@@maskedman3672 I realise its been ages since it was asked, but yes, you can. Matter of fact, there was a game for the Vita "Trillion: God of destruction" The Only enemy in the game is Trillion, imaginatively named, for having 1 Trillion Health, he goes through seperate phases, depending on how much damage he has taken however its the same evolving enemy through the game. May be more examples, but any time I can recall something from the hidden library the Vita had is a good day.
Thats true, every other level introduced a new intuitive zombie, with every other level introducing a counter to that zombie, that game always felt fresh
It's amazing how much character and personality plays into their designs as well. Most of the Zombies wear what they're going to do on their design (What does the guy with a balloon do? Why, float over your defenses, of course!), but those few which lack a really on-the-nose design, in favor of them being more story-reliant. Take the Newspaper Zombie. It's not immediately apparent what he does, but the moment you break his newspaper and see him enraged, it all becomes clear - he's reading the paper, and after you destroy his paper, he gets mad. From there on out, you remember what the Newspaper Zombie does because of his own little internal story.
Note to self: Do not use pallet-swaps to make enemies tougher, use them to make different but related enemies. The red goblin throws a torch at you and then runs away if it hits so the fire's DoT can do damage while it hides. The blue goblin stays near the water and tries to throw a rope around you and drag you in. The yellow goblin blinds you with sand and then sets traps near you. They all have the same stat block, just different behaviors.
Supporting Notes: -Recolors are a lot easier to swallow if each element is mechanically different. A fleshed out elemental system can immediately triple or quadruple the number of unique monster encounters you make. -Monsters can be made more varied by limiting the equipment or tools that hard counter them with specific requirements. Meaningful Choice is king here, not necessarily the monsters themselves. -Don't forget storytelling in mechanics, the lore is a decent source of inspiration for how to make monsters mechanically memorable. -The longer the fight takes, the less often it should be fought. A monster that takes forever to kill can feel like it haunts you everywhere even if it's only as common as everything else.
Also you can get away with recolors if you don't abuse them. Sure, FFX reuses the same dingo multiple times and sometimes they have special on-hit effects. But the key thing about these dingos is that they immediately convey their mechanics: They're agile and magic resistant (bring Tidus to deal with them. Or Wakka). Repeating these monsters allows the player to save up on memory. Imagine if there were 6 completly different looking enemies but they all had the same baseline stats. It'd just get confusing, and in the end wouldn't provide much.
On your second point about specific mechanics for specific enemies: just remember not to take it too far. It really sucks when you need a certain move to deal with one or two fights and after that you never need it again.
You raise a fantastic point about storytelling with different enemy types. The best example I can think of is the way the infection progresses through enemies in The Last of Us.
Having a new attack to look out for also kinda hypes up enemy recolors for me. In Paper Mario, you have a dark color swap for the Koopa Troopas, but these can unleash a devastating attack when you knock them on their backs, and inflict new status effects on you. For me, it was a very defining moment of where the game started to ramp up the difficulty, and introduced it through a familiar enemy.
My problem is not enemy types and looks. They can color-swap enemy types, no biggie. My problem is dominant strategy when dealing with said enemies. Their behavior has to be set up in a way that lets me experiment with the combat system so it makes multiple tactics valid and fun to do. I got this vibe from Nioh because you can switch between five weapon types + bow and rifle at any time, have different stances, use magic and ninjutsu to your advantage (debuffs, elemental effects) and work with the environment. This way, I beat some annoying side mission bosses with unusual setups because it worked for me and my playstyle or was just born out of pure necessity and desperation. The same can be said about Hollow Knight. Great enemy variation and a build-your-own-hero charm system that lets you choose your favorite style.
Sorry for the long read but it's hard to stop talking about this :D Interesting take I have a counter to it which is discovery there is no better feeling than when you discover the best way to fight an enemy vs the game telling you, take DarkSouls, for example, a hallmark of the series is enemy type weakness every enemy is weak to a specific thing and the game never tells you that it leaves it up to the player to discover and utilize another is (IFrames) while the game does say roll to avoid hits it never explicit that mechanic which is a huge part and for most people the only way to beat the game (I'm sure there is a crazy kid out there who can beat it without IFrames lol) so back to your comment of strategy if you choose to use melee on a boss that is weak to fire in DarkSouls is that the game's fault or is it your own this gets to the dare I say it the (git gud mentality) of DarkSouls games no one can deny that Discovery is both fun and rewarding but it has the risk of frustrating more action orianted players where strategy players are fine with the idea. I really don't see a way to make an action game without making generic enemies if you introduce strategy you have to slow the game down it can be done I'm sure but it is a very difficult thing to nail down, I haven't played Nioh so can't comment on it but I did play Hollow Knight and while there is plenty of ways to beat both the mobs and the bosses I just stuck to using the nail and the occasional spell so is that the games fault or is it mine (my opinion on it is that it's mine still loved the game BTW) So long as you want Discovery you're gonna have to make somethings implicit which runs the risk of players not finding it and I think that's ok especially for replayability and even conversion with friends where two people can take radically different paths to beat the same game.
@@RedEye761 I see your point, and I have to agree. This is probably just a matter of preference. Everyone plays different and expects different things from their games. As mentioned, generic monsters are no problem, as long as I can dance my way around them however I like. I'm just one of those folks who take forever with games and replay them over and over, so it's kinda obvious why I like the varied approach. Just so you know: Nioh is a loot-based soulslike with deeper (I guess) combat mechanics than in Dark Souls, and it doesn't punish me for, as an example, taking a purely dodge-based approach or a purely parry-based one. Anything goes, although enemies do have weaknesses assigned to them that make it easier to defeat them if you so wish. It also features some crazy double boss fights I still haven't dared to try, much like Hollow Knight's pantheon.
@@anonyme4881 Really? I had some bosses that forced me to rebalance my build, i.e. Watcher Knights, Lost Kin and the bad boys like Grimm and Radiance. But if you're good and quick with the nail, that's cool!
@@crisiscore341 Nail Art damage are insane and without them I cant do the pantheon at all. To be fair I never had trouble with watcher Knight.... I first tryed it... And found the secret room to kill one just after lol I find Lost Kind safer at close combat and the extra nail range is handy to control the little radiance monster that come at you. Grimm is patern heavy For Radiance I can understand if you want to kill her faster. The only time I changed my build was for lv10 Grey Prince Zote with the Fluke Shaman Combo to do mass damage because its lv10 fucking Zote and you've got no time to nail him corretly Guess thats just my playstyle to going melee
The Mario & Luigi series does enemy desings differntly, instead of making new mechanics or making the player approach the enemy in a different way (Like using single hit attacks instead multi hit ones for high defence enemies) the Mario & Luigi series makes enemies with unique attacks to make the player dodge the attack differently even when using the same concept.
What I love about the mario & luigi games is that technically, you could go an entire playthrough without being hit a single time, but to do that requires a lot of practice. There's also the risk v reward of simply dodging an enemies attack, or trying to time it perfectly to damage the enemy back. If you mess up, you could be hit yourself, but time it right and you can damage an enemy on THEIR attacking turn. Most of the battle in mario & luigi games is getting to recognise enemy patterns and capitalise on them, rather than attacking yourself
My favorite is Lakitu X and Spiny X in Dream Team. LOL. Just kidding, Honestly, Partner's in Time has the best Enemy Design of the entire series. For the cases of the Shroob-like enemies, they all look cool and intimidating.
One way to spice up a bestiary is to take inspiration from Pokemon and, instead of making palette-swap enemies, give your enemies evolutionary/mutation lines or trees. This provides the additional benefit of potential world-building and environmental storytelling, and immediately clues a player in on how to beat the encounter since it's a variant of something they have already dealt with.
@@crupplemcsplits792, even elemental variants could work if you give visual stimuli of what the enemy is. A lightning enemy should be quick and constantly moving while an ice enemy should be sluggish and slow. Of course, you can tweak design elements to fit the game, but elemental variants shouldn't just be mob recolors with a brand new elemental attack.
The criticism with BoTW's samey enemies everywhere, I've taken to calling 'Minecraft Mob Syndrome'. Because no matter where you are, in 90% of the game you are dealing with the same four or five enemies, and the results can get just as stale.
The little tweak there is the different weapons that they can hold, but still, BoTW lacks more ''regular'' enemies (I consider blobs, bats, octo' as gimmicky enemies, and Lynel as miniboss)
@@desplanchesstevan1418 The one big issue with those is after a certain point, those blobs and wolves and whatnot, barely count as an obstacle. But just the same, no matter where on the map you are, you ultimately end up fighting the same 4 enemies, and/or three bosses with little variety between places. I think a couple of tough unique enemies in each location (a la those sandworm-things in the desert) would have done wonders.
Both have a great cast of enemies, just not the type of bestiary that suits their type of game. Thats why there's so many Minecraft mods that give mobs elemental color swaps, that's what the game needs the most.
I will argue that it doesn't really matter in minecraft since the point there is not the combat, but either the exploration or-more likely- the building.
I'm glad you gave Pikmin time in the spotlight. It really deserves it. So underrated. Don't Starve, for being a game who's combat amounts to wacking things with sticks, it still has good enemy variety. Spiders that are easy to kill but come in hoardes if your not careful, protective and territorial Tallbirds, Pigs that try to hit and run you and turn into Werewolves under certain circumstances. Tentacles that slap you silly. And the hounds that periodically ruin your best laid plans. It helps that they all tend to stick to their specific biomes. You won't find tentacles in the same place Hounds spawn (well, unless you make it that way) and the survival mechanics and the different things they drop means that fighting these enemies is less about when you'll fight them, but who you should bother to go after. Need silk? Spiders. Low on food? Tallbirds, or if your feeling cheaky, hunt for Koalafants. Even the time it goes into pallete swaps in the Fire and Ice hounds can be forgiven by the fact that they have their own unique mechanics and drops.
@@AlexanderMartinez-kd7cz It's normal combat really does suck ass, I wish they fleshed it out more than just "Hit, run away, repeat, sometimes pause and heal or switch equipment for a second". I main Wheeler in singlelayer because she gets a dodge ability, more speed, and for her neutral special, she weilds a gun, all of those things making her really fun to fight and explore with.
@@bruhkan457 Yes, but we have 3 fighting based characters and one of them is mostly about using a Ghost to deal with them for you and dozens of unique bosses that serve as major mechanics one way or another.
@@Deadflower019 The bosses mostly have interesting patterns that aren't just "hit, run, repeat", the old ones are like that yes, but the newer ones (fuelweaver, toad, crab king) have some pretty fun mechanics to work with, using just the basic combat. I don't think the combat needs to be changed, just more "explored", they have shown it has potential to be interesting and maybe complex, they just got to do more with it.
I feel like there was a missed opportunity of talking about monster hunter, a game that NEEDS to have a great bestiary to work as it does. Edit: Fixed some wording
The thing that makes Monster Hunter work is: 1. Fights are hard but fair 2. There's very little cheese What I mean is that some monsters, like Rajang or Fatalis, are extremely difficult to fight, but all of their attacks are telegraphed and have predictable patterns so it's possible to defeat them without taking any damage. And elemental weakness and status effects are a thing in the game, but it's not like you can one-shot monsters or just spam one strategy until you win. Even strategies like sleep bombing that are designed to take out a massive chunk of the monster's health in one blow require a lot of setup and player coordination to pull off. The only exception I can think of is Nibelsnarf in the older games who you can cheese by repeatedly making it swallow bombs, essentially letting you stun it on command.
@@nipples123nipples I think tiger stripe zamtrios is a good example of that, while it has one similar mechanic as the original it fights very differently.
Bias in my name aside, I wanna shout out the Kirby series for its bestiaries. While they may be pretty simple to deal with thanks to how powerful Abilities can be, with the amount of them each game, it allows for a wide variety of enemies that are simple yet appealing and you can tell immediately what power they’ll give when swallowed. And at the same giving enough variance to enemies that DON’T give Abilities and are otherwise ammo when you lack one yourself. ...Unless it’s a Scarfy, Mumbies, Gordo, or Shotzo. Shoutout in particular to the Dark Matter trilogy (Dreamland 2, 3, and 64) for having to spread only a handful of Abilities compared to most other games to a big cast of enemies. Though it helps that they’re simple enough like Fire and Stone with the oddballs Parasol, Bomb, and especially Cleaning.
Enemies like Scarfy are particularly great because even in the first game, which had no copy abilities, Scarfy immediately stood out for how it served to foil Kirby's main attacking mechanics and force the player to take a different approach to dealing with them.
I think the one thing I'd want to actively add to this, is that it can be important to have enemies that fill specific design purposes; such as acting as a tutorial for a mechanic, by requiring and / or encouraging a player to make use of it. One example that comes to mind; though unfortunately an example of where the game failed rather than succeeded, is that Hollow Knight does a pretty poor job of teaching players quite how powerful the Vengeful Spirit spell they acquire early in the game is; with the forced gauntlet after you acquire it only containing squishy enemies that the player is accustomed to, where use of soul on spells rather than saved for healing would feel like a waste, and a unique enemy that you need to use it on, which the player lacks an existing frame of reference on. If the designers had included an enemy that's tough to fight close range; perhaps evading after being hit, but is taken out in one shot from Vengeful Spirit, I imagine that many players would be far more likely to realise quite how powerful the ability they'd been given is, and be willing to spend valuable soul on dealing fast damage with it, rather than saving it to heal up after the fight.
Honestly I feel that players get a pretty decent concept that the vengeful spirit is powerful, it's just that new players are *never* going to use it no matter how well they understand its strength. They might pull it out against enemies that are especially tough to hit like the moss knights, but think of it this way. Fighting with the vengeful spirit is spending soul, while fighting with the nail is gaining soul. Soul is valuable because you can use it for healing, and you can be damaged from both enemies and the environment. If you don't know what's coming next and aren't yet skilled at the game, a player is going to want to have as much soul as possible at all times so they can best deal with whatever they run into next. When it comes to regular enemies, players generally look beyond the current combat encounter and consider what would be best overall, which is also why they rarely use consumable items on trash mobs in JRPGs. Against bosses, players are more likely to play conservatively since they don't have the boss' patterns totally down, don't know how close the boss is to dead, and don't know what other tricks it may pull out later in the fight. And from a new player perspective it's probably better that they're healing rather than using spells, since that means they're spending longer fighting the boss every try, which means they're getting more practice against it each try. They'll toss out some spells if they think they're doing well, but will for the most part stick to healing.
@@android19willpwn i've never used a spell and not immediately regretted it, which is why if there's one flaw with Hollow Knight (besides the fact that the gun mod isn't vanilla) it's that the SOUL system is basically begging to be a victim of "too good to use" syndrome... if the spells had been limited in almost any other way, they wouldn't feel like pointless metroidvania-like "you can go here, now. hope you marked your map -bitch- " maybe a cooldown that gets shorter as you do damage? retains the high aggression playstyle, while not completely boning you for using SOUL on something frivolous, like, not dying...
@@robonerd125 I think the real mistake was just tying attacks to the same resource as healing. If you had a special attack meter that rapidly refills whenever you land hits, and only performed special attacks, I think most players would use those attacks liberally. And if you had a healing meter that refills only when you land hits, and requires a safe moment to spend, you'd have exactly the same healing system as now. But if you combine them on the same meter, healing is almost always more important.
@@davidbrickey8733 i actually like that they use the same resource for attack and healing. For me it adds another layer to the combat, yes most player would feel prompted to use it for healing but you can't do that forever, soul comes from melee so you eventually will have learn how to do that. It prompt me to play more aggressive than I would like (and I'm such a wuss too). I do agree they need to do better in displaying how powerful the spell is, tho I suspect most player who aren't using the spell much are probably the ones who aren't struggling much at the combat (nailing). I suck pretty bad so I had to learn to use it or I won't progress lol
The GBA trilogy and DS trilogy Castlevania games all have interesting bestiaries. Such exsamples like: •Iron Golum, that can only be instantly killed by two methods, but otherwise only takes 1hp of damage from all attacks and moves slowly. •one off enemies that can be completely ignored that you have to use special moves, or a certain action to get them to appear. •Enemies that drop items that help to heal the status effect they can cause if they touch you. •An enemy that is completely useless in attacking, but will call for reinforment if you let it escape. I could go on. •Enemies that have more then one state. •Enemies that change the surrounding physics, like gravity or block long range attacks. •stacks of a common enemy in one room that are much more dangerous then alone.
@@anonyme4881 yeah that is the best method, but there is "the chainsaw method" too, where you use one of the three other weapons that deal a lot of small individual damage, if you want a "fair" way to kill the iron Golum. Lol *(I think one of them is useless since it requires such a short range.)
Sometimes instead/as well as a palette swap there can be signs of growth from one form to another. This isn't a red Goblin, this is Blue older goblin that fights fiercer and has grown longer teeth. It's small but makes the enemies seem like they are creatures rather than a change of paint.
I tihnk Crypt of the Necrodancer did a great job at this because the enemies have a unique attack pattern and rythm to hit them, so much that there is a training area where you specificaly learn how to deal with that particular enemy using only the knife.
It helps that because movement is key in Crypt of the Necrodancer, having different types of monsters that move in different ways and hit you for various damage makes intuitive sense.
