Too much customisation?
- Thread starter OriginalBadBoy
- Start date
I tend to agree with pretty much everything you wrote there. I also tend to be a perfectionist as well, so PC could be an OCD nightmare for me as well! [big grin]
Now there is nothing wrong with that of course, as others have pointed out if you put the hours in you get the results, which is fair enough and is a good attitude to have towards pretty much anything in life. But as pointed out above this can also lead to a lot of time wasting as well, that you might not want to do, especially if you are not in sandbox mode.
Nice to see a range of views on this, and goes to show that everyone wants something slightly different from PC. Thats not surprising of course, but I don't think people should be worried about the game being 'dumbed down'. Nobody is asking for a big button that basically makes a park for you automatically, although technically I suppose that's possible. In fact we already have some elements of simplification in the game already such as auto completion of the coasters. Its those types of things that make the game a lot more approachable and makes the 'workflow' of creating stuff a lot nicer. If we can have that and have the hardcore tools as well, then everyone is catered for.
For example should there be an auto generation terrain tool? Some people may not want to spend hours getting the terrain just right. So you add a generation tool, give the user some options as to what type of terrain they want and it goes off and generates it for you. I have no issue with something like that being in the game, and neither should anyone else. If people want to go balls out and make their own custom terrain then thats fine. However people shouldn't be forced to do that either.
I do agree with some of what you have said and I can't argue with your labour (UK spelling....) of love sentiments. However. I do think that by distilling any argument for change into one that suggests we're asking for a more casual experience isn't the point.
I've invested years on "labour of love" projects. Anything from playing the guitar to learning various software programs like Photoshop and MAYA are some of the things I've taught myself and enjoyed doing in the process. I've also spent many hours constructing elaborate levels in games like LittleBigPlanet and creating complex artwork for cars in the painstaking but fair Forza. Again this was long and admittedly, at times, very frustrating. But in those times I DID feel it was down to me, because the tools at my disposal were always consistent.
That doesn't mean to say I hate the tools we have here, or that I don't appreciate what an amazing achievement it is to have created so much versatility, but I'm suggesting that it would make sense to streamline the way things get put together. To use your analogy, rebuilding an engine isn't always going to be fun, but having the right tools certainly makes it less daunting than it needs to be.
If they are afraid too much customization will scare casual players (and im sure they are, taking out things like the advanced rotating bug), just make them options in the menu, or streamline this things for a better experience (this one is the hard one to make, because there needs to be a lot of designing into it, to make a complex tool do the same being much easier to use for everyone, but its still possible).
If some people want to do their shoeboxes types of buildings, let them have it (in fact, i think the game does a good job right now being very casual friendly and also giving good options for creative people), but dont take the tools for creative people to make better things (like they did with update 2.2). The creative people, like Silvarret, Kukamonda and a bunch more, taking this stuff to their limits are they guys that spark the imagination of others, selling more games with their creations and videos, and make other people try new things.
If we are regressing to the gridy boxy system of RCT3 because some people feel uncomfortable with advanced options, better stay with RCT3. I dont really think thats going to happen, as I said, I think the game is pretty easy to use for everyone right now (will they do masterpieces? of course not, but once the simulation is there, Im sure they are going to have fun just with that).
If some people want to do their shoeboxes types of buildings, let them have it (in fact, i think the game does a good job right now being very casual friendly and also giving good options for creative people), but dont take the tools for creative people to make better things (like they did with update 2.2). The creative people, like Silvarret, Kukamonda and a bunch more, taking this stuff to their limits are they guys that spark the imagination of others, selling more games with their creations and videos, and make other people try new things.
If we are regressing to the gridy boxy system of RCT3 because some people feel uncomfortable with advanced options, better stay with RCT3. I dont really think thats going to happen, as I said, I think the game is pretty easy to use for everyone right now (will they do masterpieces? of course not, but once the simulation is there, Im sure they are going to have fun just with that).
I see both sides of this argument, but the side of the OP is a very weak argument in my opinion. Currently there is nothing to scare away a casual gamer in the core of the game. Placing paths and rides is pretty rudimentary for a 3D game. It's actually better than most. The argument seems to come in when we bring up buildings and scenery, which at the moment aren't a necessity for the core gaming (as far as we know since we have no actual management implemented yet) and the argument seems to be, it's too hard for casual gamers.
So alright, lets play with that thought. Everyone here has a point of view, but no one seems to be throwing out ideas to improve it or actually explaining what the ~casual gamer~ needs improved to make what we currently have acceptable and approachable? We've already been informed that blueprints and sharing creations will be implemented so on top of knowing that, what exactly needs to be changed? There are long discussions in this thread about what people dislike... or who is ~elitist~... but let's actually talk about what needs to be changed or added. I have a feeling the core game will have pre-designed stalls/courts/restaurants because there is the greyed-out "shops" tab we have yet to see and i believe that will be built out food/shops stands for the more casual gamer who can't build 4 walls and a roof themselves.
