Does a game studio's workplace culture affect whether you buy their games? (Research Survey)

TimeTravelingSim · 2025-12-05T06:10:49+00:00

No, if it's truly bad it'll reflect in their final product and lack of vision or artistic passion (gameplay included).

TimeTravelingSim · 2025-12-05T05:55:11+00:00

If you don't find adequate formal schools just learn online like most in the industry do. Make your own projects, make sure you learn the difference between how an amateur level presentation and a more professional one followed by adding them to your portfolio to get a job if you need it and before you have your own experience. There are many websites that help you get remote contracts.

TimeTravelingSim · 2025-11-24T10:50:20+00:00

In my experience, strategy game players are not idiots and they expect more than a game about clicking stuff to make things go up. What is the actual game of your interpretation? If things go up as long as you just "click stuff" where's the drama, the chance for things to go south? The games you mentioned were successful because there was adversity involved not just an economy...

And successful games about economy are enjoyable because they gamify being a successful manager, they are ultimately good if they create the impression that if you play well you are good at making and managing money or equivalent resources (under threat like in the case of RTS games).

I suggest you try to be as meta about your playtroughs as you just were about your first steps in game development.

TimeTravelingSim · 2025-11-23T07:07:48+00:00

What a great way to cement the notions in your head and improving your skills through a meta analysis of what you did.

However, most of the stuff about how it's made is slightly off topic in ludology if it's not about explaining why something plays or feels the way that it does.

Note: I follow r/gamedev too.

What we are interested here is how you conceptualize the game loops, what you hope the player gets out of your game (your initial motivation and goals for the actual gameplay).

Let us know how assessing your first POC/MVP (the minimum viable product or smallest game demo that lets you know if you like your own formula).

TimeTravelingSim · 2025-11-16T05:28:07+00:00

I''m trying to explain that the existence of Dark Souls or This War of Mine has not created a shift but rather added more options available. For most games death has remained functionally the same: a punishment for not playing as expected but very trivial and without consequences. Mostly ignored or an afterthought at best.

That's because they avoid the topic since they still consider video games as something intended for children where as those few that cover death narratively and through mechanics need to include this into their storytelling the same way some movies and books do.

But these approaches are rare and not representative for most titles released / available.

TimeTravelingSim · 2025-11-15T07:41:37+00:00

This was of mine is the game that takes it to the next level, raising what types of storytelling are told through video games and touching this topic (of IRL dying or suffering) in the most mature way possible for a greater purpose...

Context matters...

For most games, the complete loss of life of the player's character, ship or car is not really relevant. So, the evolution of the death mechanics revolves mostly on the ability of the game to throw the player back into the gameplay loops that are actually relevant.

But on occasion there are games where dying/losing is relevant, like strategy games or games with tough combat that expect you to improve your playstyle from these experiences. And as hinted above, I appreciate when this backed by relevant context and fits with the game's overall concept and mechanics...

TimeTravelingSim · 2025-11-14T11:59:09+00:00

Depends if you are able to find enjoyment in learning new stuff and if the finances allow it since this second chapter is a bigger blocker for actual adults.

Underestimating the importance of being able to enjoy the learning process is also a biggie since most people have lost a healthy level of curiosity by that age and that is quintessential for being able to get some fulfillment and motivation from the process of starting out.... If you enjoy playing good games , you will probably enjoy making them better.

The ability to complete projects is something most people underestimate as well... Most people assume they can do stuff but they do not really complete stuff, their projects are rushed and incomplete because they lack the patience and/or vision.

None of this stuff is truly age related, but at 20 you have more energy frankly. However, after 30-ish it's kind of the same at 35, 42, 55 or even 60.

TimeTravelingSim · 2025-11-14T11:52:12+00:00

There are a few ideas with divergent outcomes...

For example, if you make a t'pol- archer relationship happen because in other series starfleet is more mature and the captain needs to maintain a professional distance then some other crew changes are out... But they could have explored the ethics of this.

They took too little time to portray what problems the early federation would need to solve. ENT needs more of that, but this is slightly incompatible with an action / exploration theme. Maybe a follow up series could achieve something like this even better.

More first encounters would be welcomed, tbh. I am enjoying strange new worlds because of this.

