A challenge to the SC4 fanatics!

[soldyne 111]

the challenge is simple for those that have the ability to do so.

backup all of your SC4 custom content and save files.

uninstall SC4 completely.

reinstall SC4 vanilla - no CC, no mods, no Rush Hour no patches.

now play SC4 vanilla as it was initially released.

now compare to CXL.

if you still feel that SC4 was superior to CXL then by all means continue to complain, otherwise, please keep in mind that CXL is still new and after a few years of patches, updates and a few GEMs it will be a very different game.

discuss.

[RegisterST2 0]

Originally posted by: soldyne

the challenge is simple for those that have the ability to do so.

backup all of your SC4 custom content and save files.

uninstall SC4 completely.

reinstall SC4 vanilla - no CC, no mods, no Rush Hour no patches.

now play SC4 vanilla as it was initially released.

now compare to CXL.

if you still feel that SC4 was superior to CXL then by all means continue to complain, otherwise, please keep in mind that CXL is still new and after a few years of patches, updates and a few GEMs it will be a very different game.

discuss.

quote>

I've personally never bought into this argument.

CXL is supposed to be next-generation.  I built a new computer 4 months ago.  I didn't compare the CPU I was buying to the CPU in my 7 year old machine I was replacing.  I didn't get a 80 GB hard drive because 7 years ago 80 GB hard drives were okay.

Each generation of games and applications is supposed to build upon the previous generation.

Updated graphics don't count in my book.  The graphics in CXL are nice from far away, but it would be inconceivable for any game to come out with graphics simply on par with a game from 6 years ago.  So the graphics don't make it next-gen in my book.

Full 3D?  Yes.  This is definitely next-gen.

Curved roads?  This is next gen, but it doesn't seem complete to me.  It's like they added curved roads and didn't bother to address any of the issues these curved roads would bring up.  Mixing curved roads with perfectly square lots doesn't seem next-generational to me. 

The simulator part I already addressed in another thread.  It's not only not next-gen, it seems to be a step backward from the previous generation, in my opinion.

The online part I guess could be next-gen.  The fact that i never cared about an avatar or chatting with people while building a city probably lessens the importance of this to me.

I guess it just boils down to what people are looking for.  I wasn't looking for SC5 necessarily, but I was looking for a city builder that I felt was a step above SC4, however it was done.  This just doesn't feel like it to me.

Just my opinion, though.

[USA_Pride 49]

SC4 had many issues and bugs at release. I was very frustrated. EA patched the game for FREE and then offered Rush Hour up for only $0 to $20. (There was a time that RO was $10 and it had a $10 rebate).

You need to keep in mind you're comparing a $40 game to over $300 worth of CXL (initial purchase, monthly fees, purchase of GEMs).

I still think that SC4 vanilla, even with no patches was more fun than the CXL demo. But to be more fair, I would need to compare SC4 Vanilla to the real CXL, as the demo is limited to 22K and is missing 90% of the textures to keep download sizes down.

[CWLGAMER01 39]

Actually -- at release SimCity 4 was $49.99 + tax (if your state has sales tax).....  Rush Hour upon release was $29.99 and did have a $10 rebate the first few weeks after release.....

If I am not mistaken SimCity Deluxe Edition (SC4 + RH) come out with Rush Hour or maybe a little later??!!  It was $39.99.

Patching a game for "free" is something that is typical and has been the going trend in the industry for a long time......  I doubt "patches/bug" fixes will cost money......Patches and bug fixes are different then content BTW.

[soldyne 111]

comparing the costs is a difficult venture.

with SC4 there was no/very little official support for new game content other than RH.

with CXL, MC intends to offer new content in the form of new buildings, architecture styles, maps and more every month as part of the PO.

so with SC4 you paid nothing and got nothing from the official developers.

with CXL you pay a monthly fee and get monthly add ons from the official developers. if you don't pay the monthly fee you don't get the monthly add ons and it becomes the same as SC4.

