General Gaming You boys excited for TemTem? (Pokemon clone, MMO, full co-op campaign)

[Xbob42]

Been watching this game for a while, it's about to come out of Alpha, and will be launched in Early Access. But don't be fooled, the game isn't some unpolished turd where you'll be waiting 20 years for the finished product. It will be launching with 141-161 TemTems (I've heard conflicting reports and am too lazy to check) and all the designs are cute and well made, proper quality, which is SO important for a game like this.

And according to a few people who've been in the alpha, it's already a good deal better than the latest Pokemon game. I can't comment on that quality yet as I'm not in the alpha, but it looks good. Every single battle is a 2v2 (hence why you can co-op the entire campaign if you want) which I think is a HUGE default improvement over Pokemon's stale 1v1 base match-ups. I also really like the weird little glass card things the TemTems get stored in, which is just a minor detail but it's cool when someone makes a neat design that doesn't just make me think "that's like a Pokeball but worse."

 

It's heading to Steam for Early Access, but I'm sure console launches aren't too far off.

 

[Boyle5150]

looks great!  I will definitely check this out. 

[TheLeon]

You've gotta admire how completely they're going for Pokemon's entire thing. I'm in.

[Brick]

Should Pokémon learn a thing or two from this game? Yes. Will they? No. 

[Mr.Vic20]

Oh, oh wow! That's pretty great! Count me in! 

[crispy4000]

I'm fascinated by the response to this game.  Normally Nintendo fans bitch and moan about games being this on the nose, even with much-needed improvements.  'Is nothing sacred' and the like.

 

... Maybe that's just the Smash Bros community.

[Xbob42]

Got a stress test key for tomorrow, just a quick test between 11am - 1pm PST. Please only use if you can PLAY the game during that time. It's NOT a key for the full game.

 

ARNQY-2BID?-GJFN0

 

The ? is the number that comes after 2.

[Keyser_Soze]

 

[Bacon]

Early Access Game
$34.99

 

lol, hard pass for for now 

[Keyser_Soze]

38 minutes ago, Bacon said:

Early Access Game
$34.99

 

lol, hard pass for for now 

 

Rather than Pokemon Sword and Shield the $120 early access game.

 

(am I rite @Paperclyp)

[Bacon]

I mean, if I had to buy SnS or this game, I'd totally but this game instead. I just don't do early access, especially at a price grater than $10. 

[Keyser_Soze]

10 minutes ago, Bacon said:

I mean, if I had to buy SnS or this game, I'd totally but this game instead. I just don't do early access, especially at a price grater than $10. 

 

Yeah I don't really do early access either. I believe I got Day-Z when it was early access and it's still not finished (is it?)

 

However, this game promises to be done by next year so it's not too bad if you jump in now or wait.

[TwinIon]

As said in the video in the OP, it doesn't seem to deviate from Pokemon in any meaningful or interesting way, so that's a hard pass. Playing through my first pokemon game in a decade I couldn't help but feel like there was so much more it could be doing, and how few risks it was willing to take. What's the point of building a pokemon knock off if you're not going to push the envelope a bit more?

[crispy4000]

26 minutes ago, TwinIon said:

As said in the video in the OP, it doesn't seem to deviate from Pokemon in any meaningful or interesting way, so that's a hard pass. Playing through my first pokemon game in a decade I couldn't help but feel like there was so much more it could be doing, and how few risks it was willing to take. What's the point of building a pokemon knock off if you're not going to push the envelope a bit more?

 

You aren't the target audience.  It's either for Pokemon superfans who care about the under the hood changes, those without Switches, or a subset of gamers who have been whining for a 'Pokemon MMO' since the 2000's began.

[Nokt]

1 hour ago, Keyser_Soze said:

 

Yeah I don't really do early access either. I believe I got Day-Z when it was early access and it's still not finished (is it?)

 

However, this game promises to be done by next year so it's not too bad if you jump in now or wait.

Day-Z has been out of early access since the end of 2018 I believe.

[Keyser_Soze]

6 minutes ago, Nokt said:

Day-Z has been out of early access since the end of 2018 I believe.

 

December 13, 2018

 

But according to steam the last time I played it was 2014. That's a long time.

[Nokt]

1 hour ago, Keyser_Soze said:

 

December 13, 2018

 

But according to steam the last time I played it was 2014. That's a long time.

I’ve been debating on buying it. For whatever reason it seems like I have an itch to play a game like that

[Xbob42]

23 hours ago, TwinIon said:

As said in the video in the OP, it doesn't seem to deviate from Pokemon in any meaningful or interesting way, so that's a hard pass. Playing through my first pokemon game in a decade I couldn't help but feel like there was so much more it could be doing, and how few risks it was willing to take. What's the point of building a pokemon knock off if you're not going to push the envelope a bit more?

