Stop calling them "Pokemon-like" and just call them "Monster Collectors"

[DrCoeloCephalo]

I feel like game journalists are the ones most guilty for spreading this since anything relating to Pokemon is all it takes to get easy clicks and also partially to blame on non-Japanese gamers that insist on living up to the stereotype that Pokemon fans don't play anything else.

Calling other monster collectors "Pokemon-like" is extremely unfair and shallow to theses games that not only have their own spin on so many things but are far more like monster collectors besides Pokemon to begin with.

• Digimon has more in common with Shin Megami Tensei conceptually than it does with Pokemon.
• Yo-Kai Watch has more in common with Shin Megami Tensei and Dragon Quest Monsters than it does with Pokemon.
• Ni No Kuni: Wrath of the White Witch can easily be argued as being more like Dragon Quest 5 but with real time gameplay than being comparable to Pokemon.
• Disc Creatures is also far more like Dragon Quest Monsters than Pokemon.
• World of Final Fantasy is a Final Fantasy game but with monster collecing than being comparable to Pokemon.

Out of all the monster collectors I've played, the ONLY game I would fairly call "Pokemon-like" is Nexomon: Extinction, but even that game does plenty of its own things and handles a number of gameplay features better than Pokemon ever has.

Pokemon itself has always been more Dragon Quest-like than anything from its monster designs to several gameplay mechanics.

Probably the only thing Pokemon has that makes it unique as a monster collector are Contests and PokeAthlon, but both of those are gone now.

What do you guys think?

 

[Yashichi]

i never called them pokemon-likes but i like the way it sounds so i think i might start. thanks for the idea

 

[RileyXY1]

It's like how FPSes used to be called "Doom Clones".

 

[Sean Wheeler]

When I was little, I thought Pokémon and Digimon were the same series at first. They've both got Mon in their titles. They both have monsters that transform by "evolving." Okay, Digimon calls it Digivolving in the dub, but Digimon Frontier calls it evolution. Also, how do you think the Pokémon fit in those tiny Poké Balls? They get converted into data. And when you have six Pokémon, any more goes into a computer system. Yes, Pokémon are digital monsters too! And who could forget when Pokémon X and Y introduced Mega Evolution, people immediately thought of Mega level Digimon? And unlike regular evolution in Pokémon which is permanent, Mega evolved Pokémon revert back at the end of the battle like how Digimon change back to their Rookie forms.

 

[RileyXY1]

When I was little, I thought Pokémon and Digimon were the same series at first. They've both got Mon in their titles. They both have monsters that transform by "evolving." Okay, Digimon calls it Digivolving in the dub, but Digimon Frontier calls it evolution. Also, how do you think the Pokémon fit in those tiny Poké Balls? They get converted into data. And when you have six Pokémon, any more goes into a computer system. Yes, Pokémon are digital monsters too! And who could forget when Pokémon X and Y introduced Mega Evolution, people immediately thought of Mega level Digimon? And unlike regular evolution in Pokémon which is permanent, Mega evolved Pokémon revert back at the end of the battle like how Digimon change back to their Rookie forms.

I believe that Mega Evolution was inspired by the Level X cards from the Pokemon TCG.

 

[Sean Wheeler]

I believe that Mega Evolution was inspired by the Level X cards from the Pokemon TCG.

I don't really see any similarity between Level X and Mega Evolution.

 

[RileyXY1]

I don't really see any similarity between Level X and Mega Evolution.

Level X cards were upgrades from the base cards that allow it to use any attacks from the base cards in addition to new ones. I don't think that they actually ripped the concept straight out of Digimon, and they have taken mechanics from the TCG before, such as Abilities, which were based on the Pokemon Powers prominently featured in the TCG.

 

[DrCoeloCephalo]

i never called them pokemon-likes but i like the way it sounds so i think i might start. thanks for the idea

I really hate it because it makes it seem like it's okay to oversimplify an entire genre by only associating them with one game that happens to be part of it.

Games like Sonic, Spyro and Crash are platformers and all, but calling them all "Super Mario-like" would be outright foolish.

 

[Yashichi]

I really hate it because it makes it seem like it's okay to oversimplify an entire genre by only associating them with one game that happens to be part of it.

