[Discussion] The Ominous Failure of Pokemon FanGames

[Sonicspeed500]

De

 

[thepsynergist]

You don't have to be such a downer. People make fangames because they have fun doing them. If someone doesn't like it, then oh well, there are always bound to be a few that like it, and if it were me, i'd be happy with just a handful of people liking my game.

 

[Sonicspeed500]

lol sorry i didnt mean to come out as a complete negative output. I just meant to show what I feel are the areas that mean to most to me in a good Pokemon fangame. I have nothing wrong with people who want to do things their way. Like i said, Originality means a lot to me.

I just thought I would share some constructive criticism with a few laughs. But I do agree with what you said. It's why I am making a fangame too.

 

[DarkDoom3000]

I have to disagree about storylines, I would have loved it if nintendo would put more effort in their storylines. I especially want a protaganist who actually talks.

Also, fangames (especially with the starterkits) are exactly like the nintendo games. Sadly story and graphics are the only stuff which sets them apart.


I would be curious what you would think about my fangame. It's very different. Im curious whether it fit's into the failure of fangames.
Super Pokemon Eevee Edition
(feel free to ignore if you don't want)

We love originality, that's one of the coolest things about Pokemon!

that line made me chuckle. Every pokemon game is essentially the same thing :|

 

[D. Lawride]

Dear FanGame Makers:

Whoa?! I gotta play this! Those screens look awesome!.... but now that I'm playing it... this... isn't right.. I usually just to want to turn it off after about an hour (if I can even make it that far). The biggest thing is the storylines are often dried up and forced down your throat (sorry about the graphicness). Did you originally play Pokemon Blue and Red for the storyline? I didn't think so. You played because you enjoyed the mystery of the game. Using the world for your adventure, thats what made it amazing.

Okay, so here's my input on this (and I'm speaking because I'm doing a fangame that's oriented by the storyline, not the struggle for the E4):

Pokémon RBY (and FRLG, if you want to...) were, are, and will always be, the most standard of standard Pokémon games. They had everything there reduced to the simplest form: the exploration, the something-of-a-storyline-but-not-really, and the League challenge. Let's put it in a crude way: all official (save for very few exceptions) Pokémon games are the same. What changes? The storyline. In RBY, you didn't have a storyline to follow, at least not one you could actually understand to point towards a place and say you had to go there. You just had the challenge of becoming a champion. This has essentially remained true in GSC, but not as much in the the following generations (I clearly remember that RSE and DPPt actually forced you to backtrack or go to a certain place solely because of the storyline).

Nobody cares if the storyline involves teaming up with Nurse Joy-to-defeat-Team-Rocket-that-is-really-owned-by-ProfOak. It just sounds too much like some twisted anime spinoff. The original Pokemon Games let YOU be the storyline driver. You are thrown into a world where you have no idea what things lurk beyond the bushes outside your home, and you are told to go EXPLORE starting with a cute little runt-like creature. Thats the beauty of it.
Now, there is nothing wrong with adding a storyline to a fangame. I encourage it. But make it part of the game, not the sole reason of the game. It's the same thing as those fangames with 10 minutes of annoying cutscenes. The player has to click buttons while they read through all the hard work you typed into the speech bubbles, and the player is confused about they are supposed to do, or what the hoo-hah is going on!? When making a game, make it flow, add new dimensions and break barriers, they are all good things, but make it adventurous, not a homework assignment.

That's essentially what a storyline as to be, even though you put in a slightly simple way. There isn't a challenge to a storyline if there isn't a part where you have to think (I know, Victory Road in RBY made you think...) and a part where you have to go exploring or whatever you want to do. But part of the adventure is mystery, and the definition of mysterious is not knowing what something is - in this case, what you have to do.

Won't comment on the graphics part because if the decision was only mine, I'd actually do a GSC styled game like DarkDoom did. Unfortunately, the audience usually wants the most up-to-date, and we give the most up-to-date for the sake of at least being known somewhere. And don't tell that's not important.

The best tip there is for a fangame, is to make it true to the original games, that's why youre making a game of it, right? Make it original. Make it special.

So considering all facts, what do you consider an original game?
I could point out two things:

-» Storyline;
-» Setting;
-» >What you think is original<

I especially want a protaganist who actually talks.

