100 would definitely make things fly into a wall for certain plots, as I explained earlier. Perhaps raise the limit to 200 rather than 500.

A story like that sounds reasonable, and if the plot justifies the level increase then it's perfect. I was talking about having these huge levels on a classic Pokémon plot.

If the classic Pokémon plot is long enough, the levels will get there naturally. I think what you really have a problem is is the fact that the plot would be long enough, which is too long.

A rule of thumb I have for measuring the approximate level that your Pokémon team is likely to get to is: Square the approximate number of trainer battles, and multiply by 1.5. Then, take the cube root of this number. From what I know, Johto had about 250 trainer battles before the Elite Four, so you'd expect your Pokémon to be about level 45 by the time you're done if you kept your team of six the whole way through.

From what I knew of that player's plot, they had maybe 1,200 to 1,500 trainer battles at least, which is anywhere from level 129 to 150.

Never played Chrono Trigger either, but take a look at GSC (Which apparently has become my main referent...I just think it was the perfect balance between Pokémon number, areas to explore, tasks and all that) [...]

I agree that GSC was the best gen. :P
 

RaulCortez

Maybe active...sometimes?
96
Posts
12
Years
Either way you do it, you want it to seem like you are making not a lot of progress, but not in a ridiculous manner, because this would make level gaining all the more rewarding. Getting from level 19 to 20 would more better be like getting from level 49 to 50, not really all that hard to do, and you still see the progress while knowing that you won't break 90 until the fourth or final region.

One of the things that most players (specially the ones that first start playing Pokémon) look forward to, is to see the Pokémon they've trained so hard finally evolve.

If some find it to be tiring to evolve their Pokémon with the current standards, imagine to wait ages for a Pokémon to evolve. It won't be "worth the wait" or "rewarding" for the huge majority of the people that will be playing the game, i think. Teenagers (and people in general, really) these days aren't Confucius or Paulo Coelho's offspring, you know. They'll be bored quickly when even their Caterpie takes ages to evolve.

A game like that would be a tour de force and a real test of patience :\

If the classic Pokémon plot is long enough, the levels will get there naturally. I think what you really have a problem is is the fact that the plot would be long enough, which is too long.

A rule of thumb I have for measuring the approximate level that your Pokémon team is likely to get to is: Square the approximate number of trainer battles, and multiply by 1.5. Then, take the cube root of this number. From what I know, Johto had about 250 trainer battles before the Elite Four, so you'd expect your Pokémon to be about level 45 by the time you're done if you kept your team of six the whole way through.

I agree that GSC was the best gen. :P
That makes sense, if things are layed out like that, it could work. And a limit of 200 sounds way more sane than 500, indeed. And yay! GSC! :P
 
Last edited:

Dragonite Ernston

I rival Lance's.
149
Posts
13
Years
  • Seen Jun 15, 2016
That makes sense, if things are layed out like that, it could work. And a limit of 200 sounds way more sane than 500, indeed. And yay! GSC! :P

Although you do need to keep in mind that the limit of 200 is only because levels would start getting close to that anyway.

Always design a limit for the game, not a game for the limit.
 

pkmn.master

Hobbyist Game Developer
299
Posts
15
Years
  • Age 28
  • USA
  • Seen Jun 7, 2022
One of the things that most players (specially the ones that first start playing Pokémon) look forward to, is to see the Pokémon they've trained so hard finally evolve.

If some find it to be tiring to evolve their Pokémon with the current standards, imagine to wait ages for a Pokémon to evolve. It won't be "worth the wait" or "rewarding" for the huge majority of the people that will be playing the game, i think. Teenagers (and people en general, really) these days aren't Confucius or Paulo Coelho's offspring, you know. They'll be bored quickly when even their Caterpie takes ages to evolve.

A game like that would be a tour de force and a real test of patience :\

Actually, many of the new players do not, in fact, buy a Pokémon game to watch their Pokémon evolve. When you buy a RPG, you buy it for the plot, not to grind in hours of playing to level your character up just to see what move it learns at x level. As for getting bored waiting for their Pokémon to evolve, who is waiting? Why do you want your Pokémon to evolve at the start of the game? Would it be a game changer for players to have to actually play the game and level up their Caterpie (considering caterpie evolves at level 10, doubling the exp required would be like getting caterpie to level 20 in the standard games, so getting bored won't happen there)? I think not. The idea is that players enjoy the game's plot, and then get rewarded by following a well-designed plot through the evolution of their Pokemon. As a player and developer of RPGs myself, I wouldn't consider buying Pokémon Black 2 just to evolve my Tepig. To be a successful RPG developer, you have to put your focus to the actual story.
 