From what i gather, the core argument is complexity and scaring off casual gamers, but that complexity can only be unlocked when you're delving deep into the building system, on the surface it's very simple. There is a rides tab, a shops tab, a scenery tab, a path tab... are we scared away yet? And then the building tab which doesn't need to be used to play the game, especially once the shops tab opens up (i believe, again alpha and we are all arguing over something we don't even know much about yet). And for casual gamers they won't care about building disney world style castles, they'll be happy plopping trees and flower beds which are as simple as it gets right now.
Include the fact that there will likely be tutorials... and things will likely be simplified to an extent once all the aspects are finally combined together into the game... I personally don't know exactly what people arguing here want. Do you want the complex options taken away? Or do you want to do the complex things like building a whole area without actually doing the building? Cause that's blueprints. From my perspective, this is a group people complaining that they don't want to spend the time or creativity needed to build the best parks... and want a simplified option to do so... and are deflecting by saying others are elitist for sticking up for those (non-mandatory) options in the game, because yes, simplifying customization is literally dumbing down the game. The basis of saying things are too much for casual gamers it literally saying they aren't smart enough to intuitively use the tools. That may not be politically correct to say, but the argument seems to be that this game isn't simple enough for a certain group... which is how you get games like Sim City 2013... womp womp.
So alright, lets play with that thought. Everyone here has a point of view, but no one seems to be throwing out ideas to improve it or actually explaining what the ~casual gamer~ needs improved to make what we currently have acceptable and approachable? We've already been informed that blueprints and sharing creations will be implemented so on top of knowing that, what exactly needs to be changed? There are long discussions in this thread about what people dislike... or who is ~elitist~... but let's actually talk about what needs to be changed or added. I have a feeling the core game will have pre-designed stalls/courts/restaurants because there is the greyed-out "shops" tab we have yet to see and i believe that will be built out food/shops stands for the more casual gamer who can't build 4 walls and a roof themselves.
From what i gather, the core argument is complexity and scaring off casual gamers, but that complexity can only be unlocked when you're delving deep into the building system, on the surface it's very simple. There is a rides tab, a shops tab, a scenery tab, a path tab... are we scared away yet? And then the building tab which doesn't need to be used to play the game, especially once the shops tab opens up (i believe, again alpha and we are all arguing over something we don't even know much about yet). And for casual gamers they won't care about building disney world style castles, they'll be happy plopping trees and flower beds which are as simple as it gets right now.
Include the fact that there will likely be tutorials... and things will likely be simplified to an extent once all the aspects are finally combined together into the game... I personally don't know exactly what people arguing here want. Do you want the complex options taken away? Or do you want to do the complex things like building a whole area without actually doing the building? Cause that's blueprints. From my perspective, this is a group people complaining that they don't want to spend the time or creativity needed to build the best parks... and want a simplified option to do so... and are deflecting by saying others are elitist for sticking up for those (non-mandatory) options in the game, because yes, simplifying customization is literally dumbing down the game. The basis of saying things are too much for casual gamers it literally saying they aren't smart enough to intuitively use the tools. That may not be politically correct to say, but the argument seems to be that this game isn't simple enough for a certain group... which is how you get games like Sim City 2013... womp womp.
It was more of an observation than an argument to be fair. I could quite easy take what we have now and make my own parks, and so could a lot of other people, casual or otherwise.
The core question for discussion was, can Frontier make the game too complicated with too much customisation. Personally I think there is a danger of that as it stands. Nobody wants the game 'dumbed down' (hate that expression), I certainly don't. I think maybe you have got the wrong end of the stick here. This isn't about whether casuals are too 'thick' to understand it, its got nothing to do with that. The discussion for me simply comes down to to whether the game might end up scaring people away thats all. By scaring away I don't necessarily mean a certain aspect (like building creation for example).
The game should be complex and have lots of customisations, but that needs to be tempered at the same time and allow people casual or otherwise to create stuff easily as well. That might be for a variety of reasons. Going back to my previous example, a player (any type) might want to start a new park, but doesn't feel like or need to create a complete custom terrain. So they might want to use some sort of auto generation to speed up the process.
Its like for example character creation in MMO's, some (like Black Desert) are ridiculously powerful, the customisation is crazy, but there is also a 'random' button as well. Some of the random stuff might be rubbish, but then you might get something you like and you can then tweak from there. The point being there are players out there who might spend hours on the character creation, but there are also players who just want something random. Thats not dumbing the game down, its just giving the player the choice of saving a bit of time.