Say what now?

The changes are literally the core of what makes this interesting. And they're not just "under the hood" changes. At least in regards to battle, which is where the vast majority of Pokemon's issues lie, although not all of them.

 

All battles are 2v2, which alone is a massive departure.

 

Attacks are managed using stamina, not PP. This is an enormous change in that if you have a super powerful move, it simply costs more stamina. In Pokemon, I can use Earthquake a minimum of 5 times without upgrading its PP. Here, a move like that might get two uses before you're spent. Hitting 0 stamina means any stamina you didn't have gets taken directly from your health pool, and the next turn that creature cannot act, meaning you spend a turn sitting there or you swap them out. This also means that the wait action has a function in restoring stamina without using items, so instead of using your most powerful move over and over to wipe enemy teams, you have to consider far more and use more of your team.

 

Beyond this, many moves have cooldowns, or rather, build-ups. You cannot use them immediately once battle starts. They take anywhere from 2-4 turns to charge up, but you don't need to choose them to charge them up or anything. They simply aren't selectable for X amount of turns. Simply choosing to add one of these to your creature's arsenal is a big choice, because you know that move will be dead until a certain number of turns has passed, although I do believe they charge per turn of overall battle, not just when that creature is out, so you could stall using other creatures. I now don't think this is true, although I do recall a move being charged up when I took a creature out once... maybe they need to enter the fight once? Status effects still function as normal when a creature is out, so poison still hurts and doom will kill you in X number of turns regardless of whether the creature is out or not. This, combined with the stamina system, drastically changes how the game is played. This isn't minor. Pokemon has been about one-shotting (or damn near one-shotting) enemy creatures for decades now. STAB double type advantage and bam, one-shot kill every time.

In addition to above, health pools and damage levels mean that even with a big boost to damage from STAB and type advantage, you'll still rarely one-shot enemies. Makes sense, since all battles are 2v2 and you need to be able to withstand more than one attack in general. Creatures that survive multiple turns alone would be a huge departure from Pokemon, but all of these elements together mean that similarities to Pokemon start becoming more and more surface level, at least in terms of combat.

On top of that, there are also two types of synergy. Creatures of the same type being out at once power each other's moves of that type up, but some moves also have a + sign next to them and are granted both additional damage and additional effects when you have a creature of a specific type out, often different from the type of the creature using the move. There's one move I have where if I have a Nature type creature out, the move does additional damage and instead of exhausting (read: enemy creature uses more stamina per move) the enemy for one turn, it exhausts for two turns.

 

In terms of the overworld gameplay, yeah it's pretty much Pokemon. NPCs have a bit more normal dialogue and a lot of them don't want to talk about Temtem all day, which is always super fucking annoying in Pokemon when everyone just wants to talk about Pokemon in literally every conversation. Not really a gameplay change, but eh... -- OH WAIT IT'S A FUCKING MMO. You run around with other people, you can co-op the entire fucking campaign, you can do casual or ranked battles with everyone you meet, and although they're not implemented yet, you can also chat (was in alpha, is being reworked so isn't in right now) and start guilds/clans. Yeah, just a minor feature that massively extends the replayability of the game by giving a natural and more interactive world where you don't have to go to some weird lobby to play with others in a stifled, broken, garbage way like Pokemon.

 

I guess if your biggest problem with Pokemon is like, running through routes and fighting trainers/catching monsters, then yeah, not much to see here. If your problems lie elsewhere, like Pokemon's online being pitiful, the battles being slow in terms of animations and text but too fast in terms of damage dealt, how utterly dreadful 1v1 fights are (seriously Pokemon's default 1v1 scene is god awful) or how easy the game is (I forgot to mention that unless you're doing a lot of grinding, NPCs are gonna kick your ass, and the routes are long, so you either learn to play better or you run back to heal them every other battle) then there's a LOT on offer here. Oh, and it also runs really nicely instead of chugging like the fucking Sword and Shield mess.

 

It's absolutely not perfect and has its own drawbacks (server issues were awful on day 1, but it's been flawless for me today) but overall, it's exactly the kind of massive changes I've wanted out of Pokemon for years. Pokemon's entire mantra is "if it ain't broke, don't fix it," where Temtem is basically "What parts of Pokemon suck that we can make more fun?"

This little indie effort, in early access no less, has showed me how dramatically better Pokemon can be, massively different while retaining the soul of the series. It's still obviously super identifiable as a Pokemon clone, but once you actually break down what this is vs what Pokemon is, you see how lazy and cheap Game Freak has been. The animations alone are leagues above Sword and Shield, and I'm not even saying the animations are amazing, they just... actually have them. I have yet to see a Temtem get slid up and down by an invisible mouse cursor and called an "attack." Sure, there's currently only about 20% of the 401 monsters that Pokemon Sword and Shield have in-game (should be about 40%ish when the game hits 1.0) but they also probably have literally less than 0.1% of the budget Game Freak does, so... fair trade?

