Reaction is Overwheliming Negative

[pebcak2000 0]

I would have to agree with SIM_Bob 100%. This is basiclly how I feel. I first played Simcity in 1993 on my 386 based PC and have been a simcity addict ever since. I even played Sim Copter allot just to fly around and mess with my SC2K cities. When SC3000 came I was amazed with it and played it regularly until SC4 was released. SC4 with Rush hour is a great game. My biggest complaint with the game is the never fixed memory leak. There was certainly much room left in SC4 to improve on.

This new version of SimCity certainly does not apper to have the feel of the SimCity franchise. It may in fact be an entertaining game but to say that it is a sequel of simcity without any of the aspects of the original series just seems wrong. I am very disappointed in the new direction. I am trying to keep an open mind to see what else develops but to be honest....I have not seen much to get excited about.

The graphics I have seen do not impress me, the idea of a city less than 10,000 people is a let down. The whole energy and city culture aspect also seem way offbase. I could see a city culture having some influcence on the look and feel of a city but it appears to be over the top in this game. I mean come on.....the sky will be dark and red for one city and blue and sunny for another.........YUCK

What made Simcity fun for many was the city building....model aspect of it. Case in point.....my main hobby/pasttime is model railroading. Simcity provided another outlet for that area of creativity I enjoy. With Simcity, I could do things I could never do (or afford) with model railroading. With each version of Simcity the options and enjoyment just kept expanding and becoming more enjoyable. This game should have been a spin off of the Simcity franchise simular to Sim Copter, Sim Tower, etc....

Oh....and for the record I am 35

[offgreen 1]

I played, bought, and seen enough games to know what games will flop or not. While this game is a disgrace to the makers of SC4 and the prior games, the marketing machine will keep it afloat. I would imagine that if I had never played SC and I saw societies I might consider buying it. But I have and I have expectations. Everything I hear now is about dumbing down the series to "appeal" to a broader base and yet I think theres a reason its not called Sim City 5, because it seem more like Sim City 1 in 3d, with handy sims interfaces. Even Sim City 2 was more complex then what we are seeing in terms of gameplay if you think about it, and I have.

I game just looks cheesy and appears to appeal to 8 year-olds. I don't hate the game, I don't hate the sims (I own the sims 2 and few expansions, albeit not installed right now), and if someone where to give me societies for free I might waste the disk space on it (hard drives aren't cheap!). Until then I have better uses for time and money on better games and I actually like.

[schm0 27]

First of all, let me clarify. The reaction I was referring to was that from gaming sites on the 'net, not SimCity forums. Sites like 1up.com, IGN and others allow their members to comment on news, and it is this arena of commentary that I was referring to. To those who would say we don't know enough about the game to start being disappointed, I would disagree. There are plenty of things that have been released to the public about the game, the most detailed of which is contained within the Games For Windows article that was recently released. That being said, I have some follow-up questions:

Is this negative reaction just from a bunch of whiny fans who are disappointed? Or could it be that our gripes are shared by fans of the series that aren't as hardcore?

Can anyone make some historical connections between the reaction to this game as compared to other previous incarnations of a successful franchise? I have seen people compare this reaction to that of Civilization IV... have we seen this phenomenon before? What were the outcomes of that reaction?

[John-SJ 13]

Regarding Civ 4, many or the people who hated the game initially have since adapted, I believe.  There are still some that have a strong distaste for he game, but on the other hand, Firaxis will be releasing its second expansion in about a month.  The reaction to news of this new expansion seems somewhat mixed.  There are a lot of new ideas which many people see as a good thing.  Much of the dislike this time seems to be centered around a few decisions made about content, choice of civs/leaders, that sort of thing.

I don't think the dissent over Civ 4 was as strong or as widespread as that over SC:S though, but like the SimCity franchaise, Civ has a strong and dedicated following.

Hmmm, and maybe the fact of the dedicated following explains much of the dissent?  Possibly.

