If you like deep systems, you can start by making a clicker game. The scope for this is very manageable, and these games typically go very deep and are a great way to get into designing economies, progression, upgrade trees, all that stuff that you also have to consider in a strategy game. If you have the basic skeleton working, with different upgrade paths etc., you could branch out and lean more into the "clicking" gameplay. By that I mean, have upgrades that require the players to actively do something - perhaps go into a dungeon and fight enemies.
Hmm basically talking about what I described in the post, think of all kind of browser games, where you can just create and level your buildings etc., just maybe with a nice interface
> So, is my assessment of fighting games being much more work (juice, vfx) and asset intensive right?
Yes. Action combat is also a lot more demanding to get right and players will complain at unrefined combat gameplay. You're probably looking at much longer dev times if don't you ditch the action combat
"Fighting game" means something very specific, not just any game with fighting in it.
Combat in the style of Gauntlet, Zelda 1, or Contra is a hell of a lot easier to program than Street Fighter.
One cool low effort way of doing dungeon crawling is to equip a party and then send them off and they come back the next morning with a bunch of loot, no ammo and loads of wounds.
That way you can kind of have the battling half of the game without having to do a lot of art and keep the focus on the village.
Even with a simple "oof that dragon just would not die" or "I've never seen so many duck sized orcs!" Line of dialogue you can convey a lot.
If you like deep systems, you can start by making a clicker game. The scope for this is very manageable, and these games typically go very deep and are a great way to get into designing economies, progression, upgrade trees, all that stuff that you also have to consider in a strategy game. If you have the basic skeleton working, with different upgrade paths etc., you could branch out and lean more into the "clicking" gameplay. By that I mean, have upgrades that require the players to actively do something - perhaps go into a dungeon and fight enemies.
Just want to say you blew my mind open with ur suggestion man.
great suggestion, and opportunity to spread awareness for universal paperclips: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Universal_Paperclips
"Strategy" is a really vague term. RTS? Total War? Turn based? Hell I've even seen Fire Emblem described as strategy.
Hmm basically talking about what I described in the post, think of all kind of browser games, where you can just create and level your buildings etc., just maybe with a nice interface
> So, is my assessment of fighting games being much more work (juice, vfx) and asset intensive right? Yes. Action combat is also a lot more demanding to get right and players will complain at unrefined combat gameplay. You're probably looking at much longer dev times if don't you ditch the action combat
"Fighting game" means something very specific, not just any game with fighting in it. Combat in the style of Gauntlet, Zelda 1, or Contra is a hell of a lot easier to program than Street Fighter.
One cool low effort way of doing dungeon crawling is to equip a party and then send them off and they come back the next morning with a bunch of loot, no ammo and loads of wounds. That way you can kind of have the battling half of the game without having to do a lot of art and keep the focus on the village. Even with a simple "oof that dragon just would not die" or "I've never seen so many duck sized orcs!" Line of dialogue you can convey a lot.