Marketing of a management game (?) called Planet Coaster

[seeker7]

Frontier could have said PC is mostly a building game with some most basic management options. But actually it was (and still is) marketed as a management game.

Management and simulation are the core components of Planet Coaster, driving guests' decision-making and giving you control over the most granular aspects of your park from staff management, to marketing campaigns, loans and much, much more! Planet Coaster is the most sophisticated park simulation ever made. You are the boss, manage your parks to surprise and delight your guests and see the profits rolling in. We can't wait for you to be park managers for real when Planet Coaster launches

This is from the Planet Coaster website. And I'm sure most of you are aware of the "management matters video":

Pathlayout, placement of flatrides, how your coaster is built, guest brain ... is simulation evolved ...all these things interacting in new ways.

With the management game ... there are a hundred ways to solve the same problem. We encourage you to ... use all the different choices and use the different solutions that we have to the same problem.

This [=career & challenge mode] is what the game makes fun for people who might not want to be just building things and make things pretty.

The way staff reacts ... gives you another element to simulation which we never had before.

Park management screen ... lots of information there displayed in a really clear fashion and helps you understand the simulation that's running behind scenes.

I'm most proud of park management... as a lover of management games...

Real bona fide park management game.

Oversell much?

Most of this I don't see ingame. Why do they talk a big game in the PR materials when the (management) game arguably is not a big deal at all (at least not in a good way)? I'm wondering why hype it like that when you will inevitably disappoint cutomers?

The stuff is still up on the website - so is this really a hint that they have yet to implement most of what they have planned for management? I wish, but it seems unlikely.

Especially the "different solutions for the same problem" part is weird to me. I have no idea what that means. Of course I understand the term in general but there's nothing in PC that makes it feel special, like there's this interconnected system where I have this and this and that mechanism I can use to solve a specific problem. (There aren't that many problems to solve anyway.)

 

[Vampiro]

Did some cleanup in this thread.

Regardless of what you think of this thread, please try to it keep on-topic.

 

[breezerHOG1]

@seeker7 - how old are you? Yes i agree the slogan "simulation evolved" is a bit of a stretch or an oversell. I even have made many remarks about it in the past, but its not like you can sue coke a cola cuz they claim their soda tastes great, or you can't sue mcdonalds cuz their slogan tells you your loving them when your not. Thats just how marketting goes. Get over it.

Theres a difference between making constructive criticism to improve the game, and picking apart every little thing. Your posts have gone from somewhat helpful to absolutely annoying. Keep it up [rolleyes]

 

[danijami23]

Did some cleanup in this thread.

Regardless of what you think of this thread, please try to it keep on-topic.

I appreciate what you're saying Vamp and you know I love you to bits, but threads like this have been made a hundred times now. There is no more need for any new critical analysis threads on the management or any marketing thereof. Could we at least maybe merge some of the 'I don't like the management' threads so we can actually read the forum properly?

On topic. I do agree with you that it's a bit annoying that the management is not up to snuff, but you really can't rewrite a game in the amount of time this game has been out for. Also as far as the marketing is concerned, if you fell for marketing hype in the 21st century that's kind of your own fault. As creaper says, really how many slogans could we pick apart if we sat here and tried for long enough?

 

[SoapyIllusion]

I believe the term is called "beating a dead horse"

While I do understand your frustration (some what) you've gone a wee bit overboard.

Marketing slogans in the US are not as accountable as they maybe in other countries. You can say things like "Worlds best" and get away with it. One because its hard to argue something so subjective and two no one would looks into it to much. Same thing here. Frontier pushed the management pitch a bit too far. Yes to that I'll agree. But its not worth going on the war path over. They could argue "to us it is management evolved" And then point to all the things they do behind the scenes us users never see. And I'd argue that stuff is there. Just extremely hard to see.

Market will always try to overhype a game. Development does there best to make those promises a reality. Not always done. I remember back in what was it 91 or 92. Bethesda Released a Wayne Gretezky hockey game. The screenshots on the back of the box looked amazing. But when we played it. We noticed all the screenshots were made from pre-rendered images that ran at the games intro. None of it gameplay. Bethesda got away with it.

It was underhanded, sfar worse then the mottos Frontieer marketing took with Planet Coaster. But they got away with it. Lawsuite free.

 

[tyczj]

FMX level thread right here, just missing the long title name [up]

 

[seeker7]

@seeker7 - how old are you? Yes i agree the slogan "simulation evolved" is a bit of a stretch or an oversell. I even have made many remarks about it in the past, but its not like you can sue coke a cola cuz they claim their soda tastes great, or you can't sue mcdonalds cuz their slogan tells you your loving them when your not. Thats just how marketting goes. Get over it.

