Watching me taking feedback from YouTube comments https://youtu.be/teB2JSsfMUE Game design

For my upcoming Roguelike Deckbuilder game, i am designing more cards and tactics and therefore i want to know if in rare cases RNG feels like a worthy addition?

Two cards in the deck feature it at the moment.

Example:
"Roll a Dice (D6). If greater or equal 3 all champions gain 6 shield.

Otherwise all champions lose 4 life."

What do you think? Is it a nice addition to not be 100% able to predict the outcme or is it more like loss of control?
Thank you for your opinions!

So horror games are a bit of a unique bunch as mainly based on feeling as well as gameplay. But I notice that horror games cannot not be also scary constantly and need busy work? Like other games is kill monster and get instant dopamine while horror games can't really do that as it's not scary? Thus horror games have a unique design issue?

Like these are the moment-to-moment gameplay that takes up most of the horror game's play time but they all seem so 'not fun'?

There is like 3 approaches:

• A lot of horror games is around normalcy and horror when normalcy is broken, so gameplay is the player doing mundane things as busy work until a scare comes. So like majority of time you risk the player possibly bored until something does happen (the player is like 'oh I hope something bad doesn't happen when I move this box' while hoping for a scare to get dopamine). Also games with no busy work can be really boring like Phasmo matches where waiting for something to happen.
• Then there is busy work in the form of just walking around the level like a walking sim. I guess it's novel as the story is unfolding, but that is more relying on narrative then gameplay to be interesting?
• Then there is horror of navigating an active threat, like you stealth around an enemy or monster. Which is that form of busy work but now the opposite happens as now you risk the player constantly stuck in high tension and eventually get numb to the scare factor?

This is more of a brain storming post as asking you guys. Just trying to get all the ideas out there to help inspire me for possible design / approaches to a horror game.

Like am I even correct with what I wrote, do you have other game examples that are unique or different from what I said, or do you have an entirely different philosophy to this? Do all horror games need a bit more patience from gamers as can't give constant instant gratification?

Basically a game that fulfills the fantasy of basically being a playable nature documentary, that's within the Dinosaur Survival Game genre (Or maybe more accurately subgenre), while attempting to make it fun.

The idea of a game like that has always really appealed to me, I'm just struggling to decide on whether or not it'd actually be fun. I was wondering if any of you had any ideas on how you'd design something like that, and how you'd make it actually fun. Basically a multiplayer survival game that tries to make you feel like you're an animal in a nature documentary, while being both fun and immersive, and connecting you to your animal.

I'm just trying to imagine one, and while I understand that it probably wouldn't be fully possible to the scale I'd ideally want, I'd like to create as full a picture of what one theoretically could actually be, and how you could make one fun.

The definition of Dinosaur Survival Game that I'm using here is a large-scale multiplayer survival game and a system where you all play as predominantly non-Human, often extinct (Though that isn't a necessity), animals in a single ecosystem. With the common tropes of permadeath and growing from a young age to an older one over time.

Edit: Just to be clear you'd be playing as one of the non-Human animals. When I say feels like you're in a nature documentary, I might more accuratly say that you feel like you're an actual animal experiencing life, and you get to experience all the interesting things you might see animals experiencing in a nature documentary.

Goal wise, all I can think that counts is just to have fun trying to survive as your creature in a world that feels real, as a creature that feels like a real creature. I'm sure if I were more knowledgeable about game design I could come up with something more specific than that, but from an outsider's perspective, it's about as much as can be gained from any of the currently existing big Dinosaur Survival Games (I'm unsure if that's bad design, me just not being able to properly identify the goals, or something else).

Edit 2: I'd add to the goals the following: While experiencing said creature's life from beggining to end, and trying to keep them alive to the oldest they can be, to then either just get to be special and old, or to die from old age.

Edit 3: You know what, in retrospect it was probably a bad idea just mentioning a fairly niche subgenre, giving a brief description then hoping that people would understand. If you want to understand the subgenre then I'd reccomend looking up the game The Isle.