RH can be seen as a transportation GEM for comparison purposes, we already know MC plans to release lots and lots of GEMs in the future.

as far as cost comparison goes, I would say they are equal. you get what you pay for.

one thing that is left up in the air at the moment is the capacity for custom content. I don't remember how easy or prevalent CC was for SC4 vanilla (I don't think I was around here that far back). but I think it safe to say that CC was rare for SC4 at release and soon after so it is still on par with CXL at release.

the key words here are "at release".

[soltangris 42]

I completely agree with soldyne, we can´t compare the content of a newly-released game with a game that has had add-ons for years. Concerning the famous mechanics that should be ´new´. ´´úp-to-date´´ and all that, I really don´t understand what you people expect! We have a revolutionary new road-building system that no one seems  to appreciate (everybody talks only about the curved roads, but we can´t forget the changeable heights of bridges and tunnels that let you build whatever comes in your mind), we have free-form farms, we have free-form zoning system.....

OK, there doesn~t seem to be free-form lots to fit the curved roads, but if you look in the real world, you won´t see many buildings that are grid-free, even though their adjacent spaces are irregular. We have this in the demo - square buildings inside irregular lots, with the rest of the space filled with parks, Quite convincing, I would say. 

And again, we didn´t see more than 10 % of the game in the demo. Everybody seems to forget this as well. 

Personally, I pre-ordered the limited edition already. I´m gonna play the game for several months offline, see what happens, and then maybe spend some money with the PO, again to see what happens . THEN we can talk.   

[USA_Pride 49]

Originally posted by: soldyneas far as cost comparison goes, I would say they are equal. you get what you pay for.quote>

Wow, I couldn't disagree more!  LOL.

So let's do the best case scenario for MC, you do the cheap option of $6.30 USD a month, that's still $75 USD a year, plus the cost of the initial game purchase, plus the additional cost of GEMs.

$75 + 40 = $115 USD for one year of game play (once again, GEMs not included in this price)

So I can either play CXL for one year, or buy potentially 2 or perhaps three other games.

However, if I was to buy those other games, I would have them to play with forever, but if I spend $115 USD on CXL I can't play it forever, I can only play the game with all the fancy updates if I subscribe.

That's not a good value, in my humble opinion.  Perhaps we just think differently though.

[Soviet779 1]

Well simcity 4 vanilla's problems were pretty much EA's fault for their lousy Q&A and rushing the game, monte cristo arent supposed to be taking the same approach, in fact no dev/publisher should be doing this. Simcity 4 as it is today may well be an unfair comparison to cities XL but its still the same core problem, we arent getting what we want! I expected better from a dev that isnt EA.

[kevinj319 0]

I don't agree with your premise.  First of all, it is based on faulty logic:

SC4 before Rush Hour was pretty terrible, so that makes CXL really awesome because right now it is at least as terrible!

Let's bust up some of the other faulty premises while we're at it:

CXL will be better with time:

SC4 was a solid base to build upon.  The reason so many people continue to play and mod the game is because at its core, it has a solid simulation.  Buildings, transports, and face-lifts are built upon this foundation, but without the core simulation the interest would not have been there to put in the time and effort to mod the game. CXL lacks depth and there is very little in the way of simulation going on at its core.  These are changes that cannot be made after the game goes live, as any changes to the core sim would cause paying players' cities to become unstable and go bankrupt.  So yes, years of added buildings and transports, assuming they ever come, will add to CXL, but will not fix its fatal flaw, which is the lack of a decent core sim.

CXL can't compete with 6 years of custom content!:

I can't really find anyone who is expecting CXL to contain the equivalent of 6 years of custom content, so this is a straw man argument.  The complaints I see are about the core simulation, the MMO, and other things that have little to do with custom content and much to do with the overall concept of the game itself.

