Pokemon Blue - Resource Numbers & Difficulty Curve

I analyzed all the resource numbers in the game Pokemon Blue, and identified the central resource to be the conscious Pokemon in the player's party. This is because all other resources affect this in some way - and this resource is pivotal to the game, since if the player's Pokemon in their party are all knocked out, the player is teleported back to the last visited Pokemon Center, loses some of their money, and this is the closest comparison to a "Game Over" state.

Below, I have drawn up a graph of all the resources in the game and their relation to each other. There are a few resources with dual relations (each reflects the other, rather than being one-sided). For instance, XP and level affect each other, since in order to level up, a Pokemon needs a certain amount of XP - but that amount of XP needed depends on the level. Gold and conscious Pokemon in the party also affect each other, since gold can buy revives to increase the amount of conscious Pokemon, but the amount of conscious Pokemon means more fights can be won, which gets the player more gold. The same holds true for gold and encounters - the more encounters there are, the more opportunity for gold or loss of gold, but more gold can also allow the player to buy items that will decrease the encounter rate.

As you can see, this graph is confusing. The main point to get out of this is that conscious Pokemon in the player's party are the most important resource in the game, and it is affected by all others. Most directly, it is affected by the Pokemon the player has (generally, not necessarily in the party), gold, and HP.

What I Would Change

I thought of many ways that resources in Pokemon Blue could be changed based on my evaluation of these numbers, but I prefer the original game to each of these. The major change I could think of has already been done in games since – splitting the “special” stat into special attack and special defense, since the broadness of this stat is somewhat imbalanced, considering all special moves will be affected by both the attacking and defending Pokemon’s special stat, while physical attacks will be affected by the attacker’s special and the defender’s defense. However, as I said, the creators of the games already thought of this, and took care of it.

One other change that I thought of which hasn’t been implemented in the Pokemon games regards the use of PP. Looking at the graph of relationships I’d drawn out, I realized that attack, defense, speed, special, and HP all increase as a Pokemon gains levels, but PP never does. It wouldn’t make sense for it to increase drastically, since PP for powerful moves is very low in order to keep the game more balanced, but allowing PP for certain moves to increase every few levels the Pokemon gains would make PP work more like the other stats, and would give another benefit to levelling up.

This idea would also give another benefit to teaching Pokemon good TM moves early on, because then they have more time to level up their PP over time. However, this is just an idea, I don’t know how well this would work in practice since that could mess with the balancing issues in the game. However, the way things currently are, there are only a few “PP Up” items available in the game, and if the player uses those early on, on moves they later delete, then their use is pointless. Allowing PP to slowly level up would make this less frustrating.

Game Progression:

I will also evaluate the progression of the game as a result of these resources and other factors. At the beginning, the player starts with only 1 Pokemon, very few, weak attacks, weak stats, and few resources (pokeballs, money) to catch more Pokemon.

Enemies are also weak (but barely weaker than the player’s Pokemon) so the game begins with a decent amount of challenge.

The first gym is one of the hardest because there is so little access to Pokemon, especially ones that will do much damage against rock types. The learning curve is actually steep in the beginning in terms of how long it takes to win a match IF the player picked Charmander as their starter, or IF their starter has not learned moves that will take down a rock type yet.

The second gym was the toughest for me because there was still such little access to different types of Pokemon, especially with moves that will be super effective against water types. On top of that, the gym leader’s Pokemon were stronger and had far tougher attacks, and even started to use boost items. It would often take me several tries to beat this gym, if I chose any starter besides Bulbasaur.

The third gym was SIGNIFICANTLY easier for me. For one, there was a cave beside the gym containing ground type Pokemon (Diglett’s cave), which take down the gym leader’s electric Pokemon easily. Even without them, by this point, my Pokemon would have learned far better moves which make battling more one-sided in my favour since I know which types of Pokemon to use.

After the third gym, the learning curve just feels like it falls for a while. As time goes on, my Pokemon get stronger, and though other Pokemon around do too, a player that knows how to play the game and exploit weaknesses, etc. has a far easier time since there is more access to a larger variety of Pokemon, and those Pokemon can learn better and more varied attacks. Since the AI of trainers is not very intelligent (including gym leaders), this makes the game get easier in a way. Some areas become harder to make it through due to more battles and attacks doing more damage, but fights in general feel far easier, and it becomes more about training than surviving.

