|
Post by Admin on May 5, 2020 12:51:47 GMT
As you might now, I'm currently play testing the game for bug-finding and balancing.
A question I have been thinking about from the start is the element of randomness. Right now there is zero. How well your movie does is 100% based on the stats of the people involved, script parameters and budget. I did it this way because I wanted the player to feel in control of the results. There is nothing more frustrating than not being able to figure out what you did right or wrong in a game like this. However, while actually playing the game, this approach has started to feel a little... predictable? Almost sterile in a way. It doesn't seem to adequately represent the creative process of movie production since creativity is rarely predictable. Sometimes people with a bad track record produce greatness (The creator of the breathtaking, award winning drama mini series "Chernobyl" was mostly known for writing stuff like "Hangover 3" and "Scary Movie 4") and vice versa, when movies made by competent people still end up a total clusterfuck.
So to capture this I would like to add an element of randomness. However, this needs to be done carefully, so it won't ruin gameplay. the players choices should still be the deciding factor in the success of a movie. Here is the concept I've come up with:
Every movie your produce has the chance of one or more (if you are really lucky) "spark of genius" events that would give the movie or certain aspects of it a big quality bonus.
However the likelihood of a "spark of genius" event happening depends on the skills of the people involved. Having a cast full of accomplished actors would improve your chances of a "Oscar-Worthy Performance" event. Getting a director with high stats in technical abilities and having a high special effect budget might give you a "Groundbreaking Visual Effects" event... you get the gist.
You could still get these events if you don't have the budget to hire the best of the best, but putting talented people on the job will improve your chances greatly.
And of course it would work like this the other way around as well. You can get "flop" events that will reduce your movies quality. Hiring good people will lower the chances of such an event, but it won't protect you all together.
What do you guys think?
|
|
|
Post by jdrake687 on May 5, 2020 14:52:02 GMT
I think this is a fantastic idea! This echoes real life a bit more and helps a lot with spontaneity and keeping the game fresh. And I think that's super important in a game like this.
As you said, sometimes brilliant work comes from writers/directors you'd never expect it from. And sometimes people you expect amazing moves/scripts from, turn up duds. It happens and I think that makes the game (and life) more interesting and better.
Getting something incredible from someone you expected little from is always an exhilarating feeling. And the opposite for someone who's great producing/making something mediocre or awful. I do like how you've made it that hiring good talent/the right people lowers your risk. It's probably more expensive, but you have less of a risk of an awful performance or a terrible script.
I really like this addition and it just makes me even more excited for when the alpha inevitably releases!
( I really like the "Oscar-Worthy Performance" event. Reminds me of Adam Sandler in a funny way, that occasionally he'll have a brilliant performance like in Punch-Drunk Love in 2002 or in Uncut Gems just last year)
|
|
|
Post by spacekid on May 5, 2020 17:53:25 GMT
I Agree
|
|
|
Post by glikeg on May 5, 2020 18:16:26 GMT
As you might now, I'm currently play testing the game for bug-finding and balancing. A question I have been thinking about from the start is the element of randomness. Right now there is zero. How well your movie does is 100% based on the stats of the people involved, script parameters and budget. I did it this way because I wanted the player to feel in control of the results. There is nothing more frustrating than not being able to figure out what you did right or wrong in a game like this. However, while actually playing the game, this approach has started to feel a little... predictable? Almost sterile in a way. It doesn't seem to adequately represent the creative process of movie production since creativity is rarely predictable. Sometimes people with a bad track record produce greatness (The creator of the breathtaking, award winning drama mini series "Chernobyl" was mostly known for writing stuff like "Hangover 3" and "Scary Movie 4") and vice versa, when movies made by competent people still end up a total clusterfuck. So to capture this I would like to add an element of randomness. However, this needs to be done carefully, so it won't ruin gameplay. the players choices should still be the deciding factor in the success of a movie. Here is the concept I've come up with: Every movie your produce has the chance of one or more (if you are really lucky) "spark of genius" events that would give the movie or certain aspects of it a big quality bonus. However the likelihood of a "spark of genius" event happening depends on the skills of the people involved. Having a cast full of accomplished actors would improve your chances of a "Oscar-Worthy Performance" event. Getting a director with high stats in technical abilities and having a high special effect budget might give you a "Groundbreaking Visual Effects" event... you get the gist. You could still get these events if you don't have the budget to hire the best of the best, but putting talented people on the job will improve your chances greatly. And of course it would work like this the other way around as well. You can get "flop" events that will reduce your movies quality. Hiring good people will lower the chances of such an event, but it won't protect you all together. What do you guys think? I love this idea. However, I also think that the game could be unbalanced if the ends of the spectrum result are too unpredictable. For instance, if you have a director and/or producer with a lot of experience in special effects, and then have a high FX budget, then a special effects disaster should be relatively rare (does production time affect this, as well?). Similarly, if you put a director with no special effects experience/talent in a FX heavy movie with a small budget, then the special effects are almost never going to be good. I think the true potential comes into play somewhere in the middle. If you hire a talented director in a lower budget movie, then there is exists a fair possibility that the director is going to do a lot with what he has. Conversely, a director with limited experience/talent could still create good special effects in a movie with a huge FX budget (but of course, could also bomb because of lack of experience). My point is, I think the randomness element would be most effective in the middle of this spectrum is going be more interesting, where it could frustrating if it occurs all the time at at the ends. Does that make sense?
