Just to tune in....

Your project does sound rather large in scope. When you factor in all you want to put in there, you get clearly into AAA territory.

1) FPS Perspective: this is going to increase your needed art budget a lot. As soon as the camera has to move nearer to objects (as opposed to staying rather far away like in an RTS-like perspective), you will need higher resolution textures and more detailed assets, as well as a better LOD system.

Not saying it isn't possible for a small Indie game feature an FPS Perspective, or that lower quality assets HAVE to look crap when the camera is close. Just saying it will increase the arts budget, thats all.

2) Mixing art styles: as said before, this will likely increase your art budget a lot... ESPECIALLY when you want to integrate these styles into a full 3D FPS Perspective. Non-Photorealistic 3D assets can save you A TON of money, for example when doing human characters. They can also cost you more for environment props that can easely be scanned or at least have their Textures generated from photo references versus hand sculpted and painted.

But some of the styles you listed do not mesh 1-1 with current 3D technology, you would have to do some shader magic as well as get a very good animator to make them look the way you intend them to look. Again, will drive up your cost.

3) Networking: Cost factor #1 besides art nowadays (and marketing, if you include that)... It is already expensive to deisgn and maintain networking layers for game types that are pretty forgiving for control lag and "correction warping"... fast paced first person shooters are NOT among these games. Designing a networked shooter is quite a feat, especially one that satisfies the hardcore twitch shooter fans.

Again, driving up cost.

4) RPG Elements: while not on the same level as the other things, this is also a cost factor. RPG Progression elements result in 1000s of combinations that need to be balanced and tested, leading to a combinatorial explosion in the amount of game design and testing that goes into it... programming such elements might not be that hard, making sure everything works as intended will take A LOT of time.

You guessed it, driving up cost.

Then, I am not quite sure your game idea really has been thought through enough.

1) Horror games for kids, Really? Or do you mean a horror game for teens (which is quite a difference)? What is the target group? Most teenie slasher movies actually market to the 16+ age group because of violence and all. Is your intended age group below that (in which case I would cut blood and vomit instead of trying to cover it up, just like most fighting games do nowadays)?

Might be an additional point, but fits in here nicely: Ultrahardcore Difficulty for kids, really? While I have seen some kids baning their heads against virtual walls for hours on end, most of them would fling the controller through the room and throw a hissy fit after their third try, and might never come back to your game. That is certainly not what you want.

There seems to be a huge crowd that likes hard games, but I would say again age 16+ (or maybe rather guys in their tweens ort thirties).

2) Mishmash of styles... while I find the idea to make monsters, or things like a characters imaginary friends, ghosts, whatever, look slightly different and out of place, I am not sure that you are not going WAY to far with your idea. This will most probably not look cool and scary, but just weird, IMO.

3) RPG Shooter and Horror.... Shooter and Horror games have started to deviate quite a lot from each other in the last few years as the most powerful element in scaring people is taking away conrol from players, especially their ability to fight back. Shooters still are all about giving players control and cool weapons to blast hordes of enemies to heavens.

RPG Elements will just work against the horror element in this case. RPG Elements are in most cases a positive statement: your character WILL get better over time. You WILL get better tools to battle enemies in the future. If you return to an old part of the game with your overleveled character, you stomp old enemies in the ground like ants... so most of your already visited areas got just robbed of their scariest elements, the monsters. And once a player has seen that more than once, the illusion of horror is broken. Just level enough, and you can enter a new area without having to worry.

Not saying it cannot work. But you need to be VERY careful taking from your inspirations what adds to the expierience while leaving out what will distract from it or destroy it. For example the RPG elements shouldn't have any influence on your powerlevel against the games enemies, as you will loose a lot of the horror impact that way.

Make sure the shooter elements do not interfere with the horror elements (for example by making ammo very rare, and forcing players to make deliberate choices which monsters to attack).

4) Graphics from 2006, in 2023: okay, I was a little mean when pulling together these two statements of yours into one single timeline. But really, going for photorealistic graphics when you know you cannot afford it is not going to work.

Instead you should either go with a proven, Indie friendly art style, or try to come up with your own simplified style you KNOW you can afford (which is why prototypes are so important, and not only gameplay ones).