Until I’d reach the Elite Four, encounters would feel very easy. Challenge started to be made in getting through large caves without losing your mind, or making it through a confusing building layout filled with Team Rocket members who want to fight. I would get to the point where gym leaders were just a good place to get experience since it took longer to gain levels (Pokemon around were just too weak), but they were also easy to beat.

When I fought the Elite Four, the challenge was finally up again. The Elite Four was almost like a sudden shock of difficulty at the end compared to the easy ride that most of the fights in the game had been up until that point. But even then, they weren’t incredibly difficult – just enough to make it a bit of a challenge.

After the Elite Four, challenge in fights quickly fell, but the time it took to gain levels increased significantly. There was one last cave to explore with high levelled Pokemon, but even then, after a certain level, everything became easy. By around level 60, challenge started to drop significantly. By around level 80, it was basically non-existent in fights, but it was also extremely time-consuming to grow levels since there were no tougher Pokemon to fight.

Resources increase with time. The greater the resources, the easier the game.

Summary of the Learning Curve:

The curve of difficulty for battles rises at the beginning to its highest point besides the Elite Four, and then falls as battles get easier for the experienced player. At the Elite Four, battle difficulty rises sharply, but falls again after that. By level 100, there is no challenge at all.

The curve of difficulty for levelling up starts off getting easier, then slowly gets more difficult as the player’s party grows stronger and needs more experience to level up. At the Elite Four, it is slightly easier to level up again (but this is over a short period of time), and then afterwards, especially in the higher levels, levelling up becomes extremely difficult.

The learning curve in the game (for new players) starts off fairly easy, then rises in difficulty as the player learns about fighting strategies. Eventually, by maybe halfway through the game, the player will have mastered most of these strategies, and the learning curve will sharply fall. Eventually, there is nothing really new to learn, and the rest of the game is levelling up.

Altogether, the difficulty curve of Pokemon Blue depends entirely on what way you view it, and whether it is an experienced player or a new player playing the game. As an experienced player, difficulty falls with time, but time it takes to level up rises. However, the game still feels unbalanced in the way difficulty quickly falls after only a little way through the game.

Despite this, I still loved Pokemon Blue as a game, though the creators of the next generation, Pokemon Gold and Silver, made a good decision in incorporating a final challenge into the game for high-levels - the trainer Red. Red, with Pokemon in levels ranging from 70 to 80, gives a challenge later on in the game, rather than letting the last big challenge be the Elite Four, which are only around level 50, compared to the maximum level the player can reach, which is 100. If a challenge similar to Red were added to Pokemon Blue (besides the one-time fight with Mewtwo, which hardly counts), then the level of difficulty would not feel so anti-climactic.

Rules and Mechanics, Which is Which?

Today I read a blog post by Raph Koster titled Rules Versus Mechanics regarding the difference between the two in games. I'd been wondering whether there actually is a difference, so reading his take on the subject was certainly enlightening. I am going to break down his main points with my own take on his ideas.

To begin, there are a few types of rules. There are constituative rules, which are math-based, such as the loss of health or lives. There are operational rules, which are the kind of rules that would be written out in an instruction manual, which generally cover what you can and can't do in a game. Finally, there are implicit rules which don't need to be stated - such as the rule that you shouldn't throw your controller at the tv screen. Some early Wii users had to learn that one the hard way.

So if those are the types of rules, what are the types of mechanics?

Well, that's where it gets interesting. The way I understood his post, there is a certain hierarchy of rules and mechanics. Rules are, in fact, an component of mechanics. And rules are then divided into their three types.

So how are rules a part of mechanics? Well mechanics are essentially what the player does in the game - running, jumping, attacking, you name it. Rules, however, are the result or feedback from each action - which can include crashing into walls, falling, or dying. Since rules are the result of mechanics, rules are dependant upon mechanics, which essentially makes them a component of said mechanics.

