Your thoughts match mine very closely upon finishing this game. I agree that the randomness element leads to little player agency in the outcome, and a high score is not an amazing reward for completing the game. In playtesting I was able to get into the 100s, but I'm the dev and I decided on all the synergies myself so of course I'll get a very high score. All in all I agree--this is more a fun prototype / exploration than game. I really appreciate the time and energy you took in playing my game and writing such a thorough, interesting, and polite critique!
Viewing post in Roulette City jam comments
Oh, I see. So you really can consistently score markedly higher if you master the synergies. That’s very interesting to know. In that case, I guess one thing that might have helped would be having a way to reference the synergies table at anytime from within the game (like a mouse-over icon in the corner or such).
I do find that city sim games actually feel somewhat similar to breeder games (i.e. Monster Rancher, etc.). The enjoyment is derived mostly from a mixture of mastery and customization, perhaps sprinkled with some joy of discovery throughout (i.e. secrets, surprising events, etc.) to keep things interesting later on. In those games, more than anyhing, I think he payoff comes through in the form of seeing your creation thrive and perform in context. For example, we watch the city run smoothly and read the “newspaper” in Sim City, and we watch people go on rides and get a periodic earnings report in Theme Park.
So going on that, if some “advanced” building types were reserved to be unlocked with progress and if the score was presented as a mix of contextually flavored performance metrics instead, then the feelings of gratification and reward could probably come through much more strongly. Perhaps going from a small town lot to a larger city space in the vein of level advancement could also help the player master the synergies in increments while feeling like a form of progress and reward in itself.
That said, the amount of work you managed to put into this in 48hrs of solo work is already quite surprising, so I’m not sure if you would have had the extra time for those additions. Still, as this was sort of an exploration of mechanics, I figure you might want to try that post-jam to see if it can bring the fun through anyway. If you do, I’m interested to give the updated form a spin if you could give me a heads-up.
I do actually provide that- try clicking the help button! I wanted to make it so clicking on buildings in the queue would remind you of the synergies but I didn't have time. The "strategic arson" mechanic was also me trying to give players more agency.
I love the idea of unlockable buildings! That would be a great reward for higher scores. This definitely isn't a true city sim, i had to scrap a lot of ideas about events happening and little people walking around. It's honestly more a puzzle game with city flavor.
Ah, my mistake on the reference table then. My attention must have been too focussed on the play space. And yes, the strategic arson was an interesting design touch for sure. An undo button per se, but I didn’t get much use out of it since I hadn’t mastered the synergies anyway. Knowing that I can reference the table at any time changes that somewhat, though.
I can see how it is moving in more of a puzzle-y direction as you said. It seemed to be partly what you were experimenting with, but the time constraints probably limited how many puzzle-y features and mechanics you could layer on top of the base form if I had to guess. It would have been interesting if there were more “edit” tools at the player’s disposal in addition to strategic arson if going further in the puzzle direction. Perhaps game-y things that ignore real-world logic somewhat like swapping buildings or randomized building transformation, each with limited charges like with strategic arson.
P.S. Sorry for the delayed edit on the previous post. Had a phone call come in.