Games like Sonic, Spyro and Crash are platformers and all, but calling them all "Super Mario-like" would be outright foolish.

Right, but that's only because they're actually "Furry Mario-likes"

 

[DrCoeloCephalo]

Right, but that's only because they're actually "Furry Mario-likes"

Mario's the one that goes around wearing a skintight frog, cat, raccoon or a fat penguin suit.

 

[Sean Wheeler]

Level X cards were upgrades from the base cards that allow it to use any attacks from the base cards in addition to new ones. I don't think that they actually ripped the concept straight out of Digimon, and they have taken mechanics from the TCG before, such as Abilities, which were based on the Pokemon Powers prominently featured in the TCG.

Mega Evolution doesn't give your Pokémon new moves. My Mega Blaziken in Alpha Sapphire would have the same moveset as when I don't Mega Evolve.
Regular evolution in the TCG is as temporary as the games' Mega Evolution, so even the Level X power boost doesn't work as a valid comparison. Level X doesn't even change the Pokémon's look, a Level X Empoleon is just another Empoleon card. Level X was just a replacement for the EX cards. Mega Evolution was in no way based on the TCG.

 

[RileyXY1]

Mega Evolution doesn't give your Pokémon new moves. My Mega Blaziken in Alpha Sapphire would have the same moveset as when I don't Mega Evolve.
Regular evolution in the TCG is as temporary as the games' Mega Evolution, so even the Level X power boost doesn't work as a valid comparison. Level X doesn't even change the Pokémon's look, a Level X Empoleon is just another Empoleon card. Level X was just a replacement for the EX cards. Mega Evolution was in no way based on the TCG.

Level X cards have functional differences from EX cards. EX cards actually counted as separate species while Level X Pokemon did not, and EX cards give you two prize cards while Level X cards gave you only one.

 

[Otoad64]

in my opinion people call them pokemon-likes for the same reason people call platform fighters smash-likes, they simply are way smaller series

it's like pokemon is up here














and everything else is down here, there's like 20 pokemon fans for every yo-kai watch or digimon fans, whereas with mario there are a variety of well known platformers, pokemon is the only monster collecter that isn't niche

 

[DrCoeloCephalo]

Pokemon is the only monster collecter that isn't niche

That's not true at all. Shin Megami Tensei is about as mainstream as it gets and Dragon Quest had already established itself as the top dog of RPGs in sales and popularity in Pokemon's homeland before Pokemon even existed and retains that level of status.

 

[Otoad64]

That's not true at all. Shin Megami Tensei is about as mainstream as it gets and Dragon Quest had already established itself as the top dog of RPGs in sales and popularity in Pokemon's homeland before Pokemon even existed and retains that level of status.

if you ask the average person what shin megami tensei is they won't know what it is (truth be told I didn't realize that it was a monster collector before this thread) and dragon quest itself is not a monster collector, and even then they tremble beneath pokemon's popularity, like it or not.

also dragon quest is not the "top dog" for rpg sales anymore as not only has pokemon surpassed it but so has final fantasy

 

[DrCoeloCephalo]

if you ask the average person what shin megami tensei is they won't know what it is

People being ignoramt of the proper name doesn't keep it from being less mainstream. On a related note, it's kinda funny I just barely got an ad for AFK Arena doing a crossover with Persona 5 as I write this.

They tremble beneath pokemon's popularity, like it or not.

They really don't. As with any media franchise, homeland success matters first and foremost. Always has. Dragon Quest remains mainstream as ever as far as the country that makes Pokemon and loves it more than any other country is concerned, like it or not.

Honestly, this only suggests people call them "Pokemon-like" out of no foundation other than ignorance.

Pokemon's sales and popularity outside the homeland are all it has anyway because when you get down to it, it has almost nothing over any other game in the genre, let alone overall quality.

It's also kinda like how Sonic may have plenty of sales and popularity over platformer games like Wario Land or Freedom Planet but you'll notice neither of those are known for pumping out low quality titles like Sonic is.

 

[Otoad64]

People being ignoramt of the proper name doesn't keep it from being less mainstream. On a related note, it's kinda funny I just barely got an ad for AFK Arena doing a crossover with Persona 5 as I write this.

how on earth is it mainstream? a spinoff of it is more mainstream then it is. Maybe in japan it's mainstream but japan is only a small part of the world.

