The Mass Transit Discussion Thread

[Inge Jones 18]

My comment is just that I think public transport is basic to a city simulation, not to be considered an add-on. If it's not in the basic boxed game already, they didn't finish in time. No one who is thinking straight can think of public transport as an later optional addon to a city building game.

[sthudig 0]

Originally posted by: ASheroo

I will just say again in this thread (since its more relevant) about potential mass transit for single player...

Matthew told me that he has passed on the suggestion and interest of a mass transit expansion pack for single player,so they are talking about it, and it could well and truly happen. It makes perfect sense, and will be a massive win/win situation, with MC getting lots more money and support, and us getting mass transit in single player. Nothing is official yet though, but it is a lot of potential and hope, and it could happen, so don't jump to conclusions yet on mass transit in single player.quote>

Well this is certainly nice to hear and speculate about, the facts as they stand right now, and as stated by MC have been crystal clear on the issue of mass transit in single player...there will be none. No one is jumping to conclusions here, we are doing our research like smart customers, using the developer itself as a source. What could be more reliable than that?

I have also seen a suggestion bandied about that we should subscribe as an investment of some sort. Something about paying the subscription will make it affordable for them to vastly improve this game. I will tell you no reasonable person will invest in something there will never be a financial return for. And the profits from the subscriptions are far more likely to end up in the CEO's bonus check than any expensive improvements. It's time we got back to the real world here folks....

[Spinmaster 75]

Originally posted by: ASheroo

I will just say again in this thread (since its more relevant) about potential mass transit for single player...

Matthew told me that he has passed on the suggestion and interest of a mass transit expansion pack for single player,so they are talking about it, and it could well and truly happen. It makes perfect sense, and will be a massive win/win situation, with MC getting lots more money and support, and us getting mass transit in single player. Nothing is official yet though, but it is a lot of potential and hope, and it could happen, so don't jump to conclusions yet on mass transit in single player.quote>

Good to hear.

If it happens I'll buy it. I might even be open enough to "try" the PO short-term (though I've also heard that 7-day trial starts by-force the moment you register... bad idea there, let me try that out when I'm ready to, which won't be until I'm familiar with the basics of building offline anyway). And while I believe it's highly unlikely in my case, being purely objective, yes, there's even a chance I'd be hooked. But only because of the features that make sense to be online for, such as trading, chat, blueprints, visiting each others' cities, etc.... Would be even better if we can cooperatively work on building the same city; maybe not at the same time, that would probably be technically impractical if not impossible. But a turn-based (e.g. timed or owner-moderated) or ad-hoc one-at-a-time thing could work. That might actually hook me into the online play; the other stuff alone, probably not. If their goal was to entice as many players as possible into at least trying the PO subscription, I think cooperative building - which only makes sense in multiplayer - would've been a much better choice than mass transit.

But I absolutely refuse to subscribe with a monthly fee to an online service to get a feature whose only reason for being an "online only" feature is simply extortion. That may sound like a harsh word, but it's accurate - mass transit has no reason to be "multiplayer only." Even MC themselves haven't attempted to fabricate such a reason. I'm not saying they need to put every transit option in at once, nor even try to match SC4's options - even SC4 just had bus, train, and subway to start, before RH came along. But pick two of those options as "free" because something of mass transit should've been in the base game to begin with (and at least some form of highway). I'll gladly pay extra - as an expansion pack, not a subscription - for additional transit options. Would I pay for an expansion to go from "nothing" to "something" ... probably, but I'd feel robbed if I have to pay anything over the base price for the first one or two transit options. After that, no problem.

But that's all moot, if they remain steadfast about mass-transit being an online-only feature.

[PLB82 0]

May I suggest a "good faith" reward from MC:

We all agree that Mass Transit is a core feature of a city game... and most of us think a game release without it is an unfinished product.  I understand that MC needs money from sales and the PO to continue development and release new feature (i.e. FINISH the game).

There are a lot of players in "wait and see" mode that may buy the game once the remaining core features are implemented... however it's the people paying for the PO in its bare bones mode that are financing the development for them.

I suggest that as a "thank you" to the players supporting MC finishing the game, that MC gives those players a few free months.  For example, if someone pays for October, Novermber, and December with no MT, and those features get implemented in January, then let that person have the next 3 months of PO for free, to say "thanks" for sticking with an unfinished product and financing the completion of the game.

[deanco 0]

Originally posted by: Inge Jones

My comment is just that I think public transport is basic to a city simulation, not to be considered an add-on.  No one who is thinking straight can think of public transport as an later optional addon to a city building game.quote>

This.

Yes, I know I'm new here, but perhaps my outlook could be useful.  A few posts above, someone was getting excited about the fact that, perhaps, the developer will, some day, provide public transportation in its city builder game as a paid addon.  This makes my head explode.

