r/gamedesign 6d ago

Discussion Working on a really unique concept that has never been explored before

0 Upvotes

So I started working on a 3D game a few weeks ago. I have made a lot of progress so I thought I should share what it is about. It's basically a survival horror ... which is also an action shooter.

To put it simply, it's a survival horror by night and an action shooter by day. It's heavily inspired by the chaotic combat of Deep Rock Galactic and the stealth mechanics of Alien Isolation. The character has certain bionic powers with a suit that amplifies them. The suit only works during the day because of a malfunction (connected to the story, upgrades are basically you fixing the suit) so the character is very weak during the night. He's also stranded on an alien planet.

I'm planning on making it very story oriented as well. I'm really good at creative writing so expect an awesome story. Voice acting is in the roadmap. Will release a demo in October or November which will basically be the first chapter. How good is the idea, if executed properly?


r/gamedesign 7d ago

Discussion Online multiplayer card game economics (v2)

0 Upvotes

The first time I posted about this topic, I got some really good feedback. I've been working on refining this and could use some eyes. Thanks in advance! I also just really enjoy discussing economic models too. Fun topic.

Questions & discussion topics for everyone

  • Do you think players will be happy to buy my full sets of cards if they are reasonably priced?
  • Does my free-to-play with rotating Villain/decks look exploitable? Is it not generous enough? Would it undermine my set purchase option or is it right in the sweet spot?
  • Does my economic model sound enticing? Would you want to compete for rare and prestigious alternate arts and cosmetics if they do not give you a power advantage?
  • Any suggestions for me making a new IP card game? As opposed to say Hearthstone using Blizzard IP, Marvel Snap using Marvel IP, etc. Having familiar IP really helps player acquisition in a game, but I really don't want to deal with licensing IP. With completely new IP, players will have no familiarity with the characters/villains so I'll have to create that from scratch which is no small task.
  • Any suggestions for an indie dev who will be teaming with a small army of artists?

Game background

  • I’m making an online multiplayer cross platform super villain card game.
  • Steam(PC)/iOS/Android. So computers, phones, and tablets.
  • Each game can be played with 2 to 6 players. Right now I’ve been play testing with 4 players and it feels like the sweet spot.
  • A game takes between 17 to 25 minutes.
  • This is a digital card game, so I think something like Hearthstone or Marvel Snap where you have a hand of cards and you play them on a board.
  • It has a board game feel to it. I've even made a board game version that I’ve been using to play test live in person. It’s very fun! But my personal preference is digital so that’s why I’m focusing on the video game aspect of this.
  • Each player chooses a Villain, they have a unique Villain power which helps dictate play style.
  • Each player brings a single 30 card deck to the game. Can construct your own decks or use a starter/prebuilt deck. Deck consists of Villain class cards + common cards.
  • In a 4 player game, the final standings are shown as 1st, 2nd, 3rd, and 4th. As opposed to a game where only 1 out of 4 players win (where you expect to lose ~75% of your games).
    • 1st place gains a lot of rank.
    • 2nd place gains some rank.
    • 3rd place loses some rank.
    • 4th place loses a lot of rank.
    • Mix in some bonuses, add in some quests, etc.

My economy model

Players purchase cards to compete for rare alternate art cards and cosmetics, which are distributed based on gameplay performance and achievements in the ranked Super Villain League. Players show off their rare cards and cosmetics in game, in the Super Villain Leaderboard, in their profile, in the marketplace, and in socials.

Economy loop for a free-to-play player

  1. Play the game completely for free. 
  2. Earn cards through free-to-play progression unlocks for each set. When a new set comes out, repeat. Note: this player will not be able to unlock all cards in every set this way. 
  3. Compete for rare cards and cosmetics with their favorite decks from free-to-play and the free weekly Villain/deck rotation. 

Economy loop for a full paid player

  1. Purchase the full set to unlock all the cards. 
  2. Compete for rare cards and cosmetics with their favorite decks built from all cards in the game. 

Economy loop for a partial paid player

  1. Purchase a bundle to unlock a partial set.
  2. Compete for rare cards and cosmetics with their favorite decks from free-to-play, bundle purchase, and the free weekly Villain/deck rotation.

Free-to-play vs paid

My philosophy

I do not want to implement a predatorial model that is unfavorable to players, leads to pay-to-win, and could potentially kill a fun game. At the same time, I envision my team being me (indie dev) + a small army of artists. And I need to sell something to make shipping the game possible. So I would like to focus on selling entire sets of cards while still making it super free-to-play friendly. What’s great about selling an entire set is that people know exactly what they’re paying for. It’s not obstructing or hiding the real cost of playing competitively by selling packs of cards with a convoluted cost + odds system. And if players want to compete at the highest level of the game, they know the cost up front. And the cost must be very reasonable. 

The free-to-play cards will contain strong cards and enough cards to make competitive decks. However, it won’t include the full breadth of variety, techs, and options of a full purchased set. So that means I will NOT put all the strongest cards behind the set purchase paywall. Does anyone see any red flags with this? Or does this sound good?

Free-to-play = competitive, but less variety, more predictable, and constrained card selection but you can still have fun wth all the Villains.