They really don't. As with any media franchise, homeland success matters first and foremost. Always has. Dragon Quest remains mainstream as ever as far as the country that makes Pokemon and loves it more than any other country is concerned, like it or not.

stop going on about japan! yeah, homeland success matters the most, but pokemon is plenty successful in japan anyway, and besides pokemon is still making more money. and again, dragon quest is not a monster collector

Honestly, this only suggests people call them "Pokemon-like" out of no foundation other than ignorance.

yes, people are ignorant about the existance of other monster collectors, that's why they call them pokemon-likes

Pokemon's sales and popularity outside the homeland are all it has anyway because when you get down to it, it has almost nothing over any other game in the genre, let alone overall quality.

"oh well besides the fact pokemon is more popular and makes more money in 99% of the world it has nothing over the rest of the genre"

 

[DrCoeloCephalo]

how on earth is it mainstream? a spinoff of it is more mainstream then it is.

Those spinoffs are Shin Megami Tensei games. Said Shin Megami Tensei games are mainstream. Ergo, Shin Megami Tensei is mainstream.

stop going on about japan!

Why should I? It's because of Japan's innovation and open-mindedness towards video games we have variety in the monster collector genre and still have video games to begin with. This very website is dedicated to a Japanese video game that is a product of that.

dragon quest is not a monster collector

Not consistently or mainly. That does not change the fact Dragon Quest 5, a main series game, had full monster collecting years before Pokemon with plenty of its monster designs and gameplay elements being easily notable in Pokemon games.

yes, people are ignorant about the existance of other monster collectors, that's why they call them pokemon-likes

So it's fair to say people that call them that are ignorant.

"oh well besides the fact pokemon is more popular and makes more money in 99% of the world it has nothing over the rest of the genre"

Yeah.

Sales and popularity don't mean anything in regards to game quality.

Bad games can sell well. That's just a fact.

Games like Sonic 2006 and Pokemon Sword and Shield are perfect examples of that. Their sales and popularity do nothing to change the fact they suffer from and get criticized for almost immeasurable numbers of flaws that just do not exist in other games of the same genre on top of those games that don't sell as well having numerous advantages and positives unavailable in the popular games that sell well.

A game doesn't have to sell better to still be a better game.

Sonic 2006, despite its better sales and infamy, isn't the one that got an entire book written about it in regards to good game design philosophy like Wario Land 4 did.

 

[Proceleon]

I prefer "Monster Taming RPGs."

 

[Otoad64]

Those spinoffs are Shin Megami Tensei games. Said Shin Megami Tensei games are mainstream. Ergo, Shin Megami Tensei is mainstream.

yeah but a lot of people who play persona don't look at them as smt games, and even then they aren't nearly as mainstream

Why should I?

because unless the people who call them pokemon-likes are japanese, success in japan has nothing to do with people calling yo-kai watch a pokemon-like

Not consistently or mainly. That does not change the fact Dragon Quest 5, a main series game, had full monster collecting years before Pokemon with plenty of its monster designs and gameplay elements being easily notable in Pokemon games.

I admit i didn't realize a main series game was a monster collector, but do the sales and popularity of dq5 = that of the pokemon franchise?

So it's fair to say people that call them that are ignorant.

of other monster collector's existance, yes

Yeah.

Sales and popularity don't mean anything in regards to game quality.

Bad games can sell well. That's just a fact.

Games like Sonic 2006 and Pokemon Sword and Shield are perfect examples of that. Their sales and popularity do nothing to change the fact they suffer from and get criticized for almost immeasurable numbers of flaws that just do not exist in other games of the same genre on top of those games that don't sell as well having numerous advantages and positives unavailable in the popular games that sell well.

A game doesn't have to sell better to still be a better game.

Sonic 2006, despite its better sales and infamy, isn't the one that got an entire book written about it in regards to good game design philosophy like Wario Land 4 did.