I can compare it to a Civilization game where the developer would, perhaps, at some indeterminant time in the future, might provide a Diplomacy option as a downloable addon for $5 or $10.  Not having diplomacy is not a game breaker, you can still play, but one would wonder why this feature was not present to begin with.  Now imagine if instead of a paid addon, Diplomacy would cost $5 per month and you had to be online to use it?

This is the present state of things.  People, get a grip.  You're getting shafted.

[mr-tom 2]

Originally posted by: deanco

This is the present state of things.  People, get a grip.  You're getting shafted.

quote>

Good.  Point.  Well.  Made.

[The_Dalai_Llama 15]

I had to come out of hibernation to say that the lack of mass transit in the offline mode is a kick to the face. A major city cannot live on roads alone.

[littlesquare.dot 0]

Originally posted by: mr-tom

Originally posted by: deanco

This is the present state of things.  People, get a grip.  You're getting shafted.

quote>

Good.  Point.  Well.  Made.

quote>

For sure.

What I can't wrap my head around is MC's refusal to accept that the majority of the city-building market simply WILL NOT, EVER, show interest in, or continuously pay for an MMO.

Now, these same people who refuse to purchase the game due to the MMO bias have said that they would be willing to pay cash for expansions should they be made available in SP mode, meaning MC could milk them for cash now, and in the furture, as often as they like.

From a financial perspective, this essentially accomplishes the same thing as PO, but doubles the size of their potential market.

It's a no-brainer, and they should latch onto it before enthusiasm for this half-finished title fades.

One thing worth noting however, is that MC is funded by venture capitalists, correct?  This has me worried for a few reasons.

VC's won't typically touch a game of any sort with a 39.5 ft. pole, simply because you can never know how a non-established brand will be received.  In order for VC's to fund such a risky venture, placing millions of dollars on the line, it has to look incredibly sweet on some level, and the only thing I can think of that would catch a VC's attention with this title is the PO.  

If it catches on, it's guaranteed cash flow for years, and if the game takes-off like WoW did, or even half as well, you're talking tens of millions in potential profits.

Any VC who has done his/her homework will discover that a decent city building game hasn't been released in many years, no others, that we know of, are in production, and fans of the CB genre are an absurdly excitable bunch, and many can't help but play whatever new city builders are available.  

(Heck, I even bought SCS, and I know that lots of you did too, whether you'll admit to it or not

So, cramming the PO down our throats seems like a pressure tactic that VC's would utilize, not those friendly MC guys who so enthusiastically engaged us when development began on Cities Unlimited. (<-now that, my friends, is irony.)

Therefore, I suspect that MC is being held by the you-know-what's by their investors, that they can't agree to anything without their approval, and thus our repeated requests/complaints have been met with silence, simply because the VC's want to wait to see if they can grab us by the you-know-what's too with their new pet, Cities-Limited-Unless-Subscribed- to-PO.

So in short, I suspect that cash shortfalls, and the subsequent mortgaging of MC, have led to this game's astronomical shortfalls.  A darn shame, and once again, unsurprisingly, human greed is to blame.

[mmmfloorpie 0]

Originally posted by: deanco

Originally posted by: Inge Jones

My comment is just that I think public transport is basic to a city simulation, not to be considered an add-on.  No one who is thinking straight can think of public transport as an later optional addon to a city building game.quote>

This.

Yes, I know I'm new here, but perhaps my outlook could be useful.  A few posts above, someone was getting excited about the fact that, perhaps, the developer will, some day, provide public transportation in its city builder game as a paid addon.  This makes my head explode.

I can compare it to a Civilization game where the developer would, perhaps, at some indeterminant time in the future, might provide a Diplomacy option as a downloable addon for $5 or $10.  Not having diplomacy is not a game breaker, you can still play, but one would wonder why this feature was not present to begin with.  Now imagine if instead of a paid addon, Diplomacy would cost $5 per month and you had to be online to use it?

This is the present state of things.  People, get a grip.  You're getting shafted.

quote>

Sadly, this isn't even the situation... To use your analogy, imagine if in a Civilization game, they didn't have diplomacy from the start. They promised that eventually it would be added and if you paid a monthly fee, you'd have access to it. NOW  imagine that they also said that when the diplomacy option was finally made available, that it would be ONLY for multiplayer gaming and it would NOT be offered in singe player. Then imagine they said they hoped to have "buses" available by december and that they would incrementally add more transportation options over time. That's right, they want you to subscribe to the "Planet Offer" for MONTHS while they string you along and make sure you keep paying for the online service... $20 they would create a new form of mass transit every other month so that people would be more apt to purchase the 3 month subscription at a discount instead of buying one month at a time...

What a kick to the face right?