@@jasonreed7522 quite honestly palette swaps are something that are pretty common among pretty much all games early games like mario bros, metroid, etc did it too so it's not just exclusive to RPGs.
Tales of RPG series is notorious for palette Swap Design, at least after Symponia. Symphonia had at least one palette Swap per enemy, but not every enemy, but Tales of the Abyss, Vesperia, and onwards started getting really lazy. It's weird cause they make your playable characters insane in combat, but aside from bosses, regular mobs just aren't fun.
I just finished watching Mark Brown's video on JRPGs in his "design icons" series, and I have to say, very few things in this life achieve the same level of perfection as Akira Toriyama's Slime design
@@antusFireNova I have never gotten my hands on any of the 4 slime controllers. But I don't think they would be particularly nice to use as a controller. Only for display.
By far the weirdest Beastiary of all RPG's, but that's what makes the Mother series interesting, you never know who's gonna attack you on the overworld.
Although I do agree that the dozens of pallette swaps in 12 are a drawback, I would like to add to its defense that the overall feel of their overworld helped make it a lot more palatable than it would have been otherwise. The final design of the game sells this fantasy of monsters having a real ecology that you're exploring, with powerful predators existing in low level zones, monster hunterish bounty quests, and monsters interacting with eachother in the overworld even letting you scare off a pack of monsters chasing you by running them into their predator. All that really helps 'sell' the notion that palette swapped monsters are all naturally adapting/evolved to suit their unique environment. I guess all I'm saying is that proper theming really helps compensate for weaknesses in design, even if it's just to take the sting out a bit.
I also wanted to add that even as reskins their are quite a few times the reskins will act differently or have different abilities meaning a how you approach them may change. FFXII played with this alot, not just with the different area reskins, but also with the rare hunts which are often far stronger and need to be taken on carefully to not be thrown off.
@@TNobody0214 Yes, you are right here! They weren't just re-skins, but they actually acted slightly different as well, as opposed to the FFX example where that pretty much was a straight-up pallette swap.
yeah, I really enjoyed the fact that some would start fighting each other or even EAT each other. Was an interesting mechanic that was partially brought back in later final fantasies. 13 brought back the enemies fighting each other mechanic to an extent.
You showed it a bunch in the video, but I think Hollow Knight has a great bestiary. Early enemies walk at you, occasionally jog/jump a bit. As you proceed further into the world, the variety gets tougher, and each area has unique enemies.
I love miitopia’s beastiary. Because the concept of the game is so outlandish, the enemies are weird and wacky. There are still classic RPG enemies like the slimes, goblins, and banshees (all introduced in the first world), but that is fine because you can’t reveal your wackiest enemies first, or your normal enemies will be forgotten. While there are many reskins, (usually of the normaler enemies), these reskins introduce new mechanics on top of the original enemy. For example, you meet the red goblins in world 2, and they have the ability to make your miis angry. In the latter half of the game, new mechanics are still being introduces, like shield sprinkles in world 7, the second to last world in the main game.
I like the bestiary of the Mario and Luigi series. Each enemy has different attacks that you have to avoid and dodge. You will find a huge variety, even with re-skins. If it's a re-skin, their attacks are not only more powerful, but the pattern and speed of how they attack are different enough from before to make it feel engaging. They might even have new attacks to throw you off even more. Dream Team does this quite a bit, while still having unique enemies for every location you go to, so you get old with the new, while having the old be tougher and more of an actual challenge of skill in dodging it's attacks. Even (older) paper mario games made use of the re-skins in the huge variety of unique enemies. They atleast made you change your approach and felt like new battles. A dark koopa who can damage all party members with a powerful dash, or make you dizzy, is much more of a threat than one that just spins and hits you with a shell. Their mechanics are altered just enough to make it feel fresh usually. Sometimes you might find a reskin in the same level with different stats, so it doesn't feel too out of place. An example of this would be lava bubbles and embers in Chapter 5 of TTYD. Embers have higher health, while lava bubbles have higher attack. And you could find them is the same battle, so you have to pick out what you see as the larger threat. That is not to say that this game doesn't have those problems of repetition, I just think it can work around it in interesting ways. I wont touch on Origami King, because I think it was explained very well in this video.
I just wanna be one of those 5 people talking about FFXII. You showed off the Beastiary pages for all those wolf reskins but didnt talk about how much the world building and natural economy goes into the design. After talking about the general design of Dragon Quest enemies, the fact world building goes so heavily into designing each monster, giving ideas how they adapted to the area around them, strengths and weaknesses, and even a genius and species part to help show that they are designed to be part of an evolutionary tree and not just blue paint or generic design slapped over the same AI. They even add to this by giving some of the reskins new abilities or spells which adds a new spice to a familiar encounter even if the approach is the same.
Yes! They did really well even if they had lots of pallet swaps. Things like this are tools, in my opinion. And I wholeheartedly agree on the last part as someone who kicked so many Panther and Coeurl tails, but got blown to bits from Ose's Hell Blaster. *shivers*
FF12's bestiary is one I've read for hours on end when I was younger, even if I only understood half of it due to my bad English, haha! The story told through the entries and enemy descriptions was an absolute blast to read through.
When the color of breath of the wild enemies change, their AI gets better, because golden enemies don’t eat food, and they can’t get distracted by food.
talking about palette swaps, its a great way to make a game easy to learn for newcomers. lets look at Final Fantasy 12 as a great example, as you showed with the Wolves, theres a lot of them. you know what else theres a lot of? Malboros. in the other game you mentioned, FF10, there were only 2 Malboros. the first time you see one, it probably killed you with its signature Bad Breath attack. then when you see the palette swap in the final dungeon, you already know how terrifying it is, and you destroyed it with no mercy. thats great design. you dont know it, its exciting, you die for it. you learn from it, you see it again, you react accordingly. but now look at FF12. the first time you see them, they really arent that threatening. they have a new move called Cloying Breath, which causes only a few ailments. its annoying, but not deadly. as yo progress through the game, youll see two, three, five more kinds of these tentacle-plant monsters, and each one has a nastier version of their signature attack. Bad Breath has a few more ailments, and if youre undergeared and outnumbered, could lead to hasty retreat. you might not die, but you probably havent fled from many battles. then youre coming up to the final dungeon, and the crimson colored Cassies hit you with the ultimate nose-killer, Putrid Breath. for a fun fact, FF12 has more status ailments than any other FF game, and Putrid breath causes ALL OF THEM on a single character. if you havent done any sidequests, some of these ailments will be completely new to you, even if youve played every other FF game. some of these ailments persist even after death, which makes recovering from it very difficult, especially if two people are struck by it. HOWEVER, this is great game design. youve seen these enemies throughout your journey, youve seen them get stronger and stronger with each iteration, and compared to the other enemies around you, its easy to see that they are the biggest threat. getting struck by Putrid Breath is strictly your fault, you should know at a glance which enemies have which spells, and what makes them dangerous or not.
Breath of the Wild doesn't strictly lack in enemy diversity, despite how common the complaint is, but I suppose it's the distribution of them that makes it feel like there isn't enough variety. Bokoblins, Moblins and Lizalfos make up the bulk of the enemies you fight, being among the only common enemies that don't perpetually go down in just one hit (unlike the Keese, Octoroks, Pebblits and though *slightly* bulkier, the Chuchu's, which also really don't have much interaction going for them). They also concentrate in very prevalent encampments, so you frequently fight a bunch of them at a time. Other enemies tend to be quite scarce and one-offs, so it really feels like the core 3 types of enemies make up the bulk of the combat experience. It would have probably been better if areas like the desert had even just one more unique enemy besides the Molduga, which is a mini-boss. But by that notion, Molduga is legit exciting. I wager for most players, it'll be the last new type of enemy they encounter besides the major bosses or *maybe* the Yiga Blademasters. The Molduga was for me, at any rate. I wish there were more of that. It's another point the sequel could significantly improve on, which is an exciting prospect as always. Meanwhile, if you want a game with great enemy design... well, it almost feels like cheating, but Monster Hunter is a very, very obvious pick that for most probably doesn't need an introduction at this point... Monster Hunter may use the occasional subspecies, or build a new monster off an existing skeleton and thus cause some moves to be shared, but overall, the series's (main) enemy design is super strong. Minor monsters maybe a bit less so, though, so I suppose there is that.
My only issue with MH is that the games lean real hard into the "gaem hard!!! PP big because me unga bunga MR monster in 5 minute, no cart, solo" also MHW keeps on adding shitty super fast monsters that don't sit fucking still for TEN GODDAMN SECONDS so i can actually do something other than pack my happy ass up and move to wherever donkey schlongs electric type brother bounced his ass off to.
@@robonerd125 I am getting the slight hunch that you've been punched by Rajang a few too many times. Eh, I get it, I suppose. Rajang is a rough fight and I'm personally not the biggest fan of it. Overall, though, I can't say I share your sentiment that monsters are too fast or otherwise unfair. Even the recent Alatreon, after some struggling and despite the initial divisiveness among players, I've come to really enjoy. And also, based on the unga bunga stuff, don't sweat the meta enthusiasts too much. You really don't have to follow their DPS-or-bust approach if it doesn't suit you. I do think it's worth trying to work some damage boosters in, but ultimately, just try to strike your own balance. Unless there are really blatant problems with the way you set yourself up, I don't think you'll catch too much flak for whatever you're using.
@@laggalot1012 I stopped playing because it seemed like the game was going in a direction that i didn't care for, i prefer slower, more methodical approaches, i'm a lance/GL main, but every other monster in Iceborne either moves too fast for me to reliably do anything other than spend the majority of the hunt chasing after it, or waiting for it to charge me. and most of the slow monsters seem to straight up ignore shields, regardless of previous convention, like Savage Jho's miasma being unblockable despite BV Vaal being 100% blockable and that's a fucking ELDER (previously, the only unblockable attacks i can remember were grabs, which make sense, and Behemoth's EM, which was a quest mechanic) the game (for me) slowly became more and more tedious as it felt my playstyle was actively being punished whereas weapons/users like LS were getting showered with I-frames and elemental, which is a clown convention of a damage type, was being pushed to ludicrous degrees (seriously, Elem is, or was, dunno if it got fixed, the most confusing swamp of bullshit hidden mechanics i've ever seen) TL:DR i'm too stupid to change my tactics as quickly as MH wanted me to, and porting over (VASTLY overhyped) monsters from previous titles wasn't interesting enough to keep me invested...
He did an entire segment on what you're talking about in BOTW with basically the exact same points so I don't really see why you wrote 2 paragraphs on it
@@robonerd125 I can relate somewhat to that, as I'm a Gunlance main myself. Trust me, I've been frustrated at some of the things you mentioned myself and this specifically is why I've disliked Vaal Hazak are first. You basically have to slot in the Effluvium resist if you don't want it to mow you down entirely. As for these weapons being too slow... have you tried Evade Extender by any chance? When it comes to attacks you can't or just don't want to block, Evade Extender does wonders for improving the mobility of these heavy weapons. I would certainly recommend it if you find yourself having trouble keeping up in terms of mobility or getting out of things like Jho's miasma as you mention. It's not a perfect solution, you will still have to take some damage from the miasma if you aren't responding absolutely immediately but it helps a lot, I find. Longsword feels good to play, but I agree, it gets too many tools, even if it technically isn't even super amazing DPS-wise. It's a bit too easy. And I also agree that elemental mechanics could be explained much better, which is a shame. That said, since I'm pretty sure you are referring to Alatreon, I happen to like that fight a lot, after the initial struggle. ...I don't Gunlance it, though. SnS is my weapon of choice for that one, and I simply run a Safi set with a good fire or ice weapon and it works well. Alatreon definitely demands some adaptation, but I don't think it's too bad myself.
You forgot to talk about the Enemies teams dynamic, Like in JRPG how fighting Three Slimes is not the same as 2 Slimes and one Goblin , how one enemie type is not that hard but some combos maybe deadly when they team up. I think Megaman Battle Network did it the best
I always pronounce it "Beast-iary" too, but learned earlier this year it's actually "Best-iary". I still think Beast-iary sounds better tho, given it's a dictionary of beasts lol
@@vermiform that's not how bestiality is pronounced though. And I mean I've heard bestial pronounced both ways too but never bestiality (though, admittedly, that one comes up less often).
That game is the reason Shy Guys are my favorite Mario enemies. Shy Guys are great because they are so delightfully inventive and charming in the ways they try to fight, it leaves the player wondering, “What new costume are they gonna try next?”
@@ethandement3921 Or what absurd tactic they'll try to defeat me? Thing like using slingshots and baloons, dancing with a spear on hand, being on fire, using stilts to be higher, being fat, a shyguy turret, an acrobatic jump, or my personal favourite, a toy tank.
I don't know an official count, but I feel like there are very few, sprite-based platformers or action games with as many different enemy types as Yoshi's Island. And even variants with recycled sprites often have different behaviors. And that's not even getting into the amount of behaviors and expressiveness they showcase.
would love to hear what you think about games like pokemon or shin megami tensei, where the enemies you fight are also the tools you use to take them down
I'm really interested in this too. Games that use this concept are usually RPGs, a genre where players and enemies are typically on an uneven playing field. Players rarely get access to the same skills enemies have, and vice versa, and challenge is often maintained by balancing how many characters are on each side of the battlefield with how strong they are (e.g. a small army of weak monsters vs one strong warrior). Games where (almost) every enemy can be a potential ally make it difficult to rely on the usual methods of creating challenge, yet while Pokemon is thus unsurprisingly considered very easy, SMT is known for being challenging. I'd love to see a comparison of how they approach the limits of their mechanics.
Dragon’s Dogma took enemy weak spots and turned them from a way to deal damage to a way to entirely change the fight, and some fights are only winnable by exploiting them. Except unlike other games, hitting those weak spots takes exploration and skill, so winning feels like such an achievement!
Sekiro did a great job with this. Even though most enemies are human swordmen, each one has a very well defined visual design and an specific moveset. Even enemies with the same uniform are very distinct. For example in the ashina dojo they all wear a blue kimono, but there's 3 variants, the normal guys who are weaklings, the guys with a modified kimono and a bandana, and finally the elite which uses quickdraws and uses a different stance from the rest. It's also great how they all feel from the same dojo since they all use Ashina techniques that you can see Genichirou and Isshin using in their perfected forms.
A really interesting beastiary can be found in Kid Icarus Uprising. Each monster was a unique pattern and a different way to defeat them. And instead of recycling enemies using different color palletes, there are different races...
I remember looking back through the enemy trophies(?) I collected, and DANG, that game has some insane enemy variety. Not only wildly unique in their own right, but unique from each other as well!
I think bloodborne got the enemy design perfect. Enemies in the first half all look like the normal old Victorian horror monsters and stuff, but then in the second half of the game, ooooh boy. I just love that it suddenly becomes lovecraftian, and the change makes sense in the game. It was already feeding you things that hinted that it would become like that with item names and some of the random lore you read/hear from a few of the npc's. The old ones, mad man's insight, every thing said or mentioned when blood is involved. That one dude saying you need more eyes to see. The frenzy ailment!! While its not my favorite game (that being etrian odyssey) , from software made bloodborne's enemies really dang well, to the point where the only enemies that seem out of place on first encounter was the jelly fish alien looking things.
MegaMan Battle Network, while using a lot of palette swaps, has a ton of unique enemies in the series bestiary, ranging from Shadows that can only be hit with sword attacks, to Dominerds that shield other enemies, to Appleys that heal other enemies when defeated, it really keeps you on your toes to deal with each pack of enemies differently
Definitely gotta second Battle Network. Because of how the combat is the designed, how battles are timed and reward you based on your performance, and the way individual enemies have very static and predictable behavior makes it great excercise in how to best and most efficiently take out enemies. It's a strong blend of action and puzzle elements. There's a lot of ways to solve your problems and you gotta find the ideal method based on the hand and enemy combination you are dealt. Mistakes are punishing, but success is very satisfying. And even palette swaps of enemies will sometimes introduce new behavior or traits to account for that add to the challenge.
I would have been dissappointed if nobody had mentioned MMBN. Imo it has the best bestiary there is, it is an integral part of that combat system, fights in that game can be so much fun :). Also the reskins/palette swaps are actually great imo, they're similar but slightly different mechanically and actually add instead of distracting from the combat system.
Enter the Gungeon's cute enemy design and the variety of ways they interacted with each other got me excited to complete the bestiary. For mediocre monster design I nominate DemonCrawl. It is a dungeon crawler, but instead of hack&slash you navigate through a series of minesweeper boards. Despite having a variety of critters for each environment, they have no more personality than a landmine and all blur together.
You can’t do much of a comparison because there is not much to talk about with the modern Paper Mario bestiary. They are mainline Mario enemies except for Origami Kong’s bosses.
There’s something I like about FFX’s monster reskins. Maybe there wasn’t enough variety by endgame, but when the main mechanic is using the right ally on the right monster, it’s nice to decode the enemy’s weakness without wasting time using “Scan” or trying to memorize certain enemies. It may seem simple to say, “Wakka hits birds,” but even that’s more tactically involved than previous FF titles. If anything, the monsters needed extra nuance here and there to force new strategies every now and then.