CXL now is like SC4 when it first came out

SC4 had buses, trains, subways--- even before rush hour.  It has its flaws but it was engaging at its core.

Comparing the game to SC4 is unfair and should not be done:

SC4 is pretty much the standard for any city builder game right now.  Any game entering the market will be compared to it, period.  That doesn't mean that CXL should have been made exactly like SC4.  It should have been better!  Take the things that worked in SC4 and expand on them, take the things that didn't work and make them better!  Instead, CXL breaks everything that did work in other city building games and then finds more things to break.  Still don't think CXL was intended to be compared to SC4?  More can be said, but I will let MC's CEO speak for me:

Jerome Gastaldi:

"The corner-stone is a solid city building game. We’re going for the Sim City 4 spot"

source: http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2009/09/02/the-talk-of-the-town-cities-xls-jerome-gastaldi/

[soldyne 111]

Originally posted by: USA_Pride

Originally posted by: soldyneas far as cost comparison goes, I would say they are equal. you get what you pay for.quote>

Wow, I couldn't disagree more!  LOL.

So let's do the best case scenario for MC, you do the cheap option of $6.30 USD a month, that's still $75 USD a year, plus the cost of the initial game purchase, plus the additional cost of GEMs.

$75 + 40 = $115 USD for one year of game play (once again, GEMs not included in this price)

So I can either play CXL for one year, or buy potentially 2 or perhaps three other games.

However, if I was to buy those other games, I would have them to play with forever, but if I spend $115 USD on CXL I can't play it forever, I can only play the game with all the fancy updates if I subscribe.

That's not a good value, in my humble opinion.  Perhaps we just think differently though.quote>

I can see your side of things, however, your value calculation does not seem to take into account the added content you will be getting every month for your extra 75$.  before i continue I want to say that we don't yet know the quality of the added content but it should enhance the game to some degree.

with that said the added content is simiar to stuff packs from the Sims.  so is $75 worth 12 stuff packs (1 year of subscription)?  seeing as how a stuff pack is worth about 10-20 bucks I say $75 is a steal assuming of course that CXL stuff packs are decent.

[gabry85 2]

OK, I admit I'm too lazy to take SC4 back to its roots, mainly because I don't want to re-install it, move plugins and regions away from my docs, but I'll just show you 4 (as many as the good franchise) features from some Gamespot.com pictures that beat Cities XL hands down. Just Four.

Region Play. You can make your city as big as you want.

Taxes based on type and wealth. Ordinances, trade, civic funding and utilities are also included.

Hand terraforming. If you can build the city of your dreams as large as you want, you can sculpt your terrains as well.

Mass Transportation (passenger and freight trains, buses, subways). Need I say anything else?

This is all stuff I still own. Never rented it.

---

Off topic: Oh, btw, just noticed this old Golden Gate Bridge. At least the guys at Maxis scaled it up and converted to highway.

[USA_Pride 49]

Originally posted by: soldyneI say $75 is a steal assuming of course that CXL stuff packs are decent.quote>

True, we're both arguing an unknown.  You're making the optimistic assumption that additional content will be good, and I'm making the pessimistic assumption that it will be of lackluster quality and quantity.

Sooo....  I guess we'll just have to wait and see!  Hopefully my pessimistic view is wrong!

[8elhaj 0]

SC4 was terrible without RH.

I will see how CXL will be.

But we should expect more for a new-gen game than a game done 7 years ago.

[Kryptowhite 9]

the difference being simcities original gameplay was ridiculously fun and addictive.

In fact, it feels almost foreign playing vanilla because i actually play the game, as opposed to with custom content where i just plop everything.

[soltangris 42]

Why don't any of you guys agree CXL IS a new gen sim? We have amazing road-building system (you not only can build convincing curves, you can change heights at will, which nobody seems to take into account), we have flood-filling zoning (the farms), the free zoning is also there for whomever cares to attempt it. Parks and plazas, all free-form as well, and we haven't seen more than 10% of the game! There's finally hotels (not only eye candy), leisure activities, beach, skiing.... options to fine-tune airports and mass transport (I suspect there will be more than we care to do with the GEMs).....