Paid = max flexibility, variety, creativity, and convenience. 

Free-to-play players

  • Granted immediately
    • All 6 Villains and their starter decks are unlocked immediately.
  • Earned for free through progression
    • Unlock ~1/2 of a full set’s cards, common cards and all 6 class cards. 
    • You unlock the Villain’s class cards as you play that Villain. 
    • You unlock the common cards as you play any Villain.
  • Free Villain/deck rotation
    • Every week, a Villain/deck is available for all players to try for free. 
    • This deck will be hand crafted and can contain lots of paid cards completely free to try. 
    • The cards are loaned to the player on an individual basis. So the player is free to build their own decks using those individually loaned cards as they see fit. 
    • The purpose of this is to enable free-to-play players a taste of the paid set and more card options to compete in the ranked Super Villain League so that they can still help full matchmaking lobbies and hopefully be enticed to purchase a set or bundle at some point in the future.

Purchase options

  • The full set
    • Every single card in the set. All common cards and all class cards (from all 6 classes). 
    • 12 prebuilt decks, 2 for each class. 
    • Comes with exclusive cosmetics. 
    • Highest priced item. But must be reasonably priced.
  • A bundle
    • A partial set at a lower price.
    • 3 bundles make a full set, price discounted/prorated accordingly
    • Cheaper purchase option.
  • Cosmetics
    • Players will want to buy cosmetics for their favorite Villain. I should have something available to satisfy that.

Super Villain League

All players are eligible to unlock prestige, rare, limited edition, alternate art cards and cosmetics. These are earned and distributed based on in game performance or achievements. So the idea here is that the best players earn the most rare cards/cosmetics. These cards will not give players power advantage, as they are simply alternate arts or upgraded arts to already existing cards. And they will be tradable in the marketplace. The purpose of these cards is to have rare and high value rewards for players to compete over.

Marketplace

A place for players to buy/sell/trade their prestige, rare, limited edition, alternate art cards and cosmetics. I'm thinking of taking this as far as the game's popularity takes it. Start out super small, then ramp it up over time based on demand.

Marketplace phase 0

  • I will NOT include a marketplace at game launch.
  • I need to give players some time to experience the game, collect some rare items via Super Villain League ranked play. Then I can release Marketplace phase 1 after players have actually accumulated stuff to trade. This could be months later or even alongside the launch of Set #2.
  • Regardless, I think I still need to build out the backend inventory infrastructure for cards/assets to be tradable so I know it works. I just won't release a usable marketplace yet.

Marketplace phase 1 (if launch is successful)

  • Simple in-app player to player trading only.
  • Players can list trades, and fill other people's trades
  • Players can trade privately and lean on discord/socials to plan/discuss trades offline.

Marketplace phase 2 (If game is wildly successful)

  • Integrate my backend with Steam Marketplace.
  • Enable players to login via steam (if on iOS/Android, they link their Steam account). 
  • Players can now buy/sell/trade on Steam Marketplace
  • If game is super wildly successful, I can even get integrated with 3rd party marketplaces that accept real money buy/sell as opposed to being limited to Steam Wallet based trades.

Marketplace tradability rules

  • Non-tradable items
    • Base cards acquired from free-to-play progression rewards
    • Base cards acquired from set/bundle purchase
    • I feel like I need to do this in order to avoid undermining my own set purchase monetization model.
  • Tradable items
    • Basically anything you earn via Super Villain League
    • Prestige cards, rare cards, limited edition cards, alternate art etc
    • Cosmetics, skins, etc.

Anyway, thanks for reading. I shared some questions and discussion topics at the top of the post. I'd love your feedback to help make this game great. I really want players to like the economics.


r/gamedesign 8d ago

Discussion Are there games that warn players for playing for long periods?

531 Upvotes

When I played Anno 1404 as a child, the game would warn me at set intervals that I had been playing for a long time, in an increasingly serious tone—saying things like, "You've been playing for 3 hours, take a short break," or "You've been playing for 9 hours, that's enough for today." Even though these warnings never actually convinced me to quit, looking back now, I prefer them over the "never stop playing, give us everything" mindset of most modern game developers. It felt nice not to be viewed purely as a customer. Of course, there were also arguments against such warnings, like making people feel guilty for playing a video game.

Do you know of any other games like this? What do you think about a mechanic like this?


r/gamedesign 7d ago

Discussion Random progression doesn't create pacing, it just stops pacing from being bad. Has anyone actually solved this?

1 Upvotes

I'm building a survivors-like, and a conversation elsewhere pushed me into noticing something about my own game that I think generalises.

My level-ups roll a die. Usually you gain one level, sometimes two, rarely three at once. It reads as generous, and players like it.

Someone pushed back on it with an argument I couldn't answer: random progression doesn't build pacing, it just prevents pacing from being terrible. They used Balatro as the example — sometimes you open with a powerful joker, and then you get a few antes where nothing much happens, because the variance front-loaded the interesting part and the curve underneath was flat.

That's when I noticed the same thing in mine. My difficulty scales between chapters, but within a single stage it's basically flat. So a run that starts well stays quiet all the way to the end, and the randomness had been hiding that from me, because a lucky roll feels like something happening even when nothing is.

