It doesn’t have as much story as it does level design and gameplay, no.
are there quests, in depth choices, dialogue trees, and so on? I don’t think so, but i may be wrong.
Adding anything to a game should improve it, regardless of genre.
I shouldn’t need to looks at wiki to make the perfect strategy RPG.
I should be able to make the game that I envision… since this is a game about being a game designer and all.
I shouldn’t have to conform to arbitrary rules that say that adding certain things hurt a game…
implying that Final Fantasy X didn’t have outstanding tech
,the most outstanding tech AND story/world design
Having graphics that are too good… is just an inane concept.
And who decides what should go in games? You? or the game designer?
That’s right, the game designer can put whatever he wants.
Molyneaux can put anything he wants in his games. I should be able to in this game.
Because that is the point of making a game dev sim.
If I want to make a shooter with a great story, I shouldn’t automatically get a low review score.
In fact, I should get a better score for innovating from the industries norm.
That’s terrible logic.
Having something like simcity or the sims focusing on storyline makes the simulation sandboxy feel pointless.
You cannot devote time towards everything because that isn’t how the world works, so you have to put more time to certain things. if you had a massive world with terrible dialogue and only storyline, nobody would play it.
People play 2 worlds.
As the studio grows, and the team becomes more talented, I can put more things into the games. There is nothing wrong with adding a advanced physics to an RPG… especially if the story is great.
My best game so far had 2000 design points and 1500 tech points. It was an Adventure RPG, that got a 2 overall because the engine was too good, not because the story wasn’t the best that I had done so far.
You can make whatever you want. It’s called art. You shouldn’t be penalized for originality, it should be rewarded.
1 Like
Lots of indie games have art like gameplay, and they don’t get many sales and get pirates likes The War Z has bugs.
Making a romance action game will not interest people. if i wanted action i’d shoot people.
Making an rpg that only focuses on looks won’t attract the rpg crowd.
Life is life, and this game is fairly accurate with its rating system.
Is it perfect? no. that’s why i gave it an 8 out of 10.
They don’t sell well because they aren’t marketed. That is the only reason.
With the proper marketing your can sell anything.
No one has said anything about making an RPG that is a silent movie.
As long as certain areas aren’t lacking, adding more to a game should not hurt it’s review score.
It WILL hurt the review score if you over-encumber your staff members. you focus on the most important things, then work on the side things. you won’t be able to put everything into the game, you’ll have to choose somewhat.
I didn’t have to choose. I put everything I wanted to in my game and got penalized for it.
You can put whatever you want in a game until you run out of time or money. That is real life.
Not some made up rules about balance of time invested.
There are many aspects in the game that are far from reality.
Consoles don’t support racing simulators? this is just one.
casual games are sort of unbalanced and broken.
Audience is broken too, you can make Street Fighting games for Young kids
and Animal Racing game from Adults.
There are many issues except those as well.
The game is impossible to play without wiki guidance which is a real turn off for me,
it wont let you be creative,
it forces you to memories successful combos and to repeat the infinite times.
You can come up with 4 combos scores at around 9 and to repeat those combos over and over,
the game also punishes you for trying new combos, as you loose fans and time and money, that you worked really hard to earn.
Besides the wiki part, that is the reality of real games and this game.
AAA games generally stick to what works, while indies try different things.
same thing with this game.
You CAN make a very successful indie game, but it’s hard to be creative AND successful.
The reason why there are 9,000 shooters for the xbox and playstation is because they work.
if they did something completely random not as many people would buy them, because being creative narrows down people who will like your game.
I gave a look at it sometimes, but just for curiosity; I convinced myself to not using it for an entirely playthrough even though I’m not so good at the game.
Same here, been doing my own testing.
The Wiki helped me, but here’s my simple guide to “making it.”
- Build a few decent games in your garage until you have 2-3 million in the bank
- Only build a new game engine every 8 years or so… and use it for next gen consoles and lots of SEQUELS
- Once you move into your medium office, hire 2 people, possibly a balanced one, and a strong designer
- Find good Publishing deals. Always use a publisher until you get 100K fans. It really works!
- Once you have 100K fans you are probably “golden” - periodically (but not too often) build an updated game engine and make sequels to your highest rated games
- Train your team a lot… especially as you move on to Large games with ~4 to 5 employees. This helps keep your game scores consistently high by “improving” your games. (People hate to see the exact same thing twice.)
I think its a HUGE flaw if the game actually forces you to use wiki so that you will succeed…
1 Like
I would say it does not “force” you - most of the combinations of topic / genre and the elements of the game you invest in are somewhat intuitive to gamers (stick to making games you know, particular typical games, as sometimes “weird” games make it big for other reasons), though as some have pointed out, it’s a little odd to get lower scores when something like a racing sim is built for a console! (Of course, I say this because GT is a big franchise, but to be fair, I do not know real world sales figures, and I know that despite a MASSIVE investment in building the game, I ended up buying GT5 XL for just $20…)
As pointed out in my guide, my failures in the “medium” second stage of the game weren’t actually from not using the Wiki. They were from not realizing how much you NEED a publisher to make enough money at that point. You get big eyes from your first $2 million small game, but the bigger office and payroll costs invested in medium games require a much bigger fan base.
I’m doing very well on my first run through the game with the Wiki and want to see how far I get, but then I’d like to play again and see how well I do on “instinct.” To be sure, I’ve learned from the Wiki that some elements should take up 20% or less of your resources, so I know approximately where to put the slider. But I also learned just from playing that once you start to roll nice features into your game engine and games, you actually get immediate feedback in-game as to what % of those features you can include/implement without adjusting your sliders.
Really, the Wiki just greatly accelerates the “learning” curve you might otherwise experience by playing without it. (You’d just probably want to make copious notes because you can’t really dig into your old games and see what engine, features or allotments you chose.)
If you invest time or money (systems) into any minus categories for your games selected genre, then you’re game will fail. There are no - categories in real life, so the only way to know about this games traps are through the wiki. The Game rewards you for putting no time or money into certain categories, which should be penalized.
The - just need to go.
“If you invest more than 20% in any minus categories…”
If you have a 600K budget to make a game in real life, and you put more than 20% (of 1/3rd) of your budget into say dialogues but it’s a racing simulation (so 100K spent on dialogues) you only have 500K left for everything else. But you wouldn’t do that, you’d spend like 30K (5%) on dialogues and as much as possible on the engine, AI, gameplay…
In real life, there are finite resources and budgets, and you have to allocate them. The Game Dev Tycoon engine had to give you a way to make decisions about how you invest resources and score you on that, because you’re not actually writing code or designing graphics to present to the magazine reviewers.
So what is the minus category for an RPG?
There are none… but
If you made a racing game with a good story that would be cool.
If the actual racing in the racing game sucked then it would ruin the game, but having a good story alone doesn’t take away from the gameplay.
1st game failed. used wiki to start 2nd game 'till the 2nd office, after that i scored ~3 hits without wiki and finished the game.
now I play without the wiki since it takes the fun away for me