Dragonite Ernston

I rival Lance's.
149
Posts
13
Years
  • Seen Jun 15, 2016
Actually, many of the new players do not, in fact, buy a Pokémon game to watch their Pokémon evolve. When you buy a RPG, you buy it for the plot, not to grind in hours of playing to level your character up just to see what move it learns at x level.

Actually, in the case of Pokémon, there's post-game raising, which might be an issue. Sure, you might be able to wrestle down the level gain to 90 or so, but then it takes painfully long to train another out-of-story Pokémon just to level 36 to make it evolve.

As for getting bored waiting for their Pokémon to evolve, who is waiting? Why do you want your Pokémon to evolve at the start of the game? Would it be a game changer for players to have to actually play the game and level up their Caterpie (considering caterpie evolves at level 10, doubling the exp required would be like getting caterpie to level 20 in the standard games, so getting bored won't happen there)? I think not.

Again, post-game raising.

Also, doubling EXP requirements does not halve the level. Getting a Caterpie to level 10 would be more like getting it to about level 13 or 14.

The idea is that players enjoy the game's plot, and then get rewarded by following a well-designed plot through the evolution of their Pokemon. As a player and developer of RPGs myself, I wouldn't consider buying Pokémon Black 2 just to evolve my Tepig. To be a successful RPG developer, you have to put your focus to the actual story.

And putting your focus to the actual story doesn't mean that the evolutions take ages.
 

Maruno

Lead Dev of Pokémon Essentials
5,285
Posts
16
Years
I think this thread needs its name changing.

I'll voice my thoughts anyway.

The vast majority of games only need one region. RB, RS, DP and BW all have one region, and people like them just fine. GS has two regions, but Kanto is very much tacked-on and is on par with other games' post-E4 content rather than being "the second half of the adventure".

No, seriously, one region. Your masterpiece is probably too long and convoluted, and would be a better game if you had the sensibility to boil it down. It also means it's less work to do, which means a higher chance of it being completed. Only very exceptional games can be long enough to consider the existence of the level cap (which is just one of the many related issues). Swallow your pride - your game is probably not one of these exceptions.

My main concern, which people never seem to address, is what they would actually do with their multiple regions and how they'd seamlessly link them together. If the only reason the player is jetting off to Hoenn is "because Prof. Oak suggested it", then you should throw away anything you've written after that point - it's not part of the same game. Nostalgia cruise games inevitably involve recreating the official games almost word for word (i.e. start off in the starting towns, with/without your previous Pokémon, progress in the same way through the regions, blah blah blah). No. Bad. And don't come to me saying you have some twists planned - deep down you know why you added the extra region, and if that reason is "I wanted it, and I'll find a way to work it in somehow" then that's a bad reason and you should feel bad. You should do what the game needs, and it never needs someone throwing in extra regions for nostalgia's sake.

If you're particularly stubborn and still want your 5(/6/7/8) regions in your game, then you'll need to start thinking about that level cap and the related issues (level-up move-learning, evolutions, power escalation, etc.). There have been several proposals in this thread on how to fix this, and they're all rubbish. Raising the level cap just results in unrealistically-levelled wild Pokémon roaming Unova (and involves way too much balancing issues for your liking); halving the Exp gain per battle just makes it twice as hard to level up at the beginning of the game (which is off-putting, and still has balancing issues); and starting a new region afresh with no old Pokémon is the same thing as starting a brand new different game (in which case, make them different games, duh).

The official games match the Pokémon growth (fairly) well to their pace. By the end of the game your Pokémon have grown into pretty much their final form with their final moveset (levelling them up to the cap is academic when nothing else about them is going to change). Some are easier to get to that state, some are harder. The point is that Pokémon and the game both reach the end at around the same point. Adding multiple regions suddenly doubles the length of the plot, while the Pokémon are still geared around a 1-region growth rate. This is why the aforementioned level cap and related issues exist.

I've been assuming here that there is no such thing as post-game in these fangames, and with good reason. Aside from a few side-quests, the only thing you can do in official games post-game is battle other players and try to complete the local Battle Frontier. These are negated by the fact that PvP isn't available in Essentials, and very few people are going to bother trying to get bragging rights in a fangame's knock-offs of the official games' Frontiers, because to do so is pointless. This just leaves the side-quests, which can either be shifted earlier in the game or left there to do nothing but be the "for completeness" part. Either way, once the main game is finished, there's nothing left to play for. Therefore, no post-game.



Here are some random ideas I've had about using multiple regions. Their usabilities may vary; I'm just mentioning them regardless of how well they would actually work.