What more do you want????!!!!! Oh yes, I know: a game made to everybody's precise specifications, gorgeous-looking, amazingly-fast running (even on those slow 4-year-old PCs), containing everything you could imagine and some thinks you can't, and here we are talking of the separate fantasies of not 10 - 20 fans, BUT OF THE ENTIRE COMMUNITY!!!!!!! Oh yes, and all that almost for free.... say, for 40 bucks, payable once!

WAKE UP! We don't live in Dreamland, you can't blame a company that has undertaken the responsibility to realise all those insane fantasies of ours AND ADD TO THEM for wanting to charge money....

Do you complain when you pay your monthly subscription to WOW? And that one you can't even play offline, not without some features, NOT AT ALL!!!!!

And if none of the above is doing any impact on you, then continue playing SC4.

[jsieczka 19]

The idea that you have to compare Cities XL to the 1st generation of Simcity 4 is ridicules, so is the notion that you cannot compare Cities XL to SC4 outright. Cities Xls competitor for my spending dollar is not the vanilla SC4 it is the present version of SC4 aka SC4+RH+CC. For my spending dollar Cities XL is both inferior to the product that I now have in both value and gameplay.

My copy of SC4 has long since been payed off or if you spread the cost out over the lifetime of my ownership then $10 a year and decreasing fast. Cities XL I will have an initial start up cost plus monthly expenditures so $12 a month next to $0.83 for SC4, of course this is only if you want a better product.

In terms of game play I find the product that I have in my possession already to be far more fun to play. As a consumer the argument whether or not to buy something comes down to is it better then what I have now, is it more cost efficient then what I have now and do I need the product? In this case the answer is no on all accounts.

[kevinj319 0]

Exactly, jsieczka.

When I decide where to eat tonight, I think I'll compare the Whopper I can get at the Burger King down the street with a Quarter Pounder I got from McDonalds in 1987.

[cirugo 1,889]

Sim City 4 at release we knew we were getting patches and expansion packs.  We knew we were getting a BAT.

With this we are getting some half-baked MMO hybrid with no chance of updates without subscribing to their "MMO."

SimCity 4 out of the box at release sucked.  I couldn't play it without crashing until they patched it.

I don't think anyone's under the illusion that it was great at release.  It DID have most of the tools available to make a reasonably realistic facsimile of a real-world city though. 

I DO NOT WANT to play some trading game online with other people.

I just want to build a city...with planes, trains, and automobiles

(and subways)

[knightrider 0]

Originally posted by: soltangris

We have amazing road-building system (you not only can build convincing curves, you can change heights at will, which nobody seems to take into account)...we have flood-filling zoning (the farms), the free zoning is also there for whomever cares to attempt it. Parks and plazas, all free-form as well, and we haven't seen more than 10% of the game! There's finally hotels (not only eye candy), leisure activities, beach, skiing.... options to fine-tune airports and mass transport (I suspect there will be more than we care to do with the GEMs)...quote>

Well, I am glad that you are liking it.  Personally, I disagree with you.  The roads can be curved, yes, but since zones are square, you lose a lot of space.  Roads can't be upgraded by dragging new over old, you have to delete first, and half the time that causes the intersections to not line up, so you have to delete crossroads, too... meanwhile the game goes on because there is no pause in online mode.  If you want to delete a road segment, you have to create stub roads first and delete them afterward.  We don't need to even go into the missing transportation options.  Flood-filling zoning would be great if they used it on anything besides farms.  Free-zone is really mass plop.  It doesn't create a "zone," it creates a group of square boxes that we like to refer to as lots.   A zone would fill the whole area and support a vaireity of sizes and orientations of buildings within that area.  The "free zone" tool just haphazardly crams in as many square lots as it can.  The game lacks proper tools to create a park (supposedly that is in the works).  Right now you have to place roads around the border, fill, then delete the roads.  Very hack-ish.  No ability to place water for ponds or anything.  Terraforming tools are pretty lacking, too.  Hotels are cool to have in the game... but why does the city provide them?  A city-run hotel sounds pretty crummy, I wouldn't stay there.  Same goes for the leisure activities... I can see zoning for leisure, but why am I in charge of plopping it and paying for it?  And the GEM's... no one has any idea about one way or the other.

