I think the reason Enterbrain gave us a Front View battle system was ease of use for the Users.
When I first started using XP, I had a hard time figuring out the layers, but eventually got used to it. Then VX came out and they redid all the mapping and basically dumbed it town. I know they dumbed it down because people probably complained that the Layer Mapping System was too much for them to understand. Problem was they dumbed it down so much that I found it practically unusable. I think the same thing happened with the Battle System.
Sure, Enterbrain could have chosen to give us another type of battle system, ANY other type of battle system. But those other Battle Systems would have been total overload for inexperienced users. I can understand that what they wanted to do was give everyone an Engine where they could just throw in some enemies, configure Hit Points and Agility and Exp, and away you go, you got a game! Problem is that the standard battle system is just WAY over-simplified. And games made with the Default Front View Battle System suffer as a result. However, another type of Battle System would have required too much effort by most to be able to put together an entire game. If it took a person a week to get one battle working as expected, no game would ever be completed due to the complexity.
They really could have given us a bunch more options. A Default Battler Animation would have been really nice. Things like Attack Pose or Attacked Pose or Cast Pose would have been great. But there is a downside to that as well. Its a lot of effort to put together the Art for each of those poses. Not by Enterbrain, but by the average user. Our average user around here probably doesnt have the artistic skill necessary to create an Enemy, let alone an Enemy with all those additional poses.
Some dedicated members of the community have put together other types of Battle Systems, and created the artwork necessary for them. The most popular ones have gathered a handful of people to put together more graphics for those battle systems. So I think Enterbrain was incorrectly concluded that there would be no resources created by the community for other styles of battle systems.
There is always a tradeoff.
One of the problems we have with our Defaults of our editors is that the editors themselves offer an easier interface than mucking with Lines of Script. I put together a script that allows for SOME animations in battle. And I think what I came up with is also just way too complex for the average person to use. It needs to be given a GUI, an Interface directly with the Editor itself. If we had at least had that, Animations could have been much easier for the community to learn how to incorporate. So sure, scripts do their job and can work just fine, but the tradeoff is that scripts are usually very confusing and intimidating for newcomers to the Engines. And lets face it, one of the things that made RPG Maker so popular was its simplicity. There are other engines out there, but they are no where nearly as easy to use as RPG Maker. Thus, too many features have the potential to just be overload, and would actually cause less sales. The more complex engines cost more to put together, and if sales go down instead of up, they will decide on simplicity over features. Hence, a Front View Battle System.
The Front View Battle System in and of itself isnt bad, it is excessively simple. What contributes to it being percieved as "bad" is those lack of features that are easy to implement. Lacking any sort of Battler Animations is another big drawback, and that, by itself, could have made the default battles much more interesting. Its that excessive simplicity that drives Players away, not Creators. Creators can create visually stunning Maps, but when it comes to the Battle System, they are almost all stuck looking exactly the same as every other game created with that version of RPG Maker. And players will get turned off by this. Different graphics and different skins just dont allow enough creative control over the Battles to make the games themselves really shine.
Enterbrain would also have to deal heavily with Copyright issues. If they created something that supported Piracy, or theft of content made by others, they'd get their asses sued! The users are much less likely to get sued, and Enterbrain themselves would be looked at the same way as the courts looked at Napster. Napster did not steal music themselves, but they provided a tool to distribute stolen content. Bittorrent is also a company. Bitttorrent, and the entire torrent network is actually owned by CBS, yes, the same CBS that makes TV shows. Bittorrent is also decentralized, Napster was not. And this is how the courts would look at RPG Maker if they had been designed as a tool that supported copyright infringement. Taking ones graphics out of a game is just as bad as stealing the game itself. We may not agree on this, but this is the position that the companies that go to court will take. This may have been addressed by Enterbrain deciding to not copy Battle Systems from existing games, or make their Battle System so similar that copyrighted content would have been used in place of the graphics they provided.
Enterbrain could have also been sued if they simply duplicated the functionality of other popular Battle Systems. If they had done everything in their power to make the Battle System just like any of the Final Fantasy Battle Systems, again, they'd be sued. However, this is a bit different than the previous situation as users can create their own Battle Systems that do copy the Style of any RPG without fear of reprisal from companies. So if I stole graphics from Final Fantasy, thats Copyright Infringement. But if I put together a script that makes the battle system work exactly like Final Fantasy, that oddly enough is not copyright infringement, because Im not actually using their system. Yes, it does add to the potential for others to use a script to distribute copyrighted material, but since the scripters arent profitting from creating those scripts, they arent considered that much of a threat. Basically, its the same way as downloading a movie, or being the one that goes to the theater and records a movie to sell and distribute.