[Naviss 0]

Looks like we'll be getting alittle more then just buses down the line. By this picture it seems as if we'll have more things to have to manage / trade other then blueprints.

As it stands, Buses are set to come out in the 3rd content pack.

[Stef42 0]

True, but as I can remember, the 3rd content pack (with the buses) will be available after/before christmas

[LBII 3]

3rd pack! How can you guys can know precisely that it will be in the third pack and not in the 2nd ou the 4th one? In fact, how do you know the content of the futures PO updates? You are well informed!

EDIT : OMG! It's on the official website! So many promises! Lying down bus lines? Woah! My intentions to buy the game just went from 50% to 75%!

[mmmfloorpie 0]

Originally posted by: LBII

3rd pack! How can you guys can know precisely that it will be in the third pack and not in the 2nd ou the 4th one? In fact, how do you know the content of the futures PO updates? You are well informed!

EDIT : OMG! It's on the official website! So many promises! Lying down bus lines? Woah! My intentions to buy the game just went from 50% to 75%!

quote>

How do they know Monte Cristo won't go belly up before they get to the 3rd pack? It still doesn't fix the problem that mass transit isn't in single player. If you stop paying for the planet offer, you'll never be able to use mass transit, or any of the content you paid for, ever again... All you can do is play the striped down single player... Makes sense right? First you pay for the game, then you pay for the Planet Offer to get the content packs, THEN you have to continue paying for the Planet Offer to continue using the content you've already paid for twice.

Monte Cristo did this to guaruntee revenue for the next 10 years because they saw that we are still playing Sim City 4. Unfortunately, they shot themselves in the foot by pissing off the hardcore community (who are the only ones that will buy this game). Like they are only selling this game by mail order in North America (by far the largest market). The only people who are going to buy it are the ones that have been following it's progress like all of us. They are banking that we, the hardcore fans, will spread the word about this game and encourage others to buy. That's why they included a demo disc! It was cheaper to do mail order only and hope that word of mouth would generate a lot of interest. Unfortunately, word of mouth can work against you as well.

[PLB82 0]

So busses in the 3rd pack around the end of 2009.  No mention yet of a potential release of trains, subways, etc?  Or have I just missed that release date.

[LBII 3]

Originally posted by: mmmfloorpie

How do they know Monte Cristo won't go belly up before they get to the 3rd pack? It still doesn't fix the problem that mass transit isn't in single player. If you stop paying for the planet offer, you'll never be able to use mass transit, or any of the content you paid for, ever again... All you can do is play the striped down single player... Makes sense right? First you pay for the game, then you pay for the Planet Offer to get the content packs, THEN you have to continue paying for the Planet Offer to continue using the content you've already paid for twice.

Monte Cristo did this to guaruntee revenue for the next 10 years because they saw that we are still playing Sim City 4. Unfortunately, they shot themselves in the foot by pissing off the hardcore community (who are the only ones that will buy this game). Like they are only selling this game by mail order in North America (by far the largest market). The only people who are going to buy it are the ones that have been following it's progress like all of us. They are banking that we, the hardcore fans, will spread the word about this game and encourage others to buy. That's why they included a demo disc! It was cheaper to do mail order only and hope that word of mouth would generate a lot of interest. Unfortunately, word of mouth can work against you as well.

quote>

In fact, It doesn't really matter to me if updates doesn't apply to single player mode. MMO features looks good to me enough to put money on it, a couple of bucks every month is no big deal for my budget. Maybe for hardcore players it's a deal breaker but not for me, I'm sure I'll find a way to use the single player mode even if it's not complete. Sure, I would love to use mass transit in SP, but I want something else : SC4 is simply not doing the job for me anymore and I'm looking for something new and I believe that there will be no more simcities in the future : a gaming entreprise would be crazy to attack this market with so much « Simcitiy Talibans » ready to bash any game who is not 200% perfect and pure! I can live with some imperfection.

It's always a matter of rationnal choise : does the money worth the fun? For me, it does. For many, it doesn't.

[mmmfloorpie 0]

Sim City 4 was a more complete game 7 years ago, than this game is now. The only thing that has changed is the graphics. If they are expecting us to put $40 into a game and then $9.99 a month for the Planet Offer, yes I expect a 200% perfect game... I really don't understand some people nowadays... They don't have the same frame of mind as people did 20 years ago. You are the customer and must spend your money wisely. Game companies must create a quality product and support it in order to EARN your money. Nowadays, the younger generation seems to think "meh, I don't care if companies bilk me for monthly online subscription fees or if they produce a sub standard game and I waste $50 on it." It's like they think that being able to buy a game/subscribe to online content is a privelage... Like the game companies went to all this trouble to make a game, so why shouldn't they get your money? No matter how lousy the product? 