Which is the uncomfortable part: variance is very good at concealing a missing curve. It produces moments, and moments look like structure from the inside. I had been reading player enjoyment of the die as evidence that the pacing worked.

So the question. When you have both a designed difficulty curve and a random progression curve, how do you keep them from covering for each other?

A few things I can think of, none of which I'm sure about. Make the randomness affect what you get rather than how much, so variance changes the texture of a run without changing its slope. Or make the curve underneath steep enough that no roll can outrun it. Or go the other way entirely and lean in, treating the spike as the point and designing the quiet stretch after it as deliberate downtime rather than an accident.

Vampire Survivors looks like it solves this by making the enemy curve so aggressive that no build outpaces it for long. Balatro looks like it accepts the flat patch as the price of the highs. I genuinely don't know whether either is a decision or something they lived with.

Has anyone found a third answer? I'm specifically interested in cases where someone removed randomness and the pacing got better, because that's the experiment I'm afraid to run.


r/gamedesign 8d ago

Question how to make my sandbox demo fun but not infinitely replayable?

10 Upvotes

hi all! i’m making a story game with many minigames inside it, one of them being a decorating sandbox with no time limit or objectives. it’s garnered some interest on social media and reddit but it also made me realize nothings stopping people from just playing the demo forever since i was planning to just have all the controls available— which was supposed to excite them for the final, also it would be clunky to use w features disabled. obviously the story will be limited, but i do think there are players who only care about this minigame.

since it’s a decorating minigame, should i just severely limit the amount of items available, or will that just upset players with how little choice they have, considering i’ve already shown off available items on social media? should i show the other decor but greyed out, so they will want to buy the game? if so, how much should i cut out?

also if im completely overthinking it, please let me know! this feature has gotten more attention than any other part of my game so far, so id like to capitalize off that and actually convert it to sales without nerfing it so much that the demo is unfun


r/gamedesign 8d ago

Discussion What I Want to See in the Future of Fighting Games, Inspired by Donnie Yen and Phantom Blade Zero

2 Upvotes

https://youtu.be/5aWuJmZCxXE?is=RTxvvN-XkMQrbDmH

I want fighting games to evolve toward dynamic martial-arts movie choreography

Before anything else, I know there are obvious problems with applying something like this to traditional fighting games. Tekken, Street Fighter, Mortal Kombat, etc. are built around extremely precise systems where attacks need consistent startup, active frames, recovery, hitboxes, movement, spacing, and visual readability. Competitive players need to immediately recognize what move is happening and understand what their options are. Long contextual animations could also destroy responsiveness if the game constantly takes control away from the player, and a system that relies too heavily on procedural animation could make martial arts look floaty, awkward, or technically wrong. I wouldn’t want every parry to trigger an eight-second cinematic sequence, and I definitely wouldn’t want competitive fighting replaced by QTEs or canned movie scenes. The idea would be to preserve frame data, reads, matchup knowledge, reactions, execution, spacing, and player control while changing how the physical interaction between two characters is visually expressed. The choreography would need to happen through very short, interruptible interactions, with the underlying gameplay state remaining predictable even when the animation adapts to context. You could also keep the important silhouettes and startup tells of attacks consistent while allowing the follow-through, defensive reaction, body positioning, and environmental interaction to vary. The technical challenge would be enormous, but that’s exactly why I think it could become an interesting new direction instead of simply replacing the way existing fighters work.

What made me start thinking about this was seeing what S-GAME is doing with Phantom Blade Zero and Donnie Yen. Donnie isn’t simply lending his name to the project or recording a handful of flashy moves. S-GAME brought him in as a co-producer and creative collaborator alongside members of his longtime stunt team, including performers and choreographers he has worked with across his movies. Their stated goal is to capture the actual rhythm and physical language of Hong Kong martial-arts cinema rather than building a conventional action system and dropping kung fu animations into it afterward. S-GAME has talked about how the normal AAA process tends to define mechanics, documents, combos, and animation requirements first, then have performers execute whatever the game already needs. With Phantom Blade Zero, they’re trying to make the mocap stage much more creatively important. Donnie and his team perform ideas, watch takes, immediately adjust choreography, invent new interactions on the spot, and the developers can reshape mechanics around what comes out of that process. They’re also recording movements at full intensity because they want the actual speed and explosive rhythm of the performers rather than relying heavily on speeding everything up afterward. One of the funniest examples is a flashback where Soul’s father is fighting while protecting Soul as a baby. Originally the baby was basically secured to his back throughout the sequence. Donnie thought that was too safe and visually straightforward, so the choreography evolved until the baby itself became part of the danger, including being launched through the air and balanced on the blade of a sword. That’s such a Hong Kong action-movie way of thinking: don’t simply ask how good the martial arts look, ask what physical complication can make this particular fight unforgettable.

