[Discussion] What would you like to see in an original monster-battling game?

[Monstera Games]

While Pokémon is undoubtedly the most well-known monster-battling RPG, it's certainly not the only example. There are plenty of other monster-battling games, including series such as Digimon, Monster Rancher, Dragon Warrior Monsters, Keitai Denjuu Telefang, Network Adventure Bugsite, GachaSta! Dino Device, Yo-kai Watch, Graffiti Kingdom, and so on. The games in this genre tend to include an enormous variety of creature designs, and feature gameplay with an emphasis on discovery.

These sorts of elements lend themselves very well to fan works – it's fun to come up with new monsters of your own, design entire worlds for them, and stuff like that. But, what can you do with your creations after you've made them? ROM hacks and fan games are one of the easier ways to share your original designs with others, however they end up falling under the realm of "fan art". While some companies like Nintendo consider fan art sales to be a grey area (basically considering them to be a type of free advertisement), any attempt to earn money off of fan games would step right over that line - after all, they don't want your product being confused for their product.

However... there is no reason you need to use the Pokémon name in the first place! We've seen countless examples of entire fanmade rosters of hundreds of original monster designs, all assigned under the label of "fakemon." Perhaps this is done because it's easier to add new designs to a ROM hack, or to utilize an existing Pokémon-based engine such as Essentials, rather than to make an entirely new, original game for these entirely new, original monsters. That's the problem though - these shouldn't need to be seen as fake Pokémon, but rather your own creations!

As a player, what kinds of gameplay elements would you like to see in an original monster-battling game? What would you want to see done differently from Pokémon? As a creator, what would you like to see in a monster-battling game engine? What kind of monster designs do you like? What sorts of things are important to you in terms of fun or usability?

 

[Splash]

The two key points I'd like to point out are the ones I'd like to see the most:

First is the uniqueness of the monsters in terms of design and character.
A favorite of mine which is dwm2 has monsters that speaks. It made the characters much more unique than the generic monsters that you can order around. I'm not saying make them talk but creating a distinction between your game's monsters and the monsters of the popular games of today will certainly be a plus point.

Second is the battling system.. Turn based battling has been done to death but if you can take it a step further and add new elements in battling such as cooldowns or situational attacks will almost always be a plus factor. Those are my two cents on this. Thanks for reading.

 

[Monstera Games]

Thanks, these are really good suggestions to start with and they're certainly things we've been discussing amongst ourselves!

With regards to unique monsters, it's definitely an interesting design problem, both visually and gameplay-wise. Out of existing monster-battle games, DWM, Telefang, Digimon, and Bugsite all have extremely unique art styles and stand out a lot that way.

Character-wise, it is sort of strange that Pokémon usually don't talk, considering the monsters in most other series do! I agree that DWM did it in a neat way too, I really liked that their individual personalities would affect their behaviors and the things they said as well. Telefang also handles talking monsters in a fun way, with them calling the player to make random remarks and ask questions and such.

But yes, I agree, letting the monsters talk can add a great deal of characterization and personalization if it's done in a clever way and doesn't get repetitive with a small amount of phrases. Otherwise they come across more like regular animals - which can be fine if that's what you're going for, but it can also genericize them as you've said.

With regards to the battling system, turn-based battling makes the most sense when you have to worry about lag / latency in two-player battles, which is probably why it's stuck around for so long - monster-battling games are usually designed around connectivity, so this is a pretty important concern in that regard.

Even then, you're correct, it doesn't always have to be done in the same way, and even different monster-battle games handle it quite differently. Making battles fun and interesting is the most important concern, after all! As far as the game engine goes, there should definitely be different options for battle features so the creator can decide what kind of gameplay best suits their project, and we will do our best to implement those options. — RB

 

[mej71]

My current favorite monster battle system is probably Ni No Kuni, though I'm not entirely sure if you're talking about 3d battle systems. But I think it's a pretty good standard to go off of. Art aside, it feels very fluid and attention demanding, while being a combination of attack pattern analyzing, knowing strengths and weaknesses (similar to pokemon), resource management (limited mana, some attacks you have to charge up to use, some can only be used X times per battle). Not to mention, allowing the player to actually do battling is a neat concept, making it more like a team effort.

 

[Monstera Games]

I hadn't played Ni no Kuni myself but I did have a passing familiarity with it. So, I just spent the morning looking at gameplay videos and wiki info and stuff, and I've gotta say that is a really excellent-looking way to do 3D monster battles. We're going to focus our engine on 2D games, but interesting battle styles and strategic resource management are something to keep in mind regardless. — RB

 

[Minun172]

Create a cute animal like character with a simple design and inspire more characters like it but cuter (Like Emolga and Pachirisu). That is all.

What? I love those things.

 

[JouteiKaji]

While Pokémon is my favorite Monster Battling Game, I also love the Branched Evolutions(where one monster can become one of many depending on different conditions) of Digimon and Telefang, and the Ranching Aspect(where the main point of the game is just Raising the Monster) of Monster Rancher. The main problem is that the main points of those games that I love; Battle Mechanics for Pokémon, Branched Evolutions for Digimon, and Ranching for Monster Rancher; don't really work together too well.

 

[Soopa Derp Cat]

I think an interesting concept would involve starting with a few fairly generic blob monsters that slowly develop more distinctions and characteristics based on the way you use them.


For example, let's say you start with something called an Aqua Blob. If you teach it a lot of piercing and ramming moves, it might slowly develop a swordfish-like nose; give it items or EV-like things that boost its accuracy, and it'll develop progressively larger eyes. Train it in swiftness and evasion and it could start developing a long, eel-like body; go for defensive training, and it'll become compact and develop a crab-like shell. Something between the two might look more like a lobster or shrimp, while a creature with both speed and physical power could end up dolphin-like and a fragile monster with powerful elemental abilities might look sort of like a jellyfish. Use a different elemental blob, and it'll be something entirely different.


To illustrate my idea, here's a sort of "chart."


Aqua Blob > High speed > Strong elemental resistance > Low physical defense > biting and constricting attacks: A rainbow-scaled eel with a muscular jaw and body.


Avian Blob > High Attack > Decent speed > Pecking and scratching attacks: Something that looks a bit like an ostrich.


Beastly Blob > High defense > High special defense > Ramming and stabbing attacks: A rhino-armadillo thing.




That would admittedly be a pretty advanced concept to start with, and it wouldn't actually allow for much creative character design, but it would still be something cool.