Stylized graphics from 2006 can still look pretty up to date today... there is a reason why all this Pixel art 8bit nonsense took off so much after all.

Photorealistic graphics from 2006 just looks dated today. And imagine how it will look in 2023.

Lastly, it is my personal opinion that you have to be very careful when taking AAA games as references. Take small parts of it as inspiration, not the whole thing.

Do you think the way the RPG System as implemented in Destiny is slick? Take it, break it down, see what could work in your horror setting, and ONLY take the parts that fit.

You like the insane difficulty curve in Dark Souls? Craft your own, taking hints from the Souls games, and make sure it fits YOUR game instead of trying to create "Dark Souls, but with Ponies!"

All of what you said makes sense with one glaringly....not-well-researched statement:

Horror media aimed at young teens and older children (which SickMindz is aimed at, sorry if I didn't elaborate) exists in other mediums. Films, books, movies, so why not games? an aesthetic that looks like something out of an especially demented Tim Burton flick or a slightly more visceral Goosebumps novel was what I was going for anyways, so why can't this happen?

Plus, if I didn't elaborate earlier, this will not be my first game (far from it). taking the resources you explained into account, it would take a large company to realize SickMindz, so I'll have created one before even thinking about producing this.

as for why you never see a game that fits the Indie criteria from me, it's probably because I'm already working on one I can do by myself using RPG Maker and haven't run into any problems yet.

Any more poorly researched statements about the game will be remedied once I post a link to the GDD. I also had thought much of the project through for months on end, so saying it has not been though through is tantamount to outright trolling.

All of what you said makes sense with one glaringly....not-well-researched statement:

Horror media aimed at young teens and older children (which SickMindz is aimed at, sorry if I didn't elaborate) exists in other mediums. Films, books, movies, so why not games? an aesthetic that looks like something out of an especially demented Tim Burton flick or a slightly more visceral Goosebumps novel was what I was going for anyways, so why can't this happen?

Plus, if I didn't elaborate earlier, this will not be my first game (far from it). taking the resources you explained into account, it would take a large company to realize SickMindz, so I'll have created one before even thinking about producing this.

as for why you never see a game that fits the Indie criteria from me, it's probably because I'm already working on one I can do by myself using RPG Maker and haven't run into any problems yet.

Any more poorly researched statements about the game will be remedied once I post a link to the GDD. I also had thought much of the project through for months on end, so saying it has not been though through is tantamount to outright trolling.

Okay, look... if we are talking about Tim Burton style weird comedy as opposed to true horror teen flicks like scream, yeah sure, you might find an audience even in the 12+ age group, given that their parents are not opposed to it (there are enough that think tim burtons movies are not suited for children really... and while I find them quite charming and cute, I can to some extent understand where these parents are coming from).

If you are talking about Horror, most people will think about Slasher movies and Horror games.... not Tim Burton-like dark romances and comedies. I have NEVER seen a Tim Burton movie being referenced as "Horror Movie" BECAUSE he targets a younger audience, and BECAUSE they are not that scary to begin with.

So make sure you make the right references or put the right tags on it so that people understand your intended genre/style better.

It is a fact though that slasher movies with blood and gore, and downright scary movies, are too much for most kids below 12 to stomach, and while the 12+ age group might feel really grown up for watching something they probably shouldn't, parents and rating agencies will see things differently (understandably).

Is it sane to let 12+ kids watch action movies where people kick each others butt and shot each other, even if there is no blood? Is it MORE sane than letting them see a slasher movie? I don't know, and I will not try to be the judge of this.

But look up similar movies and games age group ratings, and try to gauge where your game would stand. If you don't believe me, believe the ratings other got for their games.

I think you didn't get my hidden comment on "not my first game", but that is okay, I'll try to be clearer now:

Planning a game you want to make in 8 years is quite a stretch. Does it makes sense? Probably not. You don't know what the game scene looks like in 5, let alone in 8 years. Best thing to do is leave the game as planned until now, shelf the idea for now, and move on to more productive things (like the game you are creating now in Game Maker).

