Does the ingame time pass in turns or more like real time?

[FordManFromHell]

EDIT2: Perhaps you should consider bringing this fact out more clearly that this game is going to play in real-time?

I am actually very serious about that one. I think you guys really should bring out the fact more clearly to the potential customers who (at least some of them) are probably expecting Detroit and/or Motorcity –like turn-based gameplay from this title, that this game is definitely going to be real-time. Because when I realized that this title is going to be real-time, it was like a kick to the balls and I dont want anybody to get their hopes up (not even mentioning paying extra money) for something that isnt going to happen. Not everybody likes to play these kinds of games on real-time you know.

EDIT: Rant over

[Killrob]

If one would design game from ground up to be a turn-based game with -possible- interruptions between turns (if something important happens), it would still clearly differ from a real-time game.

No dude, I don't let that count, I provided arguments for why it would be the same, now where are your arguments for that it IS any different? Maybe I didn't state my argument clear enough: If you set the non-paused speed to infinite and auto-pause at all relevant events... that is EXACTLY the same way TB games work, and we will probably provide a mode which works that way too. I'm not the programmer, but that would seems a good and easy to implement feature. A "Skip to Next Event" button is easily doable in that system as well (tape over it and write "Next Turn" on it if you wish), and will most probably also find its way into the game... I see no reason for why not.

...TB is more easier for the player to comprehend than the RT...

Huh? How is an arbitrary set of rules (turn-based mechanic) easier to comprehend than reality? Time passing at a constant pace is the most natural it can be. How is a "ticking clock" in the form of a date and a time difficult to comprehend? Please clarify why TB would be any easier to understand.

You guys are talking awful lot about multiplayer, ...

Well, that might be because multiplayer was a set feature for the game from the start, and it is a significant part from a development and design standpoint, so why should we not talk about it an awful lot? Tell you what, as a normal player of Automation I wouldn't care about MP either, I prefer playing along most of the time, but that doesn't mean that I want to impose that restriction on all players of Automation - there is a non-negligible amount of players that would see this as a massive positive feature, an argument for buying even.

I actually do understand why you don’t even consider making this as a turn-based game, ...

Are you seriously thinking that we didn't go through those considerations before this point in time? We did consider it thoroughly, and didn't find a good way of making it work in a TB setting, which leaves us with only one option. If someone came up with an awesome-sauce idea of how to make TB work reeeeally well, we might reconsider, as this mechanic has not yet been implemented, but as it stands - RT it is.

Yes I sadly realized that from the attitude that was all over your answers.

Just as clear as your attitude was all over your answers. I do not agree with Daffy on that I would like an RT game more than a TB one though, but seeing that TB would NOT work, there is no choice and thus no more energy needs to be wasted on arguing it.

...The Corporate Machine...

It is a major source of inspiration for Daffy and Zeussy, just as much as Motor City and Detroit are. I've never played it, so I can't judge it; I did play a lot of both Detroit and Motor City though. As you provide no argument whatsoever for why you didn't like it, I wholeheartedly ignore that rant.


Before I even comment on your last post I want to hear some solid arguments giving a foundation to your rant(s).

[loady740]

@killrob DAMN

[Daffyflyer]

The reason we don't advertise Automation as being turn based or real time in particular is that whilst after a lot of thought, Real Time appears to do what we want better than Turn Based, its entirely possible that we could end up finding some Turn Based system that works well. We'd rather not say that the final game is going to work a paticular way when major parts of it are still in the design phase, but if I had to say now, I'd say I'm 90% sure it will end up real time, with some time manipulation mechanics.


And yes, we are talking about Multiplayer a lot, as Killrob says its a major design goal of this project, as the few Tycoon Games that have implemented Multiplayer well have been very enjoyable to play multiplayer (I'm thinking of OpenTTD again)

I'm sorry if you're not a fan of real time games, but in the end we have to weigh up the options and choose the one that we think will work best, and (particularly given that Multiplayer is a key goal) Real Time is so far that option.

[loady740]

when you say real-time do you mean like every action you make takes a certain amount of real-world time (like farmville) to complete ?