I'm probably going to earn a reputaiton as one of those "negative and angry" people, but the truth is I tried to like this game, and I tried hard.  I tried to provide suggestions to MC to make it better, but the decisions had been cast.  

[Mctittles 0]

Ok can't really say without RH because I just recently started playing sim city deluxe for the first time. I have not mods installed though. I am fully hooked. I haven't had enough time to play because of work, but even though I want to play CXL when it is released I think I would rather continue playing this until I get bored of it. Which from the look of these forums, might be never!

Nah, I'll still save time for CXL, but yea first time ever on SC4 deluxe and it's great even by today's standards.

[soltangris 42]

Hihihi, knightrider, I guess I'm earning reputation as the 'stupid and obstinate defender' just as you are earning yours 'negative and angry'...  But let's see:

- Roads can't be upgraded. True, this sucks big time, I hate it too. But so many people complained about it that it might be that MC will do something about it. Anyway, in real world it's difficult to enlarge roads too, in downtown areas it usually means destruction of stuff nearby. Not that I'd like this to happen in the game, don't get me worng.

- Lack of variety in 'free' zones. True, all we have now is a bunch of lots that 'fit' into the zone. However, don't forget that all this is due to the fact that we only have one size of square lots for now , it's highly probable that in the full game we'll have more sizes, and the engine would try to place different- sized lots so as to better fit the zone we've drawn. Also, I hope (nobody seems to believe it, but yes, I AM the crazy optimist), so I hope that there WILL be irregular lots along with the square ones. They would fit along curves, while the other ones would fill in the rest. Won't this solve all the issues with non-grid based roads VS square zones?

- I don't understand your issue with the parks: do you want to be able to build a green area in the woods? What's the problem if the park is bordered by roads?

- Hotels and leisure. It's the same old discussion about plopable VS growable stuff, obviously you want your hotels and leisures to be growable, but MC decided to make them plopable. Which, by chance, gives you more controll over it. Again, I urge you to wait for the full game and see how everything fits together before delivering judgement. (by the way I agree with you here: they should be growable zones).

Look, I'm not stupid and ignorant, nor have I been paid by MC, I'm just trying to find good points where everybody keeps searching for the bad ones. Of course I wouldn't want to pay for updating the game; I can't even conceive of a city-builder without mass transit; I realise right now the zones look superficious and boring.... There's a ton of stuff I don't like, but there also is tons of stuff that I like. I can see potential here; I can see that with some work the missing parts of the picture will be added.

All I'm saying is: don't be so quick do deliver judgement and condemn a game that you haven't even tried! (the demo doesn't count) Would you say a girl is stupid and ugly and you never wanna meet her, when all you know about her comes from some stories from friends and seeing her picture?

[deanej 2]

Why should parks have to be bordered by roads? In RL that doesn't happen all the time.

I don't know if Cities XL can distinguish between lots and buildings, but if it can, it would be nice if something could be implemented along the lines of upgrade the road, the lot is shaved smaller if possible (which is what happens in RL in the suburbs).

[Msprintz 25]

Originally posted by: soltangris

Why don't any of you guys agree CXL IS a new gen sim? We have amazing road-building system (you not only can build convincing curves, you can change heights at will, which nobody seems to take into account)quote>

I love how everyone seems to bring curved roads into the equation, like it's the saving grace for CXL.  To that I say try the NAM for SC4.  The Network addon mod with all the upgrades adds curved roads among other things. 

