The reason for which I wrote this critic is that the OTTD is running far away from people demands, it is not fullifing any of main player’s wishes. I also wrote this critic to motivate the developers to make some huge changes and to enlarge the area of gameplay.
The economics
The cons and proposals:
1. OTTD idea is to create the most prospering transport company as a main idea. Others are to grow up towns. In my opinion all these goals are to easy to achieve. Not because of simple methods of creating transportation network BUT because of LOW and INADEQUATE COSTS of operating. It’s so easy to make profit as to prepare a breakfast in real life. Well.. I don’t know to who this game is addressed, but for me this is a child play (I hope this sound harmfull). The economy should be enriched, split up costs into categories, make some economical in-game tools to analize the costs, so player can choose from the most effective and profitable way/connection. I think, this is a good idea, that could add an educational aspect to the game, let the people learn the logical way of thinking.
2. Somehow related to point 1. I propose to make more statistical tools, that let you choose the optimal routes and distances. Econometrical tools to let you forecast the changes in economy. I think that it can be interesting if this aspect is limited to a proper.
3. THE BREAK EVEN POINT – non linear, graphically illustrated in analysis of economic relations
4. City growth only based on passenger transport (ridiculous), make a growth within the quality of constructions (buildings quality based on amount and kinds of transported goods)
5. Competition is brought down (fetched?) to “who make the highest profit and company value”
The pros:
1. Everything easy as a childplay
Explanation of demands:
Everyone is looking for more than just establishing a transport company and making easy profit and making the “map railed”. Players want to challenge, they want a real economical war, where you can make others bankrupt and stay out of the game. You should allow them to make strategic alliances, to make a bargains against others. But in this state of gameplay don’t think about it – it would be useless and a gameplay killing. I wonder if it will ever make any sense, unless the economics is enriched (here I mean the marketing adaptation to the game – another proposal).
The graphics and construction flexibility
The cons and proposals:
1. Irrational things like: no bridges over diagonal tracks, no diagonal roads, only one kind of steepness of ground. Everything should be more flexible, abilities to build more kinds of permutations of things.
2. Multi-styled towns, random, ungrouped buildings, in every city the same, making the view rather funny than real. I propose making city areas to have different styles.
3. Trains on diagonal tracks look like aircraft while turning (wrong dimensioning)
The pros:
1. Graphics as they are, are – ok – roads are nice, buildings also, seas and other stuff – ok, the only problem are the combinations that makes the game sometimes look like a one big chaos.
Explanation of demands
People would like to see esthetical effects of their efforts, they want to take more control over things they see. It makes the game to have more sense. The game should bee seen not only in a economical perception. In real life the identity of corporation and it’s environment counts. In this meaning, the efforts of play should be perceived as an art of creating something new.
Others proposals I think would be useful to bring more depth to gameplay:
1. Specialization of company – the company that is specialized in one kind of transport should gain bonuses as it’s capital raises towards a specific kind (kind as a word of wide meaning: not only categorized to air/land buses/land trains/ ships, but also within those to for example passangers/coal/others…. this may implement more categories) of transportation, and disadvantages to other kinds, they neglect. This is a very mayor and important proposal – it reflects the concept and of course fact of “learning corporation” in the real world.
2. The second main proposal – the company has always a hierarchy, there should be an ability to hire a managers that would monitor the economy changes and propose what to do, inform player about proposed solutions and let him decide what to do.
3. Everything should be flexible – as flexible as possible, and limited to the point, where further changes would complicate the gameplay too far.
I’ve wrote this because many people I know complain about the boundaries of the gameplay, it may sound as being impossible to do. But I believe in developers references, and ambitions.
Thank you for reading mine (and not only mine) opinion of OTTD.
all other is just for helping to do this task 