I know a bad game can sell well, it's just what we're talking about has nothing to do with quality

 

[DrCoeloCephalo]

a lot of people who play persona don't look at them as smt games, and even then they aren't nearly as mainstream

Doesn't matter what they look at them as. They're still Shin Megami Tensei games and they are mainstream.

because unless the people who call them pokemon-likes are japanese, success in japan has nothing to do with people calling yo-kai watch a pokemon-like

It kinda does because despite Pokemon not even really being that original, you don't really hear the Japanese refer to Pokemon as Dragon Quest-like even though it has every right to be called that by the country that isn't ignorant about the genre as a whole.

I know a bad game can sell well, it's just what we're talking about has nothing to do with quality

Fair enough.

 

[Otoad64]

Doesn't matter what they look at them as. They're still Shin Megami Tensei games and they are mainstream.

I suppose, but they're not as mainstream as pokemon anyways

It kinda does because despite Pokemon not even really being that original, you don't really hear the Japanese refer to Pokemon as Dragon Quest-like even though it has every right to be called that by the country that isn't ignorant about the genre as a whole.

but are the people who call them pokemon-likes japanese?

 

[DrCoeloCephalo]

I suppose, but they're not as mainstream as pokemon anyways

Your main statement was that Pokemon is the only one that isn't niche, which is wrong.

but are the people who call them pokemon-likes japanese?

Considering you see this comparison more often than not from non-Japanese game journalist sites and commenters, it's a pretty fair assumption that they aren't Japanese.

 

[Otoad64]

Your main statement was that Pokemon is the only one that isn't niche, which is wrong.

fair enough, though compared to pokemon it's pretty niche

Considering you see this comparison more often than not from non-Japanese game journalist sites and commenters, it's a pretty fair assumption that they aren't Japanese.

well if they're not japanese then what does success in japan have to do with anything?

 

[DrCoeloCephalo]

fair enough, though compared to pokemon it's pretty niche

Anything except something like Hello Kitty or Star Wars is niche compared to Pokemon. Try broadening the scope a little. Shin Megami Tensei is mainstream as far as franchises go. Not everything has to be in the scope of a billion dollar company that can't even make good games.

well if they're not japanese then what does success in japan have to do with anything?

The fact that the Japanese AREN'T ignorant when it comes to the genre and DON'T tend to live up to a stereotype of playing little else besides mainstream FPS games that westerners are especially notorious for and have a history of innovation when it comes to video games.

Pokemon itself probably would never have caught on if they had a similar mindset many non-Japanese gamers do because they could have very easily just dismissed Pokemon as a shallow Dragon Quest wannabe (which is a justified thing to call it) no differently from how non-Japanese dismiss other monster collectors as "Pokemon-like" with ignorance that just doesn't apply to Japanese gamers, hence the success of all these other monster collectors in Japan.

 

[Otoad64]

Anything except something like Hello Kitty or Star Wars is niche compared to Pokemon. Try broadening the scope a little. Shin Megami Tensei is mainstream as far as franchises go. Not everything has to be in the scope of a billion dollar company that can't even make good games.

I guess so, though i can think of a few more then that, also a lot of the reason shin megami tensei isn't niche is because of persona which isn't a monster collector

The fact that the Japanese AREN'T ignorant when it comes to the genre and DON'T tend to live up to a stereotype of playing little else besides mainstream FPS games that westerners are especially notorious for and have a history of innovation when it comes to video games.

Pokemon itself probably would never have caught on if they had a similar mindset many non-Japanese gamers do because they could have very easily just dismissed Pokemon as a shallow Dragon Quest wannabe (which is a justified thing to call it) no differently from how non-Japanese dismiss other monster collectors as "Pokemon-like" with ignorance that just doesn't apply to Japanese gamers, hence the success of all these other monster collectors in Japan.

what does that have to do with anything? All i'm trying to do is explain why people call things like yo-kai watch and digimon pokemon-likes and that has nothing to do with it's success in the countries where people don't call them pokemon-likes!

 

[DrCoeloCephalo]

because of persona which isn't a monster collector

Yes it is a monster collector and still a Shin Megami Tensei game regardless.

what does that have to do with anything?

It has to do with the simple fact Japan isn't ignorant and actually plays other games. I just explained that.