It would have been nice if they were to add in some more tactical elements as the game went on because the "Wakka hits birds" remains the same throughout. The battle system is fun and one of the best in the series imo but to have those slight tactical changes would have made it even better
Counter point to your legend of Zelda argument. Botw makes it so that you can not kill enemies the same way over and over again by using the weapons system. Because weapons break so frequently you often don’t want to use them on low level enemies. This encourages finding new ways to deal with the more mundane parts of the bestiary. As enemies get harder and environments change your methods of dealing with enemies have to become more and more creative. Continuously making the game feel new and exciting as you find ways to take out hoards of enemies without having to use any durability.
I largely agree, though I think the fact that the game throws perhaps a few too many weapons at you once you get yourself established to really make you care about weapon durability much, and also alternative ways of damaging enemies scale very, very poorly with growing enemy HP (and doubly so with Master Mode's health regen). Rolling boulders down a cliff or dropping explosive barrels is a great way of taking out basic Bokoblins quickly and easily without even fighting, but once you hit Black and above, it barely even dents them, so it loses its value. Silver enemies basically don't even care. I always thought that was rather disappointing. At that point, the really the only relevant methods of alternative fighting methods is knocking these enemies off a tall cliff or into water if they're not a Lizalfos. I hope for the sequel that such indirect ways of dealing with enemies remain relevant for longer or even perpetually, personally.
As much hate color swap/elemental variant enemies does get. They can give interesting combat ideas like putting all of them into an arena. Giving players challenges like how to defeat them with relative ease or fast times Thats just me though
I think a good example of color/elemental variants is in the hounds of Don't Starve. Every few days, a varying number of hounds will show up to attack you, and they become more intense over time. And along with them, depending on the seasons, come their elemental variants. Ice hounds in Winter and Spring, and red hounds in Summer and Autumn. They act the same as regular hounds, except they have less health, but killing them causes them to explode, either freezing you or setting things on fire around them. They have different drops too, since they drop more teeth than regular hounds and can even drop gems.
You showed it off a bit in the video but Kingdom Hearts 2 has some amazing enemy designs. Each enemy works differently and has their own mechanics, but each world has their own enemies. For example, in Land of the Dragons (Based on Mulan) You'll fight floating towers, centaurs with spears and puppets. While in a world like Beasts Castle (Based on Beauty and the Beast) Statues will come to life, umbrella bats hang from the ceiling and the mini boss and final boss use the idea of posession to make the castle itself attack you. Every world is like this. Space Paranoids enemies move robotically, Pride Lands enemies all move like animals and, my favourite, Timeless River manage to get a rubberhose feel to their 3D models. And then you have the Nobodies. While yes there are only 12 types you'll fight on the regular, you only encounter them when the Organization controlling them is around, giving this idea of forboding threat. These definately don't feel like the other enemies and they don't feel like they belong here, which is exactly why they are a threat. The one exception to all of this is the Cavern of Rememberance. Every enemy you fight in here is just a reskin of something youve already fought and is just used as a gauntlet to get to the final prize of the Data Battles. But it's given some leeway because it's A) Optional and B) was added in the final mix version meaning they didn't want to make brand new enemies for just this one section, so reskinned the hardest enemies in the game and made them even harder.
I think a big thing is progression, which has come up in previous videos a lot. When a game has like 5 main "areas" which you can enter into and explore freely, being able to see the new monsters and new discoveries is a big part of it. Sure, if the Slime in area 1 also has a fire and air variant in area 1 that's not a big deal and it spices things up. It's a positive. But when it's area 4 and you're fighting a Water Slime or otherwise, you don't feel like you've progressed which can really put a damper on things. Though, I think there's a nice middle ground where some reusability meets progression. Area 1: Wolf Area 2: Dire Wolf Area 3: Elemental Wolf Area 4: Cerberus (Three Headed Wolf) Area 5: Hydra Wolf (Eight Headed Wolf) In a turn based combat game, this can work well. Dire Wolf is just wolf but bigger and better stats. Elemental Wolf gives a decent bit of variety and new mechanics. Cerberus introduces multiple attacks that may have status effects. Hydra Wolf gives even more attacks and regeneration. From a Base, it's all the same. But additional effects and added mechanics, even if it's just one or two, leads to a world of difference.
4:02 Yeah, there were pros and cons to FFX's enemy designs. Some enemies don't simply have a palette swap, but they may also have added visual features and/or body parts, which was a step above their simple palette swap of the older games. However, I will say that the reuse of animations sorta made people believe it WAS a simple palette swap and they couldn't tell the difference between one certain enemy to the next. It was an interesting step for them at the time, though.
Y'know, this can easily branch into designing singular enemies, like in Monster Hunter and Shadow of the Colossus, where are are no little enemies, but rather huge ones only ;)
My favourite beastiary has to be the SMT series, mostly because of the design. However, what I always appreciated about it is that if you know your stuff in mythology you can sometimes guess the enemies weakness if you know their story. Some are more obvious while other take some real background knowledge but man does it feel satifying if you bring in tertiary knowledge to your advantage.
For good enemy design, I'd point to Sonic Mania each enemy functions differently with different ways to attack, but each zone has its own unique baddy lineup with even each act having an exclusive foe to take down.
I feel like the Kingdom Hearts games have some really solid bestiaries. As they've added more enemy types, they've done less color swapping in favor of using a variety of enemies.
even the color swaps in KH1 and 2 are more interesting than "just a color swap." theres obviously standard enemies like Shadows and Soldiers, but these guys never get color swaps. they just get stat boosts as you progress through the game. while the first encounter with a Large Body might leave a rookie player struggling, the endgame has no problems dropping you into a battle with 5 of them, with huge statboosts applied, and you still make short work of them. but there ARE color swaps, the "elemental music" enemies. they all have a signature bell shape and they fly around, but behave very differently. in KH1, the red ones are pretty slow, but might keep moving while they cast a slow moving fireball. the yellow ones are excitable and zip across the battlefield in the blink of an eye before they stop to cast an unavoidable thunder spell.
@@steveh1474 yeah the elemental music enemies actually add a lot of depth to the game with their variations. They all test the same skills: pursuing the enemy and using weakness, but the variations in their ai and weaknesses test them in different ways. At least in kh1
yeah, as far as I know, the KH series never really seemed to have issues with what looks like color swaps. They've always seemed to make each enemy unique. And even if you find the same enemy in a different game, each installment is unique enough for you to feel like you're dealing with them in a new way. They could make a KH game with every enemy they've ever used and it'd still feel like a new experience to me.
I enjoyed the enemies in the Mega Man: Battle Network series, because most enemies demo a move you can acquire and have different movement patterns to work around.
Castlevania: Curse of Darkness had many enemies on it's bestiary, but half of them were also pallet changes. Surprisingly, what they did to make the fight against of the red enemy from the blue enemy feel different was to make their best attack compltetely different, so you ended up reacting it differently from one another, even if it was by just one attack. The game also had many wolves with many reskins, but i remember some of them being able to beathe fire, or something alike, so it did seem like a more powerful version of the wolf, not just a simple stat change. Summarizing it: Reskins or color palletes can feel natural when the new versions have different or stronger attacks and powers to help backup their novelty, instead of just a stat and visual change.
Oh, wow, another person that remembers that game? Yeah, the palette swaps in the game work really well, and they feel like they've adapted to/been influenced the environment they're in rather than just being slightly different.
It's been a while after this video, but now that Psychonauts 2 has been out for a month, AND has been nominated for Game of the Year, I do believe it deserves a shout out for its beastiary, which is not only creative in taking after many negative thoughts and behaviours, but also does as good a job at telling us about the characters who's minds they reside in as the minds themselves. Bad Ideas, Doubts and Regrets, Panic Attacks, Enablers. Each enemy is introduced in a world where their existence makes absolutely perfect sense, and their appearances in further worlds ends up telling a bit about the persons thoughts and experiences. Take Panic Attacks, terrifying mini boss level enemies that represent moments of extreme distress or sensory overload, which show up in the mind of a brain in a jar who's re-experiencing sensations after 20 years, and is overwhelmed by them as a result. In subsequent minds, they'll usually clue you in that the person has experienced moments of intense distress at some point in their lives, which you might be able to figure out based on where in the mindscape you fight them. But would you believe that even their LACK of presence adds to the persons story? I wouldn't. But Psychonauts 2 did it. Regrets are representations of, well, regrets the person may have about their choices and actions. As our favorite mad dentist once said: "Everyone has their doubts and regrets." But in a mind that doesn't have them, it clearly tells you that this person regrets NOTHING about what they've done, something that makes perfect sense for the final mind you get to explore. If Psychonauts 2 had come out before this, I would damn guarantee you it would have shown up here. If Design Doc ever makes a part 2 for this, you better damn well have Psychonauts 2 mentioned in there.
Shin megami tensei or persona are some games with amazing enemies. All based on creatures or gods of myth, legend, and religion. All with stylish designs
Yeah the Megaten series is really good with it's demon bestiary. You have to be careful fighting them as you need to find a weakness, at the same time, the enemy can do so to you. You also can't just simply go through the games with just Physical or Magic focused MC and Demons cause theirs gonna be something nasty like Alciel, Girimekhala, Rangda or something else that will block, drain or even reflect attacks back at you. Granted their are some palllette swap demons like Tam Lin and Cu Chulainn, thankfully their are some alternate designs of demons like the superior Devil Summoner Cu Chulainn, but I never understood why Atlus doesn't that design more.
One funny way I accidentally made BOTW very interesting was by never finding the guy who increases inventory capacity. I don't know how I missed him but I played the entire game with the base inventory amount. This forced me to use all the creative methods of killing enemies because I only had maybe 4 swords to do traditional fighting. I'd honestly say the experience was far more engaging due to this mistake than it was once I could carry dozens of weapons around.
I would like to hear your thoughts on how different types of enemies can be grouped together to make interesting scenarios. For example, how an encounter against a mix of melee and ranged enemies creates a different (often more interesting) challenge than fighting each separately.
The lack of enemy variety is just Indicative of the larger problem: there isn’t anything interesting to look forward to or discover. People praise the game of its openness but the same time isn’t much incentive to explore other than for the sake of it. It’s all the same enemies and rewards of the same disposable weapons. There are no significant upgrades or interesting power ups to find.
Silent Hill 2 deserves a mention, though the design of the enemies is more a psychological than a practical choice, as pretty much every monstrosity you encounter is an allusion to the twisted psyches of the main characters (Abstract Daddy, anyone?).
Calling FF XII species palette swaps was really not accurate, great care went into designing each variations and there's some variety to the models as shown in this video
5:49 If you see the problem that more realistic games with all human enemies tend to feel stale quicker, would've been cool if you had shared some ideas or suggestions on how to design around this.
Thanks for the useful video, Doc! I'm working on my first game, and enemy designs has been the first great obstacle that has since switched onto Bosses. I believe in the 'less is more' principle to begin with and since we're talking about a beat 'em up game, I don't think that filling it with a multitude of different mobs would do it any good.
Part of this is why I could never stomach the Division. It's hard to suspend your disbelief when you have one regular human enemy that goes down in a certain amount of bullets ,and another, also absolutely human enemy that can soak up lead like it's mild mid-May drizzle.
I think Risk of Rain 2's enemy variety is really good, as each enemy acts very different from the others, while still sharing enough features to make them easy to understand. That, combined with the elite system that can make even the easiest enemies a threat if you aren't careful, makes the combat feel really good. Another thing is how some enemies can uniquely interact with other aspects of the game, being the players items (a huge aspect of the Risk of Rain series) and other enemies. For example, there are enemies such as the imp that give the player a damage over time debuff. When the player gets an item called razor-wire, an item that causes damaging razors to be shot from the player when they take damage, these damage over times go from extremely dangerous to a risky source of damage. An example of enemies interacting with each other can come in the form of one of the games bosses, known as the clay dunestrider. This boss, when it's health falls below a certain threshold, will have a new attack available to it. This attack has the dunestrider lay down on the ground and send out tendrils to any entity nearby, pulling them towards itself and slowly dealing damage to them, while regenerating it's own health. This attack affects enemies as well as players, and the only way to stop it quickly is to break all of the tendrils, which can be achieved by either getting the entity far enough away from the dunestrider, or by the entity dying. These factors, combined with the masive defense boost the move also grants the dunestrider, forces the player to consider how they should deal with the situation, especially since RoR2 is run-based, and the player can run into clay dunstriders multiple times during runs. These are just a few examples of how great Risk of Rain 2 is, and I think it needs way more attention then it is getting. It has a lot of cool aspects in it's design that I think it could probably show up in a video on this channel as a good example quite often.
Dante's Inferno did enemy design really well in the first half of the game. Each enemy you fought was associated with that ring of Hell (until the devs got lazy, which was a shame...). It portrayed the narrative really well, making you feel like you were actually traversing Hell, whilst making really unique grotesque designs for each enemy, which suit the theme of Hell
Y'know, Wonderful 101's bestiary is something to behold, it does great at showing off battle mechanics, with many different types of enemies often being weak to specific abilities, like how the giant turtle-like Megangs have armour that can only be shattered by using Unite Hammer (which also acts as a tutorial on using the ability itself), and if you're feeling adventurous, you can block their stomps to tip them over on their backs to attack their underbellies for extra damage! Yes there are some re-skinned designs but the overall variety is extensive throughout.
I’d like to bring Adventure Quest Worlds to the spotlight, as it has recognizable aesthetic differences between enemies, most pallet swaps actually convey information about enemy affiliation, and the puns involved with some of them or their associated quests are hysterical.
A thing that wasn't mentioned but I think it's p important is to design the enemies around the player's abilities. If you give the option of flame powers you have to make them interesting, give the player some ice enemies that are resistant or immune to physical attacks. In the same way, if you see that a mechanic is very strong in game testing, try making an enemy type or zone that counters that mechanic so that the player doesn't rely on just doing one single thing all the time.
I've been playing Dragon Quest XI S and I never feel tired of watching the monsters intro animation. I think they're funny (of course, their character designs have a great appeal)
I was just thinking about this the other day while playing Dead Cells actually. That game has incredible enemy variety and they're all very easy to remember what they do.
the kingdom hearts games always have fun enemy designs that test the players’ ability to fight them off. beyond simple foot soldiers there are bigger enemies like large bodies that are only able to be damaged from behind or with magic, or floating elemental enemies that take more damage against certain spells or heal allies. different combinations of all these heartless leads to a variety of tactics needing to be employed against them, and they all have cute designs to differentiate them, including a special unique heartless design for every world you visit that comes with fun gameplay quirks like a ghost that becomes intangible on occasion for the nightmare before christmas world or a dandelion that splits into multiple smaller enemies to fight rather than one large one when hit with wind magic in the tangled world. relegating these enemies to one world also helps them maintain their novelty since you only see them on occasion. later in the series with kh2, new enemies called nobodies are introduced, whose designs are whispy and white to contrast the heartless’ stubbier black designs and set themselves apart. gameplay-wise they serve to test the player’s skill with the reaction command system that debuted with them in kh2 by being much weaker to them than the heartless while being stronger in most other areas. also, when reaction commands debuted, nearly every single enemy got one which served to further set them apart very nicely from one another :))
Kremlings in the Donkey Kong Country games have so much personality that makes a really fun game, also everyone has a different proportions and pattern of attack
You already pointed out Bug Fables with it's scaling and enemy designs but a good one for me is Megaman Zero (the series). They put what can seem like a common normal foe into a important position to block your path while platforming or even get the jump on you if you are focused on something else, there is a lot more that the games enemies can do but rushing through the level half haired will cost you more than you bargain for and the same thing for playing it safe.
I want to hear more about human-based 'bestiaries' after I read a Kotaku article bemoaning how repetitive they can get. The author specifically mentioned how most Ubisoft-like open-world games tend to have enemies with similar functions (e.g. the one that rushes you, the one with the big gun, the one with a cloak who is definitely a sniper, and so on). The unfortunate issue about that article is how true it seems to remain, even after 4 years from its publication. Personally, I've been surprised at how games like Division 2 have been able to wring out interesting variations of these broad enemy types by making each factions' version of the type have a bit of a quirk to them. For example, while most factions have traditional snipers in their ranks, the Outcasts have one which fires arrows with explosive tips, while the Rikers have a sniper which hunkers down behind a small shield. Small touches like those can help differentiate between some human enemies, but it can be difficult to make human enemies feel distinct outside of different colors to their uniforms. I'm assuming this specific topic has been argued over numerous timed by actual developers, but the issue still persists - human enemies tend to be less interesting and memorable than non-human enemies. Hopefully, the ongoing conversation of how to make enemy characters interesting and memorable will allow developers to make more interesting games around defeating them.
Yeah, that's kinda why I don't like FPS games all that much. A vast majority seems to have that human mook issue. Even with the game I'm making, there's a good deal of humans mixed in with monsters, but a vast majority of human enemies will end up as bosses, not random encounters.