[NMUSpidey 3,956]

Speaking for myself, I was excited to play Civ4. I played Civ3 (and its expansions) and the extra features and "smarter" AI seemed like a step in the right direction. They even changed what they called "unfun" things like pollution to make it more playable. They made advancements to a game that moved it forward, rather than taking it in new directions. SCS does not seem like it is moving it forward. Many people are pointing out that SimCity has been more of a realistic urban simulator, and that this new version is not meant to be like that. Civilization is a turn-based game in which you play as a leader bent on world domination (or in the newer versions, technological domination or diplomatic prowess). Civ4 advanced this premise. SCS does not. Attempting to speak with a cool head, SCS does seem rather silly what with gingerbread houses and candy cane lightposts. But at the same time, things like floating traffic lights and hover cars can seem in place if you are playing for 300 years. I mean, it would be nice if after playing your city for centuries, to be able to show some sort of technological advancement. New York City is much different today than in 1900 and even 1950.

Even so, SCS does not really appeal to me the way SC4 did. It does not seem like an interesting move forward like Civ4 did. Maybe reviews and more information will change my mind, but I must say that from what I have seen so far, nothing is blowing my proverbial skirt up.

[Micah 16]

No... no... no.... no.... no....

This can't be compared to Civilization 4 at all. That had to do with errors in the game and the video card the game was using. That's why I and many people hated the game at first. Every five minutes: crash. *reloads game* Five minutes later: crash. About a month after the release, they came out with a patch that cured the problem and I've loved it ever since. In fact, I'm still playing it today (literally).

Now when Civ 3 transformed into Civ 4 (turning into 3D), yes, it was different. But again, you can't compare the two. Civilization is all about the game play. Simcity is more about the realism.

[Spinmaster 75]

Originally posted by: schm0 First of all, let me clarify. The reaction I was referring to was that from gaming sites on the 'net, not SimCity forums. Sites like 1up.com, IGN and others allow their members to comment on news, and it is this arena of commentary that I was referring to. To those who would say we don't know enough about the game to start being disappointed, I would disagree. There are plenty of things that have been released to the public about the game, the most detailed of which is contained within the Games For Windows article that was recently released. That being said, I have some follow-up questions:

Is this negative reaction just from a bunch of whiny fans who are disappointed? Or could it be that our gripes are shared by fans of the series that aren't as hardcore?quote>

This is true, but the problem is, even leaving fan sites out of it, still it's almost automatic the negative commentary will prevail. Not necessarily because it'll be a bad game (nevermind our personal opinions for or against), but simply because as others have pointed out, people generally don't speak out passionately for something they like, only what they don't. That, and also consider who is actually watching for info about "the next Sim City." The vast majority of them, even outside ST and other fan-based sites, will be folks who've played at least one of the previous versions and enjoyed it, and are at minimum curious about the new one. Sure, there will be some new folks, and some that played it before but thought it was too complex, but most people paying attention to the news about SC:S are avid fans. Reaction to such a sweeping change to the experience is almost expected to be negative from them. Call that negative reaction whatever you like, educated opinions, paranoid skepticism, childish whining... whatever, it's there and not many will apologize for it. Knowing this already tilts any poll, no matter how informal.

It would be interesting, but such a poll, even informal, to be of any value would have to take this into account i.e. maybe to simply compare "true blue" new players who are for or against it. Maybe even two separate polls... new players vs. old, and see the % for vs. against in each bracket. Almost for sure the old-timers would show a serious negative % vs. the positive, but as compared to the would-be new players? I am curious, actually. That would be more objective, but harder to figure out I suppose. Much less "new" players even looking or commenting either way on it.

(p.s. thank you schm0 for trying to get this thread - your thread - back on topic... it's about trying to glean "what would non-vets say?" ... not about "I like it" vs. "I don't"... we have enough threads on that already . I don't know how possible or practical it would be to do this poll, but... that is what you're trying to discuss, and I hope others can keep it on that discussion as well now.)

[rctshack 182]

Originally posted by: vilbe nothing is more scary than the unknown. and if its not known, its instantly first reaction bad. which is kinda what the SimCity fanbase has done to Societies...quote>

No, the unknown was when we thought no game was being made at all. We all thought they may not make a game for another 4 years after spore. That was the "bad reaction". This game is Known and people dislike it.

