|
Ultimate Mango posted:Can you make a city with a single S shaped road weaving over the whole map? Might be an interesting experiment... As long as you alternate residential and commercial zones, there's no significant traffic, as no one will ever take a u turn or a left before they encounter a happiness sink. But power, water, and poo poo will get lost along the super- long road so you have to distribute your utilities throughout the map. It works really well, which indicates the simulation isn't.
|
#
?
May 10, 2013 18:26
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 8, 2024 18:45 |
|
|
Broken Loose posted:Due to a scripting error, cars will end up blinking out of existence, causing the buildings that spawned them to never get money, so they can't pay taxes, so they end up abandoned, and since the new version requires a waiting period before demolished buildings are rebuilt, completely shutting down your economy a house at a time. Apparently pedestrian-only cities are a sight to behold! This game is loving crazy.
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2013 18:51
|
|
|
Cojawfee posted:It's fun to make an organically shaped city, but it has disadvantages. You can either make a cool looking city that will never amount to much, because there's not really any room, or you can make a grid city and make lots of money. Nonsense, if you specialize properly you can make absurd money with low populations. See: my casino city posted a couple pages back or any number of processor cities. edit2: For that matter, you can have a profitable city using nothing more than a recycle plant and trade depot. Alloy sells for good cash. Get education up to 3 hats, and you'll soon be rolling in more money than you'll know what to do with. Grids are for min/maxing in a way that'll lead to massive problems (and nerd rage)There just isn't enough room to cram hundreds of thousands of sims into 2 square miles. 150k is really the most reasonable max pop in this game. edit: JeffersonClay posted:It works really well, which indicates the simulation isn't. You're not playing a city simulator, you're playing Simcity 2013 
tao of lmao fucked around with this message at 19:13 on May 10, 2013 |
|
#
?
May 10, 2013 18:56
|
|
|
This is still a bad game. Please do not buy it. The patch fixed nothing, just like the other patch didn't fix anything.
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2013 19:17
|
|
|
Wait, patch 3.0? What kind of numbering scheme is that? So the game might not be horrible by iteration 10.0? What??
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2013 19:29
|
|
|
Even Diablo 3 is only... 1.09 or some crap. Yeah I don't get it. Maybe they're mentally editing out the X.X part of the version #? I guess for uninitiated investors, "version 2.0" sounds a lot more hip.
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2013 19:32
|
|
|
I think of it as Version 3.0 of patch X.001 since none of them seem to have done any good.
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2013 19:35
|
|
|
Chances are it's someone saying "Here's patch three, send it out." And some underling seeing 3 and thinking that means Sim City 3.0. Since they don't really even care all that much about the game anyway, no one bothers to correct it.
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2013 19:37
|
|
|
I figured the version naming convention came down to how a label like 2.0 or 3.0 is usually used when a patch changes a large amount of things and expands the game greatly. Like, that's the impression they want to give... except now that its out and is awful it just looks retarded.
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2013 19:38
|
|
|
ttam posted:I think of it as Version 3.0 of patch X.001 since none of them seem to have done any good. Yeah the patch numbering is confounding. However I've noticed an improvement with every patch so far, so I find that statement a bit disingenuous. Who knows, maybe I'm just massively lucky.
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2013 19:40
|
|
|
THe first few patches followed the 1.0x format and even got to 1.9 I think? Then the went with "2.0!!!" to make it seem like a huge change I guess. I think the marketers got to them. Now they are stuck with the dumb X.0 format. Why even have the decimal and the zero after it at this point. It is just patch 3. Not 3.0.
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2013 19:59
|
|
|
Mendrian posted:Even Diablo 3 is only... 1.09 or some crap. AOL used to do this. AOL 2.0, then 2.5, but after that it was all 3.0, 4.0, 9.0 etc.
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2013 19:59
|
|
|
Holy Calamity! posted:Wait, patch 3.0? What kind of numbering scheme is that? So the game might not be horrible by iteration 10.0? What?? The .0 is supposed to be there, for like, nerd cred and stuff.
