Okay, I am deep into the game. I have failed many times, and did alot of research on the GDT wiki. So here’s my list of improvements and new ideas. I’m not gonna criticize on all the bad features of the game, I’m just suggesting some things that could be added/fixed.
1. Add Sandbox topic/genre - I’ve always wanted to Create "Jerry’s Mod" 2. History on Game Engines, Expansions, etc. - Would be really helpful to know what Engines and Expansions and Sequels I have created. 3. Multi Topic :3 - If you can create Multi-Genre, why not Multi-Topic? 4. Easier System of Game Score Generation : This one’s a big one. Now, what I mean by “Easier system of Game Score Generation” is improving the way GDT calculates your created games, so players understand. This is something lots of players don’t like about GDT. I’d prefer it if GDT had a (simpler) system in which players can understand and develop their games easier. I’ve studied the wiki, the Game Development, Raw Data, and Review Algorithms, and it seems a bit complex. In a nutshell, I’d like it if GDT had a system in which players understand and know (or think) that their game is good or not. There are alot of hints already implemented in the game, strange combinations, whether or not it has good management, etc. But the way GDT calculates score, is way something players don’t know. Stuff like Correct Design:Tech ratio, Correct Slider Allocation, etc. It’s good that GDT added a game report system which helps, but I think it could be improved a little more :). 5. More Systems : More of the smaller systems would be nice. It’s a shame that “consoles” such as the 3DS, err… 3GS are left out.
If you have any thoughts, comment. I know there will be a lot, so feel free to do so.
I will also Update my list If I have more ideas, or if my ideas change.
I would love to have multiple development teams. It’d be nice to be able to assign a small or medium game to one team to bring in some money while the big team works on some AAA game which takes forever.
The big team’s got to be really skilled to do that, but I agree. It’d be cool if they’d implement a sort of system that where you could be developing multiple games at once
1 : Hahem I don’t think that design combinations are random. I think developers tried put some meaning and approximate logic in this by arguing and thinking on a base design for each genre and genre combination and it’s already 21 possibilities, then apply variations through topics. One genre added means a lot more though about that (it adds about 300 more mixes), and for me this genre don’t worth it, some other would worth it more.
2 : Yeah that would help.
3 : As I explained in point 1 I think the dev tried apply some though on each possible mixes. Allow mixing topics would generate a huge boost of possible combinations if my calculating is right and there’s currently 51 topics and 6 base genres so 21 possible genres (I consider the order not significant), so there’s currently 1071 possible combinations. If you allow also topic mixes it would be 26775 possible combinations.
4: There’s feedback through reviews and releases analysis, I don’t think players need understand exactly what’s trying to explain the wiki which isn’t updated for v1.4.x. I mean that know that release a game right after a top release has negative influence is enough. Also have an estimate idea of the best time attribution on each area of game development is first a fun guess then the game feedback is fair.
The point where the game has a feedback but it’s very rough and player should remind it himself, it’s the design/tech points ratio. The only feedback is very rough through some reviews and the player need remind all. Perhaps the feedback on that point from reviews could be a little more frequent and precise. Not the direct numbers but something like great, very good, (not comment ie good), poor, very bad. Also the game detail in history of games should remind the tech/design points and perhaps reviews feedback or something.
5 : The game has already too many consoles releases popup, so even more would be awful. Moreover consoles with a short life duration just don’t worth it for the gameplay point of view.
The Wiki does explains how on the game works on code level, but it overcomplicates the rating system.
Ingame it is a lot simpler.
For a high rated game you will need:
Taken that you already have high score ( 9+ game ) You will need to beat your own best game in order to get another high score. This sound complicated, but it just means you will have to generate about 15% more Tech/Design points.
A good Genre/Topic/Audience/Platform combo ( Okay combo’s work as well, as long it’s not marked as Bad )
Sliders set properly ( there is no single perfect slider setting ) Time Allocation is more important
A decent Tech / Design ratio does gets taken into account on calculating the score, but not as precise as the wiki claims.
Rule for Tech / Design ratio’s
Design heavy games like RPG, Adventure and Casual need more Design points.
Tech heavy games like Simulator, Strategy and Action need more Technology points.
You summed up all my research . Although, the wiki explains that in order to get good games, you need to be consistent. You dont need to beat your high score to get better games, you just need to be consistent, and you keep making 9.5+ games.
Good research. I didn’t know that casual falls into the design and action falls into the tech categories.
& 3. Your right, the devs had to create each multi genres info seperately, so for that many topics combinations… Lets just say they make an update for it when half life 3 comes out. Also, the sandbox genre/topic was a small idea,
if it could be implemented, then yeah, but if the devs think its useless, then okay.
Yes, pretty useful indeed.
Yes, I know that they added a pretty helpful system in GDT. Im just saying, if they could improve (or add to) it so a bit more so users understand really what there doing. Most players dont know about the Design:Tech ratio btw, and the only way you could get that info is out of game.
Youre probably right. This was a tiny thought, and I know there would be something wrong with this. Thanks for pointing it out.
Sandbox applies for games that does not have a strict scenario, where you will have to follow a questline or go through preset levels…
Basically have the players do whatever want within the game mechanics.
Just like playing in a sandbox, you can do whatever you want, but it will involve sand
These are awesome @JCanonz, some seem familiar which is good!
The sandbox idea is awesome. I love sandbox games, in GDT I try to create some of my favorite real world counterparts
The History of Game Engines kind of already exists in the sense that when you choose and engine, all of your engines are there. You only miss out on the engine features. History of Sequels seems to only be present if you name your game with a 2 or 3 or Game: Next. So that would be cool.
The rest sound awesome. I of course big time support the systems!
Thanks, I see where you mean when you say the History of Sequels and Engines. Although, I don’t want to have to go to the “create a game” screen to check what engines I have. And what if I make a sequel without numbers and forget? Also, when you make sequels, its important not to use the same engine to drive technical innovation. It’d be nice if the devs can create a nice, organized gui on history’s of Engines and Sequels. It’d be nice to look back on too. Anyway, thanks for the feedback
The game devs would have to wait until 4D gaming comes to the real world, because they make their game based on real world game history. If they did, then I’ll jump off a cliff
Well, Yeah, I see. It’s just that I see alot of players, competing to beat their own score, but end up creating worse, and worse games. Your still correct, in order to get 9.5+ game you would need to beat your own highest score. That would mean having to get; a great topic-genre combination, a great platform-audience combination, a great topic audience combination, a great genre-platform combination, etc.
Yeah, you don’t need an all great combo, you can focus on other aspects, and still get 10/10. But focusing on getting all great combos will greatly increase chances.
. Although, the wiki explains that in order to get good games, you need to be consistent. You dont need to beat your high score to get better games, you just need to be consistent, and you keep making 9.5+ games.
which is good!