SimCity 5

So, I better tell my Sims the Duck and Cover method is out, huh?

I wonder if disasters are a bit less sparse this time around - in the other games, I almost never got a disaster that wasn't triggered by me. Only a few fires due to overlooked and quickly fixed fire safety issues, really.

Given what we know of the system, you probably can't save scum a disaster either.

I hope those aren't the only four disasters - the volcano in 4 was always an interesting to landscape the area... the meteor was too, now that I think about it, good thing that's there.

edited 15th Oct '12 4:20:10 PM by KnownUnknown

So do we have any more details? Because this is looking like the last nail in the coffin in serious city builders.

Origin?

Not that I'm surprised.

Its online only.

Its more of an online game than a single player game.

The online only bit is unfortunate, but there's nothing I've seen so far that gives me the impression that it's an actually bad game. In fact, it looks fairly good - worth, for me at least, having to be online constantly. Hardly the last nail in the coffin in City Builders, which have certainly survived worse games.

Other than Sim City, what is coming out?

And this game is extremely dumbed down from Sim City 4. So even if the genre doesn't die, its gonna be Societies style, which is just as bad.

Or even worse, the genre only thrives in Facebook...

I don't mind always-online, I play MMOs and a whole ot of stuff on Steam.

I mind Origin (it disagrees with my router and makes it fall off the internet).

I like MM Os too but I dont want everything to fucking be one.

As I said, I don't mind always-online anyway. Since 95% of the time I'm playing a game, I'm online anyway.

Though I don't see why this would require it. Unless they're doing something like a real money economy of some kind.

DRM.

DRM< and because in theory, the idea is you have to participate with other peoples cities to fully run your city because of the way the economy works.

Is the game actually a Society style city builder, or are you just trying to use hyperbole? Because so far I've seen no information that actually justifies this statement.

edited 6th Dec '12 12:52:28 PM by KnownUnknown

so far its looking very simplified, no free zoning, no farms, no subways, etc.

After looking it up, I beg to differ somewhat.

As for zoning, the reason free zoning is out seems to be because they're making the density system more complex, not simpler - requiring density to be based off of area factors - similar to how in previous games skyscrapers wouldn't be built unless the surrounding infrastructure wasn't perfect. Essentially, you can't just tell the game you want a high density area - you actually have to work for it. Think the Caesar series.

Farms are assumed to be out because they weren't in beta versions, but there's no information about whether or not they're actually out of the game. In any case, as far as I can tell from info like this they're focusing on industry in a major way, and the economy system will likely be more complex, not simpler.

Likewise, subways are assumed to be out because they weren't in beta versions, but there's no information about whether or not they're actually out of the game. Given how integral subways are to systems in general, it seems wiser to think that they will be in the finished product.

Other preordained stuff like automatic road connections and empty space between cities is probably due to being constantly online needing a streamlined city connection system. It's... unfortunate, but necessary.

edited 6th Dec '12 1:14:08 PM by KnownUnknown

There is nothing necessary about the online only garbage.

And I'll say again the online only bit is unfortunate but there's little that gives the impression that it's an actually bad game. It still looks like it's going to be very good, and that to me is worth having to be online constantly. Then again, I have the capability to do so - it's bullshit (and it definitely should have a single player mode), but I can deal with it. I'm definitely sympathetic to those who can't be online constantly, or those who want to play it but don't have internet.

But it's still hardly the last nail in the coffin in City Builders, and being designed to be a more massively multiplayer experience is a poor reason to think so. City Building games a lot more of a niche genre these days, relying on old, preexisting series for new installments, but have still survived worse things.

edited 6th Dec '12 3:08:08 PM by KnownUnknown

I see nothing good about this game.

Sim City 4 looks like it has more (and mods)

NVM.

edited 6th Dec '12 3:10:00 PM by KnownUnknown

Is it so wrong to want a sequel to offer more than its predecessors, not less? Especially after such a time gap between the two.

- No option 100% offline with single player mode.

- Always-on connection to Origin (EA servers).

- Limitations to players in fake single player mode.

- The presence of empty spaces not editable (useless empty spaces) with automatic road connections.

- Absence of terraforming.

- Absence of farms.

- Not being able to save your maps on the hard drive (you will not be able to reload the city to a stage prior to disasters).

- Road connections placed in a fixed and pre-determined location in the map.

- Airport City (the city is only one International Airport, occupying the entire map 2x2km).

- Absence of subway.

- Automatic road connections.

- Player doesn’t have complete control over the zoning by population density (almost automatic zoning).

- Dead space between all the buildings.

- Size of the maps is 2km by 2km (small maps).

- Not being able to control the regional transport.

- Modding restrictions.

edited 6th Dec '12 3:49:13 PM by Thorn14

From a Certain Point of View, redesigning the system to be more of a Massively Multiplayer experience is attempting to offer more than the predecessors. It is an interesting innovation, even though is cuts off players who don't have internet.

It does kind of sound like you want more of the same, not "more."

Most of the stuff on that list that I haven't already explained or analyzed can be attributed to that change, and a bit of that stuff is likely downright intentional - and only "flaws" from a specific point of view. If the intent of the design is to create a game wherein an entire nation is created by players who create individual cities, then much of that stuff has to happen in order for things to be fair.

I suppose it would make more sense to think of this game as the first true MMO City Builder, rather than a single player game that's forcing internet. Again, an interesting innovation - if not one that proves players will revolt against new ideas if they're inconvenient.

edited 6th Dec '12 4:27:03 PM by KnownUnknown

Sim City Social already exists though.

Don't call it Sim City either then.

And I'm sorry, 4 square km maximum is not "from a certain point of view"

central park is almost that size.

edited 6th Dec '12 4:31:30 PM by Thorn14

Is it good? Does it truly create a Sim City experience while allowing players not only to interact with the cities around them, but rely on them on development and actually grow organically as a system of cities and economies via codevelopment? Or is it just an Allegedly Free Game that's more or less a facebook social app, with little depth.

Because the more I look up this game, the more I get the impression that it's attempting to be the former. Whether or not this game is a success or not, it may not be a big step in the single player city builder genre but it'll probably be a good step towards more depth towards MMO experience... something the MMO genre sorely needs.

What about that particular fact makes you think my comment was directed specifically towards it? I wasn't debating whether or not the size was small.

edited 6th Dec '12 4:36:20 PM by KnownUnknown

I wouldn't know. I dont touch social games with a 40 foot pole.

And I don't WANT to rely on other players >_< I just want to play on my laptp or PC and just fucking enjoy building a city at my leisure.

I don't care if there is an online mode, by all means, have it. But don't force it on players.

edited 6th Dec '12 4:36:12 PM by Thorn14

I see nothing wrong with this. Furthermore, I've never had a single problem with Origin or an online-only game, so if those are your chief complaints, well, sounds like you're dropping out of what's shaping up to be a strong city builder over rather minor issues.

"DRM" is such a ridiculous boogie man now that I can't even take it seriously anymore.