I get frustrated with supporters of this game because they instantly think the rest of us want the Sim city games because of it's "Fun Gameplay". But realisticly, like stated many other times around this forum, most Sim city fans like the game because they are interested in Urban Renewal, not fun games. Truthfully I was hoping for no 3D and for more options like transportation and being able to control more aspects of the city infrastructure.

See the fans who are supporting societies were not the fans who played Sim City 4 for the city building aspects, they played for the joy of just watching a city work. I and many other played for the joy of creating a fuctioning REALISTIC city, one we could see ourselves designing one day. Societies has shifted the view of the game from Real Urban Design to Fun Social Experiments. Well if you are into Social Experiments then by all means buy the game, but it still has nothing to do with what Sim city truely... WAS.

I think the OVERALL fight between fans is this. If you played World of Warcraft and they come out with the 5th edition and it is called "World of Warcraft - The Sims" and the point of the game is to make a family and build a house for them and have their social interactions created by you, what would the fans reactions be? Well most would be like *****... this is a war sim... not a family sim. We want our game back. Whereas some might be like WOW... this is cool... no everyone wait till it's released, it actually looks like it could be a decent game. And while yes, it may be a decent game... it has NOTHING to do with what most fans expect in the game series.

THAT is why the fans are in an uproar. It's very clear and if you had shown me this a month ago I would have predicted this perfectly. If you support the game, please stop fighting to people who don't, because the people who don't agree on this game are on the correct side of this semi-moral debate. Is it right for a game developer to slap a franchise name on anything they feel and release it as the new sequel? Even when it has nothing to do with what the series is fundamentally about? Ok, I've said a lot.

[rctshack 182]

Originally posted by: Spinmaster This is true, but the problem is, even leaving fan sites out of it, still it's almost automatic the negative commentary will prevail. Not necessarily because it'll be a bad game (nevermind our personal opinions for or against), but simply because as others have pointed out, people generally don't speak out passionately for something they like, only what they don't. quote>

Well if this game has been the opposite and had fulfilled all our wishes on our wishlist we had posted for the last 4 years... do you really believe no one would discuss it? This theory that people only speak up when something is bad ONLY works when it's not something dear to your heart (such as a game you play everyweek for the last 5-15 years). In this situation it is not whether the fence on access road I-80 should be taken down or not, because obviously 99% of the towns citizens could care less, while that 1% is REALLY heated. This is about a game we all have a lot of emotions (obviously) poured into. And if it was an amazing game being released, there would be just as much praise for it as there is negativity right now. Take the release 5 years ago into account, the forums were FILLED with "OMG, this new game looks amazing! Will it have this or that???". Never have I seen no one jumping up and down for a new game, and instead thousands of fans asking for the game to be shelved.

[JanYpe 17]

Originally posted by: rctshack

I get frustrated with supporters of this game because they instantly think the rest of us want the Sim city games because of it's "Fun Gameplay". quote>

See the fans who are supporting societies were not the fans who played Sim City 4 for the city building aspects, they played for the joy of just watching a city work. I and many other played for the joy of creating a fuctioning REALISTIC city, one we could see ourselves designing one day. Societies has shifted the view of the game from Real Urban Design to Fun Social Experiments. Well if you are into Social Experiments then by all means buy the game, but it still has nothing to do with what Sim city truely... WAS. quote>

You sure seem to like making baseless assumptions. I get frustrated with anyone who thinks that having opinion A means you also automatically believe B, and that you must have playing style C. Obviously it's all fun and games to make snide little comments, but don't run your mouth off when you have no idea what you're talking about. Screaming your lungs out over Societies doesn't all of the sudden make you the world's only true SC4 fans. Stop trying to paint yourself as superior because you've taken a dislike to a game.

If you support the game, please stop fighting to people who don't, because the people who don't agree on this game are on the correct side of this semi-moral debate.quote>

Semi-moral debate, are you freakin' kidding me? Are you completely delusional? Do you honestly believe this self important fantasy of "being on the correct side"?