To me, XBL is the biggest rip off ever. You pay for the console, you pay for the game and you pay for the internet. Then they expect you to pay for the privelage of accessing the multiplayer content of games you already paid for with hardware that you've already paid for? Factor in the fact that everyone else you are playing against online has had to buy the hardware, buy the game and pay for the internet, you've got millions of dollars that consumers have already poured into Microsoft... Then they have the balls to demand $60 a year to allow you to access something you've already paid for? PS3 doesn't charge for multiplayer and yet the games cost the same amount... So tell me, what are Xbox players getting that Ps3 players aren't? Absolutely nothing! 

Don't just roll over and accept mediocrity... Stand up for your rights as a consumer!

[sparky66 0]

i posted this elsewhere but though that it would be relevant here also.

READ THIS MC!!!

i would gladly pay a one off fee to be able to use PO content in single player. Perhaps if they released PO content to single players every six months, in a expansion pack that contained the last six months PO content (including mass transit). That would mean that PO subscibers still have the advantage of getting extra content first, but solo players would still be happy because they would get the content in the end. like i said, i wouldn't mind paying up to £20 for that, which is about six months PO subscription anyway, but i would get to use the content in solo mode and keep it indefiately.

it could also mean that alot of the people that aren't buying this game because they don't like the PO will buy it. i just don't like thae fact that i can pay all that money and as soon as i stop paying i loose all my cities and my extra content.

also, has anyone considered starting a petition to make MC make PO content availiable to solo players (for a one off fee of course, i don't expect anything free).

[ForceInfinity 0]

I disagree that XBL is the biggest rip off.  Basically what you get out of the deal is that Microsoft hosts all the game servers that you log into to play the game.  This service is universal to everyone.  It also comes with the matchmaking/leader boards/etc that are again hosted on their server.  All this for what amounts to maybe $4 a month.

The other thing you overlook is that from the business point of view, one of the only areas of the PC gaming market that is growing anymore is the MMO games.  Not only that, this PO solves their piracy problem and kills the 2nd market.  I don't like this trend at all, but it is what is is.  I've already passed on Aion, and other games because of lack of time.

For for MC dying?  I seriously doubt they'll go belly up, even if this game bombs.  They're a much more firmly established company than say Flagship Studios was.   MC also has the benefit of having several other published games from which to draw revenue.  The $64,000 question that remains to be seen is whether or not the PO subscription really justifies the benefits for you.  

In my observations of the game features, I'm not anywhere near as hung up on the lack of mass transit as others.  (Personally, I'd pave a whole city under with freeways if I had my choice on things).  It was the lack of highways that kept me away from City Life.  So on the surface of it, Cities XL would suit my purposes, but I'm reserving my judgement for now.

Originally posted by: mmmfloorpie

Sim City 4 was a more complete game 7 years ago, than this game is now. The only thing that has changed is the graphics. If they are expecting us to put $40 into a game and then $9.99 a month for the Planet Offer, yes I expect a 200% perfect game... I really don't understand some people nowadays... They don't have the same frame of mind as people did 20 years ago. You are the customer and must spend your money wisely. Game companies must create a quality product and support it in order to EARN your money. Nowadays, the younger generation seems to think "meh, I don't care if companies bilk me for monthly online subscription fees or if they produce a sub standard game and I waste $50 on it." It's like they think that being able to buy a game/subscribe to online content is a privelage... Like the game companies went to all this trouble to make a game, so why shouldn't they get your money? No matter how lousy the product? 

To me, XBL is the biggest rip off ever. You pay for the console, you pay for the game and you pay for the internet. Then they expect you to pay for the privelage of accessing the multiplayer content of games you already paid for with hardware that you've already paid for? Factor in the fact that everyone else you are playing against online has had to buy the hardware, buy the game and pay for the internet, you've got millions of dollars that consumers have already poured into Microsoft... Then they have the balls to demand $60 a year to allow you to access something you've already paid for? PS3 doesn't charge for multiplayer and yet the games cost the same amount... So tell me, what are Xbox players getting that Ps3 players aren't? Absolutely nothing! 

Don't just roll over and accept mediocrity... Stand up for your rights as a consumer!

quote>

[gabry85 2]

Originally posted by: mmmfloorpie

Sim City 4 was a more complete game 7 years ago, than this game is now. The only thing that has changed is the graphics. If they are expecting us to put $40 into a game and then $9.99 a month for the Planet Offer, yes I expect a 200% perfect game... I really don't understand some people nowadays... They don't have the same frame of mind as people did 20 years ago. You are the customer and must spend your money wisely. Game companies must create a quality product and support it in order to EARN your money. Nowadays, the younger generation seems to think "meh, I don't care if companies bilk me for monthly online subscription fees or if they produce a sub standard game and I waste $50 on it." It's like they think that being able to buy a game/subscribe to online content is a privelage... Like the game companies went to all this trouble to make a game, so why shouldn't they get your money? No matter how lousy the product? 