Theres a difference between making constructive criticism to improve the game, and picking apart every little thing. Your posts have gone from somewhat helpful to absolutely annoying. Keep it up [rolleyes]

So you've insulted me, twisted my words, told me to get over it and insulted me some more. Funny idea of constructive criticism you got there.

I am not talking about a slogan. I never said I was going to sue anyone, don't be ridiculous. Go back, read the statements devs made about the mangagement game I've typed up, compare them to the version of PC on your computer, maybe then you understand why I have questions.

I do agree with you that it's a bit annoying that the management is not up to snuff, but you really can't rewrite a game in the amount of time this game has been out for. Also as far as the marketing is concerned, if you fell for marketing hype in the 21st century that's kind of your own fault. As creaper says, really how many slogans could we pick apart if we sat here and tried for long enough?

This thread is not about wether management is good or bad or somewhere in between. I'm wondering why the devs on video say one thing and in reality PC is something different.

You say they couldn't rewrite the game since release (which btw. I didn't demand in the OP, did I?) but that's not the point. They didn't have to release the game in the state they did. They didn't have to hype it as a management game like they did. Both are decisions someone at Frontier made. You've completely ignored the question: Why do it this way when they inevitably were going to disappoint customers.

You're just short of calling me an idiot for believing in Frontier's marketing hype but at the same time you seem to suggest I should believe in their update hype. This doesn't make sense.

Also there's no less than 3 errors in your marketing argument:
1. I wasn't talking about a slogan but about various specific statements about management and how it's supposed to work.
2. Just because someone else makes the same mistake as you that doesn't make it right.
3. Contrary to what you suggest I didn't need to "try long" to "pick apart" anything, there's a clear and easy to spot gap between statements in PC's PR material and the game itself.

 

[SoapyIllusion]

You make these claims. yet your old posts never support them. [weird]

With that I'm done responding to posts like this. [yum]

 

[danijami23]

So you've insulted me, twisted my words, told me to get over it and insulted me some more. Funny idea of constructive criticism you got there.

I am not talking about a slogan. I never said I was going to sue anyone, don't be ridiculous. Go back, read the statements devs made about the mangagement game I've typed up, compare them to the version of PC on your computer, maybe then you understand why I have questions.




This thread is not about wether management is good or bad or somewhere in between. I'm wondering why the devs on video say one thing and in reality PC is something different.

You say they couldn't rewrite the game since release (which btw. I didn't demand in the OP, did I?) but that's not the point. They didn't have to release the game in the state they did. They didn't have to hype it as a management game like they did. Both are decisions someone at Frontier made. You've completely ignored the question: Why do it this way when they inevitably were going to disappoint customers.

You're just short of calling me an idiot for believing in Frontier's marketing hype but at the same time you seem to suggest I should believe in their update hype. This doesn't make sense.

Also there's no less than 3 errors in your marketing argument:
1. I wasn't talking about a slogan but about various specific statements about management and how it's supposed to work.
2. Just because someone else makes the same mistake as you that doesn't make it right.
3. Contrary to what you suggest I didn't need to "try long" to "pick apart" anything, there's a clear and easy to spot gap between statements in PC's PR material and the game itself.

Err not exactly calling you an idiot. We all fall for marketing hype, I did it with No Man's Sky, it happens, but you can't expect a markrting department not to say 'zomg this is the most groundbreaking thing you'll ever see'. Have you ever seen Activision's press releases for new Call of Duty games? It's just hilarious.

So yeah with that my point remains, and though I thought this was the implied answer to your question in what I was saying, here is your free disambiguation: clearly it is Frontier's mission to make a rollercoaster game that has advanced building and management mechanics, so they marketed it thusly. The fact they've fallen short does not somehow change their vision, it just means they fumbled things a little bit ( Edit: ok maybe a lot).

I didn't say anywhere in my post that you should 'believe in the update hype' but there you go. I have mentioned in the past that I'm of the opinion that Planet Coaster will get better with time, but I am not hyped about it, nor am I trying to convince anyone of anything.

 

[seeker7]

I said "short of". Nevermind.

you can't expect a markrting department not to say 'zomg this is the most groundbreaking thing you'll ever see'. Have you ever seen Activision's press releases for new Call of Duty games? It's just hilarious.

So yeah with that my point remains: clearly it is Frontier's mission to make a rollercoaster game that has advanced building and management mechanics, so they marketed it thusly. The fact they've fallen short does not somehow change their vision, it just means they fumbled things a little bit.

I didn't say anywhere in my post that you should 'believe in the update hype' but there you go. I have mentioned in the past that I'm of the opinion that Planet Coaster will get better with time, but I am not hyped about it, nor am I trying to convince anyone of anything.