It has got a decently sized Youtube community and in my opinion it's the best example of a Dinosaur Survival Game out there, it doesn't add on any unnecessary RPG or MMO features that confuse the subgenre explanation, and while Evrima (A recode that's so drastically different from the original that it might as well be a completely seperate game) is currently pretty buggy, incomplete and unoptimised, and its online community is hugely toxic (Never look at the unnofficial Subreddit (R/TheIsle) if you don't want to see a lot of toxicity and villainization of the Devs by people who (In the opinion of someone who is by no means an expert when it comes to game dev) seem to know absolutely nothing about Game Dev) it is in my opinion the best Dinosaur Survival Game out there. Anyway just look at a Youtube video or two (My personal reccomendations are the Youtube channels Metta and Owltime), and understand that they're cutting out a lot of downtime, and specifically focusing on one aspect of gameplay (Specifically the PVP side, which to be fair is most of it for most Playables) and you'll have a decent enough idea at what I mean.

Edit 4: As someone much more knowledgeable about this sort of thing pointed out to me in the comments, nature documentary might have been the wrong prompt to use. I more mean open world large-scale multiplayer survival game where you play as a non-Human animal in a real seeming ecosystem, that tries to make you feel like you are actually playing as a real life animal, while trying to focus on the interesting part of an animal's life that seem like they might end up in a nature documentary.

I am looking to analyse the support archetype in games. Mostly in games where a player is a dedicated support, medic or healer; so no RTS with healing characters that you can control or for example JRPGs where you can have a healer in your party. I would like to draw some conclusions that are useful for people making games that have this archetype to make it as enjoyable as the most popular pick, the DPS / damage dealer. I am looking for advice, pointers, resources and questions you would want answered.

I am looking to make all my findings public in the form of a video essay or a convention presentation that gets uploaded afterwards.

Hello there! I currently work as a game programmer and I have a bachelor in game development. I wanted to have a sideproject that is easy to pick up and drop and also wanted to deepen my understanding and knowledge of game design. That, paired with the fact that I almost always given the opportunity, play support, healers or medics in games. I've noticed they often are looked down upon, not a lot of people find them enjoyable and often play them only because it is a necessity.

I would like to dive into the why's and how's these thoughts are present for this archetype and what we can learn to make it more enjoyable.

Currently, I've noted the following games down to look into and analyze: dungeons and dragons, Albion Online, League of Legends, Payday 2, Barotrauma, Battlebit, Battlefield, Waven, Apex Legends, Paladins, Marvel Rivals, The Division 2, Team Fortress 2, World of Warcraft and Guildwars 2.
I am looking for games that did it well (like TF2 and Marvel Rivals) and badly (Like most shooters in my opinion)

Thanks in advance!

ok so long story short im making a zelda like and i want the main character to have the power of flight , I was thinking something similar to the doom wings from sonic x shadow generations

but like

how do you get a 2d character to fly

Hi yall I been trying to get this element sorted for the better part of a month now, and I feel like I lack even the vernacular to describe what it lacks. I’ll try to describe the premise; what I’m really hoping for some insight into how to turn the concept into a puzzle/challenge.

The play arena is a large space with lots of hostile enemies, and scattered around are 12-18 primordial elements (haven’t decided the final number but 15 seems sufficient) that fall into 3 categories - there is only 1 of each, the each have a unique stat bonus for acquiring then, and when a player acquires one, they place the element onto a graph. The graph is like a discrete math graph theory graph, that increases in complexity as the game progresses. When the game starts there are only 3 unlinked nodes; as it progresses, and based on player choices, nodes are added to form shapes with edges. Think of a 5-point star where every point and intersection is a node. The maximum number of nodes is always less than the number of elements, so the player has to choose what to exclude.

The kicker here is that the elements take on properties based on what nodes they are linked to on the graph. For instance, a Time node and Energy node might increase the rate of ability cooldowns. Not all combinations create special properties (there would be way too many for me to develop or the player to manage.)

The problem I see in this premise is that it very simply just turns into a task – go find these things and put them in these spots – where the goal is to make it feel more like a puzzle. I also feel like the categories element is being under utilized but I’m not sure how to add it as a constraint where it doesn’t just limit the player’s ability to experiment and build how they want, further exacerbating the issue of becoming a game of “fill in this blank” that is potentially quickly solvable/optimizable.

I had branched out looking for different takes on similar schemes. The closest thing I found was a “magic star” math puzzle, wherein each vertex is a node and all the nodes on an edges need to add up to the same number when their nodes are summed. Basically sudoku with a novel shape.

This kind of thinking from the player is exactly what I’m looking for – “where on this graph do I put this element?” How can I make a system that is solvable? What kind of constraints can I add to give a similar challenge?

Thanks for reading, would appreciate any insight yall could offer.