[britishdude1192 0]

My personal opinion to why SCS has such a negative response is EA is trying to attract more people to the SC fan base while thats all well and good in itself the type of gameplay that newcomers to the game might want doesn't represent what the experienced player expected out of a new game. While I realize that many people's desires as to what should be included in SC5 were a bit much to ask for the information that we have about SCS shows us that is not truely what WE wanted. And those who say that we don't have enough information to judge I entirely disagree. We have been shown what the game will look like what it will play like and the additions to and things that have been taken out of the game. To me that is enough to go by. I saw the first screenshot and wasn't impressed but kept an open mind, I read the artical and became more sceptical, I found out that there will be no zoning, no taxes, no real budget, and no utilities, I began to think that I didn't like the game. Then I saw the video I decided it most likely wasn't the game for me. While tried to mantain a level-headed outlook I also did see the melodramatic and childish outpouring of hatred which certainly could have been restrained, but certainly there has never been a game met with such negativity and thats why I say that maybe the game isn't marketed entirely at US (and it would be self-absorbed to think that it was)

[hawkpride147 1]

one thing to think about....Cities Unlimited is getting high praise...not negativity like Sim City: Societies is getting. could it be that the game really is lacking in what we want?

[hamsterTK 93]

Simcity to me was never so much about demand caps and building stages, Its all about building whatever kind of city you want....

This is why when I first heard they where simplifying things, I didnt really bother me. After, 2000 was simple yet it was still really fun...

But after seeing the hokey looking screenshots where there isnt any rail tracks much less any other infrastructure, I am disgusted because I cant imagine being able to build the kind of things in my head with this

My fear is that this game totally lacks the freedom to just build what you want, rather you are restricted to some ugly cartoon buildings and some boring looking roads with goofy hovercars

[getdown11 0]

I feel we the community set the bar too high. We knew what we wanted. They chose not to listen.

I feel it is a disservice to the SimCity community to not take into account anything we have been ranting for for the past 4 years. I feel this is why so may people have such negative feelings for SCS. This is not the game we were expecting. This is not the game we wanted. Granted we dont have any say in how EA does business but pushing aside maybe a quarter million fans world wide is disappointing.

Im not going to bash SCS. Its just this game was not designed with the typical SC4 fan in mind. Did we ask for social energies? No. Did we ask for the ability to create cities based on mood? No. Did we ask for larger control over the societal dynamics in a city? No again.

Honestly we wanted SC4 tweaked and upgraded to take advantage to todays technology. We wanted SC5 to be a better looking and more modable SC4 with more transport options and streamlined interface.

I personally haven't seen this much dissatisfaction from legendary franchise game ever.

[schm0 27]

So, to summarize, here are the questions being asked, plus an extra one I'd love to hear feedback on:

Do a favor for me. Visit any gaming magazine or ezine (not a SimCity forum) and scroll through the news articles they have on SCS. Most allow a small place for comments. Scroll through those comments, and you'll notice one thing: The opinion is overwhelmingly negative.

What does this mean?

Is this negative reaction just from a bunch of whiny fans who are disappointed? Or could it be that our gripes are shared by fans of the series that aren't as hardcore?

If this game were going to do well, wouldn't it have an equal amount (if not more) of a positive commentary?

Can anyone make some historical connections between the reaction to this game as compared to other previous incarnations of a successful franchise? I have seen people compare this reaction to that of Civilization IV... have we seen this phenomenon before? What were the outcomes of that reaction?

Offer your opinions and reactions here.

I will be doing an informal poll of the comments posted and quickly scroll through them and check them off as negative, positive, or indifferent (wait and see.) I'll post the results here and see what it all means. If anyone wants to beat me to the punch and do a quick survey of all the comments on outside gaming sites (not forums) let me know

_{(I'm not going to bother doing this, as nobody so far disagrees with the basic premise, so let's just discuss the topic.)}

[+Guest]

Do a favor for me. Visit any gaming magazine or ezine (not a SimCity forum) and scroll through the news articles they have on SCS. Most allow a small place for comments. Scroll through those comments, and you'll notice one thing: The opinion is overwhelmingly negative.

What does this mean?