To me, XBL is the biggest rip off ever. You pay for the console, you pay for the game and you pay for the internet. Then they expect you to pay for the privelage of accessing the multiplayer content of games you already paid for with hardware that you've already paid for? Factor in the fact that everyone else you are playing against online has had to buy the hardware, buy the game and pay for the internet, you've got millions of dollars that consumers have already poured into Microsoft... Then they have the balls to demand $60 a year to allow you to access something you've already paid for? PS3 doesn't charge for multiplayer and yet the games cost the same amount... So tell me, what are Xbox players getting that Ps3 players aren't? Absolutely nothing! 

Don't just roll over and accept mediocrity... Stand up for your rights as a consumer!

quote>

Excellent post!

/support

[mmmfloorpie 0]

Originally posted by: ForceInfinity

I disagree that XBL is the biggest rip off.  Basically what you get out of the deal is that Microsoft hosts all the game servers that you log into to play the game.  This service is universal to everyone.  It also comes with the matchmaking/leader boards/etc that are again hosted on their server.  All this for what amounts to maybe $4 a month.

The other thing you overlook is that from the business point of view, one of the only areas of the PC gaming market that is growing anymore is the MMO games.  Not only that, this PO solves their piracy problem and kills the 2nd market.  I don't like this trend at all, but it is what is is.  I've already passed on Aion, and other games because of lack of time.

For for MC dying?  I seriously doubt they'll go belly up, even if this game bombs.  They're a much more firmly established company than say Flagship Studios was.   MC also has the benefit of having several other published games from which to draw revenue.  The $64,000 question that remains to be seen is whether or not the PO subscription really justifies the benefits for you.  

In my observations of the game features, I'm not anywhere near as hung up on the lack of mass transit as others.  (Personally, I'd pave a whole city under with freeways if I had my choice on things).  It was the lack of highways that kept me away from City Life.  So on the surface of it, Cities XL would suit my purposes, but I'm reserving my judgement for now.

Originally posted by: mmmfloorpie

Sim City 4 was a more complete game 7 years ago, than this game is now. The only thing that has changed is the graphics. If they are expecting us to put $40 into a game and then $9.99 a month for the Planet Offer, yes I expect a 200% perfect game... I really don't understand some people nowadays... They don't have the same frame of mind as people did 20 years ago. You are the customer and must spend your money wisely. Game companies must create a quality product and support it in order to EARN your money. Nowadays, the younger generation seems to think "meh, I don't care if companies bilk me for monthly online subscription fees or if they produce a sub standard game and I waste $50 on it." It's like they think that being able to buy a game/subscribe to online content is a privelage... Like the game companies went to all this trouble to make a game, so why shouldn't they get your money? No matter how lousy the product? 

To me, XBL is the biggest rip off ever. You pay for the console, you pay for the game and you pay for the internet. Then they expect you to pay for the privelage of accessing the multiplayer content of games you already paid for with hardware that you've already paid for? Factor in the fact that everyone else you are playing against online has had to buy the hardware, buy the game and pay for the internet, you've got millions of dollars that consumers have already poured into Microsoft... Then they have the balls to demand $60 a year to allow you to access something you've already paid for? PS3 doesn't charge for multiplayer and yet the games cost the same amount... So tell me, what are Xbox players getting that Ps3 players aren't? Absolutely nothing! 

Don't just roll over and accept mediocrity... Stand up for your rights as a consumer!

quote>

quote>

Ok, so Microsoft hosts all of the servers... Well Nintendo and Sony have their own servers for the Wii and PS3 and they cost absolutely nothing to access. I don't have much experience with Wii, but I know from the PS3 servers that they are just as good as any other gaming server I've ever played on... They have leaderboards and all that stuff... Net cost to me: $0... If I play it once a month it's the same cost as if I played it 1000 times a month. PS3 games cost exactly the same as Xbox games cost. So I'll ask again, what are you getting by paying a fee that I'm not getting by not paying a fee?

I would have ABSOLUTELY no problem if Microsoft wanted to sell their consoles for half price and sold their games for $20 less than their PS3 counter parts. Hell, sell every Xbox without an ethernet card and if people choose to play online and subscribe to XBL, Microsoft will Fedex you an ethernet card that is a rental included in the monthly fee... Unfortunately, this is not how they operate.