Good episode! Would like to see more of this! Maybe an exploration on the tricks of balancing abilities, available strategies and powers of both users and enemies to avoid a repetitive meta way to defeat enemies (thinking of destiny here and how the fights were underwhelming shoot at a big target for math damage- up until they tinkered with the Raid puzzles). And maybe how encounter pacing, formation placement, and level design interact with keeping enemy encounters fresh as well (Halo's great at making every fight feel different no matter how many times you run it, so weird these two games were made by the same studio). Plenty more to discuss when it comes to the artistic design side as well
The Left 4 Dead games have good enemies: the commons are all easy to kill, but the gore system is amazing because they can have different body parts removed. The uncommons are just commons, but with slight differences like being fireproof for CEDA or not being distracted by pipe bombs for construction. And the specials all have unique silhouettes and ways to fight
For me, I can never go wrong with Any Mario Games roster of Baddies. Just the enemies alone help make the game great. For something related to Luigi, His 3 Luigi's Mansion titles have multiple ghost-like enemies. Now, most people will praise the first game for the "portrait ghosts" but I think Dark Moon has the best original ghost design. You have standard Greenies, who can then appear with a shovel, hammer and shield, a shield, or even inside a Mummy or suit of Armor. Slammers, which are the brutes who cause shockwaves. Hiders, who hide and throw objects at you. Creepers are the trap enemies that you have to avoid, Sneakers stay invisible and try to surprise attack you. Gobbers will stay still, but have tons of health and require you to move around so you can avoid it's attacks. And then the Poltergeists which are mini-bosses that appear in the first, third, and final mansions. along with Greenies, Slammers, Hiders, Sneakers, and Gobbers having upgraded versions of their base forms that is actually part of the lore. Let's also not forget the various Boo's, and even the Area Bosses, the Possessor Ghosts. The 5 Possessor Ghosts are under the control by King Boo, who is honestly 100x better in Dark Moon than he was in LM1. For a squad of enemies, Every single one of Dark Moon's enemies are original and are far more interesting than the original games enemies (save for ghost shy guys). and LM3's Floor Bosses. Also, Polterpup was introduced in Dark Moon as an enemy. And He is Best Ghost Doggo. Fact.
Honestly I love the enemy design for Dark Moon. I see a lot of criticism from it and the bosses "all looking the same." Yeah the Possessor Ghosts look similar to each other, but they aren't really the "main" part of the boss. The cool thing they possess is what really makes the boss unique.
Having different ways to deal with enemies like in Breath of the wild is extremely fun. Trying out all possible charm combinations in Hollow Knight was a blast, and it was always worth it because you would need the geo anyway
In my game, there are an enemy called Intense Mole. It digs around so you never know where it will show up next, and when it comes into contact with the player it explodes. The explosion deals quite a bit of damage, but it is also kind of helpful because it will damage enemies too, and the smaller enemies have low health and will probably die. I am experimenting with letting the player pick them up and take them into the next room to maybe help with bosses, but the game's mechanic is that you only have 1 inventory slot, and you can't go down the ladder to the next dungeon layer if you are holding an item, so I was thinking maybe if you pick it up b4 the fuze goes off and it explodes, you can throw it down and grab a weapon. A big part of bosses is throwing some weapons down the ladder so that if your weapon runs out of durability during the fight, you have more in the boss room to use.
I consider a good new enemy one that changes the player's interaction with the combat mechanics. If you're using the same strategy for multiple enemy types, then they're just the same enemy.
Over 15+ years of gaming under my belt and I never really considered enemy designs quite like this. I have noticed it in subtle ways such as this game is dull to play or wow this same enemy just popped up again but never to this degree or thought. Just played Dragon quest XI and I couldn’t understand why I loved the world of it. Now I can see it’s because of the great playful designs of each monster/character. I love videos like this. More please.
I like how Etrian Odyssey have some ennemies have different patterns in different formation. those fishes uses a devastating attack when in group, this ape throw weaker ennemies at you. It adds some strategy (do you try to pick that stronger enemy, or pick up the weaker ones to mitigate damage) and allow to reuse old ennemies in interesting new ways
Something feels good about seeing an enemy design that's super rare or restricted to one specific area. Such as in Donkey Kong Country 3, you get the Tyrant Twins who appear only in 3 levels, and only in the Lost World of Krematoa, it makes them feel like an occasion to see! Same with Swoopy, the bird who creates a platform in one of the earlier levels doesn't return until you get very deep into the game with a stage revolving around them. Along with the Koindozers, who have just 1 stage for them as enemies!
They could've made each subsequent variety of enemies "smarter" in BOTW, maybe? Rather than make enemies stronger. And the fact that certain known enemies in the Zelda series were removed only made things feel more static because we didn't see a lot more enemies than we have seen.
Gotta mention my favorite game Undertale here, and how it, of course, takes varied enemy designs with interesting and unique attacks and then turns that RPG system on its head by making them interesting and unique individuals as well.
I love it when you get a group of competent evil characters. I enjoyed Strega from Persona 3, I like it when a group of them mimic your characters, but better. God Hand had a really great group of antagonists as well, the antagonists should play off of each other. Caligula Effect Overdose (some call it a Persona knockoff but it's a good game!) had like a dozen antagonists, and it was fun looking at all of their silhouettes before they were revealed.
the Siralim series is one that does an obscene amount of pallet swapping, BUT they have a giant list of different unique skills in the game and each color pallet change can change how you approach the fight entirely. there are some enemies that you want to attack last because they buff their allies when they get hit. there are some enemies you want to attack first because if you attack anything else they will retaliate. many of the battles play somewhat like opening a combination lock.
Hyper Light Drifter has a pretty great bestiary. Each area has it's own unique enemies and they all behave differently; they aren't just stronger or weaker versions of each other. There is also great visual design for them which conveys the story of the game, like Halo, which is especially useful since the game has no spoken or written dialogue.
Thinking about bestiaries that particularly stood out to me. Celeste has exactly one enemy: seekers. But the fact that the game only has one means that even though seekers aren't particularly complicated, they feel a lot more like a threat than they probably would have if Celeste had more enemies. Sort of the same effect you'd get from boss fights in games that have less than three bosses total. I do really like the seekers, though, because they change up the gameplay since not only do you have to avoid them, but you also have to manipulate them into doing certain things to progress the level (especially in the b side). Xenoblade X is interesting because its enemies feel a lot like part of the scenery rather than actual enemies that you are going to fight (especially some of the really high level or big ones, like the dinosaurs by the lake or the two giant worms). While that's certainly good, the enemies also tend to have different behavior types that can vary by time of day. Some patrol an area, some pretend to be inanimate objects, some lay around, some do other things. And due to overlevelled areas not being hard to find and them being possible to approach while underlevelled (due to being able to sneak around and run away from enemies consistently enough to be something you wouldn't be immediately turned away from these areas), it has the effect of certain areas have different feels depending on when you get there in the game. For example, there's this one area in Primordia that's a path full of level 50 enemies that will attack on sight on foot but not when you're in the mech, I went to the top of the waterfall for different reasons three separate times: once when I was underlevelled and didn't have a mech, once when I was underlevelled and had a mech, and once when I was at a level where I could deal with the enemies. Those were all pretty different gameplay experiences, only one of which actually involved fighting the enemies (also worth noting with the mech, some enemies notice the mech and others don't, the other thing with the mechs is dying in Xenoblade X doesn't really have any consequences, but a mech dying does). The game also has instances where high level enemies that can one or two-shot anyone in the party roams around and will attack (typically encounters with these enemies aren't super common, they have a predictable path, they only appear during certain times of day, and/or whether they aggro you is dependent on whether you're in a mech). Their existence also makes gameplay more interesting because you have to be mindful of them in areas they appear and they're not common enough to be super annoying. There are some enemies that disguise themselves as part of the environment. The ones that actually pass for the environment can be interesting because they surprise you, but the ones that are obviously enemies also work because they're often placed next to enemies you want to be fighting and you have worry about positioning because if you get too close, you might cause an overlevelled enemy to start attacking you. The actual enemy fights in the game aren't too interesting (at least, to talk about). I don't think the different stats or quirks enemies have are often super noticeable when the character builds are very easy to turn into a one size kills all type thing, there are too many status effects that don't get explained or very well communicated to be noticed, there are too many damage types and it's not very easy to know what type of damage is being used from either your attacks or enemy attacks (like, the attack types are called physical, thermal, electric, gravity, beam, and ether if I remember correctly, and it's not clear to me always clear from an animation what type each thing is meant to do, partially because of the, at least, english names being vague. For example, there's this one enemy type called a Leviath [the flying blue fish in primordia] that has a lot of attacks where laser beams get flung everywhere, but those aren't beam attacks, those are ether attacks, it's usually only a beam attack when a robot does it). I don't think this automatically makes the combat unfun, but it does mean the enemies aren't really contributing to combat variance as much as the character you're playing, the terrain, and the threat of a certain enemy joining the fight can affect the combat gameplay. But the main thing with Xenoblade X is the enemies are really interesting in ways that aren't directly connected to fighting them. Xenoblade 2's a counter-example to how Xenoblade X's enemies are interesting. I found them a bit disappointing. A lot of the enemies in Xenoblade 2 are ripped from Xenoblade 1 in terms of designs (though a lot received anywhere from slight design changes to being completely different enemies that just share the name with an enemy from Xenoblade 1, such as brogs look like brogs in xenoblade 1 but a bit slimier and smoother while the Feris in Xenoblade 1 looks like an apex cat with a mace for a tail and a very fucked up face while the Feris in Xenoblade 2 looks like a wolf but with a mane and horns). The enemies in Xenoblade 2 don't feel like as much a part of the world as they did in Xenoblade X, but I think that has more to do with Xenoblade 2's maps being a much smaller scale than Xenoblade X's. So, for in Xenoblade X, there may be multiple packs of grexes with different territories, in Xenoblade 2, there aren't multiple packs of the same animal to track. (Considering that neither game has a ton of enemy specific variety and a lot more difference in combat is based on recognizing what class of enemy you're dealing with and some rules there, the difference between a bunny and a dog isn't a huge one mid-combat in either game because you'll probably just approach both the exact same way). But one thing it does really wrong is avoid enemies is still a part of the gameplay experience, like with the other games in the series, and different enemies have different types of detects. But the game doesn't show you the detect type so you have to sus it out yourself by interacting with the enemy or guessing based on their character design. But that doesn't work because most of the enemies are borrowed from Xenoblade 1, which does show the enemy's detection type. What happened was most enemies I either knew because I played Xenoblade 1, I treated like sight and sound at the same time (in other words, stayed out of their line of sight and didn't get too near them), or knew it had one detection type because of Xenoblade 1 but then that type was changed (which happened once during a section with enemies twice the player's level where the enemy in Xenoblade 2 was sight type but in Xenoblade 1 was nonaggressive). One thing Xenoblade 2 did better about its enemies than Xenoblade X did was the enemy typing. Xenoblade 1 doesn't have much enemy categorization. The mechon and telethia are one group of enemies that have a common gameplay, aesthetic, and story beats, but I think Monado Buster is the only attack in the game that does bonuses on enemies if they're part of a specific category. Xenoblade X and Xenoblade 2 do categorize their enemies though. In Xenoblade X, it is awful. First off, some of the best damage multipliers are enemy type based, so you'll either be constantly dropping in the menu to change your load out from "deals 50% more damage to robots" to the exact same thing but for a different enemy type or you'll just make a generic build. It also doesn't help that the enemy names include stuff like "theroids" and "pinscoid" which don't mean anything to me. Xenoblade 2's enemy categorization is a lot easier to deal with because the names are more clear "humans," "flying enemies," and "beasts" are a lot more clear than X's naming scheme. The other thing is damage boosts based on enemy type are part of this game's equivalent to a skill tree rather than equipable items. So when you see a big dog, you're like "oh, good, Pyra's good at stabbing puppies. I'll use her" rather than "I'm going to change my equipment load out now." The enemies are also a lot less monotonous to fight than in Xenoblade X since they have elemental system that isn't very complicated but it's present enough to change your approach to certain enemies, status effects are better communicated, and in general, the complexity found in X that didn't contribute to depth was stripped down (now we're back to two damage types: physical and ether, which is a lot more manageable and easy to communicate). I wanted to bring up that the process of actually fighting the enemies is better made in Xenoblade 2, but the stuff involving enemies that isn't related to fighting them in Xenoblade X is top tier. Thus, even though Xenoblade X's enemies aren't super interesting to fight, Xenoblade X still has one of my favorite bestiaries. Also, Xenoblade X's bestiary did the crime of making me think you'd get to swordfight both Gormott and Uraya at some point in some of the early trailers for Xenoblade 2. Some of the locations in Xenoblade 2 feel smaller than some of the enemies in Xenoblade X, so I don't think that assumption was entirely unfounded. It's not entirely on topic, but I think it's funny, so I wanted to share it. Pokemon is probably weird to think this way, but it's interesting that every enemy and boss has to be made with the confine that the player could achieve being that enemy (whether enemy means wild encounter or enemy trainer). So the wild encounters (that are interesting) are about getting the enemy's health low without killing it so that you can catch it while the trainer enemies are more about testing how well composed your team is. I'd be interested in hearing more about how Pokemon's premise affects its approach to enemy design. Especially considering that Pokemon is an RPG rather than something like a fighting game where the skill being tested isn't as stat based.
In Breath of the Wild, the reason they have breakable weapons and depletable resources like the specific arrow types is exactly why you are mentioning here. There will be times where you won't have your favourite weapon or resource, which means you will have to improvise and explore a different way to tackle enemies. This is something other open world games mostly fail at because you can reuse the same process over and over.
I've never played paper mario, but I swear you dunk on it in every video but then say "I swear its good" I would love a video going into what makes the game work and be fun despite its clearly numerous flaws
Sonic has always had really good beastiaries, each level has different enemies that are different enough to where you don’t get bored but not an awful surprise every time either
One good example would be Brutal Orchestra, a game made by Maceo Mair. Every single enemy in the game has something that makes them unique, such as the sepulchre using its health to summon other enemies (while also have divine protection), the choir boy’s ability to do more attacks the more you attack it, and The Ourobouros’s forgetful trait cycle.
The first 1000 people who click the link will get 2 free months of Skillshare Premium: skl.sh/designdoc0820
I really love how you flow into the skillshare ad here. Made me laugh.
ofofouf
I have a question, Would it be possible to make a game with only one enemy
@@maskedman3672 I realise its been ages since it was asked, but yes, you can. Matter of fact, there was a game for the Vita "Trillion: God of destruction"
The Only enemy in the game is Trillion, imaginatively named, for having 1 Trillion Health, he goes through seperate phases, depending on how much damage he has taken however its the same evolving enemy through the game. May be more examples, but any time I can recall something from the hidden library the Vita had is a good day.
@@potentianox1573 THANK YOU SO MUCH
The zombies from “Plants vs Zombies.” Their designs are simple, informative, and just plain charming!
Thats true, every other level introduced a new intuitive zombie, with every other level introducing a counter to that zombie, that game always felt fresh
It’s completely true. Just seeing the designs gives you an idea of what they’re special is alongside the plants you collect!
Even in the newer games the designs are great!
I'm going to miss the series. To bad EA killed it
It's amazing how much character and personality plays into their designs as well. Most of the Zombies wear what they're going to do on their design (What does the guy with a balloon do? Why, float over your defenses, of course!), but those few which lack a really on-the-nose design, in favor of them being more story-reliant. Take the Newspaper Zombie. It's not immediately apparent what he does, but the moment you break his newspaper and see him enraged, it all becomes clear - he's reading the paper, and after you destroy his paper, he gets mad. From there on out, you remember what the Newspaper Zombie does because of his own little internal story.
Note to self: Do not use pallet-swaps to make enemies tougher, use them to make different but related enemies. The red goblin throws a torch at you and then runs away if it hits so the fire's DoT can do damage while it hides. The blue goblin stays near the water and tries to throw a rope around you and drag you in. The yellow goblin blinds you with sand and then sets traps near you. They all have the same stat block, just different behaviors.
Yellow Goblin hit em with that pocket sand.
ATP Reference ?@@E_Fig05
Supporting Notes:
-Recolors are a lot easier to swallow if each element is mechanically different. A fleshed out elemental system can immediately triple or quadruple the number of unique monster encounters you make.
-Monsters can be made more varied by limiting the equipment or tools that hard counter them with specific requirements. Meaningful Choice is king here, not necessarily the monsters themselves.
-Don't forget storytelling in mechanics, the lore is a decent source of inspiration for how to make monsters mechanically memorable.
-The longer the fight takes, the less often it should be fought. A monster that takes forever to kill can feel like it haunts you everywhere even if it's only as common as everything else.
Also you can get away with recolors if you don't abuse them. Sure, FFX reuses the same dingo multiple times and sometimes they have special on-hit effects. But the key thing about these dingos is that they immediately convey their mechanics: They're agile and magic resistant (bring Tidus to deal with them. Or Wakka).
Repeating these monsters allows the player to save up on memory. Imagine if there were 6 completly different looking enemies but they all had the same baseline stats. It'd just get confusing, and in the end wouldn't provide much.
On your second point about specific mechanics for specific enemies: just remember not to take it too far. It really sucks when you need a certain move to deal with one or two fights and after that you never need it again.