It is quite pointless talking about a game that you plan to make in 2023 in 2015. No one on this forum has a crystal ball that can tell him if an idea that sounds like a good one today is going to be a good one in 2023. Or if one sounding like a bad one in 2015 is going to be a good one in 2023 for that matter.... come back with your idea in 2020, then we might be able to guess a little better what could be all the rage in 2023 or 2025 (a likely release date if you start development in 2023).

Now, as to your "graphics from 2006" comment. I guess you meant "not AAA graphics" by that, but the combination with 2023 or 2025 as possible production or release dates made it quite hilarious.

Then, what exactly is the "Indie criteria" for you? If you mean "trashy low quality 2D mobile games", then I have to dissapoint you... there are most probably more AAA Studios doing that by now than Indie Studios. Konami just told the world they would concentrate on mobile... and they most probably don't intend to make MEtal Gear Solid VI for your cellphone

"Indie" is a useless naming that has gotten a bad name in the last few years because of all the inexpierienced people entering the market with low quality games hoping to striking it rich in an oversaturated market.

But the there are just as many Indies creating good looking 3D games, cutting corners where it doesn't hurt the graphics (too) much. There are many weird and wonderful creations by Indies that stomp AAA games into the ground when it comes to gameplay, and are almost able to match their production value.

"But if they can do that, so can I!"... yes and no. Most of the Indies that create some of the bigger Indie titles are a) bigger Teams of 10, maybe 15 people, maybe more, and b) Industry veterans with A LOT of expierience producing games in AAA Studios that left them to make their own thing.

If you have neither the Team size nor the expierience, you need to downsize your scope accordingly if you want to ever finish what you are working on.

Well, your GDD alone will not do much to sway my opinion (or that of most other forum members here I guess). Ideas are cheap, and while it may take time and dedication to fill 200 pages with your ideas, it is the execution that counts.

You might have the best ideas of the world, if you cannot create a working and good game out of it in a lifetime, they are not worth anything. While you can make a great game out of a bad idea if you are a very good game developer.

Look, I understand getting your Idea shot down by someone else, even if it is just random strangers on an internet forum, hurts.

But it is an important step in game development. You WILL need to put your idea in front of strangers at some point, and you will get critique, good and bad hopefully. If most of the comments are negative, be thankfull you got them before you invested time and money into actually producing the game.

From my own expierience, there is NO idea that isn't salvageable, if you can accept to repsonse you get, analyze it and your idea, and start adjusting your idea. I am pretty sure among the bad (in my or someone elses eyes), there is just as much good in your idea/GDD that is worth implementing or can be implemented even with limited resources.

If my or someone elses comment sounds harsh, don't take it personal. Nobody is attacking you directly. It might be that there are just too many inexpierienced beginners coming in this forum with grand ideas but no idea about just how much work they are talking about, or that claim to know game development and what players want better than anybody else... given that there are some longtime industry veterans on this board (no counting myself, more of a longtime hobbyist), that is quite a bold statement.

Now, the best you can do to NOT look like one of these "idea guys", is to just accept the opinion of others on this forum as what it is. An offer of a different perspective to you... nobody can force you to listen to them, or tell you what to do. But you could maybe get some very helpful information out of it, if you listen to people instead of just negging them for having a different opinion, and present your points in a civilized, mature manner. Maybe also think about what you want to gain from posting in an online forum before you post (did you REALLY wanted opinions?)...

You can only win, nothing to loose really.

Two last things:

Before calling other peoples statements "badly researched", maybe back up your statement with actual, solid proof. Is there any study that proves Hardcore difficulty horror games for kids is an actual market? Or are you just seeing a niche nobody has filled yet (in which case it is very likely that there is a reason nobody has tried this yet)?

Then, building up an AAA Game Studio from nothing is NOT a solid plan for the future. I admire your dedication, and by all means, try it (I might too).

Just be aware that you enter a global casino, each game you produce is more or less like seeing if the one armed bandit will churn out some money. While the big boys slug it out at the poker table you cannot sit at as a small Indie.

If you are REALLY hellbent on building up a studio and creating a big Indie or even AAA Game, you better be creating the wealth needed elsewhere. Hoping for a Minecraft like runeaway hit is NOT a sane business plan. And while you might build up a solid Indie business with smaller successes over time, most probably your studio will grow MUCH slower than you think, even if you are one of the few successes.