You are worm living in a small asteroid in space, surrounded by other asteroids of varying sizes and compositions floating by. You have to reach out and attach to other asteroids, then pull them toward you to build your asteroid up, ultimately combining elements to build a habitable planet. The loop is basically identify another asteroid, evaluate it's size/composition, if desirable target and pull it in to add to your planet, if you miss you retract, if it doesn't come in right away you get rehomed, there's some heat/cold survival based on whether you're on the sun side, you burrow to recover which resets the exterior environment.. that's as far as I've got. I realize execution is what matters, but I'd like to gather some feedback on the idea to help inform that execution.

Questions:

• Done?
• Similar games?
• Dumb?
• Who would play it?
• What would make it more appealing?

I’m designing a massively multiplayer game entirely focused on mining. Players can explore the world where different ores spawn randomly based on the biome or cave they’re in.

Since mining is the core gameplay loop, I want to make the system as engaging and skill-based as possible. Currently, it works like this:

-Weak points dynamically appear on the ore (similar to Fortnite and Rust) but vary based on the ore’s rarity. Rarer ores have more challenging weak points, such as ones that constantly move or change position unpredictably.

-When players start mining an ore, a pressure gauge appears which passively decreases over time.

-Hitting weak points increases the gauge, while missing them causes a slight increase but is offset by passive decay. The goal is to fill the ore’s pressure gauge to break it.

I’m looking for ways to refine this system or ideas for alternative mining mechanics that could make a 3D MMO mining game more engaging. Any thoughts on how to improve this or introduce new skill-based elements?

I am finalizing design on the skills, classes, and other player factors for my game. Before I design enemies I am wanting to make sure I know I have the player stats and ranges covered.

With this game there are a lot of different play styles and mechanics that all go into the same stats. Mages using magic power. Fighters using strength. Blacksmiths creating items. Explorers using speed and awareness. So does the following make sense for people who don't know the full mechanics of the game? Like a new player wouldn't be scared off by not understanding or it being too complex.

Strength: Physical power. Fighters use it to determine damage for attacks. Crafters use it to determine % completion for the mini game to create custom gear. Directly increases max health by a % (numbers in testing to be determined.)

Intelligence: Magical Power. Mages use it to determine damage for attacks. Crafters use it to gain new recipes and difficulty of known recipes. Affects max vision % (same as health tbd. Map is pixel grid so higher Int means see enemies and secrets from further)

Stamina: Endurance. All classes use it for their skills. From mages casting fireballs to fighters swinging swords. The player has the same stamina bar regardless of active classes making how you use it a careful choice.

Defense: resistance to physical attacks. Reduces damage taken before any % reduction.

Resist: reduces magical and status effects. Poison air? resist lowers the damage per turn.

HP and speed are determined by class and level. You do not put points into these like the other stats

Hey there, I've only just stumbled across this community in my quest to expand my knowledge on Game Design. (Hopefully this post is acceptable)

The question I've posted is something I am investigating for college, but I've received feedback about the gameplay elements (is my described level progression a gameplay element) and was wondering if anyone has any ideas in general from it.

My pitch is to investigate the effect randomization has on a players enjoyment of a game based on having the same gameplay loop, but creating two different level progressions. (Not even sure if that's the right term)

This is a simple 2D auto-shooter, enemies spawn randomly around the player and move towards them. Player spawns with one weapon, gathers xp orbs from dead enemies and can upgrade/purchase more weapons.

After surviving for x time - they portal out into the next level.

Linear the path is always the same (similar to Super Mario World)

Level A > Level B > Level C e.t.c.

Randomized the path is a choice the player can make (similar to Slay the spire)

Level A > pick one (Level B / Level G / Level R) > pick one(Level B / Level M) e.t.c.

Does the randomization element have any impact of enjoyment/replayability?

In my game I'm trying to figure out how damage should work.

Currently formula is (attack stat × skill damage × [.8-1.2])/defense

So 5×1.1×1=5.5/3=1.83=2 if the attacker has 5 attack and defender has 3 defense.

The problem is you'll always deal 1-5 damage unless you're way over powered compared.

Lv 50 vs lv 50 dealing 2 damage for 100 rounds isn't going to be fun.

I want there to be a random number .8-1.2 times multiplier, so that every attack has a little bit of range on how much damage it deals. As well as attack, defense, and ability %. But i don't know how to make the calculation work both high and low level

Please Guide me regarding the decision for an appropriate game engine to Design a game same or better than legacy of goku 2/buu fury

I wanted to show images for reference to but I am not able to send it here

Your help will let me achieve my childhood dream, as I had only this dream to create a sequel of this game trilogy.

