|
I'd just like to remind everyone that SC2013 looked great in the pre-release streams too. It wasn't until after launch that we realized EA was using a modified version of the game that deliberately hid problems. Not saying that's going on here, but it could be. 
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2015 17:03
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 13, 2024 16:55 |
|
|
xzzy posted:I'd just like to remind everyone that SC2013 looked great in the pre-release streams too. It wasn't until after launch that we realized EA was using a modified version of the game that deliberately hid problems. Not true, there were a ton of red flags during the free demo period before launch. People just didn't want to hear anything negative about the game.
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2015 17:05
|
|
|
Darkrenown posted:I don't think there's another Cities steam, but there's various other Paradox games being streamed today and tomorrow (It's PDXcon2015 here at the moment). The streams should also be up on youtube/twitch archives later for people who missed them. Don't they hit the twitch archive as soon as the stream ends? I found it here: http://www.twitch.tv/paradoxinteractive/b/623748169 Cities stuff begins at 1:06:16
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2015 17:11
|
|
|
ToastyPotato posted:Not true, there were a ton of red flags during the free demo period before launch. People just didn't want to hear anything negative about the game. Were there? I was in both betas and had a lot of fun with it, the key was that they limited the time to end the demo before you could get the massive inevitable gridlock.
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2015 17:13
|
|
|
Goetta posted:I pre-ordered the game because I am a huge rear end in a top hat and everything that is wrong with the Gaming Industry As did I, but I used Green Man Gaming wih the 20% off code to get the game for $24.99. I can't believe a budget game is going to be better than Sim City 2013.
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2015 17:18
|
|
|
The demo was altered to conceal the flaws too.. happiness was tweaked so buildings upgraded faster, and the highest density roads were locked. The comically bad agent pathing was apparent but the short time limit prevented anyone from really getting a grasp how broken it was. The signs were definitely there but only obvious to me in hindsight.
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2015 17:19
|
|
|
SC2013 really was a scarring experience, wasn't it?
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2015 17:22
|
|
|
xzzy posted:I'd just like to remind everyone that SC2013 looked great in the pre-release streams too. It wasn't until after launch that we realized EA was using a modified version of the game that deliberately hid problems. Marketing is a very powerful art at manipulating you into buying poo poo. It's very easy to make even "hands on" style videos seem great by carefully avoiding certain features or situations or only giving the video out to paid shills or people who clearly understand how their bread is buttered. Really got to wait for the masses to have their hands on the game, for the picky spergs to tear it apart and find all the flaws (and then see how the devs respond). Also during the simcity 2013 beta I got probated trying to warn people the game was an absolute poo poo show just from the demo. There was a good week or two where the thread was modded as if it was an official EA marketing thread and only positive hype posts were allowed. I think a lot of people who didn't follow the thread over the months got misled by the enforced positivity during that time. It was just post after post of people saying the demo was so great and changed their mind and it proves to all the naysayers it's going to be the best simcity ever. Sewage block in intersection this morning, angry agents all over the block. This city is afraid of me. I have seen its true face. The streets are extended gutters and power lines, and the gutters are full of poop agents, and and when their path-finding finally screws up, all the servers will drown. The accumulated incompetence of their net code will foam up about their waists and all the pre-orderers and EA marketing staff will look up and shout "Save us!"... and I'll whisper "no." Baronjutter fucked around with this message at 17:32 on Feb 12, 2015 |
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2015 17:22
|
|
|
triplexpac posted:Were there? I was in both betas and had a lot of fun with it, the key was that they limited the time to end the demo before you could get the massive inevitable gridlock. There was concern about how locked off the beta seemed to be, and there were quite a few people who said it was because later stuff probably wasn't working. Granted, it was passed off as people being cynical, but it turned out to be 100% true. Also, there was a ton of concern about the size of the cities, and how quickly you could fill up the plot. But in general, the red flags mostly surrounded the fact that the vast majority of the content was completely locked away in the betas. Road types were locked, you couldn't really go past some medium density, you couldn't do any real economy stuff since you couldn't do region stuff, etc. And with how limited the beta was, there was still bugs.
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2015 17:23
|
|
|
KKKlean Energy posted:Don't they hit the twitch archive as soon as the stream ends? I found it here: http://www.twitch.tv/paradoxinteractive/b/623748169 Thanks for this! I remember hearing something about twitch getting rid of archives, but I guess not.
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2015 17:55
|
|
|
Chaotic Flame posted:Thanks for this! I remember hearing something about twitch getting rid of archives, but I guess not. I think the Twitch archives get pruned sooner now, is what they announced.
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2015 18:12
|
|
|
Regarding the name: If you look anywhere outside of the fanbases, such as Youtube comments or Reddit threads, you'll see quite a bit of confusion with the name and it being mixed up with Cities XL.quote:Cities XL was good, but it always felt like you could never have a good pace going. And traffic... dear god, the traffic problems... quote:I don't know how I can possibly trust them after seeing Cities XXL demoed. quote:Wait, didn't XXL just come out? quote:Am I the only one that bought Cities XXL mistaking it for this game? quote:I'm not sure what the point is for releasing this and XXL at basically the same time. They're different development companies right? but who controls the "Cities" genre itself? And is Skylines supposed to be as hardcore or is it supposed to be a kids version? People outside of the fanbase don't know what the gently caress is going on.
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2015 18:19
|
|
|
Counterpoint: Go to the comments on any YouTube video or Reddit thread. People don't know what the gently caress is going on.
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2015 18:24
|
|
|
Is this not made by the same people as all the other Cities games? If not, really poor choice of title
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2015 18:34
|
|
|
No, it's made by Paradox Interactive, the guys that did Cities in Motion. the Cities series is a spin-off of City Life by Monte Cristo, currently releaseing new interactions under another publisher notorious for their poor treatment of the property. Content from Reddit which I found while searching for map size comparisons. Forgive the meme faces but some folks here (if they're anything like me) are probably itching to know:  So the default size is close to that of SC4's smaller maps, and the modded size is close to the size of the default regions that shipped with SC4. I'm ok with this, no mammoth sized regions like the custom SC4 ones, but satisfied. I don't know why they'd arbitrarily limit how far modding can push the region size though- PoizenJam fucked around with this message at 18:43 on Feb 12, 2015 |
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2015 18:40
|
|
|
The Duggler posted:Is this not made by the same people as all the other Cities games? It has no relation to Cities XL what so ever, which is why it was such a bad decision to call it that. Skylines is a spin off of Cities in Motion.
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2015 18:44
|
|
|
I thought this was a racing game where you mod a kicking rad Nissan Skyline and race it in cities around the world.
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2015 18:52
|
|
|
They should have just called it Simulation City and gone full 
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2015 18:57
|
|
|
The Duggler posted:They should have just called it Simulation City and gone full CiMCity The ultimate troll
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2015 19:09
|
|
|
Yeah, the Cities In Motion "brand" isn't really powerful enough that they just had to keep that super well known "cities" prefix. They could have called it absolutely anything. Everyone familiar with cities in motion, a niche transport sim, would be well aware of the connection on their own. Hell they could have retained the brand and called it "Skylines in Motion" or something. Just stay way way away from the "Cities" brand due to XL. There's no changing it now, that ship sailed a long long time ago. I just hope it doesn't hurt their sales too bad (that awful farming/forestry system and the bigoted, disgraceful, soul-shattering lack of trams should be the thing hurting sales!) Baronjutter fucked around with this message at 19:23 on Feb 12, 2015 |
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2015 19:17
|
|
|
^^^ Yeah, the name is a bit of a problem. I mean, it wasn't known the cities XL people were making a new game, especially one due to come out just before C:Sl, until very recently, but still  ToastyPotato posted:Well it isn't part of the normal schedule/budget if they choose it not to be. Those graphs are nice, but have no effect on the statement that was made. Publishers and developers CHOOSE to develop and release things that way. This is evidenced by the fact that day 1 DLC is relatively new. The reason why people complain is because they feel that resources spent on developing bits and pieces of the game that will be ready at launch (or sometimes included on the game disc but locked) might as well be included in the game, or perhaps not made at all since those resources would probably be better spent elsewhere. And not every game is going to have a dev team the size of Mass Effect with multiple groups working on different things. Again, this is a choice, game development wasn't and still isn't always that much of a production. It depends entirely on the game in question. Day1 DLCs, or indeed any DLCs, are fairly new because widespread highspeed internet and especially a large digital market for PC games are all fairly new too. Prior to that you were limited to selling whatever you had on the disk when people bought your game - and that content had to be done a month or two before release to account for final testing and the physical acts of printing and shipping the media. Now you can make stuff outside of the main game's production and still have it available on day 1, but that doesn't mean the extra stuff is torn out and would otherwise have been in the game. Before DLC was a thing you'd fire people when the project was done, or move them onto other projects instead of making DLCs - you wouldn't somehow get more content out of them in the same time for the same cost. I'm not just saying I think this is how game development works, by the way, it's my experience of how it works. Admittedly I work in Paradox dev studio, not CO, but I'd be amazed if they do things very differently. You don't just say "Hey, art team! Make buildings! Keep making buildings until the day before release - on that day we'll grab everything you've made and jam it into the game except for 5 things we'll keep for DLC!". You have a project planned out with a set timeframe and budget based on the standard price of your type of game and how many units you expect to sell, you plan how to allocate it out to design/coding/art/qa etc. Art then has a certain amount of time and money to make X assets including Y buildings which might be made by inhouse artists or bought from freelancers or other studios. The artists aren't idle before or after this, they are working on other aspects of the game, other projects, or aren't part of your company and are off doing something unrelated. And you can't just have your artists working solely on your game making more and more art for the entire development cycle - it costs to employ them and people won't pay twice as much for a game with twice as much art, art time has to be part of your budget. Then, at some point between the game taking shape and it being released you or your publisher's marketing department decides they want some extra stuff made for pre-orderers and give some more money to you or your freelance artists to make, say, 5 extra buildings, but this is extra content made specifically because it's expected to encourage pre-ordering (or non-bonus DLC would be expected to make its cost back on sales) - if it wasn't to be a pre-order bonus it would not have been made. Now of course, I cannot prove this to you so if you choose to disbelieve me I won't argue, but I wanted to present the other side's case. Darkrenown fucked around with this message at 20:02 on Feb 12, 2015 |
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2015 19:55
|
|
|
I think people's issue is that if the content is ready to be released as a day-1 DLC or pre-order bonus, it could have been included in everyone's game. Saying it was ripped out is hyperbole, but I think a lot of people think any content ready at launch should be included at launch. But that's not how marketing works, and pre-order dlc works well enough to continue the practice. People who complain about dlc/expansions that are simply in the works before launch, and are only ready weeks or months after release, those people are crazy.
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2015 20:04
|
|
|
I was talking about this upcoming release with a co-worker at lunch and his first question "oh is it by the guys who make Cities XL?" So yeah really unfortunate name on this title.
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2015 20:05
|
|
|
Count me in as one of the people who was confused by the title before I knew anything about the game. I'm really looking forward to seeing how Skylines turns out though.
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2015 20:12
|
|
|
Darkrenown posted:Yeah, no. Not everything done before release is part of the normal time/$$$ project budget, so it's wrong to say any content made before the game hits the stores has been "ripped out". I'm sure you've seen this image. I'm curious, and maybe you weren't in the industry back then (no offense intended, I don't actually know), but what did companies do with artists and other employees before DLC was possible? Did they shift them on to expansion work that early (seems presumptive to "waste" money on that if the game flops). Did they have them work on promotional materials? Or were they in limbo/fired/whatever? I've read in the days of Atari under Bushnell, employees just did their own thing and pitched ideas or programmed stuff in their spare time, but that was a unique company where LSD was normal.  Darkrenown posted:^^^ Yeah, the name is a bit of a problem. I mean, it wasn't known the cities XL people were making a new game, especially one due to come out just before C:Sl, until very recently, but still Is it too late to rebrand as Skyline Cities?
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2015 20:49
|
|
|
Bel Monte posted:
If they went this route it would probably work better to subtitle it, like 'Skylines: Modern Cities' or something like that. Still I agree using the name 'Cities' is bound to cause confusion.
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2015 20:53
|
|
|
Poizen Jam posted:If they went this route it would probably work better to subtitle it, like 'Skylines: Modern Cities' or something like that. You know you're in for rough waters when the design of your game is similar to a recent turd and the name of your game is similar to another recent turd.
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2015 21:03
|
|
|
Darkrenown posted:^^^ Yeah, the name is a bit of a problem. I mean, it wasn't known the cities XL people were making a new game, especially one due to come out just before C:Sl, until very recently, but still I think this is what people take issue with though. The preorder price is the standard price. $30, so they make no additional money off of a preorder sale. They are giving people more content, day 1, if they prepurchase the game for $30, but if those people wait until day one, they do not get that content for free, they have to pay extra, even though they paid the same $30. The fact that the publisher is willing to devote a separate budget for preorder, day 1 DLC, instead of just extending the main budget and including more content, thereby increasing the value of the game is the problem. That is what people complain about. They are choosing to separately fund preorder day 1 DLC that they will give away for free to people who preorder the game and then sell it for money to everyone else who also paid the same amount for the game but at a later date.
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2015 21:20
|
|
|
Giving someone $5 off on a pre-order is alright because the latecomers just pay full price. But giving someone some $5 DLC on a pre-order while charging full price and making latecomers spend $5 to get it is not, even though they'll have 99% of the same game. I hate pre-order bonuses that aren't just a straight discount, even though it's relatively equal in DLC vs. a price drop. But at least with this title and Paradox's track record we aren't getting hosed over and the Day1 DLC is purely cosmetic. If you want to get angry about pre-orders/DLC Evolved makes a much stronger case for it. Not to say you're wrong or anything, I don't like how they market DLC/pre-orders for almost ANY game.
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2015 21:55
|
|
|
But I said in my earlier post that day1 sales are highly valued - that's why pre-order DLC is paid for and given away to people that pre-order: Everyone wants day1 sales.Bel Monte posted:I'm curious, and maybe you weren't in the industry back then (no offense intended, I don't actually know), but what did companies do with artists and other employees before DLC was possible? Did they shift them on to expansion work that early (seems presumptive to "waste" money on that if the game flops). Did they have them work on promotional materials? Or were they in limbo/fired/whatever? I'm only in my 5th year in games - but when I joined Paradox I think we had 4 projects under way at any one time and had only recently hired a 2nd inhouse artist so they could just rotate between. Both of them were/are purely artists though, no interest in coding or design. Going further back you tended to only have geeks in game development, and technical limitations meant there was less art to be done, so it was probably more common for artists to be multiroled.
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2015 22:00
|
|
|
Oh I am indifferent to the Skylines preorder bonus. It's dumb enough that I don't really care, but it does suck that in a game where one of the criticisms is the lack of building variety, that there will be buildings I don't have at launch because I didn't preorder. But if the game is going to have mod support for custom buildings, it isn't a big deal in the long wrong. But the practice, in general, sucks. Day one sales are more valuable to companies that tend to release poo poo that will have bad word of mouth spreading around it. I doubt companies with well loved games that are massive hits, are going to be mad that their game consistently sold well for weeks instead of front loading the sales on day 1.
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2015 22:00
|
|
|
It's sadly effective though. Our brains are hosed and so easy to manipulate. People know they want a game, they can buy it now and get some extra stuff, or buy it later and NOT get extra stuff? I'll probably buy this game anyways so why not pre-order and get the extra stuff?? Also people have really weird ideas about brand loyalty or "showing support" and think pre-ordering is some pious act of faith, and the faithfull shall be rewarded with day-1 DLC or EXCLUSIVE content. The fear of the game being good and missing the boat on some stupid exclusive poo poo triggers some reptile brain bullshit and makes us mash the purchase button. Budget/time spent on DLC is a good investment because it works. Every single pre-order is proof it works. Pre-orders are great because it's money now vs money later, plus it's sales you get before your game is proven to be a piece of poo poo or not. My big problem with pre-ordering and day-1 dlc/bonus content is that it rewards devs for making lovely games with good marketing. The accountants and marketing people make sure ever dollar of a game's budget be spent in the way that will give the best ROI. If diverting budget from base content to DLC has a better ROI they do that. If spending money on youtube shills and marketing gimmicks gives a better return that spending money on developing the game, they do that. It's a balancing act of course, you can't just spend all the budget on marketing and DLC, there has to be enough of a game there to look good in trailers, for the youtube celebs to squeal about. But sadly you can't just spend the entire budget on making a great game, because the ROI dimishes the more you spend. Sure you could spend your DLC budget and just have them pop out some last min bonus buildings, but are you going to really get more sales because of 5 extra buildings included in a game with hundreds? But, market those buildings exclusive, use them to foster a sense of the faithful being rewarded, or people who wait to buy "missing the boat" and you'll generate far more sales than if you just had that team add more default buildings to the game. What generates more of a buzz and entices people to buy? "editors note: the original figure of 734 unique buildings in the game has been updated to 739" or "EXCLUSIVE PRE-ORDER CONTENT!! Get 6 unique exciting buildings to set your city apart from the rest!" The person who was or wasn't going to buy the game at 734 buildings won't change their mind at 739. But there's a LOT of people on the fence about buying who may not buy after the real reviews are out that could be enticed into buying with the lure or exclusive content. That's just marketing, and anyone in the business has to play the game. Unless of course the tactic stopped working, but pre-ordering just feel so so good.
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2015 22:03
|
|
|
So... This game has exclusive buildings... But is mod friendly. What's to stop Peg/PAENG/BSC/etc. from releasing their own versions of the Arc de Triomph? And you're also very right, Baron. Humans are absolutely terrible at risk assessment in general, and far more swayed by loss aversion.
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2015 22:26
|
|
|
Poizen Jam posted:So... This game has exclusive buildings... But is mod friendly. Nothing, I assume. What a lot of publishers never realize is that there are plenty of people out there (like me) that generally don't care about mods, but feel all weird and gross if they don't have every "official" piece of the game available. I'm pretty sure these dudes have watched that happen with CiM 1 and 2.
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2015 22:33
|
|
|
Poizen Jam posted:What's to stop Peg/PAENG/BSC/etc. from releasing their own versions of the Arc de Triomph? I think there was a quote on the Paradox forums where one of the Skylines devs basically said go hog wild, they had no problem with this. I also think just 'Skylines' would have been a better name.
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2015 22:58
|
|
|
Fintilgin posted:I think there was a quote on the Paradox forums where one of the Skylines devs basically said go hog wild, they had no problem with this. Oh wow, a developer that isn't outright hostile to user created content. This does my heart good.
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2015 23:00
|
|
|
Poizen Jam posted:Oh wow, a developer that isn't outright hostile to user created content. This does my heart good. I think that the hostility to modding usually comes more from the publisher than the dev, and the publisher in this case is Paradox, who are pretty cool dudes and like modders. But yeah, the devs also being mod friendly is definitely a good thing.
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2015 23:20
|
|
|
That's great, but can anyone chime in with an explanation (even an attempt at one) of why they set a hard limit to city sizes even when modded? Edit: I'm pretty happy with 100km^2 as a jump off point for modders- it compares rather well with medium sized SC4 regions... But let's be honest; even the relatively medium sized city I live in (Hamilton, Ontario) has a municipal area of 1100+ km^2. PoizenJam fucked around with this message at 23:34 on Feb 12, 2015 |
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2015 23:25
|
|
|
Poizen Jam posted:That's great, but can anyone chime in with an explanation (even an attempt at one) of why they set a hard limit to city sizes even when modded? Only thing I can think of is that somewhere in there is hard-coded stuff that rely on the actual size and allowing for bigger size would poo poo the code up... But it's just a random guess. -edit- Assuming it's not "our game agents are so powerful that too big a map would make your computer explode right here and now"  .
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2015 23:29
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 13, 2024 16:55 |
|
|
Fintilgin posted:I also think just 'Skylines' would have been a better name. This, purely for the fact that it would stop people getting confused about whether it's a "Cities" game, and if it's related to XXL.
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2015 23:34
|
|
