Skip to main content

On Sale: GamesAssetsToolsTabletopComics
Indie game storeFree gamesFun gamesHorror games
Game developmentAssetsComics
SalesBundles
Jobs
TagsGame Engines

Very fun quiz! I’m curious how I can end up with the same type for my primary and secondary type, but a completely different type for monotype. What’s the difference in calculating monotype vs primary vs secondary type? 

First of all, thank you so much, I'm glad you liked it!

And great question! The short explanation of the difference is that they're all calculated differently from the ground up. When I was pulling from Pokedex entries, I looked at each type's monotype, primary, and secondary examples seperately, mostly because I felt there had to be some significance to a type being primary or secondary.  (Otherwise, why would there be so few non-secondary Flying types?)

And as for the results, the test is actually asking around "attributes" rather than types (e.g. "Helpful", "Expressive", etc) and because of how I organized things, not all attributes affect the monotype/primary/secondary of each type in the same way.

Given that process, I'm happy with how much the types tend to naturally cluster together! But yes, this does mean that, if certain specific attributes are scored high or low enough in the test, this mismatch can happen.

For instance, if you had answers that suggest a lack of reliance on physical strength, that data would support all the types visible in these results, but it wouldn't give any points to the Grass monotype. There's 46 attributes though, and both their presence and absence are relevant, so who knows what it was!

It's on my to-do-very-soon list to write out an official explanation of how the test gets/uses the attributes that define the results, but in the meantime, I hope this explains things a bit :)

(+1)

That definitely explains things, thank you! Honestly the physical strength was probably where my answers were lacking for Grass monotype… I would not describe myself that way. :) 

I appreciate the in-depth response, thanks so much for taking the time to answer!