In the end, I can't say if it makes changes you in particular would appreciate, as you didn't specify what part of Pokemon disappointed you, but for me it was combat, polish, performance, difficulty and just general sameyness. It just feels like for every tiny, tiny change Pokemon makes, it stays exactly the same in 100 other areas. There is zero ambition with Pokemon. They put out their games on their set schedule every few years and call it a day. We're getting DLC now, which is better to me than a rerelease, but that's about the biggest thing I can think of. And half of my enjoyment of Pokemon Sword and Shield was carried by its hype ass music. Sadly Temtem's music, while catchy and enjoyable, can't hold a candle to Sword and Shield's bangers. But hey I can just pop on the Sword and Shield soundtrack in a different window and best of both worlds!

[TwinIon]

38 minutes ago, Xbob42 said:

Say what now?

Fair enough. I appreciate the rundown. I was just quoting from the video in the OP (from around ~6 min).

 

41 minutes ago, Xbob42 said:

I guess if your biggest problem with Pokemon is like, running through routes and fighting trainers/catching monsters, then yeah, not much to see here.

Which is pretty much where I'm at. I think there is a core of pokemon that would work well outside the existing gameplay structure. Finding and putting together a team, leveling them up, and exploring the world could all easily work outside the pokemon blueprint. I don't think that the standard pokemon routes or even the turn based combat are that necessary for a pokemon game to work well, and I think there's a lot of room to explore. Compare where the Final Fantasy games have gone in roughly the same time frame. Even if you ignore the graphics, just the gameplay systems from game to game have varied so much. Yeah, some of them have sucked, but I'm a fan of bold attempts to innovate.

 

None of this is meant to be a shot at TemTem. Like The Outer Worlds, it's a game in the mold of other very successful games. There's clearly a market of people who want to play things that are extremely familiar, and I hold no ill will against the people who like those games or the devs that make them. To TemTem's credit, the move to a full on MMO is a massive undertaking, and I hope they can find the audience they deserve.

[Xbob42]

Well if you're after a Pokemon-style game without turn-based combat as an example, then might I suggest M.EXE! Sadly, the developer has had issues lately so he hasn't been able to update it terribly frequently, but even with that issue is still seems promising.

That said, I am perfectly content with turn-based combat. Trying to make everything action-based is like... the antithesis of bold to me. Turn-based combat is already so rare it's basically a novelty to see it at all. It has turned Final Fantasy from a decent series into a huge steaming pile of shit because Square can't manage action combat, just flashy combat. Their best bold innovations were the things they did with turn-based combat, like the crazy job systems and stuff from Bravely Default and, despite me thinking the game was total ass, Octopath Traveler. Their action-based games have just been the most pathetic garbage around. But that's getting divorced from the subject matter, I know what you meant.

For me, bold is generally good, but with a concept like Pokemon, we've seen so little of what these games could be even within the constraints of the series that I'm more than happy to let people take a shot at trying to change things up within those constraints.

[Ghost_MH]

Pokemon's biggest problem is competitive play. They're too afraid shaking up the formula will mess with their thirty years of competitive history. They need to divorce competitive play from the core game. What they should do is have the core games be these wild experimental games with new Pokemon, have the Let's Go games be these simplified games for younger audiences, and bring back the Stadium games for competitive play.

[Moa]

It's a shame that game freak is so complacent that the only pokemon mmo that will ever happen has to be a knockoff. 

[Xbob42]

Oh! I forgot to mention, this game has no combat RNG. Status effects always hit and last a set number of turns (visible on your health bar) -- there are no crits or any other dice rolls. You can't rely on luck to get you through things, and you don't have to pray for luck to make status effects viable.

[crispy4000]

20 minutes ago, Moa said:

It's a shame that game freak is so complacent that the only pokemon mmo that will ever happen has to be a knockoff. 

They're not complacent because Pokemon isn't an MMO.  They're complacent because of the game S&S is.

Also, Pokemon Go was a bigger deal than a Pokemon MMO.

[Ghost_MH]

2 hours ago, Xbob42 said:

Oh! I forgot to mention, this game has no combat RNG. Status effects always hit and last a set number of turns (visible on your health bar) -- there are no crits or any other dice rolls. You can't rely on luck to get you through things, and you don't have to pray for luck to make status effects viable.

 

I can't be the only person that hates the idea of an RPG with no dice rolls. It just feels wrong.

