A lot of people, myself included, have gotten confused over how the slider work in the game dev screens. I think it would be a lot more straightforward if instead of three sliders, an adjustable pie chart was shown – this communicate much more clearly that dev time is fixed, and you’re dividing up that time across the three areas. (It would also be handy to display the fixed time it will take for that phase below to drive home the point).
Thanks!
But there’s already the bar below the sliders, that works sort of like the pie chart you want.
You can’t adjust that, though. My point is that 3 discreet sliders ultimately controlling one value (time spent) is not a good way to present the information.
actual numbers showing the current T/D ratio and percentages would be great.
considering all selected engine options, employee stats/specializations etc,
so one could aim for 0%X, 29% Y and 100% Z.
( the wiki is helpful on the “good practice” ratio, but if you want to get maximum benefits,
you have to play against a spreadsheet, which effectively defeats the “fun to play” aspect of GDT…IMHO)
another great addition would be an option to select/use (user-defined) “great combination” slider-settings when creating a different type of game.
ie: “this ratio worked great for the last action-type game, use that”,
you wouldn’t have to get back to that spreadsheet again for creating a different type of game.)
( gameplay would be getting more casual…so this could be an optional feature,
aiming to hit the perfect balance once and not to be bothered again until the engine/staff skills change. 
)
Pretty much this!
The pie is a lie!
I was going to start my own thread about ‘sliders’ but I suppose I’ll post my idea here, as this topic is closely related to improving sliders.
Here’s my suggestion:
We can assume the sliders have a value between 10% and 80% (as you have to have ‘some’ time in every field, per category)
Thus when adjusting sliders, make them dynamic.
If I max out one slider, it will be at 80% and the other two sliders will be at the bottom of the bar, each at 10%. If I move a slider down to 10% (bottom) the points will be distributed either equally or first available (this doesn’t matter).
also when hovering over a slider, or when clicking and holding the mouse button, a “%” number will appear over the cursor, telling you what “%” the slider is at (no more guess work).
Additionally, double-clicking the slider will ‘lock’ the slider at its current value, so you can then adjust the other without interfering with a value you want (double-click again to unlock).
In conclusion:
dynamic sliders
"%" indicator
Lockable sliders
every one of these features are available in “visual basic” (I used to program in that language for fun) so I can presume those features are available in whatever language this game is programed in.
they were a cinch to implement there, so I can safely predict the same, here.
I’m afraid that is rather not the case,
VB5/VB6 is rather quirky by itself,but not much of a programming language… 
GDT was written in HTML5/Javascript…wrapped up in a node.js executable - that’s why it runs on win/mac/linux.
if u would want to compare VB to any “serious” language, imagine the following:
VB: buy an apartment off-the-shelf in some nice neighborhood for $$$$$$(incl. fees for the decorator),
you’ll get a nanny too, but mind your manners.
C++(or any other noteworthy lang): "study engineering and learn bricklaying, then build your own Apartment block
ASM: study quantum fizzics and start out with baking your own bricks, then start making your own paper, find a way to make pure graphite for making pencils,[…] start drawing your blueprints…eventually you’ll end up with a ready-to-sell apartment block
/offtopic
Okay, okay ^-^;; I gets the points didn’t mean to derail. But I do want dynamic, lockable, informative sliders (gives bambi eyes)
I took C++ and Java at the same University. Sadly we didn’t cover all of the book, and the most complex thing I learned in java were linked lists. I didn’t even get into the visual part of Java (nor in C++ for that matter). Both languages felt like they were meant for Linux (probably because we didn’t get into the really awesome stuff those languages could do… I feel cheated now)
there’s no “visual” in C++, as there’s no Dog in “hot dog”… Microsoft notwithstanding
Java’s “visual” parts are just a bunch of, uh, bear droppings…unless you dig way deep into JNI and the host OS,
which defeats the “multiplatform” aspect of Java…