To give some more details, it's like a action RPG game, where you can level up by fighting npcs, and by getting to specific level you unlock other locations door, fight bosses, fly around map, gain equipment and capsules for increasing your strength & save and switch characters at some specific checkpoints

For more reference you can search these following games on Google or YouTube too

Also sorry for my poor english as it's not my native language and sorry if my post has some flaws, I am new to this community, your help will be greatly appreciated, I will be in your debt 🙏

Thank you

Games like Fallout 3 and The Elder Scrolls series all have it.

I'm wondering what purpose does this minigame solve? It seems like it is out of the place, making you pause your main gameplay.

So in marvel rivals, as you may know, dr strange has a 3 minute cooldoen ability that sets up a portal between to locations. What confuses me is how Is it so seamless??? With characters in other games like symmetra, to my knowledge it's just changing positions at the press of a button, and with like magik in rivals itself, it's bot even an actual portal, she just goes invincible as an animation plays while she herself is still moving. But strange? There's no loading, no button press, it's just, walk through, and done. Now, I'm younger and in NO WAY proficient at game design, but portals like that are just so cool to me, and I'd love to know how there insides work.

So I’ve just come fresh off the heels of a 150 hour Skyrim playthrough, loved it. I’ve since been looking into Morrowind as something else to potentially play, but I’ve noticed a bit of disagreement amongst both communities in various YouTube comments about how they tackle skills and leveling.

From what I can gather, from someone who hasn’t played but has only watched, Morrowind gets you choosing skills and attributes right from the get go. Which weapon to specialise in, what skills you are good at and so on. These level up throughout the game but it’s hit chance system heavily pushes you to focus in on one branch of skills rather than spreading yourself thin.

Skyrim however only gives you a minor boost as the extent of what character creation can do to boost your stats. You can pick up a two handed axe and as long as you use it enough you’ll become proficient. On my first playthrough I wasn’t sure what options were available or what I enjoyed, so I picked up a few spells across the different schools, a few different weapon types and tried different playstyles. Until I went with a dagger wielding assassin who uses conjuration to create a small army if im ever detected.

But morrowind seems like you specialise way earlier, before you’ve really got a chance to experiment with things. In comments I see tonnes of people expressing their preference in how defining your strengths and weaknesses from the start is the ‘right way’ to design these games. But I just feel like locking myself into one playstyle from the get go sounds dull.

I’m the type to experiment. I’ll mix up my approach and gear setup depending on what I fancy at the time. Of course at the end of the game you need to focus on one thing, but I like how everything starts off low and you simply get better passively by doing things you like.

What I don’t want to do is choose how I’ll play the game right at the start. I’ll either end up min maxing and not experiencing the game dynamically or I’ll end up using the same weapon with the same approach for 80 hours.

I guess I just prefer the former, but I want to understand why people prefer the latter. I’m open minded to these things and while I’m not necessarily making an rpg like this myself, I’d like to understand it better to see if I can maybe shift my mindset to make Morrowind more enjoyable once I get into it.

So what are the major differences with these two approaches? If you play these games, how does each approach sound to you?

And I mean originally originally. Call of Duty 1, which was my first COD. I never got to play the multiplayer for real, it was a pirated copy that my mom's coworker installed on one of their office PCs, but from what I see online, the way the maps are laid out, the spawns, the ebb and flow of the game, it's all set up for it all to stay squad-based. You're never that far away from your guys at any given time. You're always covering each other, and you can set up a base of fire to pack more of a punch together and beat the enemy back, just like in the campaign. Real tactics. Best of all it seemed to happen organically.

Fast forward to COD4. By no means a bad game, and also one of my formative games. But the spawns, the map design, the flow. Yeah it was more open, which I liked, but it also became more every man for himself. I remember that one meme where this "gamer girl" was expecting voice comms in MW2 to be like "right flank!" and "cover me!" and instead she got people trading slurs and variations of "lol r u rlly a girl?" While I did enjoy the lawlessness of COD VOIP, I missed the immersiveness of the campaigns. COD4 was the beginning of the end of the game naturally funnelling you into a squad-based playstyle. Yeah you can end up with maybe two or three other guys working together to hold a corner of the map, but it lasts for all of a minute until everybody just decides to fuck off and do whatever the hell they want. People bunching up together for more survivability also happened more on PC, from what I've seen. But then again I'm biased.