 

[Otoad64]

Yes it is a monster collector and still a Shin Megami Tensei game regardless.

pretty sure it's just an rpg

It has to do with the simple fact Japan isn't ignorant and actually plays other games. I just explained that.

yeah and that information has nothing to do with the reason people call monster collectors pokemon-likes

 

[DrCoeloCephalo]

pretty sure it's just an rpg

Well, you are incorrect. It is a monster collector. I have played it and can confirm.

yeah and that information has nothing to do with the reason people call monster collectors pokemon-likes

Yes it does. It has to do with them being ignorant amd not playing other games as I detailed in the OP.

 

[Doc Monocle]

Bad games can sell well. That's just a fact.

Bad according to who, the buyer? If so, then can you speak for the buyers? If so, then can you speak for all buyers? If so, then can you speak for all those who have not bought the game yet?

 

[DrCoeloCephalo]

Bad according to who, the buyer? If so, then can you speak for the buyers? If so, then can you speak for all buyers? If so, then can you speak for all those who have not bought the game yet?

Bad from an unbiased and objective standpoint from looking at factual information regarding the game.

Whether I or anyone else bought Pokemon Sword or Shield or not does not change the unbiased, objective, researchable and very observable fact that the game has awful pop in and draw distance so that you cannot see the monsters in the distance, making the overworld look like a lifeless barren wasteland due to the lack of the respective monster wildlife being unseeable.

Games from over 10 years ago on the DS like Dragon Quest Monsters Joker do not have this draw distance or pop in issue. You can see monsters in the distance.

THAT is just one example out of dozens if not hundreds of things that would remain true no matter who bought what game.

I speak for no one but myself from doing my own research and playing a variety of games in the genre.

 

[Doc Monocle]

Bad from an unbiased and objective standpoint from looking at factual information regarding the game.

Whether I or anyone else bought Pokemon Sword or Shield or not does not change the unbiased, objective, researchable and very observable fact that the game has awful pop in and draw distance so that you cannot see the monsters in the distance, making the overworld look like a lifeless barren wasteland due to the lack of the respective monster wildlife being unseeable.

Games from over 10 years ago on the DS like Dragon Quest Monsters Joker do not have this draw distance or pop in issue. You can see monsters in the distance.

THAT is just one example out of dozens if not hundreds of things that would remain true no matter who bought what game.

I speak for no one but myself from doing my own research and playing a variety of games in the genre.

You may think it is objective, but what if someone disagrees with you? Would someone else indubitably use a similar description? Call me ignorant; I have not played any pocket monster/ monster collector games, so you would be more knowledgeable about that, but what I do know is that if the game is 'objectively bad,' then no one should like it. Would someone play a game they knew was 'objectively bad?'

 

[DrCoeloCephalo]

You may think it is objective, but what if someone disagrees with you?

A person can disagree with a fact all they please. Doesn't keep it from remaiing true. People disagreed with Galileo whom did his research and could back up how the earth orbits the sun.

but what I do know is that if the game is 'objectively bad,' then no one should like it. Would someone play a game they knew was 'objectively bad?'

That is not even remotely true and is extremely close-minded. People have absolutely every freedom to like and have fun with something completely regardless of its objective quality.

Sonic the Hedgehog 2006 is one of my favorite games of all time and I would play it again because I like alot of things about it.

However, I can put my biases towards it aside and still look at it from a more objective standpoint to fairly say it is a very bad game. That does not keep me from still liking it or wanting to play it as I have the freedom to do as I please with my likes and dislikes and no one is gonna stop me.

The Angry Video Game Nerd does precisely this and has done so for years as playing bad games allows us to better observe bad game design so we can learn from the mistakes of others and avoid those same mistakes.

So yes, they can and would still play a bad game and have the freedom to still like it despite it being bad.

 

[Doc Monocle]

A person can disagree with a fact all they please. Doesn't keep it from remaiing true. People disagreed with Galileo whom did his research and could back up how the earth orbits the sun.



That is not even remotely true and is extremely close-minded. People have absolutely every freedom to like and have fun with something completely regardless of its objective quality.

Sonic the Hedgehog 2006 is one of my favorite games of all time and I would play it again because I like alot of things about it.

However, I can put my biases towards it aside and still look at it from a more objective standpoint to fairly say it is a very bad game. That does not keep me from still liking it or wanting to play it as I have the freedom to do as I please with my likes and dislikes and no one is gonna stop me.