Is this negative reaction just from a bunch of whiny fans who are disappointed? Or could it be that our gripes are shared by fans of the series that aren't as hardcore?quote>

Something I am seeing being flung around regarding this general series of questions is that people are more apt to be vocal about a negative opinion than a positive one.  However there are factors that will make that statement either more or less true.  In this case I don't think the argument holds up at all.  If it were universally true that people are always more likely to comment with a negative opinion then we'd see a majority of negative opinions across the board in reference to all games.  We don't see this.  There are a large number of games that receive an overwhelmingly positive comment response.  There are many many people out there who are perfectly willing to voice support and positive feedback.

So, what does the negative feedback to SCS mean?  It means that most people who like to share their opinions don't like what they see.  I've read a fair share of the comments that are out there and I've seen both good and bad.  Some people who legitimately enjoy SimCity as a series actually do have good things to say.  Some people who have hardly touched SimCity before are as upset as some of the die-hard fans are.  The fact is that there is a negative majority and not all of them are hardcore SimCity fans.

If this game were going to do well, wouldn't it have an equal amount (if not more) of a positive commentary?quote>

Generally, yes.  Part of marketing is public opinion.  When public opinion for a product is generally negative you're going to have a tough time selling it, no matter how good it may actually be.  Potential buyers who are too disgruntled will actually discourage others they come in contact from buying the game.  If there has been a successful game out there that released amidst a largely negative stigma I don't know what it is.

Can anyone make some historical connections between the reaction to this game as compared to other previous incarnations of a successful franchise? I have seen people compare this reaction to that of Civilization IV... have we seen this phenomenon before? What were the outcomes of that reaction?quote>

I do have a comparison I'd like to make to another event in gaming.  The games are unrelated in playstyle, but this has more to do with player reaction/emotion than anything else.

SimCity can easily be thought of as a single game that's simply gone through many iterations over the years.  The basic gameplay has remained generally unchanged, but much has been added to it.  Those who have enjoyed SimCity have really grown to care about it and how the series progresses.  There are many talented and creative people out there who have made SimCity their own, whether through mapping or BATing or creating a City Journal.  SimCity is something in which a large number of players have invested themselves.  Suddenly EA has handed development of the game over to Tilted Mill and they have fundamentally changed everything that fans of the series have enjoyed for so many years.  Players feel slighted, hurt and ignored.  More importantly I think that fans of SimCity feel that something they care about has been ripped away from them.  Almost as a child's lost toy gets replaced.  The new toy, even if it is really cool, will never fully replace the old one in the child's heart and mind.

The game I'd compare this to is Star Wars Galaxies.  SWG was a unique game, not for all tastes, but it certainly had a dedicated and passionate playerbase.  Players had trained pets, mastered professions and even constructed their own cities.  They had invested themselves in the game and made it their own.  Suddenly something called the NGE (New Game Enhancements) was released.  The NGE fundamentally changed many things about the way the game was played.  It even went so far as to completely remove two beloved professions that had only days before been tweaked and upgraded with new capabilities.  However good developer intentions were, they had disregarded suggestion and opinion from the community and ripped apart the game they loved.  Player reaction was so negative that from that day 4 years ago to this the number of SWG subscribers has plummeted from over 200,000 to less than 50,000.  That's more than a 75% loss.  I even recently heard a story of someone so disgruntled with Sony Online Entertainment and the NGE debacle that he recommended his company make a $50,000 USD purchase from someone other than Sony.

The lessons learned from the NGE have been felt throughout the MMO development industry.  Everyone now understands that completely changing a game at it's most fundamental levels is a huge mistake.  A passionate player community has a lot of influence and can seriously cripple the sales of a game.  I think the lesson is applicable beyond the MMO genre.  To change the core gameplay of SimCity will do nothing but upset the passionate SimCity community.  The repercussions of doing so will likely have a very undesirable effect on game sales.

[spa 968]

With Civ4 the reaciton was mixed. There was a real divide down the middle between the naysayers and the boosters. In the end many of the naysayers came around. Over on Apolyton or Civfanatics (can't remember which) a guy said that if Civ4 killed the infinite city sprawl strategy he would eat the box.... well there is a great video on there of him cuting up and then eating the box in an English Muffin!  All that said, the reaction to Civ4 was split whereas the reaction here is negative. Civ4 to me is a classic that took the old formula, but tweaked and expanded the specifics. Societies is chucking everything away. The fans are reacting to that. I think the reaction will be sustained and this one will bring mediocre results for EA.