I really don't know why computer game sales are slumping except for MMOs... I prefer the computer interface over the console interface hands down. A mouse and a keyboard are way better than 6 buttons and a stiff mini joystick... I've been craving a new "sim" game for years. The sad thing is, no one seems to be making them. I've gone back and played all my strategy/sim games a thousand times over and I'm really starting to get tired. I plead for something new! I'm a huge fan of games where you build and then manage something... I love the Civilization games and the Sim City games.... Luckily, Civilizations are being made and I'm hopeful that Civ 5 isn't that far away... They seem to have modded Civ4 into as many ways as they possibly can by now, so with any luck, we'll be play a new one soon! The Star Trek MMO might be fun too, who knows...

As for a new Sim City, I was really hopeful when I heard about Cities XL. Now, not so much. Adding mass trans to single player would go a long way in healing the wounds. Somehow I think that MC would rather secure longterm profitable that MMOs bring instead of the one time investment that a single player would bring. Please "do the right thing" MC! 

[RegisterST2 0]

Originally posted by: mmmfloorpie

You are the customer and must spend your money wisely. Game companies must create a quality product and support it in order to EARN your money. Nowadays, the younger generation seems to think "meh, I don't care if companies bilk me for monthly online subscription fees or if they produce a sub standard game and I waste $50 on it." It's like they think that being able to buy a game/subscribe to online content is a privelage... Like the game companies went to all this trouble to make a game, so why shouldn't they get your money? No matter how lousy the product? 

quote>

This part.

All this crap about the community letting MC down if we don't support CXL, and pleas to support the game we don't like so MC might make the game we do like someday are goofy.

I guess I'm old fashioned, but the process is this because I am a customer not an investor:

1)  Company makes product I like

2)  I buy said product

Buying products I consider subpar out of guilt or hope or some sense of being a superior person is inane to me.

I will follow the old system, even if it's outdated and not trendy, because it makes sense to me and worked well for me for decades.  I'll leave the new system of buying on hope or guilt to the people who believe it will help them get superior products in the end.

[simidavid 0]

Although I don't agree with MC's approach to only providing free content to PO subscribers, Solo players should at least have the right to pay a small fee for the extra content. I feel that MC has strayed away from making a game that would blow a city builder's mind away, to making a game that could line their pockets with money This game has a lot of potential, but it will only be realized after MC puts it's act together and starts including Solo players into all the fun, because we paid for the game too!

[ForceInfinity 0]

Originally posted by: mmmfloorpie

I would have ABSOLUTELY no problem if Microsoft wanted to sell their consoles for half price and sold their games for $20 less than their PS3 counter parts. Hell, sell every Xbox without an ethernet card and if people choose to play online and subscribe to XBL, Microsoft will Fedex you an ethernet card that is a rental included in the monthly fee... Unfortunately, this is not how they operate.

I really don't know why computer game sales are slumping except for MMOs... I prefer the computer interface over the console interface hands down. A mouse and a keyboard are way better than 6 buttons and a stiff mini joystick... I've been craving a new "sim" game for years. The sad thing is, no one seems to be making them. I've gone back and played all my strategy/sim games a thousand times over and I'm really starting to get tired. I plead for something new! I'm a huge fan of games where you build and then manage something... I love the Civilization games and the Sim City games.... Luckily, Civilizations are being made and I'm hopeful that Civ 5 isn't that far away... They seem to have modded Civ4 into as many ways as they possibly can by now, so with any luck, we'll be play a new one soon! The Star Trek MMO might be fun too, who knows...

As for a new Sim City, I was really hopeful when I heard about Cities XL. Now, not so much. Adding mass trans to single player would go a long way in healing the wounds. Somehow I think that MC would rather secure longterm profitable that MMOs bring instead of the one time investment that a single player would bring. Please "do the right thing" MC! 

quote>

The PC issue boils down to a few different issues:

1.  Barrier for entry is high.   PC's that are capable of playing some of the triple A titles out there are much more expensive than any console.  Those PC's that are cheap come with integrated chipsets that can't handle some of the more advanced games.  So if you go on a dollar basis, it would stand to reason that you'll have many more console owners vs game capable pc owners.  Take Mass Effect for example.  Your install base in the XBox 360 is on the order of 10s of millions of consoles.  On the PC's you're looking at a small fraction of that (at least a small fraction capable of playing the game)

2. PC's as a platform:  Gaming PC's have more grunt than a console, but again since there is no baseline on a PC (differing OS's, differing memory configurations, differing motherboards, graphics, sound, etc).  Games get released that crash due to one configuration issue or another, or because some graphics driver didn't measure up.  This makes support costs huge for developers, and unless their publishers pony up some cash, or the developer didn't get enough sales, you sometimes won't get the support to fix the aforementioned issues.  This also has a secondary issue of giving people pause buying a PC game in the first place for fear of crashing.

3.  Instant gratification of consoles:  People want that instant gratification, and don't want to put up with internet activations, long installs, bugs, etc when they can just buy a console game, pop it into the shelf and play.