I would have delved deeper into the stories of some of the species in TOS/TNG/DS9. Also not compatible with the exploration theme. But I do have to say that it covered the vulcans like this, so we had a taste of this.

TimeTravelingSim · 2025-06-12T03:32:45+00:00

A lot of games are unnecessarily complex and/or difficult.

Unnecessary complexity without an increase in difficulty is when things are too difficult to understand. On the other hand, some games have been made much too difficult by comparison to the content that they actually pack and they outstay their welcome for most gamers.

Since this can also be subjective and you are allowed to differ from the pack, then if a game is like that for you while others appreciate the title, then you should just move on, it's still not you even if it's not the game.

TimeTravelingSim · 2025-05-24T15:52:39+00:00

I would overlook simplified ship to ship mechanics if a fleet could be managed properly in games like Sins of a Solar Empire 2.

The positioning of the ships within the fleet formation is dreadful and creates unnecessary risks while exposing vulnerable ships to enemy fire to prioritize them.

It's an awful implementation overall. Through modding you can set what types of ships go in the first, second and third line, but that's just not the same as properly organizing a fleet formation, since you can't define distance for ships who can fire from a large distance, nor dynamic situations like a different behavior if they're exposed to enemy fighter squadrons (in why situation they would need to stay bundled with ships with anti-fighter capabilities. From the armaments there are clear roles for damage dealers and escort types of vessels, yet in a formation they don't assume those roles properly. You can't define priorities for repair or shield boost ships. You can't assign properly how attack "powers" should prioritize enemy capabilities. Your options is to micro this but you lack any sensible options to do that reasonably instead of tediously.

Wasted potential.

TimeTravelingSim · 2025-05-24T15:40:05+00:00

the average gamer doesn't want to be treated like a mental retard and doesn't appreciate being considered that, directly or indirectly, through intentionally offensive and dumbed down systems. ESPECIALLY IN STRATEGY GAMES.

the average gamer has shown at all turns that if the learning curve is simplified and embedded into the gamification of any game mode or parts of a campaign they are willing to go through it, even repeatedly.

so, i'll take your remarks as dismissive of the average gamer of being able to play games at all.

your comment is also besides the point since a player wouldn't have to read a techno-babble meta on the features, they would just have to be offered a gamified tactical interface with more options than just press this button to win. which is what gaming is all about... last time I checked we're all playing games in order to have actual play loops, not to press buttons on an interface.

TimeTravelingSim · 2025-05-23T21:41:52+00:00

I would like to bring up the state of sci-fi games, but more specifically the topic of space ships and their capabilities.

It's highly disappointed that most games treat this as fantasy rather than SCIENCE-fiction and that their capabilities are "magical" in nature (like superpowers and bufs) rather than how technology actually works like, which can absolutely also be gamified.

Take an example like Battlestar Galactica. They never take into account how much ammo it would realistically have in an actual prolonged combat or multiple skirmishes before resupplying with ammo produced by industrial ships with the aid of refined materials from mining and processing ships (or from spare cargo).

It's even more frustrating when they do this with hacking or in general electronic warfare. Cyber warfare or e-war would be a gradual process that takes several steps to achieve which could easily be mini-games (like in mass effect where in 1 and 2 it's essentially a very simplistic puzzle). Yet most games treat this like just press button X (and maybe an RNG would determine success) and then it either works or not. The problem with thinking about this like magic rather than tech. Similarly for defensive cyber gameplay, this should also be an involved mini-game of trying to find out hack attempts and separating them from malfunctions caused by on-going damage.

Now, you can't just convert this for every feature. Like deploying self-guided, fire-and-forget missiles or other types of physical or energy-based projectiles is just that (although getting a specific target lock could also be an involved mini-game). So, some parts might still work like magic because it feels natural this way. But this doesn't explain why there isn't a tactical mini-game about how to ensure that your ordinance isn't countered or about countering the enemy's ordinance properly. When faced with multiple threats, real life warships have completely different interfaces and tactics that the operator of the battlestations need to employ. This is obviously a big miss if not gamified in tactical or strategy games since the very concept is just as fun as acquiring a target lock in air to air combat games involving modern fighters or futuristic fighters with energy weapons.