[mcm020 0]

To the SC4 community from an outsider,

First, the user created add-ons and mods are awesome. The NAM and it's included mods are something I would have died for when I used to play this game.

Now for what has brought me out of the cellar. Just now I read the announcement and several previews for SC:Societies. I was interested to see how the members of this site had taken the news of the announcement and once I saw this thread I had to register so I could vent to someone.

Literally yesterday a friend and I were discussing how Maxis needs to make another Sim City. If I would have known it would be a game with radically different concepts I would have said never mind to that notion.

The fact that Maxis is not the main developer speaks volumes here. This is a for-profit only game riding the coattails of the Sim City name. The true fan of the Sim City series (which this site is the epicenter) has gotten the shaft.

I want to build huge cities with intricate roadways and luxury homes nestled on a scenic mountain. Then I want to name these roadways and areas after myself and my dead pets and so fourth and so on. Not in SC:Societies!

When I was about 8 the original Sim City came out. I consider it a part of my education. Looks like this game is going to be marketed towards the douche nozzles who liked City Life.

If Maxis wanted to do a remake with another developer they should have picked Sim Tower.

[north country dude 202]

Originally posted by: DARKO

of course...but for some reason, I guess certain people's brains 'click' and turn on to defensive mode, and they feel they have to rebel against the masses and profess their excitement for this game (which I really find to be phony...and if you really are interested in this game, I have a shiny piece of tin foil you might be interested in).

I guess the bottom line is that everyone has their own opinion. From an artistic and strategic standpoint, this game doesn't cut it whatsoever. Maybe they are trying to market it to 3-6th graders - I don't know. If that's the case, they'll do well. They just can't expect to get the big 18-25 market with something so ridiculous.quote>

...or I guess for some reason certain peoples brains "click" and turn from to a independent thinker to one who follows the other herd into sheep oblivion. Gasp!, some people might actually have the foresight to not overreact!!  Aren't you the ones who think its "cool" to rebel against the unknown? 

You right. People who have a mind of their own and are willing to give this game at least a chance are such posers. What a bunch of idiots. Why can't they be like everyone else and jump to mostly baseless assumptions?

Wow. The true colors of this board come out more and more with each passing day. No wonder why so many have left.quote>

Look, Darko dude, if you're talking directly to me, then I would have to say that you're not exactly correct. If you're talking to the community, that's up to them to defend their own position.

Read my post with a little more comprehension. They clearly state that the "marketing for this new release" does not grab my interest. They clearly state that I will not invest my hard earned cash into buying it just to try it out.

It really does not matter that it will not be released for a few months. The game concept (which have been clearly spelled out in the press releases) and design philosophy, are what tells me that this is not the Sim City 5 that many fans were hoping for.

As for "following the herd", then no, I'm not following the herd. See the second post in this thread: http://simcities.com/forum/index.php?topic=1315.msg11360#msg11360

Even though the attitude was a bit cynical, I pretty much pegged what the reaction would be to this new release, the day before it became public!

I even went to the Tilted Mill website to find out more. So far, there is nothing, absolutely nothing about SC:S that even remotely interests me. Not the 3d graphic, the "scaled back complexity", or the new twists.

This is my personal opinion about what the screen shots, press releases, and interviews show me is coming out in the next few months. Personal opinions are not wrong, arguing with them and claiming that having them is immature, just isn't right.

It is entirely irrelevant that the game has not been released and will not be available for a while yet. Game reviews will tell the story then. But based on what the marketing hype is currently showing, it's just not my cup of tea.

[cirugo 1,889]

A hearty agreement to Jedi's post.

[JoeExplorer 1]

I am definately negative about this expansion.  I loved Caesar III and couldn't wait for Caesar IV.  What a disappointment that was.  They left out too many good parts of the game.

This new expansion for SimCity, in my opinion promises to be another big let down.  I enjoy SimCity and thaught the new game would continue with some of the ideals that are here at Simtropolis.  I mean who wants to create a fantasy land town.  Give me a break.  Unless there is a radical positive review of this game when it comes out, I won't be buying.  I am very sad to say.