You can't be serious. It's one thing to present something in the best light possible. It's a different thing to lie (Edit: Which I take by what you wrote is what Activision did). You can't expect marketing departments not to lie? That's not only wrong, it's unfair towards all the marketing people who take a different approach.
You can't expect ATARI to treat their customers right? You also can't expect a bankrobber not to rob banks? Nonsense.

And again you're ignoring the facts: It's not some anonymous marketing department but the devs themselfs talking on video.

So are they selling a vision or are they selling a game? Because I'm sure the ad was for a game. But if there's a market for visions, you can be my first customer. It's actually the vision for an even better themepark sim than PC and for 20 bucks it's yours!

What if we were talking about a different product, not a game. Would you still not find anything unusual about that kind of behaviour?
"Hey, the new Prius you've bought isn't all that eco-friendly it runs to 80% on gas at all times but since their mission is to make high quality e-cars they marketed it differently. Your own fault, sucker!"

You bet your ❤︎❤︎❤︎ Toyota would be getting an earful, and rightfully so.

 

[cerealfruitcakes]

We get it, you don't like Planet Coaster and you think the dev's are a bunch of liars. Usually people move on to other things by this point but it's like you take immense joy in endlessly arguing about it.

 

[MrAdrianSW]

man·age·ment
noun
noun: management
1. the process of dealing with or controlling things or people.
.
Things or People, PC does this rather well. While the Management of the Staff and Vendors is pretty simplified, the management of the park itself and there for the guests is a lot more complex than some realize. To manage your guests properly you need to be paying attention to them. Path planning, queue lengths, scenery, entertainment, ride statistics, food and drink placement. It can get as complex as you want... or it can be as simple as you want. The game is designed (it would seem) to function autonomously if the player cant be bothered to actively manage and just wants to build.... Which puts you in sandbox territory.. which has Zero consequence's. In challenge mode you do have to Manage the park since money can become fleeting, and if your aim is to go for a Paid Entry park, you really Do Need to learn to Manage the park well. If you are fine with a Free entry system then you are laughing because youll almost always see your profits in the Black unless you Really screw up. Problem is, Challenge parks are also very forgiving.. I have actually stopped playing my challenge park and am waiting patiently for the updates that will fix some of these more lenient management features... But, my sandbox park is going strong still..

 

[danijami23]

I said "short of". Nevermind.



You can't be serious. It's one thing to present something in the best light possible. It's a different thing to lie (Edit: Which I take by what you wrote is what Activision did). You can't expect marketing departments not to lie? That's not only wrong, it's unfair towards all the marketing people who take a different approach.
You can't expect ATARI to treat their customers right? You also can't expect a bankrobber not to rob banks? Nonsense.

And again you're ignoring the facts: It's not some anonymous marketing department but the devs themselfs talking on video.

So are they selling a vision or are they selling a game? Because I'm sure the ad was for a game. But if there's a market for visions, you can be my first customer. It's actually the vision for an even better themepark sim than PC and for 20 bucks it's yours!

What if we were talking about a different product, not a game. Would you still not find anything unusual about that kind of behaviour?
"Hey, the new Prius you've bought isn't all that eco-friendly it runs to 80% on gas at all times but since their mission is to make high quality e-cars they marketed it differently. Your own fault, sucker!"

You bet your ❤︎❤︎❤︎ Toyota would be getting an earful, and rightfully so.

Egads, you are impossible. I'm trying to respectfully put forth my opinion and have an open discussion but you are ridiculously closed, hiding behind a turgid veil of rhetoric. I'm just saying what I think; you can disagree with what I'm saying if you like, but I'm not ignoring any facts, or trying to tell anyone they are wrong. Nor for that matter am I talking nonsense - It's just what I think. Whatever, agree to disagree. I'm out.

 

[seeker7]

man·age·ment
noun
noun: management
1. the process of dealing with or controlling things or people.
Things or People, PC does this rather well.

Sorry, but no. Please no defenses of PC that completely miss the subject. The focus here isn't primarily is it a good game or not.

The premise of this thread is that the definition of "management" was given by the devs. Not the broadest general definition you could find, but things like this (see OP):

"With the management game ... there are a hundred ways to solve the same problem. We encourage you to ... use all the different choices and use the different solutions that we have to the same problem.

The way staff reacts ... gives you another element to simulation which we never had before."

E.g. the latter is contradicted by your own words: "Staff is pretty simplified."