[Xbob42]

3 minutes ago, Ghost_MH said:

 

I can't be the only person that hates the idea of an RPG with no dice rolls. It just feels wrong.

No thanks! I like to win with strategy and skill, not because I got a lucky crit. And losing because your fucking sleep status didn't work 6 times in a row is trash. Or how you can confuse an enemy in Pokemon and they can function normally the entire time, and then you get confused and hit yourself every turn.

 

It's just unfun nonsense that contributes nothing. If you need dice rolls to make things more exciting, then uhh... focus on your fucking fundamentals first. Bayonetta don't need no dice rolls to be fun. RPGs don't either, although there's always exceptions.

[Paperclyp]

9 hours ago, Keyser_Soze said:

 

Rather than Pokemon Sword and Shield the $120 early access game.

 

(am I rite @Paperclyp)

You rite

[Ghost_MH]

57 minutes ago, Xbob42 said:

No thanks! I like to win with strategy and skill, not because I got a lucky crit. And losing because your fucking sleep status didn't work 6 times in a row is trash. Or how you can confuse an enemy in Pokemon and they can function normally the entire time, and then you get confused and hit yourself every turn.

 

It's just unfun nonsense that contributes nothing. If you need dice rolls to make things more exciting, then uhh... focus on your fucking fundamentals first. Bayonetta don't need no dice rolls to be fun. RPGs don't either, although there's always exceptions.

 

That just sounds too simplified. You're basically talking about an RPG with no speed or evasion stats. I don't find that very fun. The issue you're having is that you remember the bad dice rolls more than the good ones when they really do just about break even. I like games where your strategies need built in contingency plans for when/if an action fails.

 

 

[Xbob42]

1 minute ago, Ghost_MH said:

 

That just sounds too simplified. You're basically talking about an RPG with no speed or evasion stats. I don't find that very fun. The issue you're having is that you remember the bad dice rolls more than the good ones when they really do just about break even. I like games where your strategies need built in contingency plans for when/if an action fails.

 

 

I mean, you don't need to tell me that, as coincidentally I posted this in response to that video. 

For me, Pokemon has never had good luck mechanics, it's had the shitty kind. Barring that, I think the nature of turn-based combat already has a built-in set of concepts that facilitates "X happened, what will you do?" and that's being able to take in and observe enemy movesets, types, buffs, HP, stamina, etc. Obviously in every game the enemy doing anything at all follows this idea, but I more mean you don't have to react instantly, you have time to think and plan, and when it's not like bad AI trying to awkwardly follow you and hit you in real-time, enemy moves can do a better job at breaking up your plans. I don't hate RNG in Pokemon because it fucks me over (even though it does) I hate it because it saps strategy and tactics out of the game for someone getting an absolutely ludicrous bonus for no reason.

In Pokemon especially this can be a big problem. In tankier games like Temtem, these sort of luck-based things would actually be less egregious, because they wouldn't swing things to such a devastating degree. The smaller impact luck has on an overall fight in an RPG, the more acceptable it is. A lucky crit in Pokemon can literally be the difference between there being an actual fight and just getting one-shot. Like in Final Fantasy, if you get a crit on a boss, that means the boss will die a little faster, you don't auto-win. There are no opportunities opened up by a crit killing me. There are no opportunities opened up by my Pokemon hitting itself for 6 turns while I can't do anything, and all my agency is completely stripped when I apply the same debuff to the enemy and it has 0 effect. It just feels shitty. I've given negative examples, but the same is true even when luck is on your side. I don't feel like I outsmarted anybody when crits land or when they're unable to move as I beat the shit out of them. Hell, I hate stuns and such in MMOs because I like a clear and decisive contest of skill, speed, reflexes, etc., and unplugging someone's keyboard, while obviously usable as a strategic element, doesn't give them any options at all.

 

Basically I feel like luck, and combat in games in general, needs to be a long and branching flow chart that you're making in your head as you go, but in these examples it's just "lol get fucked." And I hate that so much.

[projectmayhem]

Been enjoying this a lot more than I expected. As someone who played the hell out of red/yellow/gold but fell off X pretty quickly because of how boring the combat was, Temtems battles actually require me to use strategy. 

 

Beat the first gym boss last night and felt accomplished doing if. 

[Pikachu]

 

[Xbob42]

Game is great and already had a big update to add a safari zone that changes daily. I've been trying to hold off on playing it as much as possible until 1.0, but I still open it once every few days because it's just enjoyable.

[Brian]

Imagine how many more copies it would have sold if it was EGS exclusive 

[Keyser_Soze]

7 hours ago, ManUtdRedDevils said:

Imagine how many more copies it would have sold if it was EGS exclusive 

 

Yeah but they want actual people playing the game.

[Pikachu]

https://crema.gg/temtem/content-roadmap/