@@zidaryn specially when said move is a literal win button.
You raise a fantastic point about storytelling with different enemy types. The best example I can think of is the way the infection progresses through enemies in The Last of Us.
Having a new attack to look out for also kinda hypes up enemy recolors for me.
In Paper Mario, you have a dark color swap for the Koopa Troopas, but these can unleash a devastating attack when you knock them on their backs, and inflict new status effects on you.
For me, it was a very defining moment of where the game started to ramp up the difficulty, and introduced it through a familiar enemy.
My problem is not enemy types and looks. They can color-swap enemy types, no biggie.
My problem is dominant strategy when dealing with said enemies. Their behavior has to be set up in a way that lets me experiment with the combat system so it makes multiple tactics valid and fun to do.
I got this vibe from Nioh because you can switch between five weapon types + bow and rifle at any time, have different stances, use magic and ninjutsu to your advantage (debuffs, elemental effects) and work with the environment. This way, I beat some annoying side mission bosses with unusual setups because it worked for me and my playstyle or was just born out of pure necessity and desperation.
The same can be said about Hollow Knight. Great enemy variation and a build-your-own-hero charm system that lets you choose your favorite style.
Sorry for the long read but it's hard to stop talking about this :D
Interesting take I have a counter to it which is discovery there is no better feeling than when you discover the best way to fight an enemy vs the game telling you, take DarkSouls, for example, a hallmark of the series is enemy type weakness every enemy is weak to a specific thing and the game never tells you that it leaves it up to the player to discover and utilize another is (IFrames) while the game does say roll to avoid hits it never explicit that mechanic which is a huge part and for most people the only way to beat the game (I'm sure there is a crazy kid out there who can beat it without IFrames lol) so back to your comment of strategy if you choose to use melee on a boss that is weak to fire in DarkSouls is that the game's fault or is it your own this gets to the dare I say it the (git gud mentality) of DarkSouls games no one can deny that Discovery is both fun and rewarding but it has the risk of frustrating more action orianted players where strategy players are fine with the idea.
I really don't see a way to make an action game without making generic enemies if you introduce strategy you have to slow the game down it can be done I'm sure but it is a very difficult thing to nail down, I haven't played Nioh so can't comment on it but I did play Hollow Knight and while there is plenty of ways to beat both the mobs and the bosses I just stuck to using the nail and the occasional spell so is that the games fault or is it mine (my opinion on it is that it's mine still loved the game BTW) So long as you want Discovery you're gonna have to make somethings implicit which runs the risk of players not finding it and I think that's ok especially for replayability and even conversion with friends where two people can take radically different paths to beat the same game.
@@RedEye761 I see your point, and I have to agree. This is probably just a matter of preference. Everyone plays different and expects different things from their games. As mentioned, generic monsters are no problem, as long as I can dance my way around them however I like.
I'm just one of those folks who take forever with games and replay them over and over, so it's kinda obvious why I like the varied approach.
Just so you know: Nioh is a loot-based soulslike with deeper (I guess) combat mechanics than in Dark Souls, and it doesn't punish me for, as an example, taking a purely dodge-based approach or a purely parry-based one. Anything goes, although enemies do have weaknesses assigned to them that make it easier to defeat them if you so wish. It also features some crazy double boss fights I still haven't dared to try, much like Hollow Knight's pantheon.
I can agree but for hollow knigh I always end up as a Nail Based Knight in hollow knight...
You know, Mark of Pride, Long Nail, Quick slash...
@@anonyme4881 Really? I had some bosses that forced me to rebalance my build, i.e. Watcher Knights, Lost Kin and the bad boys like Grimm and Radiance. But if you're good and quick with the nail, that's cool!
@@crisiscore341 Nail Art damage are insane and without them I cant do the pantheon at all.
To be fair I never had trouble with watcher Knight.... I first tryed it... And found the secret room to kill one just after lol
I find Lost Kind safer at close combat and the extra nail range is handy to control the little radiance monster that come at you.
Grimm is patern heavy
For Radiance I can understand if you want to kill her faster.
The only time I changed my build was for lv10 Grey Prince Zote with the Fluke Shaman Combo to do mass damage because its lv10 fucking Zote and you've got no time to nail him corretly
Guess thats just my playstyle to going melee
The Mario & Luigi series does enemy desings differntly, instead of making new mechanics or making the player approach the enemy in a different way (Like using single hit attacks instead multi hit ones for high defence enemies) the Mario & Luigi series makes enemies with unique attacks to make the player dodge the attack differently even when using the same concept.
What I love about the mario & luigi games is that technically, you could go an entire playthrough without being hit a single time, but to do that requires a lot of practice. There's also the risk v reward of simply dodging an enemies attack, or trying to time it perfectly to damage the enemy back. If you mess up, you could be hit yourself, but time it right and you can damage an enemy on THEIR attacking turn. Most of the battle in mario & luigi games is getting to recognise enemy patterns and capitalise on them, rather than attacking yourself
The M&L went all in with crazy designs for familiar characters, I loved them
My favorite is Lakitu X and Spiny X in Dream Team. LOL.
Just kidding, Honestly, Partner's in Time has the best Enemy Design of the entire series. For the cases of the Shroob-like enemies, they all look cool and intimidating.
One way to spice up a bestiary is to take inspiration from Pokemon and, instead of making palette-swap enemies, give your enemies evolutionary/mutation lines or trees. This provides the additional benefit of potential world-building and environmental storytelling, and immediately clues a player in on how to beat the encounter since it's a variant of something they have already dealt with.
@@crupplemcsplits792, even elemental variants could work if you give visual stimuli of what the enemy is. A lightning enemy should be quick and constantly moving while an ice enemy should be sluggish and slow. Of course, you can tweak design elements to fit the game, but elemental variants shouldn't just be mob recolors with a brand new elemental attack.
risk of rain moment
undertale hard mode: exactly
My favourite example of this is Undermine. The flies and rats have a lot of different versions that change the way you approach them considerably.
@@Skuller-kh9ek risk of rain is a solid series that exemplifies this beautifully
The criticism with BoTW's samey enemies everywhere, I've taken to calling 'Minecraft Mob Syndrome'. Because no matter where you are, in 90% of the game you are dealing with the same four or five enemies, and the results can get just as stale.
The little tweak there is the different weapons that they can hold, but still, BoTW lacks more ''regular'' enemies (I consider blobs, bats, octo' as gimmicky enemies, and Lynel as miniboss)
@@desplanchesstevan1418 The one big issue with those is after a certain point, those blobs and wolves and whatnot, barely count as an obstacle.
But just the same, no matter where on the map you are, you ultimately end up fighting the same 4 enemies, and/or three bosses with little variety between places.
I think a couple of tough unique enemies in each location (a la those sandworm-things in the desert) would have done wonders.
Both have a great cast of enemies, just not the type of bestiary that suits their type of game. Thats why there's so many Minecraft mods that give mobs elemental color swaps, that's what the game needs the most.
@@realIanIANian Seeing how well the Husk and drowned work, I can only say that you are right
I will argue that it doesn't really matter in minecraft since the point there is not the combat, but either the exploration or-more likely- the building.
Enter the gungeon has a great line-up of foes. They fit the theme of the game, stand out visually and (most) are also quite adorable in a way.
I'm glad you gave Pikmin time in the spotlight. It really deserves it. So underrated.
Don't Starve, for being a game who's combat amounts to wacking things with sticks, it still has good enemy variety. Spiders that are easy to kill but come in hoardes if your not careful, protective and territorial Tallbirds, Pigs that try to hit and run you and turn into Werewolves under certain circumstances. Tentacles that slap you silly. And the hounds that periodically ruin your best laid plans. It helps that they all tend to stick to their specific biomes. You won't find tentacles in the same place Hounds spawn (well, unless you make it that way) and the survival mechanics and the different things they drop means that fighting these enemies is less about when you'll fight them, but who you should bother to go after. Need silk? Spiders. Low on food? Tallbirds, or if your feeling cheaky, hunt for Koalafants.
Even the time it goes into pallete swaps in the Fire and Ice hounds can be forgiven by the fact that they have their own unique mechanics and drops.
Don't starve needs a combat mod so bad
@@AlexanderMartinez-kd7cz It's normal combat really does suck ass, I wish they fleshed it out more than just "Hit, run away, repeat, sometimes pause and heal or switch equipment for a second". I main Wheeler in singlelayer because she gets a dodge ability, more speed, and for her neutral special, she weilds a gun, all of those things making her really fun to fight and explore with.
@@Deadflower019 To be fair, combat is not the main focus of the game
@@bruhkan457 Yes, but we have 3 fighting based characters and one of them is mostly about using a Ghost to deal with them for you and dozens of unique bosses that serve as major mechanics one way or another.
@@Deadflower019 The bosses mostly have interesting patterns that aren't just "hit, run, repeat", the old ones are like that yes, but the newer ones (fuelweaver, toad, crab king) have some pretty fun mechanics to work with, using just the basic combat. I don't think the combat needs to be changed, just more "explored", they have shown it has potential to be interesting and maybe complex, they just got to do more with it.
I feel like there was a missed opportunity of talking about monster hunter, a game that NEEDS to have a great bestiary to work as it does.
Edit: Fixed some wording
The thing that makes Monster Hunter work is:
1. Fights are hard but fair
2. There's very little cheese
What I mean is that some monsters, like Rajang or Fatalis, are extremely difficult to fight, but all of their attacks are telegraphed and have predictable patterns so it's possible to defeat them without taking any damage. And elemental weakness and status effects are a thing in the game, but it's not like you can one-shot monsters or just spam one strategy until you win. Even strategies like sleep bombing that are designed to take out a massive chunk of the monster's health in one blow require a lot of setup and player coordination to pull off. The only exception I can think of is Nibelsnarf in the older games who you can cheese by repeatedly making it swallow bombs, essentially letting you stun it on command.
I like that in MH even the reskins feel fresh, mostly because they change some of the moves, making the new monster feel familiar, but different.
Really need to play Monster Hunter. Everything I have seen about it looks fantastic
@@nipples123nipples I think tiger stripe zamtrios is a good example of that, while it has one similar mechanic as the original it fights very differently.
@@Emelenyt it's a heavy learning curve, but once you learn the flow of the game, it's freaking incredible.
"Got your aesthetic nailed down"
_Shows a clip of Hollow Knight_
Ha, I love those “I see what you did there” moments.
Ikr
*nailed down*
Bias in my name aside, I wanna shout out the Kirby series for its bestiaries. While they may be pretty simple to deal with thanks to how powerful Abilities can be, with the amount of them each game, it allows for a wide variety of enemies that are simple yet appealing and you can tell immediately what power they’ll give when swallowed. And at the same giving enough variance to enemies that DON’T give Abilities and are otherwise ammo when you lack one yourself. ...Unless it’s a Scarfy, Mumbies, Gordo, or Shotzo.
Shoutout in particular to the Dark Matter trilogy (Dreamland 2, 3, and 64) for having to spread only a handful of Abilities compared to most other games to a big cast of enemies. Though it helps that they’re simple enough like Fire and Stone with the oddballs Parasol, Bomb, and especially Cleaning.
Enemies like Scarfy are particularly great because even in the first game, which had no copy abilities, Scarfy immediately stood out for how it served to foil Kirby's main attacking mechanics and force the player to take a different approach to dealing with them.
I think the one thing I'd want to actively add to this, is that it can be important to have enemies that fill specific design purposes; such as acting as a tutorial for a mechanic, by requiring and / or encouraging a player to make use of it.
One example that comes to mind; though unfortunately an example of where the game failed rather than succeeded, is that Hollow Knight does a pretty poor job of teaching players quite how powerful the Vengeful Spirit spell they acquire early in the game is; with the forced gauntlet after you acquire it only containing squishy enemies that the player is accustomed to, where use of soul on spells rather than saved for healing would feel like a waste, and a unique enemy that you need to use it on, which the player lacks an existing frame of reference on.
If the designers had included an enemy that's tough to fight close range; perhaps evading after being hit, but is taken out in one shot from Vengeful Spirit, I imagine that many players would be far more likely to realise quite how powerful the ability they'd been given is, and be willing to spend valuable soul on dealing fast damage with it, rather than saving it to heal up after the fight.
Honestly I feel that players get a pretty decent concept that the vengeful spirit is powerful, it's just that new players are *never* going to use it no matter how well they understand its strength. They might pull it out against enemies that are especially tough to hit like the moss knights, but think of it this way. Fighting with the vengeful spirit is spending soul, while fighting with the nail is gaining soul. Soul is valuable because you can use it for healing, and you can be damaged from both enemies and the environment. If you don't know what's coming next and aren't yet skilled at the game, a player is going to want to have as much soul as possible at all times so they can best deal with whatever they run into next. When it comes to regular enemies, players generally look beyond the current combat encounter and consider what would be best overall, which is also why they rarely use consumable items on trash mobs in JRPGs. Against bosses, players are more likely to play conservatively since they don't have the boss' patterns totally down, don't know how close the boss is to dead, and don't know what other tricks it may pull out later in the fight. And from a new player perspective it's probably better that they're healing rather than using spells, since that means they're spending longer fighting the boss every try, which means they're getting more practice against it each try. They'll toss out some spells if they think they're doing well, but will for the most part stick to healing.
@@android19willpwn i've never used a spell and not immediately regretted it, which is why if there's one flaw with Hollow Knight (besides the fact that the gun mod isn't vanilla) it's that the SOUL system is basically begging to be a victim of "too good to use" syndrome... if the spells had been limited in almost any other way, they wouldn't feel like pointless metroidvania-like "you can go here, now. hope you marked your map -bitch- " maybe a cooldown that gets shorter as you do damage? retains the high aggression playstyle, while not completely boning you for using SOUL on something frivolous, like, not dying...
@@robonerd125 I think the real mistake was just tying attacks to the same resource as healing. If you had a special attack meter that rapidly refills whenever you land hits, and only performed special attacks, I think most players would use those attacks liberally. And if you had a healing meter that refills only when you land hits, and requires a safe moment to spend, you'd have exactly the same healing system as now. But if you combine them on the same meter, healing is almost always more important.
@@davidbrickey8733 i actually like that they use the same resource for attack and healing. For me it adds another layer to the combat, yes most player would feel prompted to use it for healing but you can't do that forever, soul comes from melee so you eventually will have learn how to do that. It prompt me to play more aggressive than I would like (and I'm such a wuss too).
I do agree they need to do better in displaying how powerful the spell is, tho I suspect most player who aren't using the spell much are probably the ones who aren't struggling much at the combat (nailing). I suck pretty bad so I had to learn to use it or I won't progress lol
The GBA trilogy and DS trilogy Castlevania games all have interesting bestiaries.
Such exsamples like:
•Iron Golum, that can only be instantly killed by two methods, but otherwise only takes 1hp of damage from all attacks and moves slowly.
•one off enemies that can be completely ignored that you have to use special moves, or a certain action to get them to appear.
•Enemies that drop items that help to heal the status effect they can cause if they touch you.
•An enemy that is completely useless in attacking, but will call for reinforment if you let it escape.
I could go on.
•Enemies that have more then one state.
•Enemies that change the surrounding physics, like gravity or block long range attacks.
•stacks of a common enemy in one room that are much more dangerous then alone.
Castlevania is known for great bestiary throught, munch like all metroidvania like Hollow Knighy
Also enemies that are quite weak and die in 1 hit, but are difficult to actually attack. Like Flea Men.
Can you tell about the method to kill the Iron Gollum
@@sadam-kd5ug There is a foe that drops a competence that switch magic point and health point
Golem have 1 MP and 999 HP, so it one shot it
@@anonyme4881 yeah that is the best method, but there is "the chainsaw method" too, where you use one of the three other weapons that deal a lot of small individual damage, if you want a "fair" way to kill the iron Golum. Lol
*(I think one of them is useless since it requires such a short range.)
Sometimes instead/as well as a palette swap there can be signs of growth from one form to another. This isn't a red Goblin, this is Blue older goblin that fights fiercer and has grown longer teeth. It's small but makes the enemies seem like they are creatures rather than a change of paint.
I tihnk Crypt of the Necrodancer did a great job at this because the enemies have a unique attack pattern and rythm to hit them, so much that there is a training area where you specificaly learn how to deal with that particular enemy using only the knife.
I agree. Even recolors are interesting like the dragons.
It helps that because movement is key in Crypt of the Necrodancer, having different types of monsters that move in different ways and hit you for various damage makes intuitive sense.
if recolors are rare enough they can actually become kind of exciting. like:"Oh I've progressed this far that I'm seeing the next tier"
i like how Dragon quest 11 did it where all the enemies changed once you cleared an act of the story.
Change colors/recolors you mean pokémon shinies.
I know you mean just make the goomba dark blue/green and buff it once you enter the endgame areas.
@@jasonreed7522 quite honestly palette swaps are something that are pretty common among pretty much all games early games like mario bros, metroid, etc did it too so it's not just exclusive to RPGs.
I thought Super Mario RPG did a good job with that.
Tales of RPG series is notorious for palette Swap Design, at least after Symponia. Symphonia had at least one palette Swap per enemy, but not every enemy, but Tales of the Abyss, Vesperia, and onwards started getting really lazy. It's weird cause they make your playable characters insane in combat, but aside from bosses, regular mobs just aren't fun.