By Black Ops 1, your best strategy is holing up in some building with a FAL and a claymore and shooting out a couple braps at the poor building-less schmucks running around on the street. This is a big part of what drove me to more hardcore/milsim titles like Red Orchestra and Squad, which are great but they don't quite scratch that "hardcade" itch that the very first CODs catered to.

What part of gamer psychology, or rather devs' perception of gamer psychology, were they trying to appeal to by just making spawns an absolute clusterfuck and have players default into the kill-die-repeat loop, year after year and game after game? I mean yeah theres the quick dopamine hit, and yeah they started marketing more towards dumb teenagers, but wouldnt people like COD1's style of gameplay too? After all people play the campaigns, what's wrong with setting multiplayer up to be more like the campaign? Titanfall did it, and it was good. Made by former COD devs too. I feel like if they just didn't fuck with the way it was, COD would still be as popular as it is today.

https://i.ibb.co/Mk53H86w/110.png

I am currently working on an SCP board/card game. However, I am no graphic designer or 3D modeler myself so for the time being, I just found any cc0 or cc 3.0 arts and combined them together to make this (the character's images are placeholder btw, and the blank area is supposed to be game history and chatroom but they are not done yet). I currently couldn't hire any graphic designer or 3D modeler to make any proper arts (too poor to do that). I would like to set up a patreon for it so I can hire artist or modeler but I am afraid this design may be so dated that couldn't attract anyone to be a patron. So I would like to ask if the design is too dated, or if it is even not good? (also, anyone knows if finding artist or modeler as volunteer is possible? Maybe I could find one for now to help...)

I am making a game with well over 80 classes.

I am wondering if it is good to make some of the classes unlocked through either known or unknown quests.

Examples:

Beast Tamer: known- defeat 10 monsters without dealing damage. There are a few planned ways to do this one. Wolves (easy beginner enemy close to towns) can be beat by tossing meat to an adjacent square without being seen.

Necromancer: unknown- Take lethal damage while having the dark mage class and having negative status. It isn't supposed to be some huge secret. Obvious looking it up will let players know but early on or while small could be fun. Dark mages focus on negative energy and effects so if they increase their max hp (a good number of ways) and would die they unlock a decent upgrade. It basically causes itself but directly aiming for it is a little bit more difficult.

This can also apply to class upgrades too. A tamer could become a good variety of different specializations. Undead, monster, beast, elemental, boss, plant. With a focused tamer they could have benefits for their target. Taming a boss is nearly impossible but a boss specific tamer could do so with the right team, build, and plan.

Coding wise I was thinking bosses have "tame rate: -250" with the actual thing being random number generation between 0-255. So if a tamer rolls absolute max they could, presuming it doesn't take multiple attempts. But a boss specific tamer could have effects that cause "tame rate: +25" for their next attempt. Allowing for stacking up to 3 times. Drastically improving odds.

Summarized: Do people think it would be ok to have hidden classes or goals? It could be fun but given the sheer number of classes I worry it could scare away new or less invested players.

I really want to make my own football game. I've made one before, but it was really crude. I'm starting to do some research, I've bought the table top version of 4th Street Software's Football board game (they have a PC version), and I'm planning on also getting APBA's football game and Strat-O-Matic's football game. Hoping to gather some inspiration and come up with some ideas to complement what I've already got in mind.

Curious if anyone else has tried this or has input into game mechanics.

In a GDD, should I name the developers who will work on the project, or at the very least, include the name of the designers that wrote said GDD?

I am working on a new precision platformer game and need some suggestions.

The mechanics are Jump, Dash, and Air-jump.

All boss fights are pacific, but you can parry bullets or specifics elements until you beat the boss.

We already plan to have some achievements like "beat the level using [x] jumps and [y] dashes"; "beat the level without touching [something] once/twice". But all of those achievements are so obvious... I need some "think outside the box" suggestions.

Elaborate? Bombastic? Simple?
From plated hands to small daggers, to the ever so simple arrow with a smaller piece of art on it. Which one do you think was best?

Hey everyone! We just finished Furotako, a platformer made in 48 hours for Global Game Jam. You play as a bath toy octopus, jumping from bubble to bubble to escape. Everything is using the buoyancy physics of Unreal Engine.