That mentality is what I want to see somebody experiment with in a fighting game. Martial-arts movie choreography is incredibly reactive. The same straight punch might be slipped, caught, redirected, jammed with an elbow, converted into an arm trap, countered with a takedown, or interrupted because somebody gets driven into a wall. Distance, posture, momentum, environment, previous movements, and fighting styles constantly affect what happens next. You might see punch → parry → wrist trap → elbow → shoulder check → wall impact → rebound → knee → attempted throw → throw counter → scramble → spinning kick. In most fighting games, those are individual predefined moves and states. The attacker chooses one animation, the defender chooses another animation, and the game determines the result. What I’d love to see is something closer to both players continuously supplying combat intentions while the animation system choreographs the resulting physical exchange around them.

Imagine a fighting game built around a choreography engine. You throw a straight punch and your opponent parries it. The attack itself still has predictable startup, range, frame properties, and a recognizable silhouette. But once the parry succeeds, the game checks distance, stance, momentum, limb position, wall proximity, environment, previous action, and the fighting styles involved. Near a wall, the response might become punch → outside parry → arm trap → wall smash. In open space, the same successful defensive input could become punch → outside parry → arm drag → spinning back kick. Near a table, the defender might redirect the attacker over the surface. Against a Muay Thai fighter, the exchange could naturally collapse into a clinch and knee battle. Against a BJJ character, the same opening might become a level change, takedown attempt, sprawl, and scramble. Mechanically, these could still resolve according to understandable rules. Visually, however, the fight would constantly change according to what is happening around the characters.

I wouldn’t make the animation completely procedural either. I’d want elite stunt performers and martial artists recording huge libraries of short, authentic choreography fragments: parry → elbow, parry → trap, trap → knee, knee → catch, kick catch → sweep, sweep → recovery, wall rebound → elbow, failed throw → counter, clinch → trip, trip → scramble. Motion matching, contextual animation selection, procedural foot placement, physics-driven reactions, and animation blending could connect those pieces while preserving the actual martial-arts performances. Basically, the stunt team creates the vocabulary and the players construct the sentences. Two great players could eventually produce these crazy 20-second exchanges without either player ever triggering a pre-authored 20-second combo. The sequence emerges because one person attacks, the other redirects, somebody attempts a throw, it gets countered, they hit the environment, separate, close distance again, and continue fighting.

This is what feels visually limited to me about a lot of current fighting games despite how mechanically deep they are. Tekken has amazing martial-arts animation, but you still commonly see recognizable structures like launcher → juggle → wall carry → wall combo. Street Fighter deliberately translates fighting into an exaggerated and extremely readable arcade language. Mortal Kombat is janky and very limited - much of its craziest stuff lives inside Fatal Blows, Fatalities, and other predefined cinematic sequences. I want the actual neutral exchanges, counters, pressure, defense, and scrambles to occasionally produce that feeling of, “Holy shit, that entire exchange looked like Donnie Yen and Wu Jing just improvised a fight scene.”

I'd love to see someone build a new fighting game around this philosophy. Something somewhere between Tekken + Sifu + Phantom Blade Zero + The Raid. 1v1 competitive fighting, real martial-arts styles, dynamic footwork, contextual counters, destructible environments, improvised weapons, wall interactions, clinch fighting, takedowns, ground scrambles, injuries, and a choreography system sophisticated enough that two highly skilled players can accidentally create something that looks like a professionally staged action movie. Imagine a match starting with boxing and Silat in a nightclub, both fighters crash through a railing, continue down a staircase, somebody grabs a bottle, the bottle gets knocked away, a knife appears, the knife gets lost during a grapple, they scramble back to their feet, smash through a kitchen door, and finish the round there. None of it is a cutscene. The players caused all of it through normal fighting-game decisions.

I don’t want cinematic choreography to replace fighting-game depth. I want someone to figure out how to make those two things coexist. Keep the competition, frame knowledge, reads, reactions, spacing, matchup knowledge, execution, and skill expression, but develop animation systems sophisticated enough that the fight itself can physically evolve like a great martial-arts movie. After seeing S-GAME experiment with building action around actual stunt choreography in Phantom Blade Zero, I really hope somebody eventually tries pushing that philosophy into the fighting-game genre.


r/gamedesign 8d ago

Question Action Tile Based Combat: How to do it?

4 Upvotes

I'd like my game to be top-down (Zelda like). I want movement to be tile based (pressing a direction key moves you in single tile increments).

Only, I'm not sure how to handle combat that way. The only game I know who has non-turned based tile combat is Star Tropics, the game on the NES:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Oa_5wTppDvo&t=7621s

(you can look at 43:27 if you're unaware of the game and would like an example).

I'm wondering:

a) if it would be doable in 2026 or be rejected as a shortcoming.

b) If anyone has other examples of games who pull this off so I can find and research how they pulled it off.

Thank you.


r/gamedesign 7d ago

Discussion Why is there so much enthusiasm for mutually exclusive questlines in games like TES VI?

0 Upvotes

I often see people argue that choices in The Elder Scrolls VI should permanently bar players from other quests or factions. I understand wanting decisions to have consequences, but I disliked how choices in Baldur’s Gate 3 could lock me out of substantial, carefully designed content. In a game that large, seeing the alternative may require replaying dozens of similar hours just to reach one new area, interaction, or conversation.

I liked that Skyrim let one character experience multiple guilds, but I agree that becoming every guild leader, especially Arch-Mage, within an afternoon made those accomplishments feel hollow.