I just finished watching Mark Brown's video on JRPGs in his "design icons" series, and I have to say, very few things in this life achieve the same level of perfection as Akira Toriyama's Slime design
It really is iconic.
ESPECIALLY THE SLIME CONTROLLER
@@antusFireNova I have never gotten my hands on any of the 4 slime controllers.
But I don't think they would be particularly nice to use as a controller. Only for display.
Sometimes simplicity really is the best way. Less is more
Indeed, even now you can still see the influence of akira toriyama slime design on the latest game like genshin impact
Earthbound : Let's Fight Tent, Speed Limit Signpost and Barf 😂
Dont forget Depressed "Spongebob"
By far the weirdest Beastiary of all RPG's, but that's what makes the Mother series interesting, you never know who's gonna attack you on the overworld.
Never forget
The almighty mens bathroom sign
Gotta love fighting the drunks and Karens.
Although I do agree that the dozens of pallette swaps in 12 are a drawback, I would like to add to its defense that the overall feel of their overworld helped make it a lot more palatable than it would have been otherwise.
The final design of the game sells this fantasy of monsters having a real ecology that you're exploring, with powerful predators existing in low level zones, monster hunterish bounty quests, and monsters interacting with eachother in the overworld even letting you scare off a pack of monsters chasing you by running them into their predator. All that really helps 'sell' the notion that palette swapped monsters are all naturally adapting/evolved to suit their unique environment. I guess all I'm saying is that proper theming really helps compensate for weaknesses in design, even if it's just to take the sting out a bit.
I also wanted to add that even as reskins their are quite a few times the reskins will act differently or have different abilities meaning a how you approach them may change. FFXII played with this alot, not just with the different area reskins, but also with the rare hunts which are often far stronger and need to be taken on carefully to not be thrown off.
@@TNobody0214 Yes, you are right here! They weren't just re-skins, but they actually acted slightly different as well, as opposed to the FFX example where that pretty much was a straight-up pallette swap.
yeah, I really enjoyed the fact that some would start fighting each other or even EAT each other. Was an interesting mechanic that was partially brought back in later final fantasies. 13 brought back the enemies fighting each other mechanic to an extent.
You showed it a bunch in the video, but I think Hollow Knight has a great bestiary. Early enemies walk at you, occasionally jog/jump a bit. As you proceed further into the world, the variety gets tougher, and each area has unique enemies.
Once again Hollow Knight proves itself as an absolute masterpiece of a video game.
I love miitopia’s beastiary. Because the concept of the game is so outlandish, the enemies are weird and wacky. There are still classic RPG enemies like the slimes, goblins, and banshees (all introduced in the first world), but that is fine because you can’t reveal your wackiest enemies first, or your normal enemies will be forgotten. While there are many reskins, (usually of the normaler enemies), these reskins introduce new mechanics on top of the original enemy. For example, you meet the red goblins in world 2, and they have the ability to make your miis angry. In the latter half of the game, new mechanics are still being introduces, like shield sprinkles in world 7, the second to last world in the main game.
I like the bestiary of the Mario and Luigi series. Each enemy has different attacks that you have to avoid and dodge. You will find a huge variety, even with re-skins. If it's a re-skin, their attacks are not only more powerful, but the pattern and speed of how they attack are different enough from before to make it feel engaging. They might even have new attacks to throw you off even more. Dream Team does this quite a bit, while still having unique enemies for every location you go to, so you get old with the new, while having the old be tougher and more of an actual challenge of skill in dodging it's attacks.
Even (older) paper mario games made use of the re-skins in the huge variety of unique enemies. They atleast made you change your approach and felt like new battles. A dark koopa who can damage all party members with a powerful dash, or make you dizzy, is much more of a threat than one that just spins and hits you with a shell. Their mechanics are altered just enough to make it feel fresh usually. Sometimes you might find a reskin in the same level with different stats, so it doesn't feel too out of place. An example of this would be lava bubbles and embers in Chapter 5 of TTYD. Embers have higher health, while lava bubbles have higher attack. And you could find them is the same battle, so you have to pick out what you see as the larger threat. That is not to say that this game doesn't have those problems of repetition, I just think it can work around it in interesting ways.
I wont touch on Origami King, because I think it was explained very well in this video.
I just wanna be one of those 5 people talking about FFXII. You showed off the Beastiary pages for all those wolf reskins but didnt talk about how much the world building and natural economy goes into the design. After talking about the general design of Dragon Quest enemies, the fact world building goes so heavily into designing each monster, giving ideas how they adapted to the area around them, strengths and weaknesses, and even a genius and species part to help show that they are designed to be part of an evolutionary tree and not just blue paint or generic design slapped over the same AI. They even add to this by giving some of the reskins new abilities or spells which adds a new spice to a familiar encounter even if the approach is the same.
Yes! They did really well even if they had lots of pallet swaps. Things like this are tools, in my opinion.
And I wholeheartedly agree on the last part as someone who kicked so many Panther and Coeurl tails, but got blown to bits from Ose's Hell Blaster. *shivers*
Finally, a FF12 defender, I’m also a big fan of 12, despite all those “internet” opinions.
FF12's bestiary is one I've read for hours on end when I was younger, even if I only understood half of it due to my bad English, haha!
The story told through the entries and enemy descriptions was an absolute blast to read through.
When the color of breath of the wild enemies change, their AI gets better, because golden enemies don’t eat food, and they can’t get distracted by food.
talking about palette swaps, its a great way to make a game easy to learn for newcomers. lets look at Final Fantasy 12 as a great example, as you showed with the Wolves, theres a lot of them. you know what else theres a lot of? Malboros. in the other game you mentioned, FF10, there were only 2 Malboros. the first time you see one, it probably killed you with its signature Bad Breath attack. then when you see the palette swap in the final dungeon, you already know how terrifying it is, and you destroyed it with no mercy. thats great design. you dont know it, its exciting, you die for it. you learn from it, you see it again, you react accordingly.
but now look at FF12. the first time you see them, they really arent that threatening. they have a new move called Cloying Breath, which causes only a few ailments. its annoying, but not deadly. as yo progress through the game, youll see two, three, five more kinds of these tentacle-plant monsters, and each one has a nastier version of their signature attack. Bad Breath has a few more ailments, and if youre undergeared and outnumbered, could lead to hasty retreat. you might not die, but you probably havent fled from many battles. then youre coming up to the final dungeon, and the crimson colored Cassies hit you with the ultimate nose-killer, Putrid Breath. for a fun fact, FF12 has more status ailments than any other FF game, and Putrid breath causes ALL OF THEM on a single character. if you havent done any sidequests, some of these ailments will be completely new to you, even if youve played every other FF game. some of these ailments persist even after death, which makes recovering from it very difficult, especially if two people are struck by it.
HOWEVER, this is great game design. youve seen these enemies throughout your journey, youve seen them get stronger and stronger with each iteration, and compared to the other enemies around you, its easy to see that they are the biggest threat. getting struck by Putrid Breath is strictly your fault, you should know at a glance which enemies have which spells, and what makes them dangerous or not.
The Malboros in FF12 are good design because it's more than just a pallet swap. They actually behave slightly differently as well.
Breath of the Wild doesn't strictly lack in enemy diversity, despite how common the complaint is, but I suppose it's the distribution of them that makes it feel like there isn't enough variety. Bokoblins, Moblins and Lizalfos make up the bulk of the enemies you fight, being among the only common enemies that don't perpetually go down in just one hit (unlike the Keese, Octoroks, Pebblits and though *slightly* bulkier, the Chuchu's, which also really don't have much interaction going for them). They also concentrate in very prevalent encampments, so you frequently fight a bunch of them at a time.
Other enemies tend to be quite scarce and one-offs, so it really feels like the core 3 types of enemies make up the bulk of the combat experience. It would have probably been better if areas like the desert had even just one more unique enemy besides the Molduga, which is a mini-boss. But by that notion, Molduga is legit exciting. I wager for most players, it'll be the last new type of enemy they encounter besides the major bosses or *maybe* the Yiga Blademasters. The Molduga was for me, at any rate. I wish there were more of that.
It's another point the sequel could significantly improve on, which is an exciting prospect as always.
Meanwhile, if you want a game with great enemy design... well, it almost feels like cheating, but Monster Hunter is a very, very obvious pick that for most probably doesn't need an introduction at this point... Monster Hunter may use the occasional subspecies, or build a new monster off an existing skeleton and thus cause some moves to be shared, but overall, the series's (main) enemy design is super strong. Minor monsters maybe a bit less so, though, so I suppose there is that.
My only issue with MH is that the games lean real hard into the "gaem hard!!! PP big because me unga bunga MR monster in 5 minute, no cart, solo" also MHW keeps on adding shitty super fast monsters that don't sit fucking still for TEN GODDAMN SECONDS so i can actually do something other than pack my happy ass up and move to wherever donkey schlongs electric type brother bounced his ass off to.
@@robonerd125 I am getting the slight hunch that you've been punched by Rajang a few too many times. Eh, I get it, I suppose. Rajang is a rough fight and I'm personally not the biggest fan of it. Overall, though, I can't say I share your sentiment that monsters are too fast or otherwise unfair. Even the recent Alatreon, after some struggling and despite the initial divisiveness among players, I've come to really enjoy.
And also, based on the unga bunga stuff, don't sweat the meta enthusiasts too much. You really don't have to follow their DPS-or-bust approach if it doesn't suit you. I do think it's worth trying to work some damage boosters in, but ultimately, just try to strike your own balance. Unless there are really blatant problems with the way you set yourself up, I don't think you'll catch too much flak for whatever you're using.
@@laggalot1012 I stopped playing because it seemed like the game was going in a direction that i didn't care for, i prefer slower, more methodical approaches, i'm a lance/GL main, but every other monster in Iceborne either moves too fast for me to reliably do anything other than spend the majority of the hunt chasing after it, or waiting for it to charge me. and most of the slow monsters seem to straight up ignore shields, regardless of previous convention, like Savage Jho's miasma being unblockable despite BV Vaal being 100% blockable and that's a fucking ELDER (previously, the only unblockable attacks i can remember were grabs, which make sense, and Behemoth's EM, which was a quest mechanic) the game (for me) slowly became more and more tedious as it felt my playstyle was actively being punished whereas weapons/users like LS were getting showered with I-frames and elemental, which is a clown convention of a damage type, was being pushed to ludicrous degrees (seriously, Elem is, or was, dunno if it got fixed, the most confusing swamp of bullshit hidden mechanics i've ever seen)
TL:DR i'm too stupid to change my tactics as quickly as MH wanted me to, and porting over (VASTLY overhyped) monsters from previous titles wasn't interesting enough to keep me invested...
He did an entire segment on what you're talking about in BOTW with basically the exact same points so I don't really see why you wrote 2 paragraphs on it
@@robonerd125 I can relate somewhat to that, as I'm a Gunlance main myself. Trust me, I've been frustrated at some of the things you mentioned myself and this specifically is why I've disliked Vaal Hazak are first. You basically have to slot in the Effluvium resist if you don't want it to mow you down entirely.
As for these weapons being too slow... have you tried Evade Extender by any chance? When it comes to attacks you can't or just don't want to block, Evade Extender does wonders for improving the mobility of these heavy weapons. I would certainly recommend it if you find yourself having trouble keeping up in terms of mobility or getting out of things like Jho's miasma as you mention. It's not a perfect solution, you will still have to take some damage from the miasma if you aren't responding absolutely immediately but it helps a lot, I find.
Longsword feels good to play, but I agree, it gets too many tools, even if it technically isn't even super amazing DPS-wise. It's a bit too easy.
And I also agree that elemental mechanics could be explained much better, which is a shame. That said, since I'm pretty sure you are referring to Alatreon, I happen to like that fight a lot, after the initial struggle. ...I don't Gunlance it, though. SnS is my weapon of choice for that one, and I simply run a Safi set with a good fire or ice weapon and it works well. Alatreon definitely demands some adaptation, but I don't think it's too bad myself.
You forgot to talk about the Enemies teams dynamic, Like in JRPG how fighting Three Slimes is not the same as 2 Slimes and one Goblin , how one enemie type is not that hard but some combos maybe deadly when they team up.
I think Megaman Battle Network did it the best
Dragon Quest Slime is the best designed enemy. It's so cute lol
I always pronounce it "Beast-iary" too, but learned earlier this year it's actually "Best-iary". I still think Beast-iary sounds better tho, given it's a dictionary of beasts lol
I've heard it both ways and I'm not sure that either is technically "correct." Could also be a regional thing.
I would say “ best” as a kid but kept getting corrected by family and friends. Go figure.
I 100% agree with you and will pronounce it Beast-iary until I die
@@vermiform that's not how bestiality is pronounced though. And I mean I've heard bestial pronounced both ways too but never bestiality (though, admittedly, that one comes up less often).
It comes from the Latin word “bestia”, meaning ‘animal’.
*talking about designing good bestiaries*
*shows Yoshi's Island*
Aah, a man of culture
It was so good that YIDS even had an enemy museum.
That game is the reason Shy Guys are my favorite Mario enemies. Shy Guys are great because they are so delightfully inventive and charming in the ways they try to fight, it leaves the player wondering, “What new costume are they gonna try next?”
@@ethandement3921 Or what absurd tactic they'll try to defeat me? Thing like using slingshots and baloons, dancing with a spear on hand, being on fire, using stilts to be higher, being fat, a shyguy turret, an acrobatic jump, or my personal favourite, a toy tank.
I don't know an official count, but I feel like there are very few, sprite-based platformers or action games with as many different enemy types as Yoshi's Island. And even variants with recycled sprites often have different behaviors. And that's not even getting into the amount of behaviors and expressiveness they showcase.
would love to hear what you think about games like pokemon or shin megami tensei, where the enemies you fight are also the tools you use to take them down
Fire Emblem included in that, enemies having skills and weapons that are usually all stuff that you can utilize too
I'm really interested in this too. Games that use this concept are usually RPGs, a genre where players and enemies are typically on an uneven playing field. Players rarely get access to the same skills enemies have, and vice versa, and challenge is often maintained by balancing how many characters are on each side of the battlefield with how strong they are (e.g. a small army of weak monsters vs one strong warrior).
Games where (almost) every enemy can be a potential ally make it difficult to rely on the usual methods of creating challenge, yet while Pokemon is thus unsurprisingly considered very easy, SMT is known for being challenging. I'd love to see a comparison of how they approach the limits of their mechanics.
I’ve only played one SMT game and it’s not even mainline it’s just persona 5 royal lol, but I love it!
@@thetackydramatic play a real shin megoomi tensei game (just in case, I'm joking)
@@thirdeye440 I am actually planning on playing nocturne, that’s the only SMT game I can play since I have a ps5/switch.
Dragon’s Dogma took enemy weak spots and turned them from a way to deal damage to a way to entirely change the fight, and some fights are only winnable by exploiting them. Except unlike other games, hitting those weak spots takes exploration and skill, so winning feels like such an achievement!
Sekiro did a great job with this. Even though most enemies are human swordmen, each one has a very well defined visual design and an specific moveset.
Even enemies with the same uniform are very distinct. For example in the ashina dojo they all wear a blue kimono, but there's 3 variants, the normal guys who are weaklings, the guys with a modified kimono and a bandana, and finally the elite which uses quickdraws and uses a different stance from the rest.
It's also great how they all feel from the same dojo since they all use Ashina techniques that you can see Genichirou and Isshin using in their perfected forms.
A really interesting beastiary can be found in Kid Icarus Uprising.
Each monster was a unique pattern and a different way to defeat them. And instead of recycling enemies using different color palletes, there are different races...
I remember looking back through the enemy trophies(?) I collected, and DANG, that game has some insane enemy variety. Not only wildly unique in their own right, but unique from each other as well!
With the exception of the Auram Copies and Monoeye clones.
I think bloodborne got the enemy design perfect. Enemies in the first half all look like the normal old Victorian horror monsters and stuff, but then in the second half of the game, ooooh boy. I just love that it suddenly becomes lovecraftian, and the change makes sense in the game. It was already feeding you things that hinted that it would become like that with item names and some of the random lore you read/hear from a few of the npc's. The old ones, mad man's insight, every thing said or mentioned when blood is involved. That one dude saying you need more eyes to see. The frenzy ailment!!
While its not my favorite game (that being etrian odyssey) , from software made bloodborne's enemies really dang well, to the point where the only enemies that seem out of place on first encounter was the jelly fish alien looking things.
MegaMan Battle Network, while using a lot of palette swaps, has a ton of unique enemies in the series bestiary, ranging from Shadows that can only be hit with sword attacks, to Dominerds that shield other enemies, to Appleys that heal other enemies when defeated, it really keeps you on your toes to deal with each pack of enemies differently
Definitely gotta second Battle Network. Because of how the combat is the designed, how battles are timed and reward you based on your performance, and the way individual enemies have very static and predictable behavior makes it great excercise in how to best and most efficiently take out enemies. It's a strong blend of action and puzzle elements. There's a lot of ways to solve your problems and you gotta find the ideal method based on the hand and enemy combination you are dealt. Mistakes are punishing, but success is very satisfying. And even palette swaps of enemies will sometimes introduce new behavior or traits to account for that add to the challenge.
