There’s no harm in arguing if done based on good arguments and logic. Thank you for the amount of work and thought you’ve put into your posts, even if they have achieved quite the opposite of what you intended - I’m more convinced now that aesthetics shouldn’t matter in the game - this kind of stuff does help development.
[quote]1) By having such a system that discriminates taste, you limit the options of what is viable.
Q: Would you like the game MORE by it forcing you to build cars that you yourself think are ugly?[/quote]
A: Honestly I would… I Highly doubt all car companies produce cars that they think look good. Examples: Prius, Aztec, Metro, and several other cars… None of which necessarily looked good but sold well (some not all!) and still served their purpose. Also I do believe that randomizing what the “public” has in taste as far as aesthetics and “performance” would increase the replay ability of the game immensely. If all you do is change the amount types of buyers varies from game to game I’m still going to design the exact same car for them as before (If it sold well) and just change how many of them I would produce. I don’t believe that “loading” saved data or creating the same data as before provides much of a challenge or replay ability.[/quote]
The “None of which looked good but sold well” should give you a hint: it doesn’t really matter as much as one might think it does. That is because “the public taste” is so broad that things even out quite a bit. I think you might be a bit more of a person like this who wouldn’t mind the extra layer of complexity in this area because you are so passionate about it, but forcing a poor game mechanic into the game for that? A clear no-go in my opinion.
Now that’s a pretty strong statement saying that what you propose is a poor game mechanic. Let me give you two reasons (there are probably more):
- Forcing people into doing things they don’t necessarily enjoy, for no extra benefit over the alternative apart from replayability. As is, without the taste mechanic, I would estimate replayability is around 2-3 fully enjoyable grand campaigns, each 20-40h worth of gameplay. You can try different types of manufactures, different strategies and starting locations, different markets, different tech focus, etc. For a moment, let’s say the proposed taste-mechanic does work - how much more replayability would that add on top when you have 3 play-throughs already? Pretty much none, you have seen and adapted your strategies to this mechanic in these 3 playthroughs already, but at what cost? Well, for you obviously none as you would enjoy it, but for many many other players that has added shackles to their desired gameplay.
How many play-throughs will the average person playing the game make before putting the game down? Realistic estimate: 0.5 times. Most people don’t have time to invest 100h+ into games, so offering the best possible experience for the first play-through is much more desirable than offering a bit more variety after 100h+. I for one wouldn’t want to be forced into design cars that to me look horrible, just because the game tells me I have to do that to be successful in the 20h I have to invest into this game. That is really poor game design… I don’t remember quite accurately, but I think it was some Final Fantasy title that was known for being good once you get to 20h into the game, and this would be a similar thing. “Well, you just have to restart the game a few times till the random generator has decided you can design cars you like.” won’t work. “Well, then make it optional!” has been discussed before and doesn’t work, as we live in a world of finite development resources and would have to sacrifice things that enhance the core experience.
- Fracturing buyer demographics into even smaller groups is bad for keeping an overview and becomes a micro-management intense mechanic.
You literally add layers of complexity (in Photoshop and in the game) by adding a taste mechanic. Your normal Venn-diagram areas are further split into smaller sectors of taste, which makes for a higher count of smaller target groups. We plan on having ~30-50 target groups with significant overlap in the game, splitting them into 3 or more sub-groups will make things even more fractured and messy. It would be work instead of fun.
[quote]2) By randomizing different groups’ tastes, you may end up with combinations that are counter-intuitive.
Q: Would you enjoy a game that is counter-intuitive? (intuition being formed by every-day real-world life)[/quote]
A: Yes, if it’s a real life scenario like what car companies ACTUALLY do all the time. Like stream-lining a truck, which is usually meant to be useful for any kind of hauling/pulling AND is comfortable with a smooth ride (especially a CONVERTABLE) BUT LOOKS LIKE A CAR? If I’m not mistaken that could be taken as counter-intuitive.
Explanations - First I would like to say that none of these are bad vehicles… That being said lets begin
UTE - again truck or car? Why not both right?
Wrangler - Utility Off-road vehicle for the family? Awesome! (Although doesn’t Jeep produce a few off-road 4 door vehicles before they did this?)
GTR - I personally love every thing about the GTR… AND now my kids can enjoy the ride. Right on!
Cayenne - Porsche off-road sports car/suv. They will never catch me![/quote]
You are completely missing the point here. None of your examples have anything to do with pure aesthetics. They are all combinations of different utilities that in that specific combination fill niche roles in the market, something which is already perfectly covered by the buyer mechanics we have in mind for the tycoon part, without considering aesthetics. All your examples will find enough buyers anyway, because demographics do overlap and naturally form niches. This will be emergent behaviour, and doesn’t need much programming to work.
I won’t go into you answer and comment to question 3 as this has been covered already. I’d like to address one thing though:
[quote=“Siknezz”]If you really want to know whether or not it would make an important different to your players then ask. While I’m sure
you’ll get way more of an answer than you would want, at least you would HAVE an answer.[/quote]
Letting people design what they enjoy is by definition the right answer for any game that wants to be played and enjoyed.
Thank you again for your input. It is appreciated!