I understand but the live stream was called management matters and for a total of 25-30 mins it was about that but then it went on to showing creativity and rides and general gameplay that didn't relate. Seeing how the paths have improved was great but that wasn't what I wanted to watch.
The live stream wasn't called "management matters". It was called "Beta Content Livestream" and it was the first of two livestreams detailing what's new in the game. It happens that they concentrated more on the management side of things here (and next time they'll concentrate more on rides) but it was clearly intended to show a brief overview rather than a deep dive.
I like they have increased it to 5 levels and they show what it actually means but they seem generic and all the same in principle rather than specific to the worker. And although in real terms it doesn't mean anything different to each one it's the idea of being absorbed into the game from feeling like you are truly training.
I would still want to see staff buildings and for staff to be unavailable whilst training by having to go to the training centre rather just hitting a button and poof it's done. Where is the management in that and not just a facebook game "click button to get to next level gameplay".
Having to make sure that I have enough staff whilst some are being trained and making sure that your park is still running efficiently is something I would want to manage. That is taken away in this game as it was in RCT3 compared to older games.
I understand where you're coming from. And I don't disagree that there *could* be more depth, but as I posted earlier, there's a balance. Bear in mind that the developers haven't just tacked management on as an afterthought; it's been in the design from the beginning. If something isn't there, it's either because they didn't feel it added enough to the game (or in some cases, took something away from it), or that the finite resource budget couldn't support it.
The security guard idea (although I didn't like the policeman look) is something part of the game and management. Having basic vandalism of items (benches & bins for instance) would allow the security guard to catch them and to have those as actual animations
The gardener, where certain plants/flowers can brown and die but offer greater aesthetic improvements to guest happiness so that people don't circumvent by only using plants that don't die, or it could even just be plants/flowers within 4m of the path so the gardener can access them. He/She can water them then accordingly.
I agree that these things would increase the management depth. But they also increase the resource cost (particularly the animation budget) and that has to be balanced. Gardeners are a lovely thing, and it'd be really nice if you needed gardeners to keep your park looking nice, but if you think about what it actually *means* then you'll start to see how prohibitively expensive it is. You need gardener models. They need to be rigged, and a range of animations created (happy, demotivated, etc.). Plants and foliage need to degrade or grow wild, which needs to be added to the simulation, and which needs to be supported by the game logic. It's not enough these days to just switch from a "healthy" to a "dying" sprite. They need to degrade *over time* which is a difficult thing to achieve.
There are some clear gameplay benefits to security guards, particularly around guest and staff happiness. But again, you need a large amount of animation resource. If you want benches to break, you need to model broken benches and the effect that has on guests (i.e. they can't sit on them). It's all just lots of little bits of work that needs to be done, and that steals resource from other things that we might want to see in the game.
The lack of research (currently known) for improvement of the janitor equipment where he can only empty say 10 bins before having to return to the refuse building to collect new empty trash bags and drop the others off. I don't visually need to see the janitor carry them but just the game play of managing number of bins, amount of litter & janitors is something I would like to do but now I just plop the janitor down and leave them too it.
If a bin doesn't go empty does trash overflow, do flies appear and it smell bad? Will guests start to react to this as it gets worse?
We don't know if there's any interaction between research and staff. All I can say about the janitor is that the designers went through many different options for how it would behave and settled on this one. The same goes for *all* aspects of gameplay. It's not like they just do something and go "good enough". They don't. They have to balance gameplay against resource against fun against a range of expectations from the community.
And if a bin isn't emptied, you *will* find trash on the floor, and it *will* negatively affect your guests' views on the park, which will be fed back to you through the management menus.
I still love the game for what it does but unfortunately and currently at this time it isn't something I will be spending a lot of time with.
As I've said, they won't be able to please everyone. You might find that you're one of them. But you might also find that *once you've actually played the game* that it does fulfil your needs. And if not, there's always Parkitect which *does* do a lot of these other things, and has the benefit of being simpler graphically so deeper gameplay is effectively cheaper to add.
- - - - - Additional Content Posted / Auto Merge - - - - -
But please don't try to tell those that love management that PC is 'simulation evolved'. It isn't. And that's fine, the game can be whatever the developers choose.
As far as management is concerned, it is not 'simulation evolved', so please stop pushing that and suggesting management players should be happy with what has been presented.
If it was 'simulation evolved' the game would have a lot more aspects of management that games like parkitect, cities skylines or Train Fever have (for example).
They haven't called it 'management evolved'. If they did, I'd agree with you.
They called it 'simulation evolved' and you've misinterpreted that. The simulation *is* more advanced than they've ever created. Games of this genre generally don't attempt to simulate individual people and their wants and desires; if you've seen that before, it's more than likely a veneer over a more coarse model.