Now, that all being said, I think there are some very good Front View Battle Systems that have come out in the many years that RPG Games, not just RPG Maker games, but RPG Games in general. A lesser known game called Phantasy Star also used a Front View Battle System, and it had some flaws, but had some strengths as well. For one, the battlers were animated. Heavily animated, for games in its time. Final Fantsy, by comparison was no where nearly as heavily animated, yet, due to its storytelling style, became a much more popular game. This is back in the 16 bit generation of game consoles, so were not talking Final Fantasy X or any of the 3D games. And even way back in the day, there were more animated Front View Battle Systems than the ones that Enterbrain gave us. So yes, I do understand the frustration with the default battle system.
There is another thing to consider when using more complex Battle Systems, and that is whether or not your Players will be able to use them. I've played many an RPG game, and there have been quite a few that I could not stand their Battle Systems. Implementation of Cards, battles that took too long, unbalanced, etc. Now, an average idiot will be able to pick up any game using any Default Battle System of any of the RPG Maker series, and they can damn near immediately understand how to win a battle. Breath of Fire: Dragon Quarter, I never beat, battles took too long, and was unbalanced. RPG Maker Games are fairly easy to balance battles. Some other battle systems are no where nearly as easy to balance the gameplay. Sure, they look pretty, and unique, but are more difficult to balance.
The thing is, the Default Battle System can benefit from a couple of things. Some are Graphical. Animated Battlers for one. Other things that can improve the Battle System is functionality. In my "Collection", I use a Front View Battle System that also has an ATB system and a crapton of added functionality. Blizzard wrote one of the scripts included called Reflect. Reflect is one of those staple tradmarks of Final Fantasy. KK20 wrote another script that allows "switching targets", which allows Item and Spell usage on Enemies, and casting harmful spells on the party. Combined with Reflect, this adds a lot of complexity to the battles. I wrote another script that allows Healing Items and Spells to harm Undead. It provides usefulness to the Reflect and Target Anyone scripts. The XRXS Battle System (Front View) rewards strategic thinking over battles of attrition. I also wrote a bunch of scripts that try to enhance Battle Eventing. Battle Eventing is one of those really important things that make the boring Front View battle system better, by adding strategy and varying gameplay.
I think the biggest problem with most RPG Maker Games in general is that they focus purely on battles of attrition. The rare game will come along and require strategy to defeat an enemy, but still make it easy and fun. And that is really the entire point, to make FUN games for Players. That is what many of the scripts in my "Collection" try to do, as do most other Battle System scripts, is to make games more FUN for players. Cant beat this boss because it constantly heals itself? Cast Reflect on the Enemy and let the Enemy heal your party! Then you can win! Strategy. Group of Zombies and its just you and a Healer? Have your Healer cast some Heals on the Zombies and kill them with ease! Uh oh, the boss just cast Reflect on itself and it is only suseptible to Magic Attacks? Better cast Mirror Breaker so you can hurt the boss! This enemy keeps healing the boss? Better kill that enemy before taking on the Main Boss! Have a Hostage ane Exp Bonus / Exp Penalty when dealing with the Hostage, in Battle! All possible because of Battle Eventing! Its still simple enough to beat quickly, and speed is part of the reward.
I think we may be asking the wrong question. Instead of asking about "Things you hate in the Frontal Battle System", we should be asking "What can make ANY Battle System more FUN for Players"? A bit more complexity without being too complex? A few more features like Reflect or Heals that hurt Zombies? Hostages? Animation? Moving enemies around? Being able to do "Pincer Attacks"? What makes some battle systems fun and others tedious and confusing? Battle Systems are more than just Graphics. Ive taken the standard graphics and enhanced the way battles work to try to make them more fun for Players. I also tried to make it easy for creators to create. I pulled out Limits that prevented more creativity. I decided to not dumb things down too much and remove the ability to have creativity. Most other battle systems sacrifice looking pretty at the expense of not being able to do battle events at all. It tries to maintain that Balance between offering a Tradeoff, and eliminating the expense. Just because a creature is Animated doesnt make the game that much more fun; it needs more. It needs to make sense. Fire and Water are opposing elements. Thus, a fire creature that attacks with Fire will be suseptible to Water elements. The Opposing Elements concept is one that is easy for Players to understand and incorporate into their gameplay style. But constantly mashing "Attack" and winning every battle without healing will become boring to almost every player after a while. And to overcome this, something small that can be done without scripts would be to have a Flame Sword equipped when going up against Water Creatures. Still mashing away, but its a tiny bit of strategy that I think most players will appreciate.
So really, what can we do to make Battle Systems more fun for Players while keeping it simple enough for creators to create games that are fun for Players? I think that is the BIG question that needs to be addressed.
(For any that are interested, my "Collection" is available for download on the Scripts section of this site, or over at Chaos Project.)
Discord
Light Style