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2013 20:03
|
|
|
C'monnnn Patch 4.0 that fixes everything wrong with this game just in time for the Mac version to hit my Origin  I actually haven't played this game since maybe 2 weeks after launch so much to my delight I'm starting to forget how crappy it is. I look forward to at least 2 or 3 hours of gameplay on the Mac version before I burn out all over again 
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2013 20:05
|
|
|
They are waiting for patch 4.0 so they can legally call it Sim City 4
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2013 22:59
|
|
|
They aren't planning on multiple successive generations of the same product like warcraft or the sims - they just want a continuous release process. In fact I bet the whole always online deal with server-side scripting rules was probably used to "sell" the devs on the idea since they could basically treat game development as an online service (e.g. a website) where you have a nice and tidy scrum type development model with set regular releases. So simply bumping the major version makes perfect sense (and only using the minor version for critical hotfixes). They are actually keeping to "regular releases" pretty well so far, it is almost certainly just an issue of having to deal with "putting out fires" and potentially upper management deciding to give up on their property and reallocate resources away from whatever plans they had in place to begin with. I really feel that with this game, it is soooo very easy to imagine exactly what is going on in there. There are a bunch of people that know what they are doing and do good work. If they want to keep their sanity they will simply focus on their particular responsibility and try their best not to think about the overall state of the project. This is why so many areas of the game are so incredibly nice and pleasant and polished and others are just "seriously did anyone even look at this??". If you are a competent person working at Maxis the only way you are getting through the day is blinders and lots of willful ignorance (and alcohol, usually). This of course means that cross-team communication is extremely dysfunctional. There is also literally no way to do any sort of over-arching "ownership" or "vision" for the product. Why get emotionally invested in it when you know drat well you can't make it work within the constraints around you? Even someone who means well and may even actually be good at their job is simply going to be forced to deal with direct requirements only. Meanwhile the people who dictate the constraints that make everything unworkable are too far removed from this specific project to really be reasoned with. The always online requirement came from so-and-so from corporate planning, the release date from so-and-so from finance, and you won't even be able to get in the same room as those people for like 2-3 months, and what are you going to do in the mean time? Sit around and complain? No, you have to get started on delivering within the constraints you are given. And in 2-3 months you already have all this code base that assumes always online and a release in X months, so arguing for a change in direction with a temperamental executive is going to be an extremely hard sell and not unlikely to see you replaced with somebody less prone to complaints. Best to just go "sir yes sir, great idea sir", make sure everything is documented and your rear end is covered and try not to think about the fact that you know drat well the QA plans for this sort of project are almost certainly inadequate and the capacity planning team isn't fully aware of what is about to hit them (because coordinating with them isn't your job - and the person whose job it is has no way of knowing what you know). Anywho. The major version numbers are almost certainly not a marketing thing, they are probably just coming from the poor sod doing the post-release project management, and they are simply trying to get settled into a nice and tidy regular release process (for a disastrous project everyone hates which may or may not get you shitcanned no matter what you do).
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2013 01:30
|
|
|
^ This post made me laugh partly because it's likely pretty close to what is going on at EA. Also because it immediately made me think of this:
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2013 03:37
|
|
|
Humans Among Us posted:Meanwhile it turns out you can indeed have some form of fun with the game... This is unsettlingly close to a recurring nightmare I've had since early childhood.
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2013 06:20
|
|
|
LonsomeSon posted:This is unsettlingly close to a recurring nightmare I've had since early childhood.
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2013 08:48
|
|
|
SimCity literally destroyed my life and I did not even buy it.
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2013 08:53
|
|
|
Contrariwise, SimCity died for my sins and I have been absolved. I feel great!
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2013 10:40
|
|
|
Maybe The Sims 4 will come out and be loving amazing, making Sim City Maxis' Jesus, dying for our sins.
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2013 10:45
|
|
|
OLIVIAS WILDE RIDER posted:Maybe The Sims 4 will come out and be loving amazing, making Sim City Maxis' Jesus, dying for our sins. Only after the 16th DLC and $300+ you've spent on it though!
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2013 10:49
|
|
|
Eh, I have no ill will towards The Sims. If only it wasn't an EA product.