This definition means that mechanics are actions, and rules are outcomes. When I first read that, I didn't think it made sense. After all, we typically think of rules and outcomes as different things - perhaps the idea that a rule guides the player to a particular outcome. However, upon some deep thinking, I realized this made sense after all. Think of it this way - a rule states if you do x, then y will happen. The action itself is not the rule, but the result is, because it is the result that rewards or penalizes the player for that action.

Constituative Rules as Outcomes
So how does this work for each type of rule we already mentioned? Well, let's take the example of health points for a constituative rule. If the player's character falls or is struck by an enemy, they will lose health points. This is a result of an action that is penalizing the player. Another type of mathematical rule is the scoring system - perhaps the player grabs some coins or kills an enemy and gets some points. This, once again, is the result of an action, the only difference being that this is a positive result to reward a certain behaviour.

Operational Rules as Outcomes
Operational rules are the ones that most people are the most familiar with - the kind of rules that you'd see in the instructions. These are harder to define as outcomes, but I'll give it a shot. Think of it this way - when a player is told through rules what they should be trying to do and what they should not be doing (eg. make it through the maze without running into enemies), this is essentially putting limits on the player and giving them a goal. These rules are enforced by punishing the player if they break the limits (such as running into an enemy in this example) or rewarding the player if they achieve the goal (such as reaching the end of the maze). Once again we see punishment and reward, which are results of the mechanics the player uses.

Implicit Rules as Outcomes
Lastly, we have implicit rules, which are also an outcome of mechanics. This type of rule is by far the most difficult to define as a result. My idea would be that these rules also follow the whole reward versus punishment concept. Let's take the example of Wii users throwing their controllers at the screen, like I mentioned before. This is an implicit rule, but why? Well, because the player shouldn't reasonably want to destroy their tv or their controller, and because breaking the controller or the tv would make the game unplayable. Therefore, doing so would punish the player by not allowing them to play the game, while not doing so will allow them to keep playing. Once again, reward and punishment.

Anyways, that's my take on Koster's blog post. I may not be spot on with my interpretation, but I feel like I do have a further understanding of what exactly rules and mechanics are and how they differ from one another. Will this make me a better game designer? I don't think so, but this is still one small step towards a further understanding of game design as a whole.

The Design of Ligretto

I played the card game “Ligretto” with 5 players including myself. The game is very fast-paced, and took roughly 5 to 10 minutes per round. We played each round as a separate game rather than attempting to play rounds until a player reached a score of 100 (as the rules state) due to limited time.

Rules:

Each player has their own coloured deck of cards, which is divided into a “stack” of 10 cards face down, a “row” of 3 cards face up, and a hand made up of the remaining cards in the deck. When the game starts, there are no turns, but all players will play at once. At the beginning, if any player has a 1 in their row, they will place it somewhere in the middle of the table (within reach of all players) to start a new pile. Then, if a player has a 2 of that colour in their row, they must quickly place that card on top of the 1 of the same colour, before another player does the same. If another player beats them, the slower player must take their card back and wait for the next opportunity. When a pile reaches 10, no more cards can be added to it.

If a player does not have any cards they can add to a pile in their row, then they can flip over every third card in their hand (similar to the deck in Solitaire), and if the card flipped over can be added to a pile (or start a new pile, if it is a 1), then the player may do so. However, each player aims to use the cards in their row opposed to their hand – the hand merely acts as backup.

If a player uses a card from their row, they must replace it with a card from their stack until their stack is empty. Once they have no cards left in their stack or row, the player must shout “Ligretto stop!” and the round ends.

Once the round is over, points are added up. Each player must count the number of remaining stack and row cards they have, double it, and those are their penalty points to be taken off of their score. Then, they can count all cards making up the piles in the middle (players will know which cards are theirs because of the colour of the back of the card). Each card the player had added to a pile counts for one point. The player with the highest score wins the round. The first player to reach a score of 100 from multiple rounds wins the game.

What I Liked:

Fast Pace

The game moved so quickly that it built up a lot of frantic excitement for the players. One player moving fast made others want to move fast so they don’t fall behind, and the speed of the game was half the fun.