The Angry Video Game Nerd does precisely this and has done so for years as playing bad games allows us to better observe bad game design so we can learn from the mistakes of others and avoid those same mistakes.

So yes, they can and would still play a bad game and have the freedom to still like it despite it being bad.

Is the definition of "bad" something like 'low-budget' or 'old technology' or' primitive?' If so, then countless games, even relatively modern ones eventually become bad, and then it depends on what sort of time transition scale you are using (by standards of year to year, Halo is very bad by now), in which case, it is no longer objective. You would have to clarify exactly what you mean by 'bad,' If you are going to use it in the context you have chosen.

 

[DrCoeloCephalo]

Is the definition of "bad" something like 'low-budget' or 'old technology' or' primitive?' If so, then countless games, even relatively modern ones eventually become bad, and then it depends on what sort of time transition scale you are using (by standards of year to year, Halo is very bad by now), in which case, it is no longer objective. You would have to clarify exactly what you mean by 'bad,' If you are going to use it in the context you have chosen.

The context in the case of the monster collectors at hand involves low visual quality, low animation quality, low content quantity, low quality game balance, low quality game design, low quality player freedom, low story and writing quality and low quality in quality of life changes in spite of having more than enough money to create something high budget that doesn't suffer from any of these things.

Considering how other games of the same genre blow each and every one of these categories out of the water despite of the undeniable fact of them having way fewer monetary resources to work with makes it as objective as it gets.

It certainly has nothing to do with being 'low-budget', 'old technology' or' primitive?' as I pointed out in my previous comment how a 10 year old DS game didn't suffer from awful pop in and draw distance and even games from about 5 years ago like Digimon Story Cyber Sleuth (which is originally a PSP game made on a shoestring budget) doesn't suffer from many of the flaws that have plagued Pokemon games.

 

[Otoad64]

Well, you are incorrect. It is a monster collector. I have played it and can confirm.

don't you battle as yourself? because from what i've seen you don't send out a monster and command it to attack

Yes it does. It has to do with them being ignorant amd not playing other games as I detailed in the OP.

yeah but we're not talking about the one who aren't ignorant

 

[DrCoeloCephalo]

don't you battle as yourself? because from what i've seen you don't send out a monster and command it to attack

Clearly you need to see more gameplay because the Personas/demons/shadows are for doing exactly that.

 

[Doc Monocle]

The context in the case of the monster collectors at hand involves low visual quality, low animation quality, low content quantity, low quality game balance, low quality game design, low quality player freedom, low story and writing quality and low quality in quality of life changes in spite of having more than enough money to create something high budget that doesn't suffer from any of these things.

Considering how other games of the same genre blow each and every one of these categories out of the water despite of the undeniable fact of them having way fewer monetary resources to work with makes it as objective as it gets.

It certainly has nothing to do with being 'low-budget', 'old technology' or' primitive?' as I pointed out in my previous comment how a 10 year old DS game didn't suffer from awful pop in and draw distance and even games from about 5 years ago like Digimon Story Cyber Sleuth (which is originally a PSP game made on a shoestring budget) doesn't suffer from many of the flaws that have plagued Pokemon games.

I can respect every component of the definition of "bad" as you put it excep that which others can disagree with on the grounds of their own taste in story writing. As far as design is concerned, I could give you that one if by "design" you mean the efficiency and skill with which the game was coded and laid out, but this is kind of shaky. I am willing to lend it to you, though. Overall, it was a valid definition, considering that I have never knowingly witnessed these games, and so cannot affirmatively say it is applicable to the games you are speaking of.

 

[DrCoeloCephalo]

I can respect every component of the definition of "bad" as you put it excep that which others can disagree with on the grounds of their own taste in story writing. As far as design is concerned, I could give you that one if by "design" you mean the efficiency and skill with which the game was coded and laid out, but this is kind of shaky. I am willing to lend it to you, though. Overall, it was a valid definition, considering that I have never knowingly witnessed these games, and so cannot affirmatively say it is applicable to the games you are speaking of.

You're more than free to play them and do your own research to see for yourself instead of writing essays.

I have and can fairly say that they are.

 

[Otoad64]

Clearly you need to see more gameplay because the Personas/demons/shadows are for doing exactly that.

Fair enough.