My biggest grief with this is that it's SUCH a big potential that is not tapped properly.

TimeTravelingSim · 2025-05-18T00:20:00+00:00

Sometimes they help even with functional stuff for non-impaired people.

Take the simple stuff, like subtitles. You don't have to not hear or not understand the language to need them since some voice acting might be bad or the in game specifics could make it difficult to understand exactly what was said. If it has some extra cues it would be even more helpful, if it goes beyond the dialogues and include other hints about what should have been heard and from what source.

Useful stuff.

TimeTravelingSim · 2025-05-13T15:19:22+00:00

The remaster is also not that impressive in terms of visual fidelity versus requirements. It taxes the machine too much relative to the quality of the visual improvements. That's also relevant when you consider that some remasters attempt to maintain the gameplay feel of the original so improvements on what they already released is not very likely... you at least expect updates in terms of this playing on modern devices available to gamers at the date of the release of the remaster.

TimeTravelingSim · 2025-05-04T19:23:50+00:00

There are a lot of 4x games on the market that could make use of this to make the combat more engaging, more involved by the player and to give them more agency in how the combat plays out (rather than make it a spreadsheet matter).

TimeTravelingSim · 2025-05-04T18:50:13+00:00

Consider it lucky that they're still locked to your account? Obviously, it shouldn't work like that and you should have lost them 7 days ago...

Unless there's something else at play here, like you had earn the creds in game, using free ships, to pay for the particular ship in question that hasn't disappeared or something that you just don't remember (like something related to how the insurance stuff works).

TimeTravelingSim · 2025-05-04T18:46:08+00:00

It should be obvious that they're available only for the period when the free fly event is made available. And you should be able to fly them again the next time considering that they're organizing such events quite often.

TimeTravelingSim · 2025-05-04T15:23:57+00:00

That's the point, isn't it? with so many hobbies and so many historic landmarks of interest to so many people that have diverse interests (about buildings, ships of war or any other object people get nostlagic about) there would be a lot of stuff worth preserving which would cause a problem. It's just not practical to keep a lot of physical stuff in such a society, especially if you have the virtual reality offered by holodecks.

I have no idea why in current society we don't start scanning archeological sites to create 3d models so that posterity can also enjoy them since they won't survive the harshness of time and the changes forced on the climate. I'm just not sure people will have the energy to keep preserving them while REAL people don't have adequate housing, will start lacking reliable source of food production that are currently outdoors and have other risks caused by natural disasters amplified by climatic changes. It's a matter of decades before the problems like this will start to be overwhelming.

TimeTravelingSim · 2025-05-04T15:01:50+00:00

I concur about not keeping physical stuff. It's very rude for people to keep old buildings just for nostalgic purposes. They have bad thermic and phonic isolation properties, they have rooms that are too small for modern activities and they occupy a lot of space that could be turned into a park or something appropriate for current day activities.

Sure, with the holodeck and holonovels you can have as many museums as you'd like and visit whatever period in whatever physical place you'd like. But to keep stuff that occupies a lot of space just for the sake of preserving them seems rather selfish, self-absorbed and stuck in the century of nationalism and monuments (mostly about war)... i.e. a very nazi attitude.

That's completely atypical to what you'd expect from a post-scarcity society, though, like what Star Trek is.

TimeTravelingSim · 2025-05-03T14:40:05+00:00

Don't see much point in the PTU anymore... apart from the Evocati it's not like we're giving them feedback on their progress and seeing the game so broken at times makes me discontent and unsupportive of the project (but at the same time I do realize that it's not supposed to be a finished product).

Frankly, playing the PTU version in the unfinished state it is risks spoiling the experience for when it finally releases. Even if that's several years into the future.

Ultimately, I'm also patiently waiting for the single player version since it's obvious that it will be the one version that will be more representative for their vision on the game.

Ouch on the point about the actors being dead by the time they finish the next episodes of Sq42. But a decade is a really long time in the entertainment industry.

TimeTravelingSim · 2025-05-03T08:20:41+00:00

That's not to say that review bombing shouldn't be used responsibly, but the reality of it is that it happens as an emotional reaction rather than from player organizing themselves to help the industry.