4.  Piracy.  Yes that P word.  This undoubtably hurts sales of the offline games.

5.  Why are MMO's so popular with publishers?  You can't pirate them.

An even more worrying trend may be brought on by OnLive if that ever takes off.  Basically with that thing, all your games are on the cloud and there will be no notion ever again of owning a copy of the game.  And god forbid if OnLive dies...  or your internet, or their servers...  

Anyways, The Nintendo Wii's onlive offering is thin at best, and you don't see hardly any online multiplayer if at all.

PS3... well I don't use their online offering, so I can't speak intelligently to their merits vs XBox 360 lives.  So you likely have a valid point and will concede that to you.

[coth84_1 0]

Originally posted by: mmmfloorpie

Unfortunately, they shot themselves in the foot by pissing off the hardcore community (who are the only ones that will buy this game). Like they are only selling this game by mail order in North America (by far the largest market). The only people who are going to buy it are the ones that have been following it's progress like all of us. They are banking that we, the hardcore fans, will spread the word about this game and encourage others to buy. That's why they included a demo disc! It was cheaper to do mail order only and hope that word of mouth would generate a lot of interest. Unfortunately, word of mouth can work against you as well. quote>

remember what's happened to rail simulator/railworks in railway sims community. kuju managment was blindly believe their sim is indispensable. same happens to monte cristo now.

[andrew007 0]

Hello, I am sorry that my first post has to be like this, but, where are the moderators? This discussion is completely out of topic! I guess there should be some hate/love thread for you guys to post whatever you like, but I came here to discuss the problems I am facing with traffic and all I can see is hate/love posts about the game itself.

Please go back to topic! Traffic is a pain as far as my experience goes, I have not played any sim before, but I do find the options for road constructions and traffic management quite simple, and my cities are crying for traffic problems after they reach the 100-200k limits. I tried 3 different approaches to this, but I still have serious problems. Maybe it is me that I do not know how to construct the proper junctions, but I have not seen any clever things in the SS I seen so far either.

Basically my problem is that an intersection with traffic lights and pedestrian paths for 5 lane avenues is quite bad, I tried to make some more complex road interactions, but I cannot seem to find any way to send traffic to other arteries without just creating a full intersection with traffic lights... is there any way to build exits and merges into roads for only some lanes?

Thanks

[Androv 6]

Don't think so It is possible to build large one way avenues though (5 lanes).

[deanco 0]

I hereby suggest that if you feel that paying $6/month for the possibility of having mass transit at some point in the future is, to put it mildly, a total ripoff;

If you think that being obliged to continue paying every month for basic content that should have been in the game to begin with, and to lose that content if you should decide to stop paying, is outrageous;

If you think that this marketing ploy is a cynical, shocking, money-grubbing act which takes advantage of a near monopoly on the genre, and loyal fans desperate for new content;

Then I simply suggest that you do not subscribe to the Planet Offer.

This whole ploy is all about money anyway.  OK then, I'll make it about money too.  Signed.

----------------------

BTW, RegisteringSucks, I have totally stolen your sig, and I encourage anyone else who signs to do the same.

[sparky66 0]

Originally posted by: simidavid

Although I don't agree with MC's approach to only providing free content to PO subscribers, Solo players should at least have the right to pay a small fee for the extra content. I feel that MC has strayed away from making a game that would blow a city builder's mind away, to making a game that could line their pockets with money This game has a lot of potential, but it will only be realized after MC puts it's act together and starts including Solo players into all the fun, because we paid for the game too!quote>

i agree! solo players paid for the game too MC. i personally don't like online gaming and it would be great if MC let us buy PO content for single player (and keep it too, no subscriptions).

i would gladly pay a one off fee to be able to use PO content in single player. Perhaps if they released PO content to single players every six months, in a expansion pack that contained the last six months PO content (including mass transit). That would mean that PO subscibers still have the advantage of getting extra content first, but solo players would still be happy because they would get the content in the end. like i said, i wouldn't mind paying up to £20 for that, which is about six months PO subscription anyway, but i would get to use the content in solo mode and keep it indefiately.

it could also mean that alot of the people that aren't buying this game because they don't like the PO will buy it. i just don't like thae fact that i can pay all that money and as soon as i stop paying i loose all my cities and my extra content.

[mmmfloorpie 0]

Originally posted by: ForceInfinity

Originally posted by: mmmfloorpie

I would have ABSOLUTELY no problem if Microsoft wanted to sell their consoles for half price and sold their games for $20 less than their PS3 counter parts. Hell, sell every Xbox without an ethernet card and if people choose to play online and subscribe to XBL, Microsoft will Fedex you an ethernet card that is a rental included in the monthly fee... Unfortunately, this is not how they operate.