Last edited:
Keep planet coaster great! DON'T DUMB DOWN ANYTHING [up]
Seriously, Should I explain once again that alpha is core gameplay and most likely during beta you guys will get the hand holding you want...
Yes yes, we get it. You're going to ignore what is actually being said because you like things how they are.
Seems a common theme in forums in general. You get the critical thinkers trying in vain to explain their reasoned and objective points of view all the while being completely ignored in the most condecending and patronising way.
I suggest, Techen, that if you can't be bothered reading the comment you're actually responding to then you really shouldn't bother because it's insulting to those of us who actually want to discuss stuff.
Again this was a general discussion, removing the fact that we are in alpha currently. Also this isn't necessarily what I want, I certainly don't feel I need hand holding. It also isn't just about that. It was just an open discussion, you don't need to feel threatened by it. (Which is the vibe I get from you posts).
Yes some want the hardcore features, but some don't, don't be so blind that you can't see the other side of the coin.
I guess I am not one of those "most" people as I never thought RCT1 had the best campaigns. IMO I thought they were too simplistic and that went for RCT2 and RCT3. I guess that is why I got bored by them quickly and focused more on the Sandbox in RCT3. I do want campaigns in PC, but I want some with a bit of a challenge and not too hard that they are next to impossible to achieve. What I am saying is don't have them so easy you feel that you are being handed something on a silver platter, or so hard that you will give up on it.
One challenge I would like is where you can not get a loan and start out with a limited amount of money. You might start with only a carousel and a bathroom and have to add to the park as you go along when you have enough funds to add something else. The basic plan for this might be like this (funds not go in the red):
- Carousel and bathroom
- snack bar added
- new flat ride
- drink stall
- another flat ride
- souvenier stall
- maybe another ride
- small coaster if you have enough funds (can be built a little at a time)
- Add more and more until you have a small theme park with "X" number of flat rides, "X" number of coasters, and "X" amount of money.
That's just one idea I had.
Last edited:
Personally I thought the campaigns in RCT3 were just about right for me. They were easy enough to start off with , and some later ones were hard as nails, which is how it should be.
The beauty of PC is that (in theory) players might be allowed to create their own campaigns and share them with the rest of the world. That would be a pretty killer feature to have IMO.
In RCT3 we were able to create our own scenerios and could share them simply by sending a copy of the save file to whoever wanted them.
Indeed! One of the worst things with RCT3 was that the campaigns were too easy, particularly in the main game. The addons were a little harder.
I spent a decent amount of time creating custom scenario's with a load of objectives. Then I realised you could only actually see a few of them when actually playing the scenario, as the UI box was a fixed size and had no scroll bar. So frustrating!
Going back to building, I booted into RCT3 tonight for an hour, and now I'm playing PC. The changes that have been made since RCT3 feel so, so, natural. Yes, some things need a bit of polish, and I'm sure that will have happened come release day.
I've thought about the OP's side of the argument for a while today. There is one particular game series that I love playing - Total War. But the bit of the game I love is the strategic moves on the grand campaign. I'm not a massive fan of the intricate field battles. Sure, I've given them a go over the years and can play them. I actually really enjoyed the naval battles in Napoleon, but even then, there are so many in the space of a campaign, It would literally take me weeks to complete. The solution? Not use the battle feature and just auto-resolve the battles. I've never once felt the need to complain about the complexity of the battles or the time required to win them. Because I know that for many fans of that series, the battles are what make the game for them. I don't see why other people can't do that for PC, and just use the bits of the game that they are actually interested in playing.
Consider blueprints to be the same as the aforementioned auto-resolve feature. CA don't force me to play the battles in Total War, Frontier won't force you to custom build the buildings in PC. I can't see why this is such a big concern.
I fear the OP is worrying too much - especially as he isn't even experiencing the 'problem' himself. PC is nowhere near the learning curve required to play No Limits 2.
Last edited:
I want to build the crap out of everything... but when I see all the different pieces for making a building... I kind of think... eh.. Actually losing a little bit of interest.
I want premade stores and foodstands of all kinds. While I appreciate the level that is has been taken... Yes. Sometimes I just want to plop a quick crapper down with out having to make it part of a complex.
I'm sure the blueprints will be there, but just a comment with where we are in the alpha version.
I want premade stores and foodstands of all kinds. While I appreciate the level that is has been taken... Yes. Sometimes I just want to plop a quick crapper down with out having to make it part of a complex.
I'm sure the blueprints will be there, but just a comment with where we are in the alpha version.
The OP is clearly playing devils advocate and quite rightly so. It's a mature attitude to a problem that he/she (and I) can foresee in the future irrespective of whether they are having the same concerns on a personal level.