  • All regions don't need to be the same size. Those islands in FRLG were smaller than Kanto, for instance (well, they felt smaller).
  • You don't need to be able to visit all parts of a given region. This is of particular interest to those who want to use those regions in their plots rather than just including them for nostalgia cruises. I don't think any plot where you suddenly hop to a new region could cope with having that entire region thrown into it.
  • You could move back and forth between regions at will, rather than be stuck in a strict linear progression. Puzzles and plot could jump around between the regions. Regions separated by large distances may have some fridge logic to answer to (particularly if the plot becomes ostensibly time-urgent), and people may question why you need two regions when you could use one.
  • You don't need to play through the regions in the same way the official games do. GS is an example of this, where you start off in Kanto in Vermillion City rather than Pallet Town, and head off in way different directions.
  • Regions don't need to depict different areas in the same world. How about different layers of existence (world/Shadow Realm/Aether), or parallel realities, or different time periods of the same location?
 

pkmn.master

Hobbyist Game Developer
299
Posts
15
Years
  • Age 28
  • USA
  • Seen Jun 7, 2022
Actually, in the case of Pokémon, there's post-game raising, which might be an issue. Sure, you might be able to wrestle down the level gain to 90 or so, but then it takes painfully long to train another out-of-story Pokémon just to level 36 to make it evolve.



Again, post-game raising.

Also, doubling EXP requirements does not halve the level. Getting a Caterpie to level 10 would be more like getting it to about level 13 or 14.



And putting your focus to the actual story doesn't mean that the evolutions take ages.

*Sigh* You are thinking a little to hard here. Let me put it in an example easy for you to understand.

Say by the end of the game, one that would most likely spand over 150 hours, you still want to play in the post game (unlikely since most RPGs don't include a post game). When you beat the game, the Pokemon availiable in that part of the game should be at equal level to yours, for obvious reasons. You can't seem to understand that the exp requirement being doubled won't take ages.
Take chansey, of the fast experience group.
The formula for those in the fast exp gain group is EXP= (4n^3)/5. So getting Chansey from level 19 to level 20 on a regular game would require 913 EXP, which could be attained in about 4 battles against a wild Pikachu, all at level 20. For our multi-regioned game, I would guess that we would want the exp doubled, or at least 1.5 times more. SO EXP=2((4n^3)/5) would give us 1826 required exp, attainable from about 8 battles against the same Pikachu, or about 6 if you wanted the formula to be multiplied by 1.5 rather.

So how can you not see that battling 8 Pikachu, without even using the Lucky Egg, doesn't take "ages". Another thing, who even sees leveling up Pokemon on a fangame a "post-plot"?
 

RaulCortez

Maybe active...sometimes?
96
Posts
12
Years
At everything Maruno said:

THANKS. That's just what i wanted to get across since Post #1.


Actually, many of the new players do not, in fact, buy a Pokémon game to watch their Pokémon evolve. When you buy a RPG, you buy it for the plot, not to grind in hours of playing to level your character up just to see what move it learns at x level. As for getting bored waiting for their Pokémon to evolve, who is waiting? Why do you want your Pokémon to evolve at the start of the game? Would it be a game changer for players to have to actually play the game and level up their Caterpie (considering caterpie evolves at level 10, doubling the exp required would be like getting caterpie to level 20 in the standard games, so getting bored won't happen there)? I think not. The idea is that players enjoy the game's plot, and then get rewarded by following a well-designed plot through the evolution of their Pokemon. As a player and developer of RPGs myself, I wouldn't consider buying Pokémon Black 2 just to evolve my Tepig. To be a successful RPG developer, you have to put your focus to the actual story.

Thing is, in the case of Pokémon, we're not talking just about moves. We're talking about visuals, the Pokémon themselves.

Let's say i like Tyranitar. I know to get Tyranitar you need to evolve your Larvitar(lvl.30), and then your Pupitar(lvl.55). But you don't like those two, I like Tyranitar. It's badass and I like it. Simple as that. I don't think the average person would wait all you're supposed to wait for them to get all the experience to evolve TWO times before you get the Pokémon you want. Imagine an Arion or even worse, a Deino case.

I agree that the plot is pivotal for a story. And for someone who's NEVER, EVER played a Pokémon game before it would be Ok, since they had no idea how quickly Pokémon gain levels or experience on official games. But to anyone who's played Pokémon before would be thinking why on earth is it taking them so much to make their Pokémon to gain levels for any reason. And why compare them with official games? It's the canon. You're making a fan game using characters out from a franchise, not a completely new game with new monsters. It's obvious people will compare because they're expecting new experiences while keeping the main foundations of that franchise.

Now, this is my personal opinion and view on this based on what i like and enjoy about Pokémon games. Everyone is free to add whatever they like to their games. :)
 
Last edited:
Back
Top