Biggest Failure of CXL?

[LivingInThePast 364]

Originally posted by: N106

I've decided not to make a final judgement until about a month after CXL is released. I need to wait for the reviews. Also, I couldn't even play the demo because the file had gotten corrupted after 20 minutes of waiting.

If CXL fails, then Simtropolis will probably refocus back on SC4 in a matter of weeks.

And, I've come to a realization. Sim City 4, the game we all love, was a FLUKE!!! The reason EA didn't make a Sim City 5 the way we wanted was because we're not the audience they're aiming for. EA has refocused.

Meanwhile, Monte Cristo was trying to aim for us, but was also looking for groups from other audiences. Not only that, but they had a deadline and aren't a big gaming company. The reason things may seemed tacked-on is because they didn't have enough resources or time.

I've personally accepted that there will be no Sim City 5. We'll probably be using SC4 for a few more years until computers advance to the point that we cannot play it. Then, Simtropolis and other SC4 sites will die. One by one, users will become inactive, as they can no longer play Sim City 4, and are left without a replacement.

By about 2015, the loud voice of SC4 fans wanting a good SC5 will have been silenced.

Yes, I am a major pessimist.quote>

Here's the plan: wait until EA gives up on it for good...buy it out, spruce it up, create patches and add-ons.

[rtil 1]

i've gotta give them credit for one thing - they have a lot of nerve to completely alienate what should be their core audience for the sake of attempting to maximize profit. if they keep the game the way it is now, it will fail, and they will regret it.

[geek12 0]

Originally posted by: RegisteringSucks

The biggest disappointment to me is SP mode seems to have been sacrificed for a chat window, trading tokens, and an avatar.

It's not the only disappointment, but it's the biggest one for me.quote>

I agree, it's not about the montly fee, it's not about mass transit, it's all about how they kinda butchered our single player mode

[Da_Brain 0]

OK, I'll have a go at this:

How about BORING! Lack of Stats, Lack of Simulation, Lack of fixes, Lack of Core Game Play and in General a very sloppy put together piece of software that actually took 2 years to make!

I have more, but I'll quit for now!  

[Easy Bakes 253]

Mostly boring. I didnt like you have to destroy whole sections to upgrade roads.

This may go the way Spore did in this community. Died for lack of intrest.

[rsd6000 8]

Originally posted by: Easy Bakes

Mostly boring. I didnt like you have to destroy whole sections to upgrade roads.

This may go the way Spore did in this community. Died for lack of intrest.

quote>

oh - how you know its died?

[Dirktator 2,327]

Let's try to get back to the original topic, and keep it civil please, guys.

[Z77 3]

personally i think the biggest failure is online play. i havent actually played it yet, so im not going to start bashing it nor praising it. but if from what i hear is true, i wont be buying it b/c of the fact. but like i said havent played it. *goes searching for game*

[frdrcklim 139]

I think it's fairly reasonable that you need a 8800GT to see this game in max detail. I think it's fairly obvious. SC4 had a somewhat 2-D to 3-D engine so the graphics are less demanding. I think the problem why people are a bit upset is because of the jump they have to make. Hua10 is right though. Graphics cards now are on the cheap. A 9800 GT for $100~, a GTX 260 for $180~

[jabezscratch 159]

Senator CXL, I served with SC4, I knew SC4, and SC4 was a friend of mine. Senator CXL, you're no SC4.

[tSlater 134]

It's boring.  Every time I hopped into the beta, I'd play for about 15 minutes, get bored, and load up Sim City 4.

To add to the person's earlier complaint with the buildings all being square:

Taking into account addons and whatnot, Sim City 4 is more off-the-grid than CXL is.  All SC4 buildings are still anchored to a grid, and the roads are limited to whatever FAR pieces are available in the NAM, while CXL offers any angle of roads with options for any angle.  However, with all of the CXL buildings being the same shape, all one can really do is take a full grid system and rotate it.  In the end, you still have a grid layout.. just not aligned N-S; E-W.  Thanks to the NAM's FAR, diagonal overhanging buildings, and these new FAR-oriented buildings, SC4 can create a less-grided look than CXL can.  Sure, this could change, but that would still be only one issue amongst many. 

