Automation is a great game and all - I’ve spent at least 100 hours in it, but as you learn more about engines and how they work you might wish for more customization options (eg. separate cam duration/lift/separation controls) for your engine.
Of course, the game shouldn’t be overwhelming to people who are new to this stuff and I understand the simplification of some things, but if you ever want to “build” a fully custom engine, you should definitely check out Engine Analyzer Pro.
It’s a very nice program which essentially lets you create your own engine with pretty much no constraints (You can have 2 GT60 turbos bolted onto a B18 that revs to 20,000rpm) and you get a LOT of info about it - for each rpm step, you can see the exhaust backpressure, piston speed, CFM, etc.
There’s also Drag Analyzer Pro by the same company that (obviously) lets you simulate a drag race with your own tranny/body/axle/engine/whatever setup.
They’re two completely different games… the way you call it an “alternative” makes it sound as if you don’t even like Automation. Honestly, what was the point in posting this?
Those are actual dyno simulators to help you build actual race engines, I fiddled around with those simulators before I found Automation and you just cant compare them. The CLOSEST I have found to Automation is Gear City and even then…yeah, Gear City goes more in depth with building your car (making a gearbox SUCKS, no fun, Automation devs got it correct here) but that is about it, you cant compare them graphics wise either since GC seems to be built for 90s PCs.
I’d also add that Engine Analyser Pro costs a few hundreds.
As for GearCity, while I hope it becomes a great game, but I seriously dislike the slideriness of its car and engine designers, as well as the very high level of micromanagment. It shows decent examples of how not to do things, although from what I understand the dev wants to fix those issues.
YEP!! But in no real way do I find them “fun”, there is no end point, no progression, no goal save for the one you set yourself. Just a simulator for work IMO.
Sounds like a cool program, TBH, and I also remember using CarTest(as old '90s DOS program) back in the day…that was hella fun to play around with. Even so, though, even CarTest can’t really compare to Automation.
True, but I guess the saying “quality, not quantity” applies here.
EVERYTHING in GearCity has a slider, most of them don’t even have any values either. That’s why it’s bloody awful.
[quote=“Microwave”]True, but I guess the saying “quality, not quantity” applies here.
EVERYTHING in GearCity has a slider, most of them don’t even have any values either. That’s why it’s bloody awful.[/quote]
It follows a different design approach compared to Automation - that’s for sure. It’s not awful though, not by a long shot. As opposed to Automation (which I also love dearly), it is actually fully playable in its current state and, altogether, a lot of fun if you’re into the actual tycoon stuff. Automation wins in the actual vehicle/engine design department - it obviously cannot compete on the tycoon side of things yet - and, if we’re being honest, you’re only moving sliders about in Automation as well, it’s just visualized better
Also, GC is being developed by just one single dude, who has put a lot of effort into it and is just a really nice guy in general. Calling his game “awful” is just extremely unfair. Daikatana is an awful game - GC certainly isn’t.
[quote=“freeman”]It follows a different design approach compared to Automation - that’s for sure. It’s not awful though, not by a long shot. As opposed to Automation (which I also love dearly), it is actually fully playable in its current state and, altogether, a lot of fun if you’re into the actual tycoon stuff. Automation wins in the actual vehicle/engine design department - it obviously cannot compete on the tycoon side of things yet - and, if we’re being honest, you’re only moving sliders about in Automation as well, it’s just visualized better
Also, GC is being developed by just one single dude, who has put a lot of effort into it and is just a really nice guy in general. Calling his game “awful” is just extremely unfair. Daikatana is an awful game - GC certainly isn’t.[/quote]
Yeah, it’s less car focused, and more focused on being like the tycoon games of old. Personally I don’t enjoy it much, and think it has some kind of frustrating UI and game design choices. But It’s not awful as such. Just somewhat flawed and not quite my thing.
[quote=“Microwave”]The game just seems half assed. Also, if you read closer, you’d notice that I said:
You’re just aimlessly dragging sliders around all the time, and half the time you don’t even know how much they affect the final product.[/quote]
They may not have values - but they clearly state what they will do and the final result is always shown at the bottom of the screen. If what you’re doing is “aimless” it’s not the game’s fault in this case. Automation used to be a much worse offender in this regard - remember when stuff like the “Offroad” stat wasn’t shown in the top left? It was a huge pain and a lot of guesswork to work on that stat. It’s much more usable now, of course.
Back in the earlier versions of Gear City (Where it would crash for no reason and after x amount of turns), I made a cool $800 million selling cars from 1900-1930. Did it take forever to get the hang of it though
I played Gear City open beta 1.18. The game lacks a certain excitement that was found in Automation. The point and click interface is boring compared to Automation’s. The car designer seems limited. The whole process of waiting turns makes me feel like there is a lack of feedback, plus when you make decisions like committing factory lines it just closes the menu. No noises or text to give feedback that your selection was accepted. Overall the game just doesn’t have that excitement you get from Automation. If Automation wasn’t coming out I would probably play Gear City because I have been looking for a car company tycoon game for years. But knowing Automation exists and is playable, it’s like using a ten year old operating system instead of a new one.
I have and play both Automation and Gear City. They both appeal for different reasons. Automation for the in depth characteristics for the engine designer and the intricacy of engine designing. Where as Gear City has many more options (flat heads, T heads, etc), various forced induction and engine types, and sizes. Each with its own advantage and disadvantage. I like automation because it shows the problems in designing engines, and the realism. Gear City appeals to me because I can choose what type of engine to build in what way regardless of the time period (flat head in the 90s, OHV in the teens, etc). Automation to me is more about the in depth car designing more focused on the cars in general. Where Gear City is about the broad use of designing cars and the larger impact of said designed car.
If Automation by the time its finished (completely) offers options like flathead, t head, 4 sp automatics in 1946 (like the Hydramatics used in GM), etc I will no longer need Gear City. Because Automation should be about choice as well. Even though the game is geared tward post war designs, previous designs should also be available as a cheap cost alternative. Its frustrating a slight bit that early in the game I wouldn’t be able to recreate a realistic car due to the unlock of certain tech is later then was really available. A example a 1952 Oldsmobile Super 88 with a 4 speed hydramatic, 4 barrel. I know you can unlock items earlier, but suffer reliability issues (4 barrels were common years before 1955 in the US, since the 30s The 4 speed hydramatic was used in many brands other then GM (Lincoln, Rolls Royce, Nash, Hudson, Kaiser, Fraizer, Willys, and Bentlys). If I wanted to build a 4 speed automatic in the late 40s early 50s its would be very unreliable, but the hydramatic was always known as a very reliable transmission (I actually had one 1956 Pontiac StarChief Catalina, and they are comparable to modern automatics in how they feel and respond unlike the 2 speed slam o matics common at the time). Thats why so many other brands used it.
Im not complaining about Automation. I am merely showing the appeal and drawback IMHO to each game. Automation can easily make Gear City irrelevant if the people playing had more choices (which sounds like later DLC). Automation should also consider a DLC for prewar.
@JayZee88: Prewar stuff doesn’t work in Automation that is something that comes up a lot. You can’t have realistic calculations and have straight up inferior designs next to superior designs at the same cost, it doesn’t make sense. In gearcity this is less of an issue because it doesn’t simulate things as accurately, it can make an interesting choice out of this, we can’t. Cheers!