Yes! MMBN has a great bestiary, and even the reskins can sometimes have different twists to them like the reskinned cannons having a shield.
I would have been dissappointed if nobody had mentioned MMBN. Imo it has the best bestiary there is, it is an integral part of that combat system, fights in that game can be so much fun :). Also the reskins/palette swaps are actually great imo, they're similar but slightly different mechanically and actually add instead of distracting from the combat system.
Enter the Gungeon's cute enemy design and the variety of ways they interacted with each other got me excited to complete the bestiary.
For mediocre monster design I nominate DemonCrawl. It is a dungeon crawler, but instead of hack&slash you navigate through a series of minesweeper boards. Despite having a variety of critters for each environment, they have no more personality than a landmine and all blur together.
They even tell you what they do on first sight
Pistol bullet kins shoot pistols
Shotgun kins use shotguns
Sniper kins use snipers(red laser included)
It might be interesting to do a comparison of the early Paper Mario games bestiary and the modern ones
Old ones win by a landslide
You can’t do much of a comparison because there is not much to talk about with the modern Paper Mario bestiary. They are mainline Mario enemies except for Origami Kong’s bosses.
@@iantaakalla8180 I meant more what each one was trying to accomplish
Talking about how badly the modern Paper Mario games are is always a win.
Ian Taakalla wrong.
There’s something I like about FFX’s monster reskins. Maybe there wasn’t enough variety by endgame, but when the main mechanic is using the right ally on the right monster, it’s nice to decode the enemy’s weakness without wasting time using “Scan” or trying to memorize certain enemies. It may seem simple to say, “Wakka hits birds,” but even that’s more tactically involved than previous FF titles. If anything, the monsters needed extra nuance here and there to force new strategies every now and then.
It would have been nice if they were to add in some more tactical elements as the game went on because the "Wakka hits birds" remains the same throughout. The battle system is fun and one of the best in the series imo but to have those slight tactical changes would have made it even better
Counter point to your legend of Zelda argument. Botw makes it so that you can not kill enemies the same way over and over again by using the weapons system. Because weapons break so frequently you often don’t want to use them on low level enemies. This encourages finding new ways to deal with the more mundane parts of the bestiary.
As enemies get harder and environments change your methods of dealing with enemies have to become more and more creative. Continuously making the game feel new and exciting as you find ways to take out hoards of enemies without having to use any durability.
I largely agree, though I think the fact that the game throws perhaps a few too many weapons at you once you get yourself established to really make you care about weapon durability much, and also alternative ways of damaging enemies scale very, very poorly with growing enemy HP (and doubly so with Master Mode's health regen). Rolling boulders down a cliff or dropping explosive barrels is a great way of taking out basic Bokoblins quickly and easily without even fighting, but once you hit Black and above, it barely even dents them, so it loses its value. Silver enemies basically don't even care. I always thought that was rather disappointing. At that point, the really the only relevant methods of alternative fighting methods is knocking these enemies off a tall cliff or into water if they're not a Lizalfos. I hope for the sequel that such indirect ways of dealing with enemies remain relevant for longer or even perpetually, personally.
As much hate color swap/elemental variant enemies does get. They can give interesting combat ideas like putting all of them into an arena. Giving players challenges like how to defeat them with relative ease or fast times
Thats just me though
I played through FFX for the first time and really enjoyed the elemental pallet swaps.
I think a good example of color/elemental variants is in the hounds of Don't Starve. Every few days, a varying number of hounds will show up to attack you, and they become more intense over time. And along with them, depending on the seasons, come their elemental variants. Ice hounds in Winter and Spring, and red hounds in Summer and Autumn. They act the same as regular hounds, except they have less health, but killing them causes them to explode, either freezing you or setting things on fire around them. They have different drops too, since they drop more teeth than regular hounds and can even drop gems.
You showed it off a bit in the video but Kingdom Hearts 2 has some amazing enemy designs. Each enemy works differently and has their own mechanics, but each world has their own enemies. For example, in Land of the Dragons (Based on Mulan) You'll fight floating towers, centaurs with spears and puppets. While in a world like Beasts Castle (Based on Beauty and the Beast) Statues will come to life, umbrella bats hang from the ceiling and the mini boss and final boss use the idea of posession to make the castle itself attack you.
Every world is like this. Space Paranoids enemies move robotically, Pride Lands enemies all move like animals and, my favourite, Timeless River manage to get a rubberhose feel to their 3D models.
And then you have the Nobodies. While yes there are only 12 types you'll fight on the regular, you only encounter them when the Organization controlling them is around, giving this idea of forboding threat. These definately don't feel like the other enemies and they don't feel like they belong here, which is exactly why they are a threat.
The one exception to all of this is the Cavern of Rememberance. Every enemy you fight in here is just a reskin of something youve already fought and is just used as a gauntlet to get to the final prize of the Data Battles. But it's given some leeway because it's A) Optional and B) was added in the final mix version meaning they didn't want to make brand new enemies for just this one section, so reskinned the hardest enemies in the game and made them even harder.
I think a big thing is progression, which has come up in previous videos a lot.
When a game has like 5 main "areas" which you can enter into and explore freely, being able to see the new monsters and new discoveries is a big part of it. Sure, if the Slime in area 1 also has a fire and air variant in area 1 that's not a big deal and it spices things up. It's a positive. But when it's area 4 and you're fighting a Water Slime or otherwise, you don't feel like you've progressed which can really put a damper on things.
Though, I think there's a nice middle ground where some reusability meets progression.
Area 1: Wolf
Area 2: Dire Wolf
Area 3: Elemental Wolf
Area 4: Cerberus (Three Headed Wolf)
Area 5: Hydra Wolf (Eight Headed Wolf)
In a turn based combat game, this can work well. Dire Wolf is just wolf but bigger and better stats. Elemental Wolf gives a decent bit of variety and new mechanics. Cerberus introduces multiple attacks that may have status effects. Hydra Wolf gives even more attacks and regeneration. From a Base, it's all the same. But additional effects and added mechanics, even if it's just one or two, leads to a world of difference.
4:02 Yeah, there were pros and cons to FFX's enemy designs. Some enemies don't simply have a palette swap, but they may also have added visual features and/or body parts, which was a step above their simple palette swap of the older games. However, I will say that the reuse of animations sorta made people believe it WAS a simple palette swap and they couldn't tell the difference between one certain enemy to the next. It was an interesting step for them at the time, though.
Y'know, this can easily branch into designing singular enemies, like in Monster Hunter and Shadow of the Colossus, where are are no little enemies, but rather huge ones only ;)
My favourite beastiary has to be the SMT series, mostly because of the design. However, what I always appreciated about it is that if you know your stuff in mythology you can sometimes guess the enemies weakness if you know their story. Some are more obvious while other take some real background knowledge but man does it feel satifying if you bring in tertiary knowledge to your advantage.
For good enemy design, I'd point to Sonic Mania each enemy functions differently with different ways to attack, but each zone has its own unique baddy lineup with even each act having an exclusive foe to take down.
I’d love to see a video about good and bad enemy leveling systems (Elder Scrolls, Final Fantasy, etc) and how to make them successful
I feel like the Kingdom Hearts games have some really solid bestiaries. As they've added more enemy types, they've done less color swapping in favor of using a variety of enemies.
even the color swaps in KH1 and 2 are more interesting than "just a color swap." theres obviously standard enemies like Shadows and Soldiers, but these guys never get color swaps. they just get stat boosts as you progress through the game. while the first encounter with a Large Body might leave a rookie player struggling, the endgame has no problems dropping you into a battle with 5 of them, with huge statboosts applied, and you still make short work of them.
but there ARE color swaps, the "elemental music" enemies. they all have a signature bell shape and they fly around, but behave very differently. in KH1, the red ones are pretty slow, but might keep moving while they cast a slow moving fireball. the yellow ones are excitable and zip across the battlefield in the blink of an eye before they stop to cast an unavoidable thunder spell.
@@steveh1474 yeah the elemental music enemies actually add a lot of depth to the game with their variations. They all test the same skills: pursuing the enemy and using weakness, but the variations in their ai and weaknesses test them in different ways. At least in kh1
yeah, as far as I know, the KH series never really seemed to have issues with what looks like color swaps. They've always seemed to make each enemy unique.
And even if you find the same enemy in a different game, each installment is unique enough for you to feel like you're dealing with them in a new way.
They could make a KH game with every enemy they've ever used and it'd still feel like a new experience to me.
I enjoyed the enemies in the Mega Man: Battle Network series, because most enemies demo a move you can acquire and have different movement patterns to work around.
And they teach you about mechanics and hazards such as broken tiles, healing from grass, paralysis, taking enemy tiles, blockades, etc.
Castlevania: Curse of Darkness had many enemies on it's bestiary, but half of them were also pallet changes. Surprisingly, what they did to make the fight against of the red enemy from the blue enemy feel different was to make their best attack compltetely different, so you ended up reacting it differently from one another, even if it was by just one attack.
The game also had many wolves with many reskins, but i remember some of them being able to beathe fire, or something alike, so it did seem like a more powerful version of the wolf, not just a simple stat change.
Summarizing it: Reskins or color palletes can feel natural when the new versions have different or stronger attacks and powers to help backup their novelty, instead of just a stat and visual change.
Oh, wow, another person that remembers that game?
Yeah, the palette swaps in the game work really well, and they feel like they've adapted to/been influenced the environment they're in rather than just being slightly different.
It's been a while after this video, but now that Psychonauts 2 has been out for a month, AND has been nominated for Game of the Year, I do believe it deserves a shout out for its beastiary, which is not only creative in taking after many negative thoughts and behaviours, but also does as good a job at telling us about the characters who's minds they reside in as the minds themselves.
Bad Ideas, Doubts and Regrets, Panic Attacks, Enablers. Each enemy is introduced in a world where their existence makes absolutely perfect sense, and their appearances in further worlds ends up telling a bit about the persons thoughts and experiences.
Take Panic Attacks, terrifying mini boss level enemies that represent moments of extreme distress or sensory overload, which show up in the mind of a brain in a jar who's re-experiencing sensations after 20 years, and is overwhelmed by them as a result. In subsequent minds, they'll usually clue you in that the person has experienced moments of intense distress at some point in their lives, which you might be able to figure out based on where in the mindscape you fight them.
But would you believe that even their LACK of presence adds to the persons story? I wouldn't. But Psychonauts 2 did it.
Regrets are representations of, well, regrets the person may have about their choices and actions. As our favorite mad dentist once said: "Everyone has their doubts and regrets."
But in a mind that doesn't have them, it clearly tells you that this person regrets NOTHING about what they've done, something that makes perfect sense for the final mind you get to explore.
If Psychonauts 2 had come out before this, I would damn guarantee you it would have shown up here. If Design Doc ever makes a part 2 for this, you better damn well have Psychonauts 2 mentioned in there.
Shin megami tensei or persona are some games with amazing enemies. All based on creatures or gods of myth, legend, and religion. All with stylish designs
Yeah the Megaten series is really good with it's demon bestiary. You have to be careful fighting them as you need to find a weakness, at the same time, the enemy can do so to you. You also can't just simply go through the games with just Physical or Magic focused MC and Demons cause theirs gonna be something nasty like Alciel, Girimekhala, Rangda or something else that will block, drain or even reflect attacks back at you.
Granted their are some palllette swap demons like Tam Lin and Cu Chulainn, thankfully their are some alternate designs of demons like the superior Devil Summoner Cu Chulainn, but I never understood why Atlus doesn't that design more.
@Smash 456 Mara is peak level design my boy, look at that Girth, it's all about the Girth.
One funny way I accidentally made BOTW very interesting was by never finding the guy who increases inventory capacity. I don't know how I missed him but I played the entire game with the base inventory amount. This forced me to use all the creative methods of killing enemies because I only had maybe 4 swords to do traditional fighting. I'd honestly say the experience was far more engaging due to this mistake than it was once I could carry dozens of weapons around.
I would like to hear your thoughts on how different types of enemies can be grouped together to make interesting scenarios.
For example, how an encounter against a mix of melee and ranged enemies creates a different (often more interesting) challenge than fighting each separately.
The lack of enemy variety is just Indicative of the larger problem: there isn’t anything interesting to look forward to or discover. People praise the game of its openness but the same time isn’t much incentive to explore other than for the sake of it. It’s all the same enemies and rewards of the same disposable weapons. There are no significant upgrades or interesting power ups to find.
Silent Hill 2 deserves a mention, though the design of the enemies is more a psychological than a practical choice, as pretty much every monstrosity you encounter is an allusion to the twisted psyches of the main characters (Abstract Daddy, anyone?).
You’re one of those youtubers where when you upload it’s instantly a good day. Keep it up 👍
Calling FF XII species palette swaps was really not accurate, great care went into designing each variations and there's some variety to the models as shown in this video
I wouldn’t say great care. Any variety they could add is making statuses which you’d have a gambit for Esuna for. Otherwise you walk forward
5:49 If you see the problem that more realistic games with all human enemies tend to feel stale quicker, would've been cool if you had shared some ideas or suggestions on how to design around this.
Thanks for the useful video, Doc! I'm working on my first game, and enemy designs has been the first great obstacle that has since switched onto Bosses. I believe in the 'less is more' principle to begin with and since we're talking about a beat 'em up game, I don't think that filling it with a multitude of different mobs would do it any good.
Part of this is why I could never stomach the Division. It's hard to suspend your disbelief when you have one regular human enemy that goes down in a certain amount of bullets ,and another, also absolutely human enemy that can soak up lead like it's mild mid-May drizzle.
I think Risk of Rain 2's enemy variety is really good, as each enemy acts very different from the others, while still sharing enough features to make them easy to understand. That, combined with the elite system that can make even the easiest enemies a threat if you aren't careful, makes the combat feel really good.
Another thing is how some enemies can uniquely interact with other aspects of the game, being the players items (a huge aspect of the Risk of Rain series) and other enemies. For example, there are enemies such as the imp that give the player a damage over time debuff. When the player gets an item called razor-wire, an item that causes damaging razors to be shot from the player when they take damage, these damage over times go from extremely dangerous to a risky source of damage.
An example of enemies interacting with each other can come in the form of one of the games bosses, known as the clay dunestrider. This boss, when it's health falls below a certain threshold, will have a new attack available to it. This attack has the dunestrider lay down on the ground and send out tendrils to any entity nearby, pulling them towards itself and slowly dealing damage to them, while regenerating it's own health. This attack affects enemies as well as players, and the only way to stop it quickly is to break all of the tendrils, which can be achieved by either getting the entity far enough away from the dunestrider, or by the entity dying. These factors, combined with the masive defense boost the move also grants the dunestrider, forces the player to consider how they should deal with the situation, especially since RoR2 is run-based, and the player can run into clay dunstriders multiple times during runs.
These are just a few examples of how great Risk of Rain 2 is, and I think it needs way more attention then it is getting. It has a lot of cool aspects in it's design that I think it could probably show up in a video on this channel as a good example quite often.
Dante's Inferno did enemy design really well in the first half of the game. Each enemy you fought was associated with that ring of Hell (until the devs got lazy, which was a shame...). It portrayed the narrative really well, making you feel like you were actually traversing Hell, whilst making really unique grotesque designs for each enemy, which suit the theme of Hell
Y'know, Wonderful 101's bestiary is something to behold, it does great at showing off battle mechanics, with many different types of enemies often being weak to specific abilities, like how the giant turtle-like Megangs have armour that can only be shattered by using Unite Hammer (which also acts as a tutorial on using the ability itself), and if you're feeling adventurous, you can block their stomps to tip them over on their backs to attack their underbellies for extra damage! Yes there are some re-skinned designs but the overall variety is extensive throughout.
I’d like to bring Adventure Quest Worlds to the spotlight, as it has recognizable aesthetic differences between enemies, most pallet swaps actually convey information about enemy affiliation, and the puns involved with some of them or their associated quests are hysterical.
A thing that wasn't mentioned but I think it's p important is to design the enemies around the player's abilities. If you give the option of flame powers you have to make them interesting, give the player some ice enemies that are resistant or immune to physical attacks. In the same way, if you see that a mechanic is very strong in game testing, try making an enemy type or zone that counters that mechanic so that the player doesn't rely on just doing one single thing all the time.
I've been playing Dragon Quest XI S and I never feel tired of watching the monsters intro animation. I think they're funny (of course, their character designs have a great appeal)
I was just thinking about this the other day while playing Dead Cells actually. That game has incredible enemy variety and they're all very easy to remember what they do.