[MandelSoft 2,775]

Originally posted by: Easy Bakes

Mostly boring. I didnt like you have to destroy whole sections to upgrade roads.

This may go the way Spore did in this community. Died for lack of intrest.

quote>

 

You say that Spore died? While it has over 3 million users worldwide (me included)? I don't think so!

Back on topic: the biggest failure of Cities XL is trying to attract city builder gamers, while targeting on the MMO gamers. This leads to the Planet Offer, neglecting the Solo Mode, and neglecting essential features like mass transit

 

[IonWind 3]

Originally posted by: tSlater

To add to the person's earlier complaint with the buildings all being square:

Taking into account addons and whatnot, Sim City 4 is more off-the-grid than CXL is.  All SC4 buildings are still anchored to a grid, and the roads are limited to whatever FAR pieces are available in the NAM, while CXL offers any angle of roads with options for any angle.  However, with all of the CXL buildings being the same shape, all one can really do is take a full grid system and rotate it.  In the end, you still have a grid layout.. just not aligned N-S; E-W.  Thanks to the NAM's FAR, diagonal overhanging buildings, and these new FAR-oriented buildings, SC4 can create a less-grided look than CXL can.  Sure, this could change, but that would still be only one issue amongst many. quote>

Amen!

Maybe I should just install Simcity 4 once again. I would still be doing the same, no matter if it was CXL or SC4. I would be avoiding the elevated lots with retaining walls, but doing this is way easier in SC4. CXL doesn't give any guides that would be of use on terrain.

[rushman5 33]

No room to express too much creativity, very constricted and bound. I know they say don't expect another SC4 with 6 years of CC, but why shouldn't we?

[BurroDiablo 222]

Custom content is the key to this game... we have been saying this ever since CXL was annouced. Once custom content starts appearing, all these little foibles will slowly dissapear, as they have in SC4.

What I do NOT want to see is this 'filter' system that they may implement so people cannot cheat on the PO by giving custom buildings super-attributes (like cash parks and such). I know MC wants to see CC on the PO, but I think the majority of us couldn't care less... we just want to have a fun city building game. It certainly serves SC4 well.

[soldyne 111]

hmmm, biggest disappointment? they did not give us the plopping of buildings they promised, at least not in the demo anyway. as was mentioned earlier, when I am designing a rural neighborhood I don't want suburban apartment complexes sprouting up next the corn fields. or when I am making a suburban apartment complex, I don't want 5 different kinds of architecture showing up, I want it all to be the same so it looks more realistic.

as far as PO goes, MC sold out; they are not trying to make a game, they are trying to make a profit. with that said, I will still buy the game as I see a lot potential with it.

[jabezscratch 159]

Originally posted by: El Burro

Custom content is the key to this game... we have been saying this ever since CXL was annouced. Once custom content starts appearing, all these little foibles will slowly dissapear, as they have in SC4.

What I do NOT want to see is this 'filter' system that they may implement so people cannot cheat on the PO by giving custom buildings super-attributes (like cash parks and such). I know MC wants to see CC on the PO, but I think the majority of us couldn't care less... we just want to have a fun city building game. It certainly serves SC4 well.quote>

I agree 100%.  What is turning me off CXL at this point is the apparent disparity b/n the online and offline experience.  I worry that MC is trying to make the PO so much more enjoyable than offline play just to draw in the subscription fees.  Economically speaking, I understand that.  But, just remember and be forewarned MC: you are dealing w/ a community of players who have grown w/ SC4 and established high standards of quality when it comes to a city-bulding sim so don't think you can jerk around so many people and expect SC4-level loyality.  I hope that I'm not sounding overly harsh towards MC but SCS got abandoned and CXL will die on the vine too if most of these outstanding concerns are not addressed satisfactorily.