Just a personal opinion here, but I'm one that doesn't agree with the idea that the main character should speak. (sue me, Nintendo's spoiled me already with Zelda and Pokémon [but not Mystery Dungeon]).

that line made me chuckle. Every pokemon game is essentially the same thing :|

In the bottom line, the very bottom line, I can't disagree xD

 

[The 100 Mega Shock]

Maybe one day someone will make a game which aims to take advantage of a computer instead of blindly following a design philosophy of a prettied-up GBA game (and sometimes a DS with no regard for how that interface translates to the PC), as well as improve the base game mechanics further than what is shoved out by a company reluctant to change.


But that would require effort and a time spent thinking, as well as the skill to develop new solutions.

 

[Sonicspeed500]

I clearly remember that RSE and DPPt actually forced you to backtrack or go to a certain place solely because of the storyline

I find Pokemon B/R/Y and S/G/C to be the best of them all, because of little things like this. I have no problem with intense storylines, but make sure you have a Rewarding Factor. I don't want to play a massive storyline game that dosen't give me any joy in return for playing it. That's my point.

And as for graphics, I LOVE the original B/R/Y and S/G/C graphics. What I meant earlier was the layout that people recreate with the Pokemon Graphics. I think it's amazing that you DarkDoom3000 have actually made a game with the original gameboy sprites, as that takes skill. And I will most certainly try it out and let you know what I think :)

My whole premise of posting this wasn't to attack every person who makes a game, but to push people to add that extra 10% to prevent the game from looking like this:

While the building layout is nice, and tree spacing is unique, theres not much thought put into it, no flowers, paths, the fences come out of nowhere.

 

[MilesG170]

I'll be honest. I don't make fan games for anyone but myself. I posted the one I am currently working on at the prodding of my partner, but honestly, I just mess with them for the fun of it. I have some friends that play the stuff I do, but it is just a hobby for me. If some people don't like it because it's not "Pokemon" enough, then why even play a fan game. If you are looking for something "Pokemon", then play any of the games that have already been released. I love the look of different games, such as Super Eevee Edition and The Lost Region. Those two are taking Pokemon we know and love and changing the battle system, and both seem to have a great story driving them. It may just be me, but I that the best part of fan games is just doing your own thing.

However, I will qualify what you first stated by saying that if you are making a fan game for the purpose of actually doing something with it, like becoming a video game designer, then the things you said are highly relevant. It is important to know what your potential fan base likes and doesn't like. Thanks for sharing your opinion.

 

[Maruno]

I'm glad plot was mentioned, and I'm even happier that some people seem to like less plot. For me, Pokémon is about exploration and personal growth (i.e. how you raise your Pokémon, and how your strategies/general play style develop over time). It is not about being told where to go and who to talk to.

The rest of my post is a suggestion of a different kind of game.

All Pokémon games have been very linear. The only exceptions I can think of are that you can travel to Cinnabar Island in two different ways (one easy but involves going back to Pallet Town, and the other harder but starts immediately from Fuchsia City), and the same for getting to Fuchsia City in the first place (Cycle Road vs Routes 12-15). They're not much of examples, I know, since nothing is different depending on the chosen path. I was also really disappointed when I found out you could only go clockwise around Unova.

The thing is, I think Pokémon could successfully become an exploration-type game, with several different paths to take. No overarching plot needs to exist (especially not a "save the legendary, save the world" one), although slight hints about where else the player could be exploring would be fine. Instead, the game would be full of mini-quests (not really "side-quests", because there's nothing for them to be at the side of) which can take all shapes and sizes.

With mini-quests, you can expand on many small aspects of the Pokéworld (e.g. a mini-quest involving tracking down a rogue Porygon for Silph Co, in which it is explained why Porygon was invented in the first place), and all these little tales build up into a rich and atmospheric world much more than any apocalyptic interactive story could (which only cares about the big picture). There's also less pressure to make each mini-quest perfect; if one or two aren't great, there are plenty of others of equal importance to cover for it; on the other hand, if your apocalyptic story isn't up to snuff, that's your entire game ruined. It also lets your imagination roam free, by letting you put in all those little ideas you had that may not have fit into a more traditional style game. You're characterising the world here, not the antagonist (the protagonist is never characterised in a Pokémon game anyway, because it's the player), and I would say the world is bigger than the antagonist.

That's not to say there can be no overarching themes. All NPCs can generally like living in harmony with nature, or being friends with their Pokémon and all that other shiny-eyed stuff the official games are made of. You can have recurring characters (so long as you make sure they introduce themselves before they become all chummy). You can even have Team Rocket in there, typically as the cause of some of the mini-quests. You can also have overlapping mini-quests (longer fetch quests?), so long as one mini-quest doesn't overshadow the rest and become the main plot. Really, you can easily include every feature that exists in the official games (that isn't exposition dialogue for their plots).