I really don't know why computer game sales are slumping except for MMOs... I prefer the computer interface over the console interface hands down. A mouse and a keyboard are way better than 6 buttons and a stiff mini joystick... I've been craving a new "sim" game for years. The sad thing is, no one seems to be making them. I've gone back and played all my strategy/sim games a thousand times over and I'm really starting to get tired. I plead for something new! I'm a huge fan of games where you build and then manage something... I love the Civilization games and the Sim City games.... Luckily, Civilizations are being made and I'm hopeful that Civ 5 isn't that far away... They seem to have modded Civ4 into as many ways as they possibly can by now, so with any luck, we'll be play a new one soon! The Star Trek MMO might be fun too, who knows...

As for a new Sim City, I was really hopeful when I heard about Cities XL. Now, not so much. Adding mass trans to single player would go a long way in healing the wounds. Somehow I think that MC would rather secure longterm profitable that MMOs bring instead of the one time investment that a single player would bring. Please "do the right thing" MC! 

quote>

The PC issue boils down to a few different issues:

1.  Barrier for entry is high.   PC's that are capable of playing some of the triple A titles out there are much more expensive than any console.  Those PC's that are cheap come with integrated chipsets that can't handle some of the more advanced games.  So if you go on a dollar basis, it would stand to reason that you'll have many more console owners vs game capable pc owners.  Take Mass Effect for example.  Your install base in the XBox 360 is on the order of 10s of millions of consoles.  On the PC's you're looking at a small fraction of that (at least a small fraction capable of playing the game)

2. PC's as a platform:  Gaming PC's have more grunt than a console, but again since there is no baseline on a PC (differing OS's, differing memory configurations, differing motherboards, graphics, sound, etc).  Games get released that crash due to one configuration issue or another, or because some graphics driver didn't measure up.  This makes support costs huge for developers, and unless their publishers pony up some cash, or the developer didn't get enough sales, you sometimes won't get the support to fix the aforementioned issues.  This also has a secondary issue of giving people pause buying a PC game in the first place for fear of crashing.

3.  Instant gratification of consoles:  People want that instant gratification, and don't want to put up with internet activations, long installs, bugs, etc when they can just buy a console game, pop it into the shelf and play.

4.  Piracy.  Yes that P word.  This undoubtably hurts sales of the offline games.

5.  Why are MMO's so popular with publishers?  You can't pirate them.

An even more worrying trend may be brought on by OnLive if that ever takes off.  Basically with that thing, all your games are on the cloud and there will be no notion ever again of owning a copy of the game.  And god forbid if OnLive dies...  or your internet, or their servers...  

Anyways, The Nintendo Wii's onlive offering is thin at best, and you don't see hardly any online multiplayer if at all.

PS3... well I don't use their online offering, so I can't speak intelligently to their merits vs XBox 360 lives.  So you likely have a valid point and will concede that to you.quote>

Ya, but if you think about it, it's always been this way. You've always had to pay for a good computer in order to play the good games. People always got the "instant gratification" from consoles. Piracy has always been a huge problem for PCs. There used to be practically no security features on PC games and people were free to copy as much as they wanted...

The difference, is that 10 years ago, PC gaming was intensely profitable and popular. Even with all the piracy, they made a load of money.

Part of the problem (atleast I think), is that when the tech bubble poped back in 2000 it took with it alot of the smaller developers with it... The remaining ones were eventually all bought by the strongest companies and merged... Now these companies focus on "what's profitable" instead of "what's new". Thus, there is alot less innovation and creativity. All we get are an endless line of first person shooters and sequels to only the most popular game series...

Maybe the technology curve has really exploded too, I don't know... I can still play most new games fairly well on this ATI x1300 that I've had for 2+ years now... And I have to think that people that enjoy playing these games are still out there... They just need to make their voices heard. I'm only 25 now and when I was a teenager I loved playing these types of games just as much as I do now... So I don't think it's just a generational thing either... I think alot of younger people would like these games too if only someone made them! Sadly, if you are the type of gamer that likes to kill aliens with shotguns, there are plenty of games for you... For everyone else, we are stuck to playing our old games and hoping a new company comes along to make something new! Right now, I'm waiting eagerly for Tropico 3 and maybe Cities XL if they atleast promise to release mass transit to SP... If they do that, I'll go out and buy the game tomorrow! 

[Stef42 0]

I think that MC has made Cities XL so complicated, so extensive, that it costs to much time.

The mass transit in Sim city 4 was in the game at its release, witch was great because people knew that when they bought the game it was complete.

Now I have the feeling that Cities XL is not complete. It is going to take a while before Cities XL will ever be complete, the advertising on the official website doesn't make it better. It more gives the feeling that 'new content will arrive soon' but 'later,later,later' for a 39,99 euro costing game witch isn't complete.