Game Dev Tycoon General Feedback & Suggestions Rolling Thread 1

Game Dev Tycoon ideas
#163

I think there are a number of changes that I would make. The game is currently good but some of the issues with the game score and predictability have hampered its replay-ability.

I think the entire environment that the game is contained in needs to be altered. I don’t want to compete against my own high score but I want to compete against the market. If my competitors are releasing games that average a certain quality, I should be compared to where the market is. I know that it would then be possible to constantly be ahead of the market and some companies can do that currently. However, if I am constantly dominating, the market would/should be able to adjust and innovate faster.

Having in-game competition could be either by some pre-established setting (easy, normal, hard) or by competing via a multiplayer where I could compete against peoples ‘ghosts’ or live against friends. I tend to play on breaks at work and so playing against live people may not be an awesome option for me but I could see other people loving that.

I would like to see a greater level of feedback on scores. Seeing a ‘meh’ or ‘fun at times’ doesn’t really help me improve things. Tell me that the game could have focused more on design or on technology. I know I wouldn’t want to read the same thing over and over again so it could say things like they focused too much on graphics or the sound could have used some love. I would like to see the slider positions be able to be saved. Allow me to build upon what I had done with a greater level of accuracy as opposed to saying well, this slider was about here so I’ll move it in this direction.

I would also like to see the course of history dependent on my and my competitors. If nobody is making games for console Y, then the market share should suffer considerably and shift to where the games are being made for. I know games isn’t the only reason someone would buy a computer (mac or pc) so that would make sense to maintain a steady amount of market share nearly regardless of if games are made there or not. But it would make sense that if nobody in the market is making games for the Wuu that it wouldn’t last very long. Or, if most of the games made for the gameling are aimed at the younger population, that the draw/bonus for making a younger game would increase and making an Everybody or Mature game might have a larger negative impact. I would also like to see research available on differing game ‘types’. I would like to be able to release a standard edition, a special edition (where I could pick what benefits it has, maybe beta testing access, maybe a poster or all the DLC that comes out for the game), a limited edition (where I could pick more goodies on top of the special edition) and maybe a fourth edition that could have even more goodies, like coming in a fancy case or something like that.

I would also like to see more researching options. Many people have mentioned the desire for a multi-platform release and I think that would be awesome. I also think that what additional things you add to a game should matter (a steering wheel shouldn’t positively impact a fantasy/rpg; if anything, it should detract). I would also like to be able to preform more market research. The market should have more trends than it currently does and I should be able to research those trends and maybe see them before they happen if I do enough research. I should be able to, with enough marketing, find out who the early adopters are and see what they are doing/where they are heading. This wouldn’t need to be perfect either. I could see this getting to be overpowered and making it easier to make a best selling game but it should help. I would also like to see some of the things that CocoMadness mentioned with various ‘levels’ of fans and communities. I dunno if I would wnat to see the buying of reviews but I can see how that could impact things. Having the ability to use my fans to do market research, alpha and beta test could help me release a better game, not to mention could help ramp up the hype machine. I would also like to see more of what Cocomadness lays out in 3.1, with more in-depth design. Give some more randomness and larger numbers of events, including employees getting sick (which may increase in likelyhood if they are overworked) or having some sort of chemistry within my team (finding the right balance of people might allow for the team to hit their stride easier where having a bunch of strong personalities may hamper design, though I would need to have some visual queues either way) and breakthroughs (like coming across something you might have had to research, like non-linear levels, while developing a game that gets included in the game). I would love to be able to release DLC (either free or paid, but I would like to have the option to do either) that could generate additional revenue (and allow me to release a potential game of the year edition or a compilation of the game and DLC after some period of time) or have microtransactions or in game economies based on real money (all of which should allow me to make more money on a given game release and extend the life of the game a bit). I also think that you should be able to research things that may not pan out (like how the new Sim City had to be always online. This may have looked good at first but it has hurt the game a bit as many people were not very happy at first and some people I know vowed to not buy the game after that, or how the new Xbox One hasn’t had that great of a reception because of what wasn’t talked about or has been vague since the unveiling of it). I would also like to see the ability to upgrade my current engine. Maybe you can only upgrade them a couple times before you need to do a new one but it is something that the industry can actually do so it would be nice to not have to spend a bunch of in-game money to upgrade to include the newest graphics so I can research the next graphics. I’d also like to get to have some sub-genres; especially for sports and music games. Allow me to select the sport(s) the game focuses on to more appropriately target an audience. If I could have celebrity endorsements (ie, Madden or Tiger) you could also add some risk that the celeb may carry that they do something stupid that can hurt the brand (ie, Armstrong and the steroid isues or Tiger and his lady issues) or that they become a global icon (like Tony Hawk, LeBron or MJ). This could be the same with action games where I could select 1st person, 3rd person, platform as sub genres and target an audience to maybe gain more hardcore fans.