You should probably include some form of ultimate goal, though. In every Pokémon game, this is the Elite Four. That's why the credits roll when you beat them, and why everything after is called the "endgame". Challenging the Elite Four is just one of those things you do nowadays in Pokémon, and it's a simple yet effective ultimate goal to set for the player, as it's a definitive final battle that you know has to be worked at to reach. Of course, you can still have endgame things anyway, but setting this kind of goal helps the player through the game by giving it a "point" (even MMORPGs have stories and level progression and all that, even if you can do what you like in them).

Another thing in favour of exploration-type Pokémon games is that you can emphasise Pokémon habitats. You can't introduce Pokémon in a certain order if the player can go where they like, so instead you could have a desert area for Ground types, a volcano for Fire types, etc. (poor examples, but you get the idea). The player can then use this habitat information to help them decide where to go ("I like Ice types, so I'll go to the glacier" first) - it's always better to let players know what their decisions will affect ("I chose to go to the glacier because I know it will mean I encounter Ice types") rather than making it essentially a blind choice ("I don't know what's down either of these paths, so I'll flip a coin"). This is because the player has control over the decision, not a "coin toss" random choice that's out of their hands, and the player likes to control their own destiny.

Negative aspects of an exploration-type game include many of the down sides sandbox-style games have. This includes balancing (e.g. making sure trainers/wild Pokémon are always at an appropriate level) and making sure the player is able to go where they want (e.g. provide the Cut HM on each different path). These things involve a bit more planning than usual, to make sure the player had a good experience going through every area whether they start there or are "mopping up" later on. There are plenty of ways around this, including making the first part of the game linear to introduce the player to the kind of game it is (e.g. introduce Gyms and the Elite Four, and imply the latter is the ultimate goal) before letting them free. A less optimal solution would be to just provide multiple ways to get from A to B in an otherwise linear game (e.g. the player can choose to go either over the hill or through the cave, but will end up in the same place anyway).

So what would a game like this mean? More exploration and less (if any) main story, certainly. It also means the author wouldn't need to worry as much about the story or making sure the player goes where they need to be next. Instead, that planning can go into designing more realistic habitats and balancing and the mini-quests, so it's not really any extra work (it's just a different kind of work). There's no real difference in the amount of mapping or eventing. And you have to admit, it's significantly different to what all the other fangames are doing.

 

[FL]

that line made me chuckle. Every pokemon game is essentially the same thing :|

No in evey time. Most notably GSC.

I personally thinks that the style with 8 type-based gyms, evil team, E4 and the champion that every player see before is TOO overused (by nintendo and fanmakers). Please make at least other number of GYMs/E4 or put they color-based/weather based or something!

Negative aspects of an exploration-type game include many of the down sides sandbox-style games have. This includes balancing (e.g. making sure trainers/wild Pokémon are always at an appropriate level) and making sure the player is able to go where they want (e.g. provide the Cut HM on each different path). These things involve a bit more planning than usual, to make sure the player had a good experience going through every area whether they start there or are "mopping up" later on. There are plenty of ways around this, including making the first part of the game linear to introduce the player to the kind of game it is (e.g. introduce Gyms and the Elite Four, and imply the latter is the ultimate goal) before letting them free. A less optimal solution would be to just provide multiple ways to get from A to B in an otherwise linear game (e.g. the player can choose to go either over the hill or through the cave, but will end up in the same place anyway).

You can use a code to make the normal wild pokémon (and maybe trainers) be around your most level higher pokémon. This can really helpful in balance question.
This idea is good! I hope that someone can make a game like this Megaman concept.

Maybe one day someone will make a game which aims to take advantage of a computer instead of blindly following a design philosophy of a prettied-up GBA game (and sometimes a DS with no regard for how that interface translates to the PC), as well as improve the base game mechanics further than what is shoved out by a company reluctant to change.


But that would require effort and a time spent thinking, as well as the skill to develop new solutions.

Quote for the win.

 

[DarkDoom3000]

Maybe one day someone will make a game which aims to take advantage of a computer instead of blindly following a design philosophy of a prettied-up GBA game (and sometimes a DS with no regard for how that interface translates to the PC), as well as improve the base game mechanics further than what is shoved out by a company reluctant to change.