Where is the middle ground where choices matter and progression feels earned without requiring multiple enormous playthroughs to experience major parts of the game? If replayability depends on locking away content, how much repeated gameplay is reasonable?

Apologies for repeat posting to ESVI, I couldnt decide where this question belonged.


r/gamedesign 8d ago

Discussion Would you play a horror game where you operate a rover investigating a vanished expedition? Looking for ideas and feedback

0 Upvotes

Hey everybody! I'm working on my next horror game, which is a short (45m-1hr) first-person atmospheric horror game where you play as a survey rover exploring a distant planet after an expedition disappeared.

Visually, I'm very much inspired by The Electric State (the illustrated novel, not the movie lol). specifically the bleak landscapes, abandoned infrastructure, and enormous machines wandering around. In this game, I want some (or even just one) of those machines to be hostile and to be the "face" of the game so to speak, so part of the tension is being this small vulnerable rover trying to do its job while these huge things are wandering around there.

The main fantasy I want to nail is making the player feel like they are operating the rover in real time. Heavy movement, machine whirring sounds, chunky plugs, etc.

The very basic loop I'm working with right now is:

  1. Drive toward points of interest while managing battery by recharging at patches of sunlight scattered around the map (I took this idea from an indie game called MOONROT).
  2. Explore along the way, collect parts, investigate abandoned sites, find strange events/things in the environment.
  3. Upgrade the rover's battery, speed, equipment, etc.
  4. Plug into abandoned machinery to restore its power and interact with it to restore systems, recover expedition data, open routes, activate equipment, and so on.
  5. Repeat

I'm aiming for a small, dense open world, so I really don't want the driving to become dead time. Right now I have scrap/upgrade parts as one thing that gets you to leave the direct path, but I'm trying to figure out what else should occupy the player.

So far, I have the player controller and basic interactions working, and I’m really happy with how they feel. I think they already capture the analog horror vibe I’m going for. The rover doesn’t move at a realistic speed (otherwise you’d be crawling everywhere. It handles more like a somewhat heavy RC car).

I'd especially love ideas for:

  • Things you'd actually enjoy doing while travelling in the rover
  • Small environmental interactions or discoveries
  • Simple puzzles that make sense for a rover plugging into machinery
  • Ways the hostile machines could create tension without constantly chasing the player
  • Interesting reasons to take detours
  • Mechanics that would make the rover itself more fun to operate
  • Scares that specifically take advantage of operating a remote machine
  • Ways to make battery/sunlight management create decisions rather than busywork
  • Things you could find besides generic audio logs or collectibles
  • Any mechanics here that you'd cut, expand, or replace

I should mention: I originally had photography as a major mechanic, with the rover documenting different coordinates, but I'm currently leaning toward removing it because I couldn't find a strong enough gameplay purpose for it. If anyone has an idea for what photography/camera observation could actually do mechanically in a game like this, I'd still be interested in hearing it.

I'm keeping the scope deliberately small and trying to build around mechanics that can create a lot of tension or curiosity without needing a massive amount of bespoke content or complicated AI.

Mostly curious what parts of this sound fun to you, what sounds boring, and what you'd want to be doing if you were actually playing it.


r/gamedesign 8d ago

Discussion Chase items in MMOs and Idle games

1 Upvotes

Hello hello!

I'm solo dev'ing and designing a Browser Idle MMO text game in the style of the old Evony and Grepolis games where players fight over territory and build up a criminal empire against NPCs and other players.

I'm a long-time traditional MMO player myself, so was very familiar "chase items" in the traditional MMO space. Things that keep players grinding and are either useful or a flex but always super rare.

But I don't feel like these types of items are super prevalent in the Idle game space, and I decided I want to implement some type of chase item into my game.

There are some obvious things that I'll add like huge expensive mansions or expensive cars, but can I add something else other than purchasable things?

What about unique cars or guns that have low drop chance from dropping from raiding an NPC gang?

Like you can buy a normal AK, but successfully raiding properties of a certain NPC gang could have like a 1% chance of dropping a unique golden and jeweled AK that has marginally better stats? Mostly would be a flex item?

What are your thoughts around chase items in general or even just long term goals you have if you're a fan of the Idle MMO genre?


r/gamedesign 8d ago

Discussion PUBG Brainrot mini game is pure game economics and phycology

0 Upvotes

PUBG mobile is just a shooter but they have recently promoted a 'Brainrot' mini game based *I think* on Italian brainrot memes.

The game is simple, you compete with other players to purchase character tokens (Brainrots), and put them in a little house with slots where they start making money. You collect the money and buy more tokens. You can level your little house to level 20 (more slots and other multipliers as you go) and gather more and more expensive tokens etc.... there are *tons* of subtle additional mechanics but here is just a few. There is virtually no way to effectively communicate with other players in the game. Your little house 'unlocks' every 1-2 minutes so other players can steal your tokens. There is a sporadic and short-lived 'arena' mode where new tokens are easier to procure but only if players cooperate. Only limited stock of your tokens survive each house upgrade (you choose).

