My devs can’t go far above 900 points, but the quality requirements keep growing.
If I develop a game that I have perfect routine in and also wait very long until I release a sequel of it, the ratings get worse.
My perfectly created Need For Cars 10 had a rating of 5.
I even had my devs going level 3 turbo mode and everything.
Also for my very strong RL computer the high end game gets performance issues.
I’ve got framerate drops and even a few short freezes if everyone works at full strength.
I’d say it’s too many bubbles.
Also every minigame I develop gets a very trashy rating.
I’d suggest to measure the rating by the size of the game.
A little jump&run game can still be a lot of fun if well developed.
You can’t get above 900 points? Sounds like your staff need training.
And yeah, I do wish smaller games didn’t get rated so much in comparison to big games - it makes developing for medium-only platforms completely non-viable.
My latest run earned 59 million, the result of a playthrough dedicated to weird simulations in 2D. Playing the game for high score, I come near to 80 million reliably. My highest was 88M, but I haven’t been able to replicate that…
The period measured by the high scores is where things are most interesting. Which employees should be hired, and how fast? When is advertising correct, and how much? Which features are most important to research? Which stats are most important to train? The first office even has a substantial risk/reward component.