I agree, With all the customisiation options of Rpgmaker XP, it's kinda worrying to see them all still do the same thing.

Why not improve what nintendo does? Add more attacks- remove the supid 4move limit, Speed up the battles. The official games were dreadfully slow.

I donno, It's just that the game development section just looks too much like the rom hacking section now.

And as for graphics, I LOVE the original B/R/Y and S/G/C graphics. What I meant earlier was the layout that people recreate with the Pokemon Graphics. I think it's amazing that you DarkDoom3000 have actually made a game with the original gameboy sprites, as that takes skill. And I will most certainly try it out and let you know what I think :)

First time i've ever seen someone write the games with their second one first. heh. (as in silver/gold/crystal instead of gold/silver/crystal)

The genII graphics were a bit of a risk, I've seen some of the amazing screenshots from garnet and xenotime. Wasn't sure how it would be recived, but it was better than expected. It was ironically, new.
Using 2nd gen graphics have actually made it a lot easier. you can get away with more. But you have to have the mapping skills to make it work.

 

[dannyboy601]

With mini-quests, you can expand on many small aspects of the Pokéworld

THANK YOU!
I have been searching for a game containing miniquests, but I could never find one. To be honest that's what motivated me to make my own game. There are a lot of miniquests in it, along with the occasional subtle miniquest that points you in the right direction. The great thing about it is that you can choose to follow them or not.

 

[udivision]

I agree with you about the story lines in pokemon games. Not worth paying much attention to, so if you force it as a feature of your game it may backfire.

 

[Worldslayer608]

Rarely do I chime in on Discussion here on PC, because I feel they generally lack valid points.

I felt the need to chime in here because Lost Legends (while seemingly dead) has been undergoing revamps since it's origination as Pokemon Dissension back in the ROM hacks section.

While you all are right, the overall story is something that needs to have less focus but still direct the player towards an ultimate goal in order to actually complete the game it is important to remember that that goal in and of itself needs to have a little spice to it. Something other then the same old same old is nice to have. The key is finding that unique flavor and being able to mesh it into a game to the point where it does not feel like that is all there is to the game.

I am a HUGE Zelda fan, and I like to bring ideas from Zelda into Lost Legends be it a utility tool the player can use to do certain things (like the power gauntlets) or something such as a little side quest to help out a town member who lost their Psyduck.

The challenge I am noticing, is keeping the main plot of what is going on intact while offering the player enough to do without feeling bored. There are only so many side quests one can perform without feeling like it is getting repetitive.

That being said, it has less to do with developers bringing something new to the table and more to do with the commitment it takes to actually bring something new to the table. Lost Legends has been in the works for years and in the long run of things, I have revamped it so many times there is not a whole lot to show people because it is one of those things that is routinely in development and in order to get it out, it will really need to just be played through in a demo, which takes time. I like to have a polished version of everything I plan on having in a demo, and that takes time and dedication, something the general fan game community lacks in general (don't mean to dog on everyone). Originality and creativity take time patience and dedication, some people don't have that.

 

[Yuoaman]

I really don't see why plot has to take the backseat in a Pokemon game - while I enjoy the official games for what they are it is usually the plot and characters that draw me into a game. The fact is: the Pokemon universe is a great setting to introduce new characters and set up interesting plots and I don't see why we as fan game developers shouldn't take advantage of this opportunity to create something completely unlike the official games.

As well, since the original post mentioned maps, it isn't that difficult to create a natural-looking map - if you can look at it and not imagine things looking that way in reality then you've made some sort of mistake along the way. Natural paths are made around grass and other vegetation in a non-linear fashion - unlike buildings, which are built in more and more regular patterns depending on the size of the settlement.

You don't need to be horribly artistic to create a great looking map, just do what looks right for the area.

 

[flamemaster]

i completly disagree with you on the storyline point.
when making a game, originality is key, and it mostly comes out in the storyline.
the whole reason i play fangames, is cause i want to see different storylines that bring something new to the table, i want to see games that have the pokemon style, but a more rpg-ish feel, if i just wanted the regular old pokemon game, i would probably just sign out and play nintendo's games, that in my opinion, have had a declining rate of originality. now i do agree that people should touch up there maps, but thats part of a learning process, not everyone is perfect at making maps, heck, most people (like me) hire a mapper to make the maps for them, cause they are no good at it.

just one more thing.