So don't plan 8 years ahead for an AAA future that might never come. Invest your brain power into the smaller scale games you CAN make today, release them, and concentrate on growing THAT business.

Everything else is just wishful thinking.

I actually see no reason to doubt how sound the statements regarding business and actually making the game are.

But what irks me the most is when somebody sees "kids" and "horror" in the same sentence and doesn't think of actual examples of youth-appropriate horror such as Goosebumps (Or anything from R.L. Stine) and Tim Burton; instead they just say "horror isn't appropriate for kids" regardless of the existence of two prolific creators who do almost nothing but produce horror media aimed towards the 12-14 (or younger) demographic(s).

That being said, do you have any suggestions on what kind of adjustments must be made then?

I actually see no reason to doubt how sound the statements regarding business and actually making the game are.

But what irks me the most is when somebody sees "kids" and "horror" in the same sentence and doesn't think of actual examples of youth-appropriate horror such as Goosebumps (Or anything from R.L. Stine) and Tim Burton; instead they just say "horror isn't appropriate for kids" regardless of the existence of two prolific creators who do almost nothing but produce horror media aimed towards the 12-14 (or younger) demographic(s).

That being said, do you have any suggestions on what kind of adjustments must be made then?

Well, I think this is more a problem of NAMING... I wouldn't call something "horror" that, for all the horror related scenery and characters used, is not meant to scare people... it might make kids shudder at times, but at the same time tries to not scare them too much.

Of course I see how you could call it "horror" movie or game if the game is about mummies or ghosts, but to me that is misleading, and might mislead the parents of your intended audience, IF you aim at an audience below the 16+ age group.

I do think dark romance and dark comedy can be appropriate for kids... after all, kids LOVE halloween and stuff like that. As long as scary things are not made in a way that tries to scare the audience at full effect, which is what horror movies normally do. That is why I am relucant to call it horror movie/game, when all you want to do is use scary characters and scenery to tell a age appropriate story which is not about cheap scares at all.

When it comes to recommendations, I would do the following:

- If you target age groups below 16+, I would drop the horror monicker. Just call it a shooter. If you want to go for max acceptance, also drop the shooter naming. Call it an adventure... ideally your shooter is about more than just shooting things, or scaring people, especially when targetted at young kids. Concentrate your marketing message on that instead of the horror, or maybe even the shooter monicker.

- Stop thinking in decades. Start thinking in years. Concentrate on what you can do today. Don't plan for a future that is uncertain.

-> You want to build a studio. Great. That starts with creating games and releasing them. Create games, and FINISH them! Release them. See what you can do NOW.

IF you think your Idea is sound, and needs to be made a reality, either scale it down so you can finish it in years with your current resources, see if you can get funding for it (highly unlikely without a track record), or shelf it for now. Don't throw it away... but don't waste more time on it for now.

To put it like that: the more energy you invest into a project not viable today, the less energy you can invest into getting into a position where this project becomes viable in the future.

- Rethink if your planned difficulty curve matches the target audience. Make sure you don't frustrate kids. Not many kids have the tolerance for frustration that some older hardcore gamers have.

The younger the target age group, the more you have to be careful here. Doesn't mean your game HAS to be easy, but it NEEDS to make things not frustrating for the players.

- I would go back to the drawing board when it comes to the planned graphics. The following things might need to be considered, at least if you want to scale down:

-> First Person Perspective: is it necessary? You can reduce the amount of details needed in models and textures considerably by going third person, and you might drop it even lower by going isometric (or pseudo-isometric if we are talking about a 3D Game).

-> Photorealistic Graphics: Necessary? There is a whole bunch of stylized 3D art styles that can save you a lot of time and money on producing models. Why not take a hint from classic tim burton animation movies? If there is one thing kids don't care about, it is if the graphics are photorealistic or stylized. Hence why cartoons are such a success among them.

-> Different art styles: How far do you want to take it? While the general idea is sound and might work brilliantly, taking it to far will lessen the "horror" impact (if you don't know it, read up about the "Uncanny Valley"... the reason why this is such a problem is BECAUSE the divergence from the real thing is rather small!). Also, the more extrem the divergence in art styles, the more expensive and hard to do it will become.