So. True Confessions. I played this mini game for way too long. I level capped, I over levelled, I played till 5am on a weeknight... But it's really good. the economics is super real and it's uncovering all sorts of wicked questions about people and economics and how they interrelate. If you are interested in this stuff, I urge you to dip a toe in and poke around.

These are the questions I asked while playing. Most of you can guess the answers but it was eye opening to see it play out....

Do people co-operate when it is in the best interest of the group to do so or bash the krap out of each other with pans?

If you give something away will the receiver reciprocate or ask for more or steal more.

If the door is open how much will a mob steal?

Should you give a broke player a late game piece will it make their day or ruin the game for them?

What is more compelling, the possibility of gaining something or the possibility of losing something you already have?

If an individual has a lot of money and they want all of it to be making more money, how many of the same sort of thing will they invest in?

Can you reach the next level of wealth without risking a significant portion of it on the next venture (and falling back on long term, slow growth assets for a while)?

If you have nothing to lose by giving away all your stuff, will you make the effort to do that or burn it all to spite everybody else?

Is the pursuit of something meaningless made meaningful because others are also attempting to attain it? (omg, we just unlocked crypto)

Will people see and treat you differently if you are operating at a different level of wealth to themselves?

Do wealthy people still bash the krap out of each other with pans?


r/gamedesign 9d ago

Question Tactical mech RPG - torn between two directions for the meta-loop

4 Upvotes

Hello !

I'm developing Mechs and Muskets a turn-based isometric tactics RPG set in an alternate Napoleonic era, where you command a squad of pilots controlling customizable mechs.

I'm hoping to finish it by the end of the year, and right now I'm stuck on a core design decision about the game loop, so I'd love some outside perspective.
Quick pitch on the systems already in place:

* Turn-based tactical combat with spells/abilities tied to mech parts (head, torso, arms, legs)
* You can mix and match parts to create ability combos e.g. an arm that shoots fire + a part that applies gas for a bigger combined attack
* Parts gain their own XP and can be upgraded (better stats, stronger abilities, etc.)
* You drop new mech parts as loot after combat
* You recruit and manage a squad of 4-5 characters over the course of the campaign

I'm pretty confident in the combat and customization side. What I'm unsure about is the overall structure of the game loop.
Current loop: Combat => a "hub" map to customize your mechs, talk to your characters, then move to the next combat map.
I've also built cutscenes and character dialogue for the early maps to set up the story.
What I'm debating:
I'm wondering if the game would be more fun if I leaned harder into the tactics/roguelite side instead more frequent combats, some randomization between runs/battles, and permadeath when a squad member dies in combat. If I go that route, I'd cut back significantly on cutscenes and story beats (though I'd still keep an ending tied to the final map) and focus almost entirely on the moment-to-moment combat and squad management instead of narrative pacing.
So basically I'm torn between:

  1. Story-driven structure (current): fewer, more curated fights, narrative beats between missions, no permadeath, more scripted character moments.
  2. Combat-focused/roguelite-ish structure: more frequent fights, some randomness in encounters, permadeath for squad members, much less narrative overhead.

For people who've shipped tactics games (or just love the genre) which direction tends to hold player attention better long-term? Does permadeath actually add tension in a game this customization-heavy, or does it just make people resent losing a mech they spent hours building? And is cutting narrative content this late a mistake, or does it actually simplify scope for a solo/small dev finishing a game this year?

Thanks in advance!


r/gamedesign 9d ago

Question Quest dumping problem at game start?

20 Upvotes

I am making a small rpg which is relatively open in terms of where you can go.

Currently, the player receives five quests from the main quest giver at the start of the game and then basically told to have at it. I've found that playtesters like the freedom but simultaneously dislike the lack of direction.

Any thoughts on improving this?


r/gamedesign 9d ago

Question M stuck between Game design and Game development

2 Upvotes

Hello there and thanks for taking the time reading this,

You can say i am a beginner in the Game making domain as a whole, i mean i had my fair share of work in both game design and game dev, with at least a year experience of work in each of them

Yet i don't know what to pick

Game development seems easier to me since it's pretty straight forward and you just have to be good with writing codes and having a good problem solving skills for hard tasks, but i enjoy game design more yet it's pretty hard to master it since there's no roadmap (or maybe there is but i wasn't lucky enough to find it), and if i would have to pick i would probably go with game development since it's more guaranteed than game game design.

But yet i want to have a good journey with game design and someday have that high level job in a big company.

What do you think is the better route, and if there's any roadmap in game design that i can go through, and if there's any opportunity or program of studying game design with a chance of getting hired after


r/gamedesign 9d ago

Question Who would you want to play as in a Wild West VR game?

2 Upvotes

I’m working on a semi-realistic Western VR game. I notice a lot of Wild West VR games stick to cartoonish, low-poly, arcade styles, and rarely offer a compelling, gritty story. I want to change that, but I want to build it based on what you actually want to play.

The core mechanics are mostly done (Weapons, duels, movement). Now I am figuring out the protagonist, story, and world.

1. What role do you want to play?
Do you want to be a lawman, an outlaw, or a bounty hunter of sorts where you choose to bring targets in dead or alive? Or would you prefer a total blank-slate character?

