How did I discover I'm building a tycoon-roguelite game?

In the previous devlog, I described how I validated the theme (trading in the Old West) and the main aspects of the game: transporting goods between towns, the risk of not having enough food, the difference in food prices between towns, and the fact that player's actions create a reputation, which in turn makes NPCs more favorable of offering and agreeing to better commercial therm for transports.

The first version of the game was a text-based adventure. Each time the player was presented with a text description of the situation and a few choices.

It was clear to me that the game should move to some kind of map, but wasn't clear how.

First attempts

At first, I create a simple map with 2 towns and the player could move between them. When the player was in a  town, a simple UI with basic menus allowed the player to accept delivery deals, deliver them to the destination, and when appropriate collect payment after the deal was done.

When the player was moving between towns, the game time would advance and the player would consume food. If the food level reached zero, the player would lose.

It was clear to me that this experience is not good. Going out of a town without knowing if you have enough food is too risky and losing because it is very frustrating. It's not clear how could you have done it differently?

Rethinking game UX and a new notion of the game genre

The first Idea I had was not to allow the player to travel to another town if they don't have enough food. This turned the game made of only discrete actions: buying food, working with delivery deals, and choosing the next destination.

This new notion felt similar to roguelike and roguelite games. In many of these games, especially in roguelikes, the player makes a move and then the game responds. In between actions, the player can take as much time as they need to carefully consider the next move.

Another important notion of roguelike and roguelite games is the high uncertainty that results in taking risks. It's not clear what the potions do, is this armor cursed or blessed, what is the secret power of this new monster? What makes this notion even stronger is the strong usage of the player's point of view: you know only what's happening next to you, and you need to travel through the game to know what's happening elsewhere, including in places you have already been to.

I came to realize that I was looking for a similar experience in my game. When I started thinking of this game (and on The Gang & Co. Trading Company) I knew I wanted to create a game that creates an experience close to real-world business management. I felt that in many business sim games, or other strategy games, things are too much clear and explicit. You know which technologies and improvements you can create, you gave stats and reports that any CEO would envy, and the game explicitly tells you what you are missing.

I strongly felt this when playing Rim World. Even though Rim World is not a classic business game, it has a lot in common in its emphasis on colony management and internal processes. Soon while playing, I notices how much the game reveals what is missing and what can be done: this colonist is not happy because they share a room with others, or is feeling bad because they ate filthy food, and so on. Each of these clearly portrays the things the player should take care of or improve. This does not make it simple, but it was not what I was looking for.

Remembering some good business games

As a child, I spent a lot of time playing business simulation games and strategy games: SimCity, Theme Park, Theme Hospital, Civilization, Heros of Might and Magic, and so on. Two of my favorite games were Railroad Tycoon, and Railroad Tycoon II. Thinking back on these two games, I came to realize some interesting facts: not like the other games mentioned, the Railroad Tycoon games were based on a simple game loop and concept: as the player transfer more goods and passengers between cities they evolve. Their evolution gives rise to more demand for transportation. Demand increases directly by more demand in stations, and by the appearance of new industries. The best the player can do is leverage these industries by buying them and having vertical control over the supply chain.

To me, there was another attractive aspect of Railroad Tycoon, as well as other strategy games: building your own thing. In Railroad Tycoon there was a feature that replayed your expansion on the map. I could watch these again and again. When playing SimCity, I remembered the history of each new area I developed. 

Understanding I'm building a Tycoon-Roguelite

Eventually, I came to understand that I'm creating a Tycoon-Roguelite:

• The player builds an operating business system - like in tycoon games.
• This system is your design - like in tycoon games.
• The basic principle that allows advancement is like in Railroad Tycoon: transporting goods increase the opportunity to transfer more and with better margins.
• But you can lose everything if they are making a too big mistake - like in roguelite/roguelike.
• Progress makes the player more resilient to mistakes - like in both genres (and many others).
• Nothing happens until the player makes a move - like in roguelite/roguelike.
• Unlike tycoon games where you can mostly lose parts of the system due to mistakes, here your system is you. When you lose the system breaks,  - like in roguelite/roguelike.
• Last, information is very dependent on your location. You know only what is around you, like in roguelike/roguelite, as opposed to the knowing all view of many strategy and tycoon games.

Please play the game and let me know what you think!