Quoted By:
>37123593
[1/3] I just unleashed my autism.
If the games are to be open world, they should be Action RPGs, not turn-based RPG, or at least wild battles are not to be that way. However it's difficult to make it so it'll be rated E. If they can afford it to be rated T, you can play with many more possibilites.
>How do you want it to play?
You going side to side with your Pokemon companion. It will automatically attack, defend, stall for time or distract wild Pokemon it finds, depending on the strategy of your choice, more or less like in pretty much every ARPG out there. You as a trainer can also take damage and even participate in wild battles or lure Pokémon so you and your partner can weaken and catch wild Pokémon. Pretty much a Monster Hunter approach for Pokémon.
As for trainer battles, use the traditional, turn-based system as they are more formal, lore-wise.
>How would you implement progression
With an "authority" variable which Pokémon will take orders from you, so:
- You can sequence-break to Elite Four easily without beating any gyms using "low-authority" Pokémon such as regional rodent, bird or three-stage bug; however that would take much skill to accomplish.
- You can't just borrow a legendary from a friend and sweep the game with it or catch a high-level Pokémon by luck and just be done with it
- Make a way to quantify solo and shitmon runs
- Create a "maybe less is more" approach, as fuller teams require more authority to be run
- Give players a tangible progress marker in such an open game.
This variable increases each time you complete a main quest such as beating a gym, complete an important goal or beat the Elite Four.