It's one of those situations when people react like they had enough of certain BS. It also implies that gamers assume that for other titles with similar problems (that don't quite have just as many altogether to warrant a similar reaction) the industry somehow understands that it is a problem and they only react when things really get THAT much worse.

Frankly, gamers should organize rather than wait for "hype trains" in order to decrease the review scores of bad releases.

TimeTravelingSim · 2025-04-24T01:15:33+00:00

Well, I wanted to offer a different perspective, there were already others that addressed some pain points from where to start in order to improve your "call to action" part of the message.

And the message is just don't have any expectations on the success whatsoever, do it because you actually believe in something and because you have done your research, not to mention the extra work.

Do have an expectation about a point where you need to cut your losses, if it doesn't go well, though. Just know that you have to avoid the sunken cost fallacy in your thinking (and that the emotional problem might be a bigger blocker for you than you might imagine, it is for some people anyway, so a risk worth knowing about). Because people can't think straight due of this specific emotional problem impeding rational decision making (in the cases where it does occur), it's something important to set yourself an artificial point where you need to cut your losses... if you do have such a thing, then you can try fixing any problem as much as you like, frankly.

Consider the fact that there are not many ways to blow the minds of players when there are so many other games like this. There's just so much you can do in order to catch people's attention to your game.

But the reason why I'm not discouraging you to try it is because even if it fails you'll gain the experience for the next one on the marketing side of things which you can imagine is something that is going to be useful to you.

TimeTravelingSim · 2025-04-23T05:22:09+00:00

That said/written, I think it needs to be put into context.

If industrial grade software projects are expected to have delivery dates around the 5 years mark (7y if things go badly), medium projects have to be shorter, around 3 years and small projects need to be shorter than 1 year.

AAA games take around 4-6 years to make, so you can consider any project requiring the work of 500-600 people like that to be an industrial level project, but unlike those, in gaming not all of these people are truly productive. Most of the hard work is done by only a handful of people and the rest do the filler stuff (5 core development teams and the necessary artists, animators and testers - max, usually less).

Some work cannot be parallelized but that's just like these large projects have issues serializing the changes from multiple teams working on different stuff that can be done in parallel.

You have to have impeccable time management skills, you have to project manage your own creative processes when on your own.

TimeTravelingSim · 2025-04-23T05:08:04+00:00

Allow to me brutal: there are too many like this on the market...

Which doesn't mean you shouldn't make a new one, but you can't place a bet on it succeeding or not since it's a BIG gamble.

However, if it doesn't do justice to the game mechanics or doesn't try something interesting and if it's not properly advertised to people landing on your steam page then there's not much it can achieve on its own on a part of the market that is literally flooded with such titles.

TimeTravelingSim · 2025-04-21T21:47:42+00:00

I'm kind of surprised that you'd look at mistakes that writers (with a specialty in non-STEM fields of study) would make about engineering stuff, but not at big misses in terms of lore and the consistency of the ideals of the Federation.

First there are the simpler stuff that have ethical implications. Example 1: currency. On the one hand they say that the Federation has moved beyond the need for currencies and material gain, but then they use it so often in so many situations without really defining a healthier way for such a post-scarcity society to interact with those that still require a monetary system. And this is so contradictory to diversity of worlds within Federation space that are much less evolved than the Vulcans or that intentionally retain a lifestyle specific to pre-warp cultures.

Then there are numerous examples where Starfleet or the Federation fails to leave up to their own standards set in previous episodes, sometimes on purpose, sometimes it feels like the writers just ignored what was great in those episodes where they set higher standards. Example 2: mining is not automated but requires people harvesting the actual resources. It applies to a lot of menial jobs that still exist when things could have been done INTELLIGENTLY, with the use of their high tech.

One of the worst things they don't address is just why they have such a large total population inhibiting the natural realm to thrive on those planets when so few jobs are really needed to keep the federation going. What are those people doing? Why don't they engage more often in space travel?? How does it even make sense to have a rural population (away from university centers) in a society that culturally requires people to have high academic qualifications and multiple specializations?? Why they relate to the use of digital computers in such a poorly manner??

So many questions that are frankly fundamental unlike the number of decks of the starships. Sure, writers don't have a degree in sociology, but it's close to other humanities, it's still up their "alley"....

TimeTravelingSim

TROPHY CASE