What we want is a complete game that's at least on par with the intial release of SC4, we're not getting that.  We're not even getting mass transportation, including buses.  These are realistic expectations and it's not like they couldn't be met.  

[RegisterST2 0]

Originally posted by: soltangris

However, don't forget that all this is due to the fact that we only have one size of square lots for now , it's highly probable that in the full game we'll have more sizes, and the engine would try to place different- sized lots so as to better fit the zone we've drawn. quote>

I'm just curious, but why would you think this is highly probable?  It wasn't in the beta and it's not in the demo.  Release is only two weeks away.  There's not a lot that can change at this point.

[Ocram's Razr 963]

Know what, if you don't like CitiesXL, don't buy it. Sure SimCity 4 Deluxe is old, is half 3D requires custom content to be very fun, and took a long time for all patches and the expansion pack to come out but don't let that sway you into thinking that SimCity 4 is worse than Cities XL. The facts that Monte Cristo is a small game company, the game was delayed, people expected next gen features and all of the abilities and visuals of SimCity 4 + Rush Hour EP+ years of custom content should not make you feel sympathy or understand the difficulty of making such a game, you are above that. You think, no you KNOW that you can do better. You should turn all your hate and disappointment to work on a game like Urbs Urbis or Simtropolis 1000 (Urbs Urbis died and Simtropolis 1000 never went anywhere and exists solely as a thread). I know that you can succeed and show up Monte Cristo!

Note: this post is meant to be sarcastic.

By the way, there are ploppable parks in Cities XL, the smallest of them is unlocked at 20,000 population.

[knightrider 0]

Originally posted by: soltangris

Look, I'm not stupid and ignorant, nor have I been paid by MC, I'm just trying to find good points where everybody keeps searching for the bad ones. quote>

Oh, hey, I don't think you're stupid.  I also don't think MC paid you, they can't even moderate their own boards let alone organize somehting like that.

I don't want to rain on your parade if you like the game. I also know most games aren't perfect. I just don't see this as a matter of the glass being half full or half empty... it's more like 1% full and 99% empty.  Anyway, I really am not sure why there are so many people who think the release version is going to be miraculously different from what we have seen.  I'm sure they will improve on some issues, but they won't change the overall game mechaincs or add in a complex simulation, which is really my main hangup on the game.  Besides, my experiences with the lack of progress in the beta do not lead me to expect the game to change much.

If you want to get the game, I'm not trying to change you.  If there is anyone out there who isn't sure if they should shell out the cash for this game, they can read my posts and decide for themselves if my points make sense.  After all, it's not like the store will accept returns on video games if you change your mind.  Besides, I just like discussing.  Anyway, take care!

[Numpty Dumpty 17]

Originally posted by: soldyne

the challenge is simple for those that have the ability to do so.

backup all of your SC4 custom content and save files.

uninstall SC4 completely.

reinstall SC4 vanilla - no CC, no mods, no Rush Hour no patches.

now play SC4 vanilla as it was initially released.

now compare to CXL.

if you still feel that SC4 was superior to CXL then by all means continue to complain, otherwise, please keep in mind that CXL is still new and after a few years of patches, updates and a few GEMs it will be a very different game.

discuss.

quote>

1. I love playing SC4.

2. I have NEVER downloaded or installed one SINGLE piece of custom content in the 7 years SC4 has been available.

3. Given points 1 and 2, SC4 at release, is EASILY a more complete city building experience, given that it is plainly obvious that we have less options with CXL  vanilla than we did with SC4 vanilla.

You shouldn't even need to ask the question.

Cities XL Vanilla has:

-No real zoning. It literally has NO zoning. Zoning is allocating land to be sold to people who will pay tax on it, not building houses FOR people of only a CERTAIN demographic. That's not zoning.