I would like to see some interaction between companies too. I would like to have multiple competitors and I could try to work with a competitor to develop a larger game than I have staff for and we could split profit. Or I could see that a competitor announced they are working on a game and I could try to out-do them, come out with a game first or make sure I avoid that game type if I think they will ‘beat me’ in score and sales. Or, when it comes time for me to make my own console, I could try to release first and get the jump on the market or try to make sure my console is better/cheaper. Additionally, maybe I work with another company to split the cost of research. If I go in with someone on a new graphics thing that may be expensive and cost a bunch of research points, maybe I can team up with someone in the market. I won’t be the only one to have it them so some of the benefit may deteriorate but I also save some money which could be good.

I would eventually like to see some pricing in here as well but I know that can be challenging to do well and if it is not done well, it can really hurt. I’d eventually like to have the option to price my games at differing levels. Maybe I think my AAA game is worth $100 for the standard edition, $140 for the special edition & $200 for the limited edition.

I would also like to see more potential for early adoption on my part. If a company is coming out with a new system, I’d like to be able to have a launch title or, if my company gets ‘in’ with a certain system either by being successful enough or releasing enough exclusive titles of a certain quality, that I could have the game pared with the system itself. I know that with the new PlayStation, Sony is working hard to court indie devs so maybe a company may do the same thing and offer a one-time (or a few month) drop in the license fees to try to make things easy.

Additionally, I would like to have more options when setting up the game. I know I mentioned that I would like an easy, medium or hard mode earlier but I would like there to be more options from the get go. I know some people like the historical accuracy of things right now so I would like to have the option to have the system success dependent on the in game market or true to history. I would also like to have the option to lengthen the game. Maybe go from 25 years to 30, 40, 50 or even 60+. With this, there would need to be more consoles released in the future Like an Mbox Two, Mbox Infinity, PlaySystem 4, 5, 6 and maybe a few other consoles that come from a new company (like if Apple decided it wanted to get into the business or something like that)

Next, I would like to see a more dynamic office environment. Have people get up for coffee or play video games (especially during a testing phase) and so on. Adding things to the office might help team cohesion and chemistry while decreasing the amount of vacations they need to take. Eventually, I would like to get to have my own office where I pick a place in the town (in a business park, near a university, near some attraction…) that could also help my team work more efficiently (or less, if I put it in a poor place, like a dying part of town or in a bad part of town) and then I could add as much staff as the building allows, have a greater research department (which might even have different divisions, like researching competitors, researching the market, researching new tech…) and so on.

I am currently working so this was originally much longer but I have had to leave and come back to it several times so I will end on this one; The review algorithm needs to be more predictable and provide more feedback. It is really hard, if not near impossible to learn what you did right or wrong currently. Since you are competing against your own high score, it can feel like you are struggling to learn what you did right because what got you a 9.75 game in your last game might only score in the 7s or 6s next time. Essentially, I want to better know what I can do to create an awesome game without having to go to a wiki. Currently, it can be tough to have a ‘feel’ of how you are doing and how this game that you are working on is going to do. I would like to be able to know this game is going to be awesome so I need to ramp up the hype as much as I can or I have had a number of setbacks and issues with this game so I may just want to scrap the project all together.

One last thing that I just remembered, I’d like to be able to change the name for a game before I release it. i could have the game code named ‘game #123’ but release it as “awesome game name here”.

Hope this can help make this game better! It is a good game but has a good amount of potential for growth!

1 Like
#164

Choose perspective for game like 1-person 2-person 3-person…

#165

I already posted to the one big idea thread, but I also have a minor one. You can combine genres, but not topics? I would love to make a sci-fi racing game. Or a time-traveling romance.

Also, racing and action should be a good combo.

#166

previous concept: Adjustable “Quick Setting” sliders for game genre development:

  • Currently, each game development cycle defaults to the previous build. Perhaps it would be better to have it default to the highest rated build for that genre. If a beginner builds their first strategy game and it ranks 5.25; when they go to build that next strategy game, they begin with that default setup to adjust as they “feel necessary” to improve the games changes for success.
  • This would let the “Developer” tweak and remix their previous settings while trying to balance labor allocation in order to attempt to achieve the balance while building the best possible game.
1 Like
#167

I’ve got an idea!

  1. Maybe in next versions of GDT there will be some new office’, like super big high-rise and something like that.
  2. Interactive interview’s with answer choice!
  3. Before release of a game create a demo where we decide how many percent of a game demo show.
#168
  1. So basically an upgrade to the offices, and if there was customizes such as the companies logo, that would be nice.
  2. That would be a lot of effort, but if it does eventually get added, that would be a perfect, good idea.
2 Likes
#169

The possibility to get even more employees would be nice too. Getting specialists for everything :D.

#170

If that would happen, in my opinion, a max on specialists should be enhanced to 7 for example if there is 20 employees in a game.

#171

I’d say, a max of 1 for every kind of specialist.
And maybe being able do produce multiple games at the same time.

#172

New Offer:
Allow the game to determine the details of the engines and their impact
And the result at the end points received will be considered only to prevent physical and graphics created

#174

I always thought that it could work, say have 20 employees, and split the team into say, a team leader that is a specialist in leading teams and he could have a team of say 7-8 people, the game would take longer to make but the bonus, would you get more profits, but the game might not be as good of quality.