[Daffyflyer]

when you say real-time do you mean like every action you make takes a certain amount of real-world time (like farmville) to complete ?

No, I mean real-time as in real time strategy, as in there isn't a "next turn" button like in Civilization that you must press for anything to happen

[loady740]

so kinda like openttd then? (i play that if you didn't know)

[Daffyflyer]

so kinda like openttd then?

Yes.

[FordManFromHell]

No dude, I don't let that count, I provided arguments for why it would be the same, now where are your arguments for that it IS any different?

So let me get this straight, you have a concept in your head about how this game will play and now you want me to give you arguments about how that exact concept (wich is in your head) would play differently if it would be turn-based (with possible interruptions) instead of real-time? First of all I think your request is twisted right from the start, and secondly I did not say that this concept of yours would play any differently if it was turn-based with possible interruptions vs. real-time. What I was saying however, was that that if you design a game which is turn-based with possible interruptions right from ground up (so it would play bit like Motorcity if I remember correctly), then it is going to differ clearly from a real-time game.

How is an arbitrary set of rules (turn-based mechanic) easier to comprehend than reality?

Im not saying that for us as physical beings “turns” would be more logical way to pass time vs. real-time. Im not saying anything like that. Im talkin about -GAMES- and how EASY it is to comprehend something that is happening in -GAMES-. When you really start to think of it, isn’t it obvious that it is much easier to -gameplay wise- comprehend a system where you move and after that your “enemy” moves, vs “we all move at the same time”? In turn-based gameplay it is much more obvious what you can do before your “enemy”, whilst in real-time it isn’t all that obvious since there are much more factors defining that than just “whos turn is it”.

Well, that might be because multiplayer was a set feature for the game from the start, and it is a significant part from a development and design standpoint, so why should we not talk about it an awful lot?

Well now I must ask you where have I ever said that you should not talk about multiplayer? Or where have I said that it should not be a significant part of development and design? I said I don’t like MP, perhaps because of this you are (consciously?) misinterpreting what I said and turning my sayings into something else? Anyway, I don’t care about MP so im not really interested talking about it.

Are you seriously thinking that we didn't go through those considerations before this point in time?

No I havent said anything like that.

It is a major source of inspiration for Daffy and Zeussy

Really? The Corporate Machine is a major source of inspiration for Daffy and Zeussy? Oh ok, im not going to lie; im pretty disappointed..

Before I even comment on your last post I want to hear some solid arguments giving a foundation to your rant(s).

If you count out the fact that I like turn-based gameplay more than real-time gameplay (it needs to be count out because that is just my personal opinion), then what is left is my argument which goes like this: In turn-based gameplay it is more easy for the player to comprehend what he/she can, or cannot do before his/her enemy does something vs. real-time gameplay.

The reason we don't advertise Automation as being turn based or real time in particular is that whilst after a lot of thought, Real Time appears to do what we want better than Turn Based, its entirely possible that we could end up finding some Turn Based system that works well. We'd rather not say that the final game is going to work a paticular way when major parts of it are still in the design phase, but if I had to say now, I'd say I'm 90% sure it will end up real time, with some time manipulation mechanics.

And yes, we are talking about Multiplayer a lot, as Killrob says its a major design goal of this project, as the few Tycoon Games that have implemented Multiplayer well have been very enjoyable to play multiplayer (I'm thinking of OpenTTD again)

I'm sorry if you're not a fan of real time games, but in the end we have to weigh up the options and choose the one that we think will work best, and (particularly given that Multiplayer is a key goal) Real Time is so far that option.

Daffy, im not saying you are wrong in what you are doing, you do what you want to do and such an approach can only rarely be wrong, besides its your game after all. I also deeply respect the fact that you seem to (somewhat) respect my opinion, instead of just trying to twist my sayings into something else and then attacking those twisted comments as I would of said them. As I already said I am going to play the final game and I am going to try and enjoy it. Heck in the mean time I might even go through my stuff and try to find my copy of The Corporate Machine and give it a go !

Btw, I say this again just to make sure: I havent said that you should not talk about multiplayer, nor have I said that it shouldn't be a major design goal in your project.