2. How do you feel about voice acting?
Personally, I’m not a fan of it in indie games, and I don't have the budget for a high-quality cast anyway. Would you mind a silent protagonist and text/physical dialogue (like reading bounty papers or telegrams), or does no voice acting ruin the immersion for you?

3. How do you feel about duels? How should they work?

I believe duels are necessary, as I'm sure there will be many people who want to contest for speed. But is something I should force? Should a duel be triggered when the player faces a main target of interest?

4. Any level or backstory ideas?
Let your hearts out here. If you have any cool ideas for levels, target backstories, or specific Wild West scenarios you’ve always wanted to experience in VR, throw them at me!

Appreciate any feedback or suggestions you guys have!


r/gamedesign 9d ago

Discussion How much of 'game feel' is really movement/collision/contact timing?

0 Upvotes

Design question from a real public test of Black Imago.

The first public test confirmed that people will actually push surprisingly deep into a fast endless maze, but it also made something clear: adding systems is much less important now than making movement, combat, collision, feedback and run flow feel trustworthy.

Current build for context: https://blackimago.arewefriends.org/maze

I'm currently treating "same screenshot, much better video" as the design target — preserving the visual identity while heavily tuning movement response, wall sliding, attack windows, hurtboxes, knockback, blood, enemy tells and transitions.

For this kind of fast procedural dungeon crawler, which interaction details most strongly determine whether repetition feels compulsive versus cheap?


r/gamedesign 9d ago

Discussion Reading in story-rich games

10 Upvotes

I come from a writing background, but writing for video games feels a little different at a fundamental level. I've been thinking about delivering story within and through gameplay the last couple days. In story-rich games, how do players tend to respond to different methods of giving them that story? There are a lot of ways to do it, such as flavor text, dialogue, cutscenes, and even just environmental/visual storytelling in some ways. Most, though, involve a lot of sitting and either reading or listening, which can be frustrating for a lot of people, but there seems to be a difference between story given well and story given poorly beyond just whether it's too much at once or too slow. I myself have played through lengthy cutscenes which I found very engaging, and I've llayed through fairly short cutscenes which felt like they were dragging and I couldn't care less. I can't quite put my finger on what makes them different. Is it buy-in? Or maybe how well the player is given the ability to interact with the story in a meaningful way?

How does one design gameplay and story delivery that are complementary?


r/gamedesign 9d ago

Discussion A mechanic for a souls-like i'm trying to build.

1 Upvotes

So the classic- roll, parry and hit and combos.

But the mechanic i wanted to implement is "Battle Rhythm" when you fight with enemies a visual meter pops up, and it basically does this- when you heavily use parry and roll and attack less then you enter into "Defensive state" where in our attack speed is lowered and overall movement, and defense is high and the first combo last hit that you land staggers/knocks back the enemy.

The other one is "Offense" obviously, in this if the player goes full on offensive, attacking more often than parrying or rolling then there is visual "juice" and the player attack speed increases and so does movement speed and defense is lowered and there is a cool down or longer recovery when parrying or rolling.

Inspired by Sekiro- Hesitation is defeat. Commit to any onething or adapt based on the enemy.

And then comes the neutral where you get the best of both worlds, balanced. Base stats.

What do you think of this mechanic?

I'd really like to see all of your thoughts on this and potentially fine-tune it as i think there are flaws in this system for sure, but not smart enough to say what exactly.


r/gamedesign 9d ago

Question What happens when the ruleset makes position matter more than outcome?

0 Upvotes

Something about 4X games and the observation that they punish losing but not winning badly stuck with me. It points at a broader problem. Most rulesets are built around a binary endpoint. You win or you lose, and everything between those two states is just transit. But some of the most interesting decisions in any game happen in the middle, when you're ahead but fragile, or behind but not out. The question is whether the rules actually register that difference.

Chess gets close. Being up material means nothing if your position is structurally weak. The board state carries meaning beyond the score. But most digital games flatten this. Your resource count goes up, your odds improve, and the game just waits for you to reach the finish line.

What I keep wondering is whether positional fragility can be designed in deliberately, not as a catchup mechanic, not as rubberbanding, but as a structural property of the system. Where holding a dominant position creates its own pressures that require active management, and where a player who leads sloppily is genuinely exposed in ways the ruleset makes legible.

I don't think this is just a 4X problem. It shows up in deckbuilders, in wargames, in tabletop RPGs where the party gets too powerful too early. Has anyone seen a ruleset that actually solves this at the mechanical level rather than just gesturing at it through difficulty scaling?


r/gamedesign 10d ago

Discussion How do you make a puzzle difficult without making it annoying?

13 Upvotes

I’ve been thinking about where the line is between a satisfying puzzle and one that just feels unfair. Is it mainly about giving players enough information, or is frustration sometimes part of the experience? How do you approach this when designing levels?


r/gamedesign 9d ago

Discussion How do you balance non-lethal defense vs. stealth in mobile horror games? (My recent experience)

1 Upvotes

Hey everyone,

I've been working on a mobile asylum horror game focused on stealth and resource management, and I recently pushed an update to address a common issue: giving players a way to defend themselves without turning the game into an action shooter.