4:48 fun fact: Yiazmat has the same idle animation as normal wolves
the kingdom hearts games always have fun enemy designs that test the players’ ability to fight them off. beyond simple foot soldiers there are bigger enemies like large bodies that are only able to be damaged from behind or with magic, or floating elemental enemies that take more damage against certain spells or heal allies. different combinations of all these heartless leads to a variety of tactics needing to be employed against them, and they all have cute designs to differentiate them, including a special unique heartless design for every world you visit that comes with fun gameplay quirks like a ghost that becomes intangible on occasion for the nightmare before christmas world or a dandelion that splits into multiple smaller enemies to fight rather than one large one when hit with wind magic in the tangled world. relegating these enemies to one world also helps them maintain their novelty since you only see them on occasion. later in the series with kh2, new enemies called nobodies are introduced, whose designs are whispy and white to contrast the heartless’ stubbier black designs and set themselves apart. gameplay-wise they serve to test the player’s skill with the reaction command system that debuted with them in kh2 by being much weaker to them than the heartless while being stronger in most other areas. also, when reaction commands debuted, nearly every single enemy got one which served to further set them apart very nicely from one another :))
Kremlings in the Donkey Kong Country games have so much personality that makes a really fun game, also everyone has a different proportions and pattern of attack
You already pointed out Bug Fables with it's scaling and enemy designs but a good one for me is Megaman Zero (the series). They put what can seem like a common normal foe into a important position to block your path while platforming or even get the jump on you if you are focused on something else, there is a lot more that the games enemies can do but rushing through the level half haired will cost you more than you bargain for and the same thing for playing it safe.
I want to hear more about human-based 'bestiaries' after I read a Kotaku article bemoaning how repetitive they can get. The author specifically mentioned how most Ubisoft-like open-world games tend to have enemies with similar functions (e.g. the one that rushes you, the one with the big gun, the one with a cloak who is definitely a sniper, and so on). The unfortunate issue about that article is how true it seems to remain, even after 4 years from its publication.
Personally, I've been surprised at how games like Division 2 have been able to wring out interesting variations of these broad enemy types by making each factions' version of the type have a bit of a quirk to them. For example, while most factions have traditional snipers in their ranks, the Outcasts have one which fires arrows with explosive tips, while the Rikers have a sniper which hunkers down behind a small shield.
Small touches like those can help differentiate between some human enemies, but it can be difficult to make human enemies feel distinct outside of different colors to their uniforms. I'm assuming this specific topic has been argued over numerous timed by actual developers, but the issue still persists - human enemies tend to be less interesting and memorable than non-human enemies. Hopefully, the ongoing conversation of how to make enemy characters interesting and memorable will allow developers to make more interesting games around defeating them.
Yeah, that's kinda why I don't like FPS games all that much. A vast majority seems to have that human mook issue.
Even with the game I'm making, there's a good deal of humans mixed in with monsters, but a vast majority of human enemies will end up as bosses, not random encounters.
Good episode! Would like to see more of this! Maybe an exploration on the tricks of balancing abilities, available strategies and powers of both users and enemies to avoid a repetitive meta way to defeat enemies (thinking of destiny here and how the fights were underwhelming shoot at a big target for math damage- up until they tinkered with the Raid puzzles). And maybe how encounter pacing, formation placement, and level design interact with keeping enemy encounters fresh as well (Halo's great at making every fight feel different no matter how many times you run it, so weird these two games were made by the same studio). Plenty more to discuss when it comes to the artistic design side as well
Enemy visual design is so underrated in video games
The Left 4 Dead games have good enemies: the commons are all easy to kill, but the gore system is amazing because they can have different body parts removed. The uncommons are just commons, but with slight differences like being fireproof for CEDA or not being distracted by pipe bombs for construction. And the specials all have unique silhouettes and ways to fight
For me, I can never go wrong with Any Mario Games roster of Baddies. Just the enemies alone help make the game great.
For something related to Luigi, His 3 Luigi's Mansion titles have multiple ghost-like enemies.
Now, most people will praise the first game for the "portrait ghosts" but I think Dark Moon has the best original ghost design.
You have standard Greenies, who can then appear with a shovel, hammer and shield, a shield, or even inside a Mummy or suit of Armor. Slammers, which are the brutes who cause shockwaves. Hiders, who hide and throw objects at you. Creepers are the trap enemies that you have to avoid, Sneakers stay invisible and try to surprise attack you. Gobbers will stay still, but have tons of health and require you to move around so you can avoid it's attacks. And then the Poltergeists which are mini-bosses that appear in the first, third, and final mansions. along with Greenies, Slammers, Hiders, Sneakers, and Gobbers having upgraded versions of their base forms that is actually part of the lore. Let's also not forget the various Boo's, and even the Area Bosses, the Possessor Ghosts. The 5 Possessor Ghosts are under the control by King Boo, who is honestly 100x better in Dark Moon than he was in LM1.
For a squad of enemies, Every single one of Dark Moon's enemies are original and are far more interesting than the original games enemies (save for ghost shy guys). and LM3's Floor Bosses.
Also, Polterpup was introduced in Dark Moon as an enemy. And He is Best Ghost Doggo. Fact.
Honestly I love the enemy design for Dark Moon.
I see a lot of criticism from it and the bosses "all looking the same."
Yeah the Possessor Ghosts look similar to each other, but they aren't really the "main" part of the boss.
The cool thing they possess is what really makes the boss unique.
@drakewahl7609 each one has between 1-5 horns that shows how powerful they are.
Having different ways to deal with enemies like in Breath of the wild is extremely fun. Trying out all possible charm combinations in Hollow Knight was a blast, and it was always worth it because you would need the geo anyway
In my game, there are an enemy called Intense Mole. It digs around so you never know where it will show up next, and when it comes into contact with the player it explodes. The explosion deals quite a bit of damage, but it is also kind of helpful because it will damage enemies too, and the smaller enemies have low health and will probably die. I am experimenting with letting the player pick them up and take them into the next room to maybe help with bosses, but the game's mechanic is that you only have 1 inventory slot, and you can't go down the ladder to the next dungeon layer if you are holding an item, so I was thinking maybe if you pick it up b4 the fuze goes off and it explodes, you can throw it down and grab a weapon. A big part of bosses is throwing some weapons down the ladder so that if your weapon runs out of durability during the fight, you have more in the boss room to use.
I consider a good new enemy one that changes the player's interaction with the combat mechanics. If you're using the same strategy for multiple enemy types, then they're just the same enemy.
KH1 with the white mushrooms incentivises think more about magic.
even those was different between the areas...
In one area, you might get the chance to use gravity on them, but in another, you might need stop.
Over 15+ years of gaming under my belt and I never really considered enemy designs quite like this. I have noticed it in subtle ways such as this game is dull to play or wow this same enemy just popped up again but never to this degree or thought. Just played Dragon quest XI and I couldn’t understand why I loved the world of it. Now I can see it’s because of the great playful designs of each monster/character. I love videos like this. More please.
I like how Etrian Odyssey have some ennemies have different patterns in different formation. those fishes uses a devastating attack when in group, this ape throw weaker ennemies at you.
It adds some strategy (do you try to pick that stronger enemy, or pick up the weaker ones to mitigate damage) and allow to reuse old ennemies in interesting new ways
Something feels good about seeing an enemy design that's super rare or restricted to one specific area. Such as in Donkey Kong Country 3, you get the Tyrant Twins who appear only in 3 levels, and only in the Lost World of Krematoa, it makes them feel like an occasion to see! Same with Swoopy, the bird who creates a platform in one of the earlier levels doesn't return until you get very deep into the game with a stage revolving around them. Along with the Koindozers, who have just 1 stage for them as enemies!
They could've made each subsequent variety of enemies "smarter" in BOTW, maybe? Rather than make enemies stronger. And the fact that certain known enemies in the Zelda series were removed only made things feel more static because we didn't see a lot more enemies than we have seen.
Gotta mention my favorite game Undertale here, and how it, of course, takes varied enemy designs with interesting and unique attacks and then turns that RPG system on its head by making them interesting and unique individuals as well.
I love it when you get a group of competent evil characters. I enjoyed Strega from Persona 3, I like it when a group of them mimic your characters, but better. God Hand had a really great group of antagonists as well, the antagonists should play off of each other. Caligula Effect Overdose (some call it a Persona knockoff but it's a good game!) had like a dozen antagonists, and it was fun looking at all of their silhouettes before they were revealed.
I like the enemies in Dark Messiah of Might and Magic. Varied, not overdone, each offering unique challenges with several ways to defeat them.
the Siralim series is one that does an obscene amount of pallet swapping, BUT they have a giant list of different unique skills in the game and each color pallet change can change how you approach the fight entirely. there are some enemies that you want to attack last because they buff their allies when they get hit. there are some enemies you want to attack first because if you attack anything else they will retaliate. many of the battles play somewhat like opening a combination lock.
Hyper Light Drifter has a pretty great bestiary. Each area has it's own unique enemies and they all behave differently; they aren't just stronger or weaker versions of each other. There is also great visual design for them which conveys the story of the game, like Halo, which is especially useful since the game has no spoken or written dialogue.
Thinking about bestiaries that particularly stood out to me.
Celeste has exactly one enemy: seekers. But the fact that the game only has one means that even though seekers aren't particularly complicated, they feel a lot more like a threat than they probably would have if Celeste had more enemies. Sort of the same effect you'd get from boss fights in games that have less than three bosses total. I do really like the seekers, though, because they change up the gameplay since not only do you have to avoid them, but you also have to manipulate them into doing certain things to progress the level (especially in the b side).
Xenoblade X is interesting because its enemies feel a lot like part of the scenery rather than actual enemies that you are going to fight (especially some of the really high level or big ones, like the dinosaurs by the lake or the two giant worms). While that's certainly good, the enemies also tend to have different behavior types that can vary by time of day. Some patrol an area, some pretend to be inanimate objects, some lay around, some do other things. And due to overlevelled areas not being hard to find and them being possible to approach while underlevelled (due to being able to sneak around and run away from enemies consistently enough to be something you wouldn't be immediately turned away from these areas), it has the effect of certain areas have different feels depending on when you get there in the game. For example, there's this one area in Primordia that's a path full of level 50 enemies that will attack on sight on foot but not when you're in the mech, I went to the top of the waterfall for different reasons three separate times: once when I was underlevelled and didn't have a mech, once when I was underlevelled and had a mech, and once when I was at a level where I could deal with the enemies. Those were all pretty different gameplay experiences, only one of which actually involved fighting the enemies (also worth noting with the mech, some enemies notice the mech and others don't, the other thing with the mechs is dying in Xenoblade X doesn't really have any consequences, but a mech dying does). The game also has instances where high level enemies that can one or two-shot anyone in the party roams around and will attack (typically encounters with these enemies aren't super common, they have a predictable path, they only appear during certain times of day, and/or whether they aggro you is dependent on whether you're in a mech). Their existence also makes gameplay more interesting because you have to be mindful of them in areas they appear and they're not common enough to be super annoying. There are some enemies that disguise themselves as part of the environment. The ones that actually pass for the environment can be interesting because they surprise you, but the ones that are obviously enemies also work because they're often placed next to enemies you want to be fighting and you have worry about positioning because if you get too close, you might cause an overlevelled enemy to start attacking you. The actual enemy fights in the game aren't too interesting (at least, to talk about). I don't think the different stats or quirks enemies have are often super noticeable when the character builds are very easy to turn into a one size kills all type thing, there are too many status effects that don't get explained or very well communicated to be noticed, there are too many damage types and it's not very easy to know what type of damage is being used from either your attacks or enemy attacks (like, the attack types are called physical, thermal, electric, gravity, beam, and ether if I remember correctly, and it's not clear to me always clear from an animation what type each thing is meant to do, partially because of the, at least, english names being vague. For example, there's this one enemy type called a Leviath [the flying blue fish in primordia] that has a lot of attacks where laser beams get flung everywhere, but those aren't beam attacks, those are ether attacks, it's usually only a beam attack when a robot does it). I don't think this automatically makes the combat unfun, but it does mean the enemies aren't really contributing to combat variance as much as the character you're playing, the terrain, and the threat of a certain enemy joining the fight can affect the combat gameplay. But the main thing with Xenoblade X is the enemies are really interesting in ways that aren't directly connected to fighting them.
Xenoblade 2's a counter-example to how Xenoblade X's enemies are interesting. I found them a bit disappointing. A lot of the enemies in Xenoblade 2 are ripped from Xenoblade 1 in terms of designs (though a lot received anywhere from slight design changes to being completely different enemies that just share the name with an enemy from Xenoblade 1, such as brogs look like brogs in xenoblade 1 but a bit slimier and smoother while the Feris in Xenoblade 1 looks like an apex cat with a mace for a tail and a very fucked up face while the Feris in Xenoblade 2 looks like a wolf but with a mane and horns). The enemies in Xenoblade 2 don't feel like as much a part of the world as they did in Xenoblade X, but I think that has more to do with Xenoblade 2's maps being a much smaller scale than Xenoblade X's. So, for in Xenoblade X, there may be multiple packs of grexes with different territories, in Xenoblade 2, there aren't multiple packs of the same animal to track. (Considering that neither game has a ton of enemy specific variety and a lot more difference in combat is based on recognizing what class of enemy you're dealing with and some rules there, the difference between a bunny and a dog isn't a huge one mid-combat in either game because you'll probably just approach both the exact same way). But one thing it does really wrong is avoid enemies is still a part of the gameplay experience, like with the other games in the series, and different enemies have different types of detects. But the game doesn't show you the detect type so you have to sus it out yourself by interacting with the enemy or guessing based on their character design. But that doesn't work because most of the enemies are borrowed from Xenoblade 1, which does show the enemy's detection type. What happened was most enemies I either knew because I played Xenoblade 1, I treated like sight and sound at the same time (in other words, stayed out of their line of sight and didn't get too near them), or knew it had one detection type because of Xenoblade 1 but then that type was changed (which happened once during a section with enemies twice the player's level where the enemy in Xenoblade 2 was sight type but in Xenoblade 1 was nonaggressive). One thing Xenoblade 2 did better about its enemies than Xenoblade X did was the enemy typing. Xenoblade 1 doesn't have much enemy categorization. The mechon and telethia are one group of enemies that have a common gameplay, aesthetic, and story beats, but I think Monado Buster is the only attack in the game that does bonuses on enemies if they're part of a specific category. Xenoblade X and Xenoblade 2 do categorize their enemies though. In Xenoblade X, it is awful. First off, some of the best damage multipliers are enemy type based, so you'll either be constantly dropping in the menu to change your load out from "deals 50% more damage to robots" to the exact same thing but for a different enemy type or you'll just make a generic build. It also doesn't help that the enemy names include stuff like "theroids" and "pinscoid" which don't mean anything to me. Xenoblade 2's enemy categorization is a lot easier to deal with because the names are more clear "humans," "flying enemies," and "beasts" are a lot more clear than X's naming scheme. The other thing is damage boosts based on enemy type are part of this game's equivalent to a skill tree rather than equipable items. So when you see a big dog, you're like "oh, good, Pyra's good at stabbing puppies. I'll use her" rather than "I'm going to change my equipment load out now." The enemies are also a lot less monotonous to fight than in Xenoblade X since they have elemental system that isn't very complicated but it's present enough to change your approach to certain enemies, status effects are better communicated, and in general, the complexity found in X that didn't contribute to depth was stripped down (now we're back to two damage types: physical and ether, which is a lot more manageable and easy to communicate). I wanted to bring up that the process of actually fighting the enemies is better made in Xenoblade 2, but the stuff involving enemies that isn't related to fighting them in Xenoblade X is top tier. Thus, even though Xenoblade X's enemies aren't super interesting to fight, Xenoblade X still has one of my favorite bestiaries. Also, Xenoblade X's bestiary did the crime of making me think you'd get to swordfight both Gormott and Uraya at some point in some of the early trailers for Xenoblade 2. Some of the locations in Xenoblade 2 feel smaller than some of the enemies in Xenoblade X, so I don't think that assumption was entirely unfounded. It's not entirely on topic, but I think it's funny, so I wanted to share it.
Pokemon is probably weird to think this way, but it's interesting that every enemy and boss has to be made with the confine that the player could achieve being that enemy (whether enemy means wild encounter or enemy trainer). So the wild encounters (that are interesting) are about getting the enemy's health low without killing it so that you can catch it while the trainer enemies are more about testing how well composed your team is. I'd be interested in hearing more about how Pokemon's premise affects its approach to enemy design. Especially considering that Pokemon is an RPG rather than something like a fighting game where the skill being tested isn't as stat based.
In Breath of the Wild, the reason they have breakable weapons and depletable resources like the specific arrow types is exactly why you are mentioning here. There will be times where you won't have your favourite weapon or resource, which means you will have to improvise and explore a different way to tackle enemies. This is something other open world games mostly fail at because you can reuse the same process over and over.
I've never played paper mario, but I swear you dunk on it in every video but then say "I swear its good"
I would love a video going into what makes the game work and be fun despite its clearly numerous flaws
I would love to see a "GD/BD" episode dedicated to beastiaries.
Sonic has always had really good beastiaries, each level has different enemies that are different enough to where you don’t get bored but not an awful surprise every time either
Shoutout to the Payday special enemies for being highly distinctive and easy to identify at range, as well as filling unique niches.
One good example would be Brutal Orchestra, a game made by Maceo Mair. Every single enemy in the game has something that makes them unique, such as the sepulchre using its health to summon other enemies (while also have divine protection), the choir boy’s ability to do more attacks the more you attack it, and The Ourobouros’s forgetful trait cycle.