[Daffyflyer]

Really? The Corporate Machine is a major source of inspiration for Daffy and Zeussy? Oh ok, im not going to lie; im pretty disappointed..

More of an inspiration in terms of the fact that it did kind of what we want to do but did it pretty poorly, I'll agree that its not a very good game, but I can see how it was trying to work.

I won't argue that The Corporate Machine was a great game, it had some pretty serious flaws, and only the Computer industry aspect of it really even worked at all.


Anyhow, what it comes down to is that this is something we've already pondered to death a good two years ago, back then we thought real time was the way to go and we still do now, turn based has its advantages but in the case of the game we want to make its not likely to be right for us. If there turns out to be a good design reason that turn based is worth the problems it causes then we'll probably go that way, but I don't see that being likely.

[FordManFromHell]

More of an inspiration in terms of the fact that it did kind of what we want to do but did it pretty poorly, I'll agree that its not a very good game, but I can see how it was trying to work.

I won't argue that The Corporate Machine was a great game, it had some pretty serious flaws, and only the Computer industry aspect of it really even worked at all.

Its not like I would be the center of the universe and that my opinion would weight more than somebody elses opinion, because it doesnt. But anyway I will still state that you saying that somehow returns much of my “lost” faith to this game’s tycoon part. Thank you.

Anyhow, what it comes down to is that this is something we've already pondered to death a good two years ago, back then we thought real time was the way to go and we still do now, turn based has its advantages but in the case of the game we want to make its not likely to be right for us. If there turns out to be a good design reason that turn based is worth the problems it causes then we'll probably go that way, but I don't see that being likely.

I do understand this, im not exactly even trying to convince you to make Automation turn-based. Well I must admit that at some point I tried to argue that -logically thinking- TB would be an equal option for real-time in Automation (except the MP would most likely be a real pain in the ass), but at the end of the day it’s all about personal preferences. And it was that personal preference that lead you to choose the real-time system over turn-based system (plus the fact that the MP would be hard if not impossible to implement on this game with TB system).

Anyways, I still feel that I will trust you guys with this one, so keep up the good work!

[GroundHOG2010]

Im not saying that for us as physical beings “turns” would be more logical way to pass time vs. real-time. Im not saying anything like that. Im talkin about -GAMES- and how EASY it is to comprehend something that is happening in -GAMES-. When you really start to think of it, isn’t it obvious that it is much easier to -gameplay wise- comprehend a system where you move and after that your “enemy” moves, vs “we all move at the same time”? In turn-based gameplay it is much more obvious what you can do before your “enemy”, whilst in real-time it isn’t all that obvious since there are much more factors defining that than just “whos turn is it”.

Just to randomly butt in here after the whole thing has probably been said and done. A real time game, for me, is simplier than a real time game. In a real time game, if I want to know what an enemy, be it AI or another player, is doing, I come up with ideas from what they are going for from what there company (in the case of a tycoon) is doing. This is much harder in a turn based as what the company is doing doesn't come up when they are doing it, but after its done, and the head start has already happened. Eather way, you still have to guess at what they are doing, but its quicker to come to a hypothosis in a real time game.

Besides, why are you even talking about this. It has clearly been said that they looked into turn-based, but its downsides and upsides didn't match as well (or at all) with the gamestyle, and the better system for the game was real time with pauses. Eather way, it shouldn't matter. I don't pick up a game because its real time or turn based. I don't pick it up because real time is the only way I play. I pick it up because I enjoy the game, and think that it would be a good game to play. Thats all that should matter.

[FordManFromHell]

Besides, why are you even talking about this. It has clearly been said that they looked into turn-based

Correct if I am wrong, but I believe there hasn’t been any clear mention about what kind of system (TB or RT) they are going to use in Automation, at least not until in this thread that is. I think that should answers to your 'question' of why I made this thread in the first place.

Eather way, it shouldn't matter. I don't pick up a game because its real time or turn based.

I can somewhat relate to what you are saying, since I also don’t purchase a game just because it is turn-based, however I also may NOT be purchasing a game simply because it is real-time. If somebody likes oranges more than apples, then it does not mean that all he ever buys and eats are oranges just because “they are oranges”. It just simply means that he likes oranges more than apples.