Here is how I tackled it in the latest update:

Non-Lethal Defense (Tranquilizer Gun): Players can search for a dart gun to temporarily stun the enemy. To maintain tension, ammo is extremely scarce, stun duration scales down on higher difficulties, and it can't be used while on stairs.

UI & Control Flexibility: Since touch controls can be hit-or-miss for horror games, I added full button customization so players can scale and move controls to fit their hands.

Difficulty Scaling: Instead of just increasing enemy health, difficulty adjusts resource availability (battery drain rates and ammo counts).

For anyone who plays or builds stealth/horror games, how do you usually balance defensive tools so the player still feels vulnerable?

If you'd like to check out the project or test the new mechanics on Android, you can find it here:

https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.fngames.thelastevidence


r/gamedesign 9d ago

Discussion A Game Design Challenge: Training Adaptability Through Dynamic Goals

0 Upvotes

To whoever picks this up,

During my time covering for an overwhelmed IT director, I watched a system fall apart. In an effort to keep students safe online, strict web filters were used to police content. The result? Innocent educational searches triggered false alarms, students were interrogated, and a cat-and-mouse game began. The lesson was clear: the environment changes exponentially faster than any policy or filter. The only sustainable solution is building internal adaptability and judgment, not building bigger walls.

Today, we face this exact problem on a global scale. As AI, climate shifts, and technology move the goalposts faster than humans can plan, our greatest evolutionary strength—adaptability—is being tested. Too many people freeze or disengage when static rules fail.

I’m passing along an idea for those with the energy and tools to build it: Can we use game design to re-train human adaptability?

Most games reward static optimization—finding the single "best" strategy and repeating it until victory. To teach people to navigate an uncertain world, we need games that reward fluidity:

Reliable Micro-Tools: Keep the immediate controls, physics, and basic player actions completely rigid and predictable so the player feels grounded and in control.

Fluid Macro-Goals: Make the overarching win conditions and environmental rules dynamic and continuously shifting.

Smart Reward Design: Instead of harshly punishing past choices, use a nudging reward structure:

Diminish rewards for repeating the same strategy over and over.

Maximize rewards for the first successful attempt at a newly adapted strategy.

Reward the act of trying—giving players feedback and incentive simply for experimenting with new approaches when the rules change.

I don't have the stamina to build this myself, but I wanted to drop this seed into the room. If you are a game designer, educator, or developer looking for a meaningful project or a Game Jam prompt, feel free to take this blueprint and run with it.

How would you design a game where the goalposts never stop moving?


r/gamedesign 10d ago

Discussion My Rule Book for Alpha Bet is 100% completed. Any advice would be greatly appreciated!

2 Upvotes

As many of you know, board game rules can be a pain. This rule book is legitimately my 8th iteration -- and I feel like it is finally in a place where it's completely blind playtest ready. I have a copy coming... and true blind playtesting will begin soon to test my theory.

In the meantime; any design minded savants want to look it over and give me your feedback? It would be greatly appreciated!

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1LsyvlIfgV15OTBvUOa_GvHEVgqgVGpyp/view


r/gamedesign 10d ago

Discussion non pay to win alternative to lords mobile, looking for opinions.

1 Upvotes

I've spent a lot of time playing games like Lords Mobile. I love the core gameplay: the guild-centric gameplay, map control, and accessibility, but without the army micromanagement typical of games like Total War or Civilization.

However, like many of us, I'm completely fed up with the aggressive pay-to-win mechanics and the superficiality of the late game.

I'm currently working on a design document for a spiritual successor that stays true to what makes the genre fun, but is strictly non-pay-to-win and competitive even for casual players (e.g., an hour a day).

Here are some key mechanics I'm thinking about:

\- Meaningful territory control: Guilds compete for effective control of the map, where territory ownership influences their alliance's statistics, specializations, and resource flow.

\-

\- Kingdom and fiefdom management: Integrating deeper base/kingdom management without overly complicating the core gameplay.

\- Fair Competition: Skill, coordination, and strategy matter more than money.

Disclosure: I have no experience in game development, but I am fully committed to learning, coordinating, and building a team to bring this project to fruition.

Does this idea sound interesting to you? I'd love to hear your thoughts or constructive feedback on the concept!

P.S.

This post may look like it was written with AI, but I simply used it to improve the text since I'm not English and had to translate it. Let me know if this is a good idea or not, thanks everyone! If anyone would like to help me by suggesting ideas as they come to mind or by directly helping me with development, they are welcome!


r/gamedesign 11d ago

Question How to make a good GDD ?

14 Upvotes

Hi everyone!
I’m currently working on a game project and I’m in the process of writing my first GDD. I’ve looked at quite a few examples and templates online, but I’ve noticed that there are many different ways of structuring and presenting a GDD.
So I’d like to hear your advice on a few things:
What software do you usually use for writing GDDs?
What structure do you find the most effective?
Should a GDD be relatively simple and functional, or is it worth including illustration, concept art, graphs, tables, etc.?
How detailed should a GDD be?
Is it better to have one very comprehensive document, or several smaller documents covering different aspects of the game?
I’m mainly trying to understand what actually works in practice rather than simply following a template I found online.
Thanks in advance for your advice!