[Gringamuyloca 47]

For me, the biggest failure of CXL was how disappointed I was just watching the demo load! All the hype had led me to believe that it was going to be everything SC4 is and more.... what I found was something akin to SimCity3000 in 3D... BLECH!

The worse part was was how quickly my diappointment grew as I went through each step of the CXL Demo tutorial...as I realized with a sinking heart that THIS is not even close to what I've been waiting for.

I am so thankful I DIDN'T order the pre-order! What a waste that would have been!

[DCMetro34 577]

We heard you the first two times.  

[USA_Pride 49]

Originally posted by: DCMetro34

No mass transit, hands down. It being a mod, and making us join this 'scam-like program' just to have mass transit and a ski resort, and useless other mods MC makes is stupid. For all us SPs we have to PAY and JOIN something to get what should've been in the game to start.quote>

You're mistaken.  The subscription only get you a DISCOUNT of 30% on mods, they cost EVEN MORE beyond the subscription and original game purchase.

[UrbanLegend 63]

I'm reserving final judgement, but the demo felt unfinished.  I don't care about MMO. I just want to sit there for hours on a Sunday while I'm hungover and my girlfriend watches DVR recordings of Oprah and just play with a big virtual trainset.

[DCMetro34 577]

Enough.

[Legosim 14]

monthly fee, takes a powerful pc to play, lack of transportation, and pay for ad ons, there plain n' simple

[hua10 0]

Originally posted by: Legosim

monthly fee, takes a powerful pc to play, lack of transportation, and pay for ad ons, there plain n' simple quote>

I have a two year old rig that I spent about $1500 on back in 2007 that you needn't spend over $800 to build something similar today.

Frankly, if spending $800 is too much... I'm not sure if pc gaming is for you

[yamaneko 2]

There is an economic downturn affecting most of Europe and North America at the moment;  those not currently unemployed have reason to fear losing their jobs.  $111/year to play plus $100 to upgrade the computer plus $50 for the software is too expensive. 

[Omniassiah 3]

Edited: Whoa helps if you read both pages....

Hua10, My guess is that you don't look at the City Builder crowd as the crowd that is pushing the edge with the latest graphics cards, Super high end Processors, and 32Gb of RAM. There are certain Genres that you can say that and then there are those you can't, City building is one of them. We're not talking about a game genre that has been known for pushing the limits of hardware. Your far more likely to get a kid or parent picking up this game then you will a Die-hard FPS player who never tried a city builder before. I updated my computer for Crysis, If you asked me to do the same for CitiesXL I would laugh at you.

That said I found for the graphics that CXL has its performance is abysmal.

But that said what killed me was how static your city was. It didn't seem like there we're people there that occasionally did things that you may not have wanted to happen. CXL just felt all very scripted...

[rtil 1]

I actually think the attention to detail on zoom levels compared to performance in CXL is pretty impressive. that being said, though, it doesn't change the fact that the game itself just screams sub-par.

[Travellingboys 0]

My biggest problem is the massive gaps between the buildings and the alignment of the buildings up against the roads. You have absolutely no control over how your city looks and very limited choices. Personally for me, I like total control over the look, feel, structure, age of my cities and I try to replicate places that I have been. For me, Sim City is like a virtual model railway project and quite frankly CXL was a poor replication of SimCity Societies. I'm sorry but I was bored. They had some great ideas and graphics but in the end didn't know how to please the true followers.....

[Deathcat001 8]

CXL wasnt SC5 remeber that people. Give MC a small break, i know its a bad game but look at the 3 sim citys before SC4, they wernt good. Now MC is at number 2 (or 3) so yeah. 

[SimFox 804]

I think this is an interesting view on Planet Offer thing of Cities XL:

"Cities XL is an online multiplayer city-building strategy game, which, in The Demoman's mind, means it's probably sort of like playing SimCity while being called a fag by a bunch of strangers."quote>

source: The Demoman: Cities XL Review by Christopher Livingston