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2013 10:54
|
|
|
OLIVIAS WILDE RIDER posted:Eh, I have no ill will towards The Sims. If only it wasn't an EA product. I really, really enjoyed The Sims 1 and 2, and I've always wanted to get The Sims 3, but then I look at its Steam store page and the base game is still 44,99 (4 years after its release) and there's ~520 (!!) worth of additional DLC available sooo ... yeeeah, naaww. And I actually thought I was exaggerating with my $300 comment earlier
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2013 11:35
|
|
|
The Sims 3 DLC has gone on mega-sale on Steam a few times (like 66% off for each thing) but you'd still be paying well over $100 for everything even with those discounts. I think their release was paced so you would buy them for $40 at a time as they were released, with the presumption being that you were constantly playing just that one game and each DLC was answering the hardcore Simmers' wants for more. VV That too. univbee fucked around with this message at 14:49 on May 12, 2013 |
|
#
?
May 12, 2013 14:10
|
|
|
univbee posted:The Sims 3 DLC has gone on mega-sale on Steam a few times (like 66% off for each thing) but you'd still be paying well over $100 for everything even with those discounts. I think their release was paced so you would buy them for $40 at a time as they were released, with the presumption being that you were constantly playing just that one game and each DLC was answering the hardcore Simmers' wants for more. But it's like Train Simulator, where only crazy people buy all of it.
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2013 14:13
|
|
|
OLIVIAS WILDE RIDER posted:Maybe The Sims 4 will come out and be loving amazing, making Sim City Maxis' Jesus, dying for our sins. I would play the gently caress out of sim religion.
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2013 14:29
|
|
|
univbee posted:The Sims 3 DLC has gone on mega-sale on Steam a few times (like 66% off for each thing) but you'd still be paying well over $100 for everything even with those discounts. I think their release was paced so you would buy them for $40 at a time as they were released, with the presumption being that you were constantly playing just that one game and each DLC was answering the hardcore Simmers' wants for more. I know about the sales, I've even considered getting it during one, but as you said, it would still be in excess of 100 bucks to get all of it, and that just seems insane to me. And it's not even like Train Simulator where a single DLC costs like 15 bucks and features a single train or whatever, it seems like most of that Sims 3 DLC is quite substantial, and they're the price of a full game each. As much as I would enjoy that game, I'm most certainly not going to support this system. E: I mean, I have no problem with Horse Armor or TF2 hats which are purely cosmetic; If people feel like wasting money on that, more power to them, but when I have to pay that much money for substantial gameplay elements, it's a bit different. Burning Mustache fucked around with this message at 15:03 on May 12, 2013 |
|
#
?
May 12, 2013 15:00
|
|
|
Third World Reggin posted:I would play the gently caress out of sim religion. The Sims Medieval had sort of a cool look at religion in the Sim world with the different churches of The Watcher. The game itself wasn't great, but it would be neat if they included some descendant religious sects in the new Sims or SimCity.
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2013 17:47
|
|
|
quote:E: I mean, I have no problem with Horse Armor or TF2 hats which are purely cosmetic; If people feel like wasting money on that, more power to them, but when I have to pay that much money for substantial gameplay elements, it's a bit different.
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2013 23:31
|
|
|
Gadzuko posted:I don't follow this reasoning. Cosmetic DLC is ok but if it adds gameplay elements it's unacceptable? The Sims 3 is a 4 year old game. I bought it at some point and never felt like buying an expansion, but the game works out of the box, it's got tons of gameplay even without buying any DLC. The expansions represent 4 years of ongoing development, I don't think it's unreasonable that they charge for the features added after release. It's unacceptable because it feels like a rip-off to charge excessive amounts (in this case, > 500) for something that no other comparable game does (gameplay DLC). These days, I don't usually buy new games at full price, when I pay for a game I wait until it's in the 25-35 range, depending on how much I feel like it's going to be worth playing. Sometimes, I pay more than that if I feel that I'm going to get my money's worth and that I'm going to get a good mileage out of the game, such as in the case of Borderlands 2 where I paid a bit more and paid the Seasons Pass right away, as I'm getting a shitload of content and some good 200 hours of playtime, if not more, out of that. Sometimes I'm ok with spending up to 70-80 on a game after all DLC such as in the case of Mass Effect 2 with all of its content DLC; I also easily invested more than 200 hours into that game and I consider it to be an exceptionally expensive game to make, what with all the voice and animation work that went into it. No game, however, is worth 500, and while you can certainly play The Sims 3 out of the box without any DLC, it seems like an utter rip-off to charge that much when I can get the "complete" experience of other videogames for a 1/10 of that, ongoing content development or not. E: To clarify somewhat; And of course cosmetic DLC is basically a rip-off too, but I wouldn't ever consider that to be essential to get the "full experience" out of a game, whereas with gameplay DLC this is the case, and again, charging me that much money for the "full" game is what feels like a rip-off. I'm fine with cosmetic DLC because I have no urge to buy that and I consider people doing so as throwing additional money at a developer because they feel like supporting them beyond what they initially charged for the game, that's fine to me. However, expecting me to pay ridiculously inflated prices for your full game (when compared to other videogames) I'm personally not ok with. At the end of the day it comes down to how much I feel like paying for a video game, and very roughly speaking, even if your game will entertain me for hundreds of hours and is of exceptional quality and production value, anything above ~100 bucks is going to make me pass your product entirely. Burning Mustache fucked around with this message at 06:34 on May 13, 2013 |
|
#
?