It is a die-and-retry corridor game; you die as soon as you touch the water. There are 8 obstacles :

• standards platforms with different shapes
• bubble: make you jump in air
• sponge: drowns after a small delay
• soap: gliding
• syphon: makes platforms move with flow
• hot steam: flys player up
• baby hand: drops randomly in a zone moving platform or player
• duck: big and patrols with a simple patter

I’d love to get your honest feedback on:
🎮 Movement & controls – Does the jumping feel satisfying?
📏 Difficulty balance – Too easy, too hard, or just right?
🎲 Global fun - We went for super easy gameplay, but how to make it most enjoyable?
Are the variety of mechanics sufficient? Is level design the key here?

🔗 Try it here! https://gamejolt.com/games/Furotako/968596

🔗 short video https://youtube.com/shorts/IdnNCTTZvIg?feature=share

All thoughts are welcome—thanks for taking a look

So i am learning coding while I work on the design for my game. Very new and not my strong suit (more math than language kinda guy). But it seems like using character tags and controls would work well for a lot of the npcs.

Background: Designing pixel top down grid game (want to make way more but starting simple for obvious reasons). World is divided into towns, wilds, open area, and dungeons.

The main niche or gimmick so to speak is classes/jobs. 4 to start but can gain more through gameplay. Max of 5 classes can be used at any 1 time. 2 active (use abilities and bonuses) 3 inactive (gaining xp) and can be switched in any town. Planning on single player design but multiplayer possible.

There are currently over 80 classes and more incoming. New ones have quests usually (defeat 10 beasts without dealing damage gets beast tamer for example).

Tags: Basically what i can tell is having tags such as

Wolf (tag: summoned, ally) would make easy if statements. If summoned creature is released end of round /kill kinda thing.

I'm seeing unique interactions (planned or unplanned) and wondering if i should encourage or prevent them.

For instance. Summoner class summons wolf. Buffs summon with abilities. Releases wolf. Before end of round tamer class tames wolf (getting high level ally with boosted stats). These kind of fun multi player interactions could be very fun but also easily broken.

Should I try to have them exist as I code and design or should I prevent it?

So I'm working on my game and this is basically a distilled problem that I'm really trying to get working and fun.

I'm trying to design a balanced PvP scenario in this situation: Basically one player controls a monster, you could think something like Pokemon with 4 moves they choose between. They have access to just 4 different attacks that their monster automatically will do, and they have about an X amount of seconds to decide a move or it'll be considered a "pass" turn.

The player controlling this monster would be against another player who is playing it more action orriented, like a Dark Souls character. They have dodge, sword swing, and all that jazz.

I'm trying to think of how this design could work out? If I make the monster AI's attacks target perfectly, it'll be cheap by the action player. If their skills are too telegraphed, they'll never get a hit in against the player. This is where I'm struggling with the balance. What happens if the action-based player were to run right past the monster and attack the controlling-monster player directly? Could that create an interesting dynamic?

It's important to note that the player controlling the monster is kind of doing turn-based combat, where a turn is a certain amount of real-world seconds in order to be compatible with the other player that is doing real-time combat.

Is there any examples of a 1v1 pvp game where one player can only control NPCs, and the other is real time action combat?

Would love some ideas!

I currently have an Associates Degree in Liberal Arts and want to transfer to another school this fall to get into something that would allow me to be in game design or game level design for a career. My college downtown has 2 CS degree programs.

The first program is just a BA in Computer Science.

The second program is a BA Integrated Degree in Computer Science and Design with emphasis on human perspective into the design process.

I was wondering which would be better for my situation. I want to design and make games.

The design aspect of the second program is focused on UX/UI design, animation, typography, visual tech, etc

I could do the first regular CS program with a minor in graphic design for more focused classes on animation, digital art, UX/UI design, etc OR I can just get the combined CS and Design degree

What option would be best for me? I am worried people won’t take me seriously with an integrated degree.

I was initially planning to steer away from combat; however, without it, it seems quite limiting in game design for players to make decisions regarding team compositions for an idle creature collection game. Thoughts?

In my preproduction phase of my game, and I want the main character to start off as seeming heroic and kind, only for their true colors to be revealed over the course of the game. I want the player to feel empathetic and feel bad for the victims of the main character, but how do I make the player hate the main character while encouraging them to keep playing the game?

Basically, looking for something that allows you to make links between characters/locations/etc, and the links should update their text if something gets renamed.

So for example, if I have Jenny who lives in London, and her sister is called Amy, if I change Jenny's name to Jessica, the London page should automatically reflect the change and show Jessica instead of Jamie.

Bonus points if it has a spider diagram included.