It's not a matter of interest, which is why your solution won't suit many people. Myself included. I want to build, I have the inclination and the time which is the reason I hope that Frontier do something to facilitate an easier way to do it. It's not a complaint, nor is it a request to "dumb down" or remove features from the tool-set. It's simply talking about the possibility of an alternative to what SOME (yes, again, myself included) may see as an overly complicated way of doing things.
Having said all that. If the system we have in place right now is incorporated into the full release, that will be fine for me. I'll persevere and I'm sure, with practice, i'll adapt.
That may be too late for some, though.
That's fine. I've read your posts on this topic again and I respect what you are saying. I just don't see what is so difficult about the current building tool-set. Perhaps you can elaborate? You've mentioned building walls sims style, but I'm not sure that fits with the 'piece by piece' philosophy Frontier have always favoured. Not to say that they shouldn't at least give ideas a go, though.
There are some very powerful tools already to help create elaborate buildings, such as modular building and duplication. You can spend time creating a small but elaborate section of a building, and then simply replicate it make something much bigger. Here is a great example:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JCtSUYUVCKc
I know there are some certain 'wants' from the building tools that I'd like personally, such as advance movement to be applicable to individual building pieces. And we need to be able to activate the advanced movement tools on entire buildings, without having to move them first (which is just plain silly) But given this was developed literally in the week before alpha 2 went live, I'm sure they will be spending more time on it for future releases. There will also be mass select and mass delete as well, which should help.
Hopefully blueprints will also let us reuse our own building between parks. So perhaps we will be able to spend time creating an elaborate building in one park, and then import it with just a couple of clicks in another park, which would allow a player to build to whatever level of detail suits them, as well as save time.
It's not necessarily that it's "difficult", but it's horribly tedious and time-consuming. Of course once blueprints are out, I'm sure there will be some great ones included in the vanilla game and around the community that will make it less so, and with that in mind I'm not fully going to pass judgment until the game is complete.
Sorry, I didn't mean to imply that I found the current system of building particularly difficult. But I do think it could reach a wider audience by being more accessible. You may be a lot more talented, or resourceful or even more patient than many, and that's to your credit; but the time spent building such elaborate structures does take us away from what I'd consider is actually the point of the game. Enjoying and managing a theme park.
To give you an example of what I'd consider more accessible, here is a build in the aforementioned Sims 4...
[video=youtube;YeiUt6zWO90]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YeiUt6zWO90[/video]
Now.....Please don't assume this is a solution nor am I advocating a complete overhaul, but this type of structuring could complement what we already have. This, for me, is just an example of how much easier the building side of PC could be....
It has a simple, but beautifully intuitive UI with a level of modularity that is constrained by consistent rules without sacrificing the options available to the player. The key word is consistency.
If we look at PC so far, while brilliant in its freedom it isn't consistent.
-Buildings pieces, in their very basic grid form, are not uniform, if your are not keeping a watchful eye on your placement you could be in for some trouble when dealing with roofs or any sort of symmetry further down the line.
-Building within the "rules" of the grid can cause unnecessary and unsightly 'Z-fighting'. The clashing textures are a nightmare for those with an OCD among us! This would be resolved if a similar approach to the above was adopted.
-Lack of consistent rules regarding the different types of pieces leading to "sticking plaster" fixes. Does it rotate along all axis? Does it place in the expected position?
-Pathing is seemingly arbitrary causing unnecessary time wasting and frustration.
-Pieces within buildings within buildings within buildings......again.......needlessly perplexing.
These are just a few things I can conjure up of the top of my head, but, when you add in becoming proficient at using the terrain tool and coaster builder, as well as actually managing the park; you can surely understand the cumulative effect this will have an all but the most ardent and dedicated of fans.
Again, please take the above with the disclaimer that, yes, I know its an Alpha and yes, I know that they are constantly improving things. I'm just trying to illustrate why I think their is a risk of alienating a lot of potential customers if the current tools are maintained.
Last edited:
Guys there is a whole "shops" section not yet added to us, and blueprints. It will be very easy for casual players to just plop stuff down and whatnot. The reason it isn't like that is because the developers aren't testing it yet. They are testing the modular building and Alpha 1 (continues in Alpha 2) are not interested in casual building yet, because they are focused on the much more complicated building system test. In a couple months, you'll probably get access to much more simple things. Just be patient for now and test the things they want us testing
After watching the sims speed build, I must say that is an interesting tool to build structures. I do think that PCs current build system is more complex and has more freedom. I cant say for certain, but that building could be built in PC minus the spires in a short amount of time. I am almost tempted to try and build it just to see LOL