Pros vs Cons.

[Dufflebags]

Im interested in this game. Maybe current owners could give me some point notes on the good things about the game, AND the bad? I'd like a realistic picture of the game.

[ArtyD42]

Pro:
You can play the demo rather than get someone to influence you to buy this game.

http://www.greenheartgames.com/game-dev-tycoon-downloads/
Enjoy.

[in development]

Con:

There is no con. Just kidding. But I'd hate to say anything negative about this game.

[SweetPoison]

Its like Civilization game with tycoon,,no as such con

[MechaM]

Its more or less like anyother tycoon, I highly enjoy this game its a trial and error type. you will go bankrupt a few times before you start making big games that people love. You can pick features to focus on when making your game and see how it works out with consumers.

[Joshua Raposa]

Cons: they use fake names for systems :p

[Jarl Bread Maker]

Originally posted by Joshua Raposa:

Cons: they use fake names for systems :p

This is a pro, dem greedy game corps can't say "TM BICH"

[Treetop69]

the con is if you try to master the game and you fully come to understand how shallow the rating system is

once you do that you can easily naiil 10/10 100% of the time, make mad bank, a few play throughs of the same eras and you can quickly be making MMOs for the xbox or early pc

just get your main guy to be a design guy, hire a super high tech software guy, and get 1 balanced guy after the office.

rush 700 design while the other 2 guys make games, get an early mmo

the best non game wrecking tip till give you is to not try to be outstanding, try to be consistant.


actually, ill wreck the game for you.

it does not matter what your game is, how the sliders work out, ect ect. as long as a few conditions are met youll get a 10/10

1) no one was over worked
2) the total Tech + Design points = 110% of your PREVIOUS GAMES total tech and design points. Ratio of points is irrelevant
3) the combo/platform is one that is different from the previous, and a valid good combo/great combo/ect

basicly aim to make 10% more points each game, but not 11% as that wastes a valid % of growth for the next game.

100
110
121
133
147

could be a sereis of games, and all of those would be 10/10s


game play vs sound, ect, all that is meaningless. your score and how your specialize is also meaningless save for unlocking reqs


its incredibly shallow, but enjoyable for a day or two

[Dufflebags]

There's the real review I was looking for. Thanks everyone.

[ArtyD42]

Sadly Treetop didn't give you a review, but the way to game the system rather than if it's fun or not. He doesn't even have this game on his list.

In addition he gave you the information only partially bashed as there is a wiki about it. I have gamed the system to do some funny things personally and his review is lacking.

For starters it's a known fact that your first "hit" game needs to break 30 total design and tech combo points. From there on you're fighting your own best score. Every time you get close to or surpas that score the bar gets raised 11%. Thus it starts at 30, then goes 33, 36, 39, 43, but also doesn't account for new topic/genre types with this math.

I gave you a link to the page with demos you can try in the first response. Nobody can tell you that you'll have fun or not in a game with a review but they can tell you features of a game. Sometimes people will tell you things are the next greatest thing and a demo will say to your personal choices it's a piece of garbage.

TL;DR: Try the demo if you want to decide if the game is fun enough for you to want to buy it. Nobody else can tell you if you are going to have fun without knowing everything about you.

[Tripas]

Well, I like the game, it's pretty compelling, but it REALLY fells more like a game that relies on "studying" the underlying formula that rules its decisions than an game that relies more on organic decision making.

For instance, the game doesn't really give you as much feedback on what you're doing right or wrong as it should, so you'll feel lost without reading up on the formula on the wiki. Also, you research new features for your games like better graphics, open worlds, better sound systems or storytelling devices, but they're all interchangeable as long as they're of the same "value". So for example, choosing between having either Achievements or a SAVE SYSTEM is worth the same amount of "points" to make a better game. Making a Sports game that has an Open World is ALWAYS a better idea because it gives you more "points", which is kind of weird.

Like I said, the game is pretty enjoyable, but it's just a shame that it makes the process of making a game look more like a machine rather than a creative work.