The best tip there is for a fangame, is to make it true to the original games, that's why youre making a game of it, right? Make it original. Make it special.

i dont know about everyone else, but i started making a fangame, cause i loved emerald version, but also cause i thought, nintendos, were getting suckier, and i wanted to give the public a non-sucky pokemon game, to compete with nintendo's.
flamemaster~

 

[Blaziquaza]

Honestly, storyline is important for any game, even a repetitive one.
Anybody that says that storyline should be less focused on know nothing about making any game at all.
And that's generally why fangames are worse off than official games, they pay less attention to important things, instead fosusing on graphics and the like.
And hiring people to make maps and storylines mean you'll never learn.

 

[aquakip]

People are saying that storyline should be a big focus in the fangame as well. However, that's not always the case.

Take Helio Version as an example. We were almost strictly storyline, and tried to break the barriers with ours. But it didn't work and it ended up getting so out of hand that we got confused with it ourselves and did not like it at all. The storyline should be Pokemon-enough to where it is nice to work through and easy enough to where the gamer doesnt beat their head against the desk trying to understand it.

So we're working on a new one that is exactly this. Better and much more simple.

 

[Pharetra]

Dear FanGame Makers:

Please use caution when pursuing the wonderful world of fangame making. I say this because out of the few that actually DO come to fruition with a final release, So many of these fangames are very harsh and rocky. It makes it hard for others to experience the same joy you had while making it.

EXAMPLE:
EPIC STORYLINE
RICH MAPS
NEW POKEMON
NEW MUSIC

Whoa?! I gotta play this! Those screens look awesome!.... but now that I'm playing it... this... isn't right.. I usually just to want to turn it off after about an hour (if I can even make it that far). The biggest thing is the storylines are often dried up and forced down your throat (sorry about the graphicness). Did you originally play Pokemon Blue and Red for the storyline? I didn't think so. You played because you enjoyed the mystery of the game. Using the world for your adventure, thats what made it amazing. Nobody cares if the storyline involves teaming up with Nurse Joy-to-defeat-Team-Rocket-that-is-really-owned-by-ProfOak. It just sounds too much like some twisted anime spinoff. The original Pokemon Games let YOU be the storyline driver. You are thrown into a world where you have no idea what things lurk beyond the bushes outside your home, and you are told to go EXPLORE starting with a cute little runt-like creature. Thats the beauty of it.
Now, there is nothing wrong with adding a storyline to a fangame. I encourage it. But make it part of the game, not the sole reason of the game. It's the same thing as those fangames with 10 minutes of annoying cutscenes. The player has to click buttons while they read through all the hard work you typed into the speech bubbles, and the player is confused about they are supposed to do, or what the hoo-hah is going on!? When making a game, make it flow, add new dimensions and break barriers, they are all good things, but make it adventurous, not a homework assignment.


Another thing, RICH MAPS does NOT mean square layouts of cities that look like re-hashed versions of Viridian City and Glitch City combined. Nor does it mean FR/LG grass and trees with 3D Diamond/Pearl sprites... If you want a rich and successful world base for your game, take your time with it! make it look nice! We love originality, that's one of the coolest things about Pokemon! I would rather play a short one region Pokemon game with OUTSTANDING cities and clever sprite-layouts, than a 50 city and 5 region world that looks like a Kid Pix stamp-fest.

The best tip there is for a fangame, is to make it true to the original games, that's why youre making a game of it, right? Make it original. Make it special.


Last off, just let me say that I feel this is the most appropriate forum to post this in, as it has to do with Game Development, and it's actually a formal post as well. Consider this as a heavily opinionated guide from a 19 year old on tuning up your Pokemon game. If you disagree, I accept opinions because it makes us all think.

-Thanks for reading my rant, Sonicspeed500

I agree on your thoughts of big storylines. I think that storylines need to be simple, not because big storylines filled with plot-twists etcetera are confusing for the player, but for the fact this is a Pokémon game. Really, many people complain for the Pokémon games not having a real storyline, so why doesn't Nintendo develop a Pokémon game with a big storyline?
Right, because they know a Pokémon game isn't about the storyline, but about exploring a whole world, catching Pokémon, training them, becoming the champion etcetera.

Don't get me wrong though, I love big storylines. I just wanted to say a good Pokémon game doesn't need an awesome storyline.

 

[MonsterMMORPG]

you cant expect to have awesome game. Because awesome games requires to much dedication and time. So after you spend so much time and work and make awesome game what happens ? Nintendo shut you down like they did to my PokemonCraft :(