May 13, 2013 06:00
|
|
|
Gameplay expansion DLC is normally perfectly fine in my book, but not so much in the case of The Sims where features present in one game are removed in the sequel and subsequently re-implemented over three or four $20 expansions/DLC packs. Does there really need to be three Pets expansions? To bring the topic back to the game the thread is about though, I do wonder if mod support (i.e. not banning users from Origin for "hacks" like UI changes) is forthcoming or if they will essentially pull the plug on community-created content at roughly the same time the development team's efforts to repair their tangled mess of a codebase cease. I suppose they might go the clever corporate route of putting a "all modifications belong to EA" clause in the EULA somewhere and start selling the community's work as if it was their own (see: recent Cities XL "expansion" that bundled a handful of new buildings with some community patches and called it a day). Cutting the dev team down to a small group that makes its own implementations of popular mods or community add-ons to sell as DLC / include in future patches would make sense from an economical standpoint, and hey, why rely on your own coders when your Most Loyal Fans (tm) can do the work for you? It also makes sense from a PR standpoint. If the community can do better work, you implement it and reap the benefits of a working game. If the community is unable to do better work, you can openly disregard all the complaints from people who say it would be easy to fix certain game issues. Get your game fixed for you and/or have your critics discredited, all with no real effort on your part. The only thing preventing it from happening is the fact that EA would have to swallow its pride enough to say "hey guys, do you think SimCity is missing anything?", which is decidedly unlikely given their current community relations guidelines.
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2013 07:46
|
|
|
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hN_s7q5Dd4E
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2013 18:40
|
|
|
This video is clearly nonsense as there is no DRM on SimCity it's a MMO. Who wants to play a mmo on a local server? Nobody. 
kedo fucked around with this message at 18:47 on May 13, 2013 |
|
#
?
May 13, 2013 18:43
|
|
|
As horrible as all of this sounds, I actually have an urge to try this out just to see if I can overcome the limitations present in the game. Is there no legit way to get involved without also getting origin? Because I'm quite happy with Steam and have no desire to sign up with another digital download service.
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2013 21:49
|
|
|
Don't buy it, at least not yet. You will regret it. Wait until it is out of paid beta, if it goes that long. I think Origin is the only digital download vendor. Either way, you'll still have to go through Origin to play.
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2013 21:51
|
|
|
Buried alive posted:As horrible as all of this sounds, I actually have an urge to try this out just to see if I can overcome the limitations present in the game. Is there no legit way to get involved without also getting origin? Because I'm quite happy with Steam and have no desire to sign up with another digital download service. Nope. It's Origin or nothing.
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2013 21:52
|
|
|
Buried alive posted:As horrible as all of this sounds, I actually have an urge to try this out just to see if I can overcome the limitations present in the game. Is there no legit way to get involved without also getting origin? Because I'm quite happy with Steam and have no desire to sign up with another digital download service. What on earth are you want to 'overcome'? Besides overcoming a smart grasp on your finances?
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2013 21:54
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 8, 2024 18:45 |
|
|
I bought this game and occasionally check here to see if it is fixed, and it has not been. No one is even talking about this anymore, its a shame.
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2013 21:55
|
|