-No real management of cities.except for two sliders for residential and corporate taxes as opposed to ordinances, taxes for every single demographic of every tax revenue producing sector in SC4 and even setting budgets for individual buildings in accordance to the needs of the immediate surroundings.

-Terraforming. You could actually MAKE your own landscape. There is nothing of that sort in CXL.

-ZERO mass transit........not even BUSES will make it into vanilla we are now being told.......

Do you REALLY need to ask which is the more complete city building game vanilla wise?

[deanej 2]

I don't know why people think "remove CC from the equation and Cities XL is better than SC4". I guess they forgot how good base SC4 was. When I was last here before the Cities XL demo none of the mods (except NAM) had really taken off... CC was just lots, maps, and the occasional mod, and the NAM was mostly pathfinding fixing + puzzle pieces. SimMars was barely even a concept at the time.

When I compare Cities XL to SC4, I don't include custom content. Cities XL being equal to vanilla SC4 + some RH (such as ground highways, avenues, the bridges) was a reasonable expectation. It's disappointing that MC couldn't do that.

By the way, 10% of the final game pretty much means art. You're not going to see major changes like the cheerleaders seem to expect. It was pretty much to keep the download size reasonable (the one city, seven day limit, 22,000 citizens limit is enough for a demo). 75-90% of the space used on a game these days is art and music. Not coding.

I'm not saying it's bad to like Cities XL (on the contrary, I believe that if MC plays their cards right it could be a good game), but you can't ignore its shortcomings.

[JakeMD 107]

everything is a-ok here.

[soltangris 42]

Heheh, it's really funny to see how people can never stop comparing the two games. Even when they try to be more objective.... (I'm not talking about this specific thread, which is dedicated to it)

It also makes quite evident the REAL reason for all complains: that Cities XL is not, and will never be, Sim City 5.

For instance, they can't get over the fact that MC dared to change the basic population mechanic and introduced classes; even though the SC classless mechanic is quite unrealistic in a real big city. I mean, remember how a fully developed, 5 000 000+ city looked in SC4, with the whole region also developed? Skyscrapers, $$$ residential buildings, malls. That was it. Little middle class, no lower class at all. Now, let's brush aside the fact that this never happens in real life, even in the richest countries in the world. Let's just.... admire our creation and our mastery in making all zones developed to the highest levels!

How dare MC remove city services coverage!  When my whole joy in life was to constantly tweak that hospital's capacity and range..... When in real life people don't go to the nearest hospital (unless it's an emergency); in real life they go to the hospital that is covered by their health plan; or to the medic that they personally know (even when his office is on the other site of the city), or the free public clinic, again across town. And never mind the fact that in CXL services position will ALSO be important, because travel time actually DETERMINES houshold's satisfaction.... Oh, but in the demo I placed a hospital at the edge of the map and it worked! Never mind that the demo limits the city to 22 000 and there's hardly any traffic in it...

In short, how dare MC not make Sim City 4 with updated graphics, curved roads and zones!

And, most of all, HOW DARE THEY CHARGE a monthly fee to keep updating the game and adding content to it???!!!! When we had SC4 for free....(never mind the fact that beyond RH EA never moved a finger to support its development).

So, people, I call to you: instead of complaining of what Cities XL might have been, go complain to EA and plead to them (you might consider falling on your knees also) to make Sim City 5! Although, I can tell you why they haven't considered it until now: Because they see how difficult it's gonna be to satisfy you!

They see, actually, that it's gonna be impossible. They might as well turn their energy and money to more profitable, more promising enterprises.....

I'm sorry if this post sounds bitter. But that's exactly how I meant it to sound. Feel free to attack me. State for the 100th time how much better SC4 was than CXL is gonna ever be. How many more options it has, how it has mass transport.....

Or, maybe, think a little bit, wait a little bit, and give CXL a chance.

edited for caps, replaced with bold

-swat.