I was afriad EA would blow it and it seems to me they did.

[mjmbears 0]

I am incredibly disappointed about this new game, considering that we have had to wait 4 years for this new simcity. Considering the amount of time simcity fans have spent voicing their ideas on this website and other site and making suggestions, this proves that EA doesn't give much thought to its fans, as there is so much more than can be done to SimCity4, and that this new game is not based on the wishes of the general simcity community! Whilst on its own this game could be very good, it is obvious that EA is targetting the gaming population that are into The Sims franchise and that will boost its sales.

[DARKO 3]

North,

Actually it wasn't even direct towards you. Thats why I posted a qoute form another poster. It was a sarcastic remark to a statement that sorely needed one.

Shacks,

I've been making realistic functioning cities since this series started. I also duel as a real life urban planner. Not sure what you mean that people who "support" SCS, or as I like to say, not continually scream bloody murder, are not these so-called "real fans". Too blanketed man.

Honestly thats besides the point right now. After seeing that video today I'm almost ready to completely join your side brotha. This video looked way more bare-bones than the one that Rachel chick showed. That video looked glowing with potential, this one looked like some kind of Hasbro game for toddlers gone wrong.......

I may soon be on the Urbs Urbis or whatever committee if I see more videos like this.  

[aestiva 0]

(Posted earlier elsewhere but I wanted to expose my opinion as I hope EA Games might lurk here and reconsider.): 

"I almost want to cry.  I play ONE computer game; SC4. I don’t want some weird SIMSy game with cutesy BS, like clown buildings. It’s so fruity. I just don’t know what to say. I wanted futuristic cities with flight corridors to plan, space colonization!; anything but this crap. They have taken a beloved pastime of mine and handed it over to people with no real love for it.  F-ing hacks!   What a horrendous disappointment.  Realism is what we have been constantly trying to achieve.

Who cares if it is harder, I do.

I want harder, not candy cane light poles. Bring on the challenge. Stop pandering to the masses. Go for the long tail.  Brainy games for brainy people.  Corporate sellouts, I hate you!  Challenge me! Screw the plebian masses, Make a SimCity game that appeals to the Nerd, Geek, and Brainiac, and earn my loyalty forever.

-Aesitva

[Garek Maxwell 1]

Originally posted by: aestiva

Screw the plebian masses, Make a SimCity game that appeals to the Nerd, Geek, and Brainiac, and earn my loyalty forever.

-Aesitvaquote>

Are you willing to pay $100+ for that game? If so, and are most members of Simtropolis, then you might have something there. In fact, some companies might actually do that eventually. $200+ masterpiece that a couple of thousand people buy. Sure, it's expensive, but they're hardcore fans who'll pay anything for what they want....right?

[Sim_BOB 2]

hell yeah dude i would shell out a hundred, even 200 bucks to get a decent sim city 5

[dedgren 830]

i would shell out a hundred, even 200 bucks to get a decent sim city 5quote>

I know where, for less than (US) 20 bucks, you can get a decent SC4 that, for only a little bit of additional time spent online, you can make ROCK!

...I just don't get you folks who are spending all your time waiting for the next big thing...

David

[Garek Maxwell 1]

Originally posted by: Sim_BOB hell yeah dude i would shell out a hundred, even 200 bucks to get a decent sim city 5quote>

Now find several thousand more friends who would do the very same thing, otherwise it'll be around several thousand dollars.

Changes things a bit, now doesn't it?

[aestiva 0]

I make a lot of money, and I know many don't (and I remember when I didn't), but  I'd be willing to pay a lot for a SimCity that was truly worth it.

Maybe the era of the exclusive game has arrived.

In any case "Societies" is weak, and not what was needed or expected.

-A

[Batdog 0]

Societies looks to be the skidmarks of such a great franchise. It makes me wonder why we wait 4 years to find that the next installment will be worse than the first simcity. If we really want the simcity5 we where expecting we might have to make it on our own. Not let EA create a bad imitation that will be marketed at the sims franchise (or whoever they where going to market it to).