|
|
|
Post by Admin on May 5, 2020 19:16:49 GMT
Well, a special event only gives you a bonus or malus, not automatically make it great or terrible. So if you're starting point is "terrible" and you get the event, you would get a decent result. If it was already pretty good and you get the event you will get awesomeness. And the other way around of course.
|
|
|
Post by glikeg on May 5, 2020 20:03:53 GMT
Well, a special event only gives you a bonus or malus, not automatically make it great or terrible. So if you're starting point is "terrible" and you get the event, you would get a decent result. If it was already pretty good and you get the event you will get awesomeness. And the other way around of course. Ah! That makes much more sense than how I was picturing it. So, would there also be a chance for multiple events (i.e. special effects, script bonus, performance, etc)?
|
|
|
Post by Admin on May 5, 2020 20:04:51 GMT
Jep!
|
|
|
Post by JoeGuest on May 6, 2020 22:11:06 GMT
Randomness sounds good!
What I do find boring is when games are too point allocatey.
Like, getting a good drama script is 3 points character, 2 points plot, 6 points dialogue. (If you get what I mean).
I find it removes freedom and also it changes the nature of the game for me, as you just replicate the same thing so it's slightly a pointless exercise once you've cracked it
Not sure if that makes any sense
|
|
|
Post by paulvine on May 7, 2020 19:10:00 GMT
Great idea for randomness! I also believe some films get huge box office and awards success without specific reason. Take "Sixth Sense" with its huge box office and six Academy Awards nominations! Director was 29 years old NOBODY, Bruce Willis was at the end of his best years. Or "The Silence of the Lambs" that won all top five Oscar categories including "Best Film," which never happened before and might never happen again in a horror genre.
I don't know if you are planning to do it, but you could also add some random life events. For instance, "Rise of Private Space Companies" will effect people's interest in sci-fi genre for a year or two. "War Conflict" might effect war genre for several years and so on.
|
|
|
Post by Admin on May 7, 2020 19:45:00 GMT
That's a neat idea. The game already has trends and untrendy topics, "real life" events could be an interesting way of expanding this system.
I know exactly what you mean. Most game development studio games (there's a whole bunch of them) have the exact same problem. You allocate a number of points between categories like sound, graphics etc. and there is a perfect formula for each type of game. Once you figure it out it's very easy to repeat success. That won't be possible in Film Studio Tycoon. There's simply to many variables that factor into the success or failure of a movie.
Little update on the matter: I implemented the events, both positive and negativ (of course there's room for more in the future). They will show up as a review when the movie get's released. If no event triggers you'll just get a generic review based on the movies quality ("A big disaster", "A masterpiece", etc.). Reviews will eventually be expanded to provide more variety, but that's such a time consuming task that's I'm going to work on that post alpha.
|
|
|
Post by dester on May 7, 2020 20:12:19 GMT
I think randomess is very important so the game does not end being just something very easy after you just figure the winning formula. But I think that you can balance after releasing the alpha and getting the opinions of the game. idk if i expressed myself good
|
|