And I don’t think so, yet again, say 20 employees, you don’t want 9-10 specialists, it doesn’t make sense in my opinion.

#175
  1. Running D:T tally on the Dev UI would be nice.
  2. Floating UI Screens
  • I’d Like to be able to keep tabs on Research Progress while deciding who to allocate where & when in the design process.

I wouldn’t mind a few more mix & match options for the “player character”… Seperate Style, Color choices would be nice for Hair, Skin, Outfit

1 Like
#176

Strategy Genre: Should not put graphics as an ‘important’ field. Many strategy games stand on their complexity rather than their eye candy, and your average strategy gamer will continue appreciating a dynamic AI and a complex world long since they’ve gotten used to the visuals. This would help make it a bit more distinct from simulation. In exchange, it should put the focus on world design, as a rich and complex world makes for a deeper strategy game for the pure strategy genre.

I use Crusader Kings II (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/VideoGame/CrusaderKings?from=Main.CrusaderKings) as my example (A Prime example of a History + Strategy game in the context of Game Dev Tycoon). The visuals are simple by today’s standards. The characters (an important focus on the game) are represented by simple static portraits. The units are simply animated soldiers. “Battles” are merely the two soldier icons generically attacking each other while the battle statistics screen shows how the battle is going. Clearly the visuals are NOT Paradox Interactive’s primary concern…and a lack of them does NOT hurt the enjoyment of the game. While the game does feature a realistic terrain map mode, most people just play in the political map mode, which paints the whole landscape in simple colors to show who owns them.

Meanwhile, they took the time to do their homework and filled in ALL the locations, cities, temples, castles, provinces, famous dynasties going back centauries. The world is very well fleshed out and the game benefits for having this level of depth. That would clearly show a focus on ‘world design’. Crusader Kings isn’t an isolated example. Take Master of Orion II(http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/VideoGame/MasterOfOrion?from=Main.MasterOfOrion) a Space + Strategy game that came out around the same time as Donkey Kong Country. It has clearly inferior graphics to DKC, but doesn’t suffer for it, due to the rich fleshed out tech trees and dynamic universe-generator that made a new map for each play-through. The “Dynamic Economy” “Dynamic World” engine components sound like they would be a welcome addition to any strategy game. “Realistic Weather” and “Day/Night Cycle” too if the strategy game in question is weather-dependent.

To account for this, Strategy games should be moved a little closer to design than they are now, while still remaining a tech focused genre (maybe 1.4 rather than the 1.5 it is now)

At the moment, Strategy and simulation games feel like carbon copies of each other as you can make just as good a simulation game as you can a strategy game with the exact same team and the exact same slider positions and engine components. Moving the focus away from graphics and onto world design would also allow players to still develop good games when behind on graphics tech, and develop for lower tech level platforms without suffering much for it, and make the strategy genre unique as being the only genre that doesn’t have a heavy preference for graphics. This would also naturally leverage the bonus to strategy games that the later platforms like the GS have without suffering from the lower tech level of those handheld platforms.

2 Likes
#177

I agree with doing several games at once. The fact that many of the smaller platforms can’t handle large games forces your otherwise large studio to developing undersized games if you want to develop for that platform. A team of 7 could handle 2 medium games at once, or 7 small ones. When developing an undersized game, you could designate which people would be assigned to work on that game at all. The people who are told not to touch one game remain free to start a different game entirely.

#178

For that Pinstar, the game would have to be balanced so a limit on how many games a team can make, then to balance the game, people would make as many games as possible to get more money, but I say this should cost a lot more money as the team is not as skilled as the player himself.

#179

I wish the turns were much longer. It felt as though there was not enough time for each era, and that many times I managed to release 2-3 games before that console era was over and the new consoles were released. This game could be like the civilization series where you can play for hundreds of hours, but then as soon as I was really getting into it, the game ended.

Some minor options I would like to see would be:
Option to send all staff on vacation at once;
Better feedback on game reviews;
Cheaper game topic prices (Like it would be better if we could unlock multiple topics at once via a minigame or achievement)
An in-game guide of desired game development traits by genre
Real time score updates, and leaderboards

2 Likes
#180

I was thinking That the game has little staff. i would suggest that you add 100-300 staff, and you can put them into different sections like graphic,sound,world design.

#181

Like I said, 100-300 is too much. Its like getting a game that has multiplayer, can only fit 12 people to try and put 300 in there next game…its too much and would require too much things. If the staff got extended to lets say, 20 or so, that would be much better.

#182

What might be more realistic is that each individual staff member is actually a team lead, who have a host of unnamed programmers and artists working under them. When they go up in level, they can handle more staff under them. It is also why their wages go up, as it is paying for a larger team.

Stats would represent the general skills of the team rather than just the manager. Trainings would represent team training sessions rather than individual trainings, but otherwise function the same as it does now.

That said, the actual gameplay balance would be the same, so this would all be visual fluff.

1 Like
#183

Oh so you can just click “Go to Team One” and that has the lead programmer and characters without name, then you talk to the leader and that, and when they level up, the stats go up? Thats a very good idea :100: