|
When I play, I intentionally slow my rate of expansion. Most of my cities are quite spread out and I only upgrade road densities one at a time. I also try to make them as visually pleasing as possible. Nothing bums me out more than grid-based hell-holes with no personality. I like playing the maps with unique landscapes that force you to make the most of an even smaller amount of space. In old SC games where you could terraform, I'd always flatten everything out just because I could. This game has forced me into some really interesting layouts. As far as producing electronics: go full alloy with the recycling plant and import plastic. A fully upgraded factory will need more alloy than your recycling can provide, so you'll eventually have to import that as well. I have seen prices change at least once, but what caused it is anyone's guess.
|
# ? May 2, 2013 15:56 |
|
|
# ? Mar 28, 2024 12:35 |
|
There is a window there, especially when it was new and there wasnt a huge thread to tell you how unfun the game was going to be, where you really could believe a fun game existed. I think a lot of us got wrapped up in that after the betas (since they only let you play the fun part of the game). Once the game launched and the problems became clear that it was broken at a development level, it struck us immediately that it wasn't us just being new and not knowing the game: it was fundamentally flawed. I'd say there was about 20 hours of buggy gameplay at the beginning before you'd reach that point, but it should only take about 10 hours now and that's only if you're not reading this thread (or anything else on the internet). The game sucks. It ALWAYS sucked but it was harder to tell at first.
|
# ? May 2, 2013 16:07 |
|
I argue there IS fun to be had, but you have to think of it as anything BUT a simcity game. It's a really cool pachinko machine you can customize. It's a fun coin-slotting screensaver that can occasionally interact with other people's coins. Its a relaxing zen-garden/bonsai-tree that you can calmly make small changes to. It is NOT a fun or remotely accurate city building simulator.
|
# ? May 2, 2013 16:21 |
|
RVT posted:You saw the part where I asked my question right? Up until my post the entire thread was meta-complaints, so I wasn't off base in asking. No. I stopped reading when you decided to stick that little passive aggressive remark in. This is the thread for discussion of SimCity. It's ridiculous you would think this isn't the place to ask questions about it.
|
# ? May 2, 2013 16:35 |
|
Has anyone been able to confirm whether getting a refund for SimCity causes your Origin account to be banned in entirety?
|
# ? May 2, 2013 16:37 |
|
RVT posted:You saw the part where I asked my question right? Up until my post the entire thread was meta-complaints, so I wasn't off base in asking. You didn't have to be a whiny baby about it, or imply that there are a bunch of people who would love to talk about all the great things in this game if only they weren't "chased off" by people criticizing it. This (and the previous) thread is pretty much nothing but people complaining about the game because that's the state the game is in. It's not like some tiny minority of players took over in here and are being super hostile to everyone. The whole persecution complex that pops up in random threads on SA is super annoying. If you want to talk about something, talk about it. Don't make a smarmy comment just because a bunch of people chose to talk about something else.
|
# ? May 2, 2013 16:45 |
|
Honestly, despite the brokenness, I would have a shitload of fun with this game still if you could build bigger cities. I must have been extremely lucky, because the only bad bug I ever ran into was the one where Trade Depots would randomly stop exporting (which I believe has actually been fixed). Traffic isn't nearly as hosed as it used to be either. The game is actually well designed in my opinion. Pretty much all the problems are related to the technical implementation of the design. A lot of people have a hard time making the distinction between those two things though.
|
# ? May 2, 2013 18:29 |
|
Magnitogorsk. posted:The game is actually well designed in my opinion. Pretty much all the problems are related to the technical implementation of the design. A lot of people have a hard time making the distinction between those two things though. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ACdu1ho2Ic4
|
# ? May 2, 2013 18:49 |
|
Holy Calamity! posted:Amazon hates Sim City too! I have to admit that one of the not expected consequences of this mess of a game for me is a newly found respect for Amazon. Those guys really seem to be into client retention. And that's very good for consumers.
|
# ? May 2, 2013 19:17 |
|
Like I said, lots of people can't distinguish between those two things. A bug that occurs when taxes are set to 0% before any unhappiness is generated has nothing to do with the game design. Did you know there's a bug in SimCity2K where if you take out a loan and repay it right at the start of the game you make $1 million per year forever? What a shittily designed game!!!
|
# ? May 2, 2013 19:35 |
|
Magnitogorsk. posted:The game is actually well designed in my opinion. Pretty much all the problems are related to the technical implementation of the design. A lot of people have a hard time making the distinction between those two things though. quote:simcity.GetFudgedPopulation = function (a) { quote:kNoRepeatNetworkAlertSeconds : 15, Fudging population numbers and an "always online" mode that can be disabled by commenting out two lines of code: truly, hallmarks of a well-designed game.
|
# ? May 2, 2013 19:39 |
|
Things that aren't game design: - The code that displays the population number - The implementation of a DRM scheme
|
# ? May 2, 2013 19:43 |
Sydney Bottocks posted:Fudging population numbers and an "always online" mode that can be disabled by commenting out two lines of code: truly, hallmarks of a well-designed game. No no no, see that's just implementation, so is the entire decoupling of I from the RCI system.
|
|
# ? May 2, 2013 19:43 |
|
Magnitogorsk. posted:Things that aren't game design: What are some examples of the good design in this game?
|
# ? May 2, 2013 19:45 |
|
voltron lion force posted:What are some examples of the good design in this game? The user interface. Tying building density to road density instead of having to zone it seperately. Modular buildings. Elimination of tedious poo poo like power lines and pipes. City specializations. The infographic overlays. Sharing city resources with neighbors (if it actually worked, and if it was optional so you could play single player if you wanted). Collaborative great works. The overall user experience of building poo poo is actually fun and engaging. Magnitogorsk. fucked around with this message at 19:51 on May 2, 2013 |
# ? May 2, 2013 19:49 |
|
Other than the fact cities don't have resources and if I wanted to play a resource trading game I'd play Civilization, the resources thing is a very cool idea. That's a small thing really, but it's a perfect example, one of many, of what went wrong with this game conceptually. I don't give a poo poo about resources. I just want to build a loving city.
|
# ? May 2, 2013 19:54 |
|
There's no doubt the resource-related specializations need some balancing, but they were one of the most fun parts of the game for me (when it actually worked). If they hadn't hosed everything up so badly I think that's a concept that could have been expanded a lot in expansions/DLC
|
# ? May 2, 2013 20:00 |
|
Sydney Bottocks posted:an "always online" mode that can be disabled by commenting out two lines of code: truly, hallmarks of a well-designed game. The game's poo poo, but changing a line of code that changes the behavior of a program isn't anything revolutionary. There are plenty of other ways to talk about the poor design of the game (underlying game logic and business rules).
|
# ? May 2, 2013 20:01 |
|
This seems to be the best place to ask: Why do people still play SC2K and SC3? I wonder what makes those versions stand out, that some people would prefer them over SC4.
|
# ? May 2, 2013 20:01 |
|
Nostalgia
|
# ? May 2, 2013 20:04 |
|
Doh004 posted:The game's poo poo, but changing a line of code that changes the behavior of a program isn't anything revolutionary. There are plenty of other ways to talk about the poor design of the game (underlying game logic and business rules). Except the idea behind always online is that the game does most of its calculations on the server because our scrub machines can't handle the ~agent system~ but really all it is is a DRM check that the game does, making it a lie.
|
# ? May 2, 2013 20:05 |
|
ExtraNoise posted:Has anyone been able to confirm whether getting a refund for SimCity causes your Origin account to be banned in entirety? I'm guessing no, because if it did we would have seen a ton of complaints about it. I assume because EA doesn't want anymore bad PR on the subject. But... ?
|
# ? May 2, 2013 20:07 |
|
Cubemario posted:This seems to be the best place to ask: Why do people still play SC2K and SC3? I wonder what makes those versions stand out, that some people would prefer them over SC4. SC2k is less complex than 3k and 4k, and has a strong nostalgia factor. 3k doesn't lean on region play as heavily as 4k does, although it's entirely possible to just build a standalone city in either one.
|
# ? May 2, 2013 20:09 |
|
This game is so unpopular that pirates don't want to crack it.
|
# ? May 2, 2013 20:41 |
|
Has anyone cracked D3 yet? Not trying to be snide, just asking.
|
# ? May 2, 2013 20:44 |
|
The "disable two lines of code for offline mode" is, to me, a pretty good example of just how poorly this game was both designed and implemented. The game was pretty clearly designed from the ground up around the "need" for an "always online" mode. EA wanted it for various reasons (DRM, cash shop, and so on). Every subsequent decision about the game's design had to flow from that original decision to have an online mode. So I think that in many ways, the game's design is likely the root of many (if not all) of the various problems that were subsequently discovered (once they got past the initial (launch day servers fiasco", that is). Could all of those problems have been avoided if the game was offline-only, or if the online mode was optional? I would say "no"; it's likely that there were always going to be various things that would have cropped up regardless of whether the game was online or not. But I do think that the "always online" requirement forced the developers to make certain design choices that they might not normally have made if they didn't have to keep a (completely unnecessary) online mode in mind. To be sure, the technical implementation side of things also comes in for its' fair share of criticism. The fact that such a "crucial" feature like "always online" was poorly implemented by just writing a script that says "ping the servers and turn the game off if it doesn't respond after 20 minutes" is pretty indicative that a lot of the people who were coding stuff didn't really know what they were supposed to be doing (or just didn't give a poo poo). Now, whether that's down to the design team not communicating what they wanted properly, or the coding team not understanding what they were being asked to do, is a whole 'nother ball of wax.
|
# ? May 2, 2013 20:45 |
|
ChewyLSB posted:Except the idea behind always online is that the game does most of its calculations on the server because our scrub machines can't handle the ~agent system~ but really all it is is a DRM check that the game does, making it a lie. Hey cool, I agree that EA lied about it. But, it has dick-all to do with if the game is designed well or poorly. Basically, it's stupid to quote "HEY GUYS SOMEONE ON REDDIT CHANGED A LINE OF CODE HOW BAD OF A GAME IS THIS". Sydney Bottocks posted:The "disable two lines of code for offline mode" is, to me, a pretty good example of just how poorly this game was both designed and implemented. No, it's not. It's a single point of implementing that check. Any sort of healthcheck should be in one place so that future development doesn't need to keep repeating the same thing over and over. Now, this is getting into generalizing code design, and I'd really really like to not do that. Doh004 fucked around with this message at 20:48 on May 2, 2013 |
# ? May 2, 2013 20:45 |
|
I think as far as game design issues, the biggest problems were that rather than trying to work within the limitations imposed by the simulation's capabilities, they ended up cutting corners. I think this game would have been a lot more successful as a SimTown 2, rather than a full-fledged SimCity. Fully simulate much fewer individuals, have them actually go to the same place to work and home every time, actually represent the right number of people in the town, etc. Get rid of the power, water, trash agents, they're unnecessary. Instead, they went for something much broader (and as a result, shallower). I actually still have a good amount of fun with the game and screwing around with the simulation, but I think a much narrower scope with much deeper simulation would have been a much better choice. (That's DRM issues, etc aside, anyway) waffle fucked around with this message at 20:53 on May 2, 2013 |
# ? May 2, 2013 20:51 |
|
ChewyLSB posted:Except the idea behind always online is that the game does most of its calculations on the server because our scrub machines can't handle the ~agent system~ but really all it is is a DRM check that the game does, making it a lie. You can "run" the game without those two lines but you can't save or anything.
|
# ? May 2, 2013 20:56 |
|
Beamed posted:The FAQ says the game is fun despite the earlier warnings. So, well: is it? Last I played (before Patch 2.0) it was pretty fun for maybe 3 hours. Once you fill your city to capacity and congestion you are left with a terrible mess of micromanaging the small space and impossible traffic. I did enjoy seeing the city grow, but that made for a game that was ultra repetitive and maybe 3 hours of fun max. The problem is that the game being fun for 3 hours at a time with no promise of further growth becomes terribly UN-fun when you realize that every time you load SimCity you are basically going to have to start a new city from scratch just to get enjoyment out of this game. It's incredibly limited and I guess if you like watching cities grow then maybe you can still have some fun, but if you're looking to do anything more complex like manage an existing city you will find this very tedious. Just my two cents. Obviously lots of people can and will disagree.
|
# ? May 2, 2013 20:58 |
|
Air Julio posted:Has anyone cracked D3 yet? Not trying to be snide, just asking. Nope. The game itself works like an MMO; all monster behavior and item drops are controlled server-side.
|
# ? May 2, 2013 20:59 |
|
Air Julio posted:Has anyone cracked D3 yet? Not trying to be snide, just asking. Unlike SimCity, critical portions of D3 actually do run on the server, so it's impossible to crack. I'm sure people are working on emulating the server though. But like with WoW, I suspect they will be unsuccessful. Sydney Bottocks posted:The "disable two lines of code for offline mode" is, to me, a pretty good example of just how poorly this game was both designed and implemented. An edict came from above that the game has to be always online. The game doesn't actually need to be online, so they added a pinging mechanism to force it. Some idiot left 2 variables (not '2 lines of code' like everyone keeps saying) in a plain text file easily edited by the user that allows you to gently caress up the pinging. It really has nothing whatsoever to do with the design of the game. edit: and I doubt the pinging is completely unnecessary. They probably use it for their lovely save synchronization Magnitogorsk. fucked around with this message at 21:05 on May 2, 2013 |
# ? May 2, 2013 21:00 |
|
What am I supposed to be observing over the course of this video?
|
# ? May 2, 2013 21:19 |
|
OneThousandMonkeys posted:What am I supposed to be observing over the course of this video? The city continues to grow despite not having any commercial or industrial zones.
|
# ? May 2, 2013 21:21 |
|
I still feel that a lot of the game's flaws were very likely rooted in its' design, but on the same token I am neither a game designer or coder, so I won't continue to belabor that point and will defer to those who have more experience with those fields. At the end of the day, regardless whether it was poor design or poor technical implementation or a combination of both, I think we can all agree that the game wasn't what people were led to expect it to be; and that a lot of paying customers (and potential paying customers) were left bitterly disappointed, as a previously highly-anticipated and highly-respected IP was ruthlessly exploited for every ounce of gamer goodwill before being abandoned and left for dead.
|
# ? May 2, 2013 21:22 |
|
OneThousandMonkeys posted:What am I supposed to be observing over the course of this video? All the bad poo poo that happens (crime, germs, fires etc.) is based off a single "unhappiness" variable. There is a grace period at the start of the game where no unhappiness is generated to let you get your city up and running initially. It turns out that the initial generator of unhappiness is taxes, and once happiness is non-zero it becomes a self-perpetuating thing. So if you set your taxes to 0% before ever building anything, the cycle of unhappiness never starts, so no bad poo poo ever happens. Which allows an all-residential city to slowly grow in density until maxed out. To do this you have to have a region that already has a City Hall (to let you set taxes) and you need to gift your city enough money to build all the roads. You'd think the solution would be to make happiness generated in a less retarded way, but they chose instead to just put in a hack where buildings can't gain density until they have water and power Magnitogorsk. fucked around with this message at 21:31 on May 2, 2013 |
# ? May 2, 2013 21:28 |
|
I can't help that despite the lovely traffic and other bugs, I would instantly have "more fun" if they gave me the bigger city sizes I've been wanting since day one. I don't know what sort of terrible bugs that would introduce if the agent system had to pump water or electricity that much further. The electricity pumps just might not be up to it
|
# ? May 2, 2013 21:30 |
|
Cubemario posted:This seems to be the best place to ask: Why do people still play SC2K and SC3? I wonder what makes those versions stand out, that some people would prefer them over SC4. SC4 is leaps and bounds better as a city simulator but has a certain sterility to it. SC3K and SC2K were more lighthearted and gamey, and in many ways more fun to play.
|
# ? May 2, 2013 21:31 |
|
Magnitogorsk. posted:Like I said, lots of people can't distinguish between those two things. A bug that occurs when taxes are set to 0% before any unhappiness is generated has nothing to do with the game design. Did you know there's a bug in SimCity2K where if you take out a loan and repay it right at the start of the game you make $1 million per year forever? What a shittily designed game!!! No, see, the problem isn't that the taxes counter unhappiness forever. The problem is that there is little to no RCI interaction as a result of poorly designed systems. The way the game works:
And that's it. There's no interdependency. I can list the C and I functions, but they are in just as much of a vacuum (save for the occasional C that requires freight to function, but those inevitably fail due to traffic and pathfinding). Not only that, but the original version of the exploit required parks to work, and parks weren't even necessary in the game because Sims lacked happiness mechanics-- so they just made parks give out money, instead. These aren't glitches, they're design flaws. How about the fact that they used agents for everything, including water and power? Electricity physically fails to arrive at destinations in this game because of pathfinding or being intercepted. That's not a glitch. That's a side effect of an awfully designed system, about as much of a glitch as the inability to play Solitaire multiplayer. OneThousandMonkeys posted:What am I supposed to be observing over the course of this video? The city you are watching is literally just a big mass of residential zoning. No utilities. No commercial. No industrial. People move to this suburban hellhole so they can never have running water or get a job, but it's fine because the taxes are at 0%. Magnitogorsk. posted:To do this you have to have a region that already has a City Hall (to let you set taxes) and you need to gift your city enough money to build all the roads. It is also possible without gift money. Check the related videos. Broken Loose fucked around with this message at 21:39 on May 2, 2013 |
# ? May 2, 2013 21:37 |
|
|
# ? Mar 28, 2024 12:35 |
|
Broken Loose posted:The city you are watching is literally just a big mass of residential zoning. No utilities. No commercial. No industrial. People move to this suburban hellhole so they can never have running water or get a job, but it's fine because the taxes are at 0%. Oh, so this is SimCity: Ron Paul Revolution Edition.
|
# ? May 2, 2013 21:40 |