Egads, you are impossible. I'm trying to respectfully put forth my opinion and have an open discussion but you are ridiculously closed, hiding behind a turgid veil of rhetoric. I'm just saying what I think; you can disagree with what I'm saying if you like, but I'm not ignoring any facts, or trying to tell anyone they are wrong. Nor for that matter am I talking nonsense - It's just what I think. Whatever, agree to disagree. I'm out.

I'm sorry you feel that way.

I am very open to hear arguments but I reserve the right to point out when your logic doesn't make sense (= nonsense).

You were talking about what to expect of marketing departments when my question was about the developers statements. If you don't wanna call it "ignoring the facts" feel free to label it ignoring the post you're responding to.

Oh, and another thing I want to add, please stop attacking me personally ("you're impossible, you're ridiculously closed...."). You don't know me so you're in no position to judge me like that.

 

[breezerHOG1]

lets say your right, seeker. lets say the marketing team mislead us, and lets say they changed the slogan. what would that solve? maybe you could focus your thoughts on how to improve the game without attacking this forum. threads like this just doesnt help anything

 

[matty b1]

I tend to agree seeker, point well made.

I don't think it's unreasonable to make the point and I don't think it's unreasonable to ask a company to (especially a larger one we might expect more ethical practices from) to correct or adjust their marketing until their product matches their rhetoric.

I understand that standards these days are out the window in terms of marketing being a free for all but 'over-hyping' and under-delivering is a really poor way to interact with your customers and loses a company goodwill.

So to remain constructive, I would ask Frontier to adjust their marketing to match the current reality of the game.

I would also ask for a note to be made of the correction, for example - "we understand that we may have caused misunderstanding with some of our marketing, to date etc etc". I would be happy with just the former paragraph though. The latter suggestion being a bit unrealistic, unfortunately.

I know I'll probably cop alot of flack for this post but maybe ask yourself why you want to attack people that are just pointing something out that you probably agree is not ideal.

For the record, this is the first time I've posted on this issue.

 

[seeker7]

I would ask Frontier to adjust their marketing to match the current reality of the game.

I would also ask for a note to be made of the correction, for example - "we understand that we may have caused misunderstanding with some of our marketing, to date etc etc".

I'm not at the point to draw consequences yet (not saying you can't, don't get me wrong!), I'd really like to understand what happened there. I mean, you don't talk about all the awesome features and how you're giving players not just a couple of more boxes to fill with numbers - and then you release a management game that many players agree could be called RCT 3 2.0.

We have these statements from the guys responsible for the development of PC. It's those people who are actively working on the game, not some marketing department that has no idea what the game actually looks like.
I understand that you can get carried away a bit when you're telling a friend about a video game for example. But in a message from the developers that's meant to tell customers what they should expect from the game you'd choose your words more carefully I imagine.

I'd like to think when someone like that is praising the hundreds of different solutions PC offers to deal with a single problem - even if that wasn't meant to be taken literally - there actually was a considerable amount of different solutions in the game.
So it's a valid question: What happened there? Did they drop something (or some more things) at the last minute? Is it something they're gonna patch in half a year from now? Can you really imagine them lying through their teeth on camera? I feel it all doesn't add up.

Just saying "they tried and fell short" isn't a good explanation either. They must have read reviews. They're - at least in parts - definitely reading the forums. So they're aware of the shortcomings. But still under the headline of "management matters" they write on the homepage "Planet Coaster is the most sophisticated park simulation ever made." [weird]

 

[stuk71]

But still under the headline of "management matters" they write on the homepage "Planet Coaster is the most sophisticated park simulation ever made." [weird]

What are the 'other' park simulation games that are more sophisticated that Planet Coaster?

 

[seeker7]

What are the 'other' park simulation games that are more sophisticated that Planet Coaster?

Haha, nice try! [wink] [big grin] I don't agree with the premise of that question.

Let me try to make it clearer. My line of argument is this: For many players there's little difference between RCT3 management and PC. Sure, they've changed some things. But still it doesn't feel like a better or more sophisticated management system. There's "guest brain", for example, that's new. But the reactions of the community go as far as "They're dumber than the peeps from RCT3". For the record I don't think this is the case but I can't tell you how the AI in PC is supposed to be a (r)evolutionary step.

So the management is on par with RCT 3, maybe it's slightly better than RCT 3. So maybe for some people the MOST SOPHISTICATED part technically is true. Even the smallest improvement from RCT 3 is still MORE.
But. They have a whole video describing how "more sophistication" looks like. And the way PC is, is just different from that.

So that one line even though it might technically be true (which I'm not sure it is) if you just look at that part, considered in the context of what's been presented is ... weird to say the least, because it functions as a reaffirmation of the other statements.

 

[stuk71]

So that one line even though it might technically be true.

So... you have answered you own question then?

Have a great weekend [happy]