Cooperation for the Sake of Competition

It was actually really neat that even though this game is highly competitive, players would sometimes work together to achieve a common goal. For instance, if there was a red 2 on a pile in the middle, one player had a red 3 in their row but didn’t notice, and another player has a red 4 that they are waiting to put down, the player with the 4 may tell the player with the 3 that they are free to put the card down, because this would then allow the player with the 4 to put their card down. I noticed a lot of this sort of cooperation going on, and it made the game a bit more interesting, because this meant that players were not only watching their cards and the piles in the middle, but they were also watching opponents’ cards for an opportunity.

The Hand Counts for Something

Until we added up our points at the end of the first round, I’d been afraid that putting down cards from my hand wouldn’t count for anything in the end, even though the vast majority of cards I’d put down were from my hand. However, the way the scoring system is set up, players gain points for all the cards they put in piles in the middle, whether they are from their hand or their row, so it was a relief to see that all those cards weren’t just a waste.

No Turns

Players all play the game at once, which means there is no waiting for anybody to take their turn. This actually caused a great amount of chaos since you have to pay attention to everything going on around you as well as your own cards, but this actually made the game so much fun because it was so crazy.

Game Length

Though the rules state that the game should be replayed until a player reaches a score of 100, players could choose any goal score to make the game as long or short as they like, since each round is typically so short. That means that this game is great for anywhere from a short break activity to a full game night.

What I Disliked:

Flipping 3 Cards from my Hand

Since the game was so fast-paced, having to count out every 3 cards from my hand (the same as in Solitaire) became very tedious, and it felt like I was wasting the most time doing this. Since I felt so rushed, sometimes I would miscount, which would waste even more time if I had to count again. Though counting out 3 cards is a simple task, it becomes irritating under pressure when time is limited.

Needs an Appropriate Seating Setup

When we played the game, we played on a long desk, which seemed to be fine at first, but once we really got playing with all the different piles in the middle, it was often difficult for a player at one end of the desk to reach a pile of cards at the other end. In order to play this game with as little frustration as possible, players would need to find a more appropriate table to play on, which makes setup for this game more difficult than some.

Messy and Confusing

The fast pace of the game caused people to throw their cards everywhere, hoping they would land on a pile (especially when playing on a long desk where not everyone could reach), which ultimately made the game far more confusing than it had to be. Sometimes piles would spill over and it would take a moment to figure out which card is the top card since the cards would be scattered, and if we didn’t clear finished piles (with 10 cards) right away, we often wouldn’t notice when that pile couldn’t be added to anymore. The messiness of the game would sometimes give me a headache when trying to figure out what’s what.

Negative Scores

I feel like I’m being picky complaining about this one, but it was always frustrating to finish a round only to end up with a score in the negatives. This would be especially annoying if we were playing the full game, where we would race to be the first player with 100 points. The frustrating part about this is that even though you may have had an amazing previous round where you earned yourself plenty of points, if you do badly at the next round, you can just as easily lose all those points you just earned. Unlucky players may even have bad rounds a few times in a row, and then they can never really catch up because their total score would be so far into the negatives. This just doesn’t make players feel very good about the scoring system.

Temptation to Stop Rather than Breezing Through Your Hand

Sometimes, if I turned up a card from my hand that I can almost use (and which would help me to put down a card from my row), I was tempted to stop flipping through my deck and just wait and see if someone would put down the card before mine. For instance, if I had a blue 9 in my row, a blue 6 was on a pile in the middle, and I flipped up a blue 8 in my hand, I would sometimes wait, hoping that someone would put down a blue 7, even though I should probably keep going through my hand. This would often slow me down somewhat, which was definitely less fun than keeping the game fast.

What I Would’ve Designed Differently

I was thinking about my last point that I disliked in Ligretto, which was the fact that sometimes I would be tempted to pause while going through my hand because I didn’t want to lose a good card. Then, I thought of a possible solution. I don’t know how well this would work in practice, but in my head it sounds neat, so I might as well just explain it.

My idea would be to add one more mechanic to the game – the concept of an empty “slot” to add a special card from your hand to, in order to keep that card for later. This would allow you to keep flipping through your hand while keeping the card out that you may want to use after another player puts the card before it down. If you change your mind and find another card in your hand that you want to keep out instead of the one you already put in your slot, perhaps you could exchange them by putting the slotted card back into your hand, and put the card from your hand into your slot. This would make the game more complex, but it would be interesting to see how gameplay would change as a result of this.