Comparing Simcity and Cities XL

[gabry85 2]

Originally posted by: bluespottedhorse

My only gripe with SC4 is the maps being too small 4x4 km and no curved roads.quote>

I'm with you here on curved roads: it's one big thing in CXL, that's for sure. Point is, would you exchange everything else for curved roads?

As for 4x4km maps in SC4, that's what Region Play is for. I don't care about the map size as long as I can expand my city with multiple maps across a theoretically unlimited region. That's definitely one of the best SC4 features and it's really, really, really bad SCS, CL and CXL didn't have it at all (looks like their developers never realized such potential for a 'modern' CB game)... not to mention mass transit (sorry, couldn't resist ). Dunno about you, but I just can't go back to SC3K-style maps anymore. I mean, would you come back to Windows ME after you've installed XP or Vista or Seven? Or lose some of the coolest or most popular spells in your favorite (MMO)RPG?

This is not exactly my idea of evolution. You might see it differently, but that's just me.

[site400 12]

Originally posted by: jeremy12

for those of you holding out for a new sim city from maxis.... http://news.bigdownload.com/2009/11/10/rumor-most-of-command-and-conquer-team-to-be-laid-off-after-candc/

According to their report, citiing unnamed sources, the C&C development team at EA's Los Angeles studio were warned that most of its members would be laid off after the release of Command and Conquer 4, which is slated for release in 2010. The report also states that layoffs are pending in other EA studios including Maxis (The Sims and Spore) and Pandemic (the upcoming Saboteur). Once again EA has yet to confirm if these reports are true.quote>

quote>

Yeah, I imagine we'll see SC5 at about the same time we see Kings Quest 9.  Cities XL will probably be the last attempt at a legitimate city builder.  If it fails miserably, I doubt anyone will ever try again....especially after the lambasting CXL received by the core fan base!

 

[Elukka 0]

Well... last time I looked at CXL was a year or two ago, and it certainly seemed better then.

I see some people say it's still in the early stages of development and more features will come. I will perhaps look at it again in a few years, and stay with SC4 when the citybuilder bug bites me in the meantime.

[Tuscan 20]

Originally posted by: toroca

I don't understand why so many people are so surprised that CXL is being compared to SC4...  Am I the only one who realizes that CXL is the first real competition to come along for SC4 in seven frakking years? They're both city-builders. Comparisons are inevitable. Get over it or go find something else to read.

I don't count Societies as real competition, by the way, because the SimCity fanbase watched the prerelease coverage and knew in advance that it wasn't the game they wanted. That's why it sold so miserably.  We were hoping for something different with CXL because of how much Monte Cristo engaged the fanbase.  EA and Tilted Mill essentially made a game and expected us to like it because it was a new SimCity, regardless of the fact that it didn't have anything we wanted or asked for in SC4's supposed replacement.

I have said this elsewhere, but it bears repeating, because it is evidence of just how GOOD SC4 actually is: In Societies' debut month, November of 2007, it was OUTSOLD by SC4 Deluxe.  What was then almost a five-year-old game outsold its own successor when it was brand new.  What's more, SC4 Deluxe was the tenth highest selling game of November, 2007.  THAT'S staying power.  And it wasn't a fluke, either; SC4 Deluxe has appeared in the top ten best selling PC game charts sporadically ever since it was released, and SC4 Vanilla DOMINATED the sales charts when it was new.  Neither SCS nor CXL can make the same claim.  SimCity 4 may not have sold as well as The Sims (but then again, no game in history ever has, so that's not really saying anything) but it IS a best-selling game that has surely made a huge profit for EA. The fact that it can still be found new on the shelf (and not even the bargain bins) in practically every game store is further evidence; how many other PC games that are seven years old still have such a prominent place on store shelves?

Now, because of the fact that SC4 remains the market leader in city building games, comparisons with CXL were inevitable and to be expected, especially since Monte Cristo made it a point early on to engage the SimCity fanbase, ostensibly to find out what we wanted in the "next big thing" in our genre. And that's why there is so much dissappointment over CXL. It is NOT the game we were hoping MC was going to make. Much of our input was seemingly ignored. And the release version seems half-finished, even compared with the original non-Rush Hour release of SC4 back in January of 2003.  Two of the primary ommisions are also two of the most ludicrous: lack of terraforming tools and lack of mass transit.  There hasn't been a major city-building game without both of those features since the original SimCity, and that was 20 years ago!  What were they thinking? Are they actually surprised by the fan backlash over these two omissions?  They shouldn't be; it was present during the beta.

CXL is a major step forward in city builders in some areas.  The graphics are beautiful, of course. The road construction system wins hands down over any prior city builder. The way they did farms is great. But in every other way I could think of during the beta, CXL is a step backward from SC4, which, be honest, is the game it has to beat to be successful. The zoning is a step backward, and a big one; the last time the SimCity series had a comparable zoning feature was the original version (I'm referring to the set sizes and lack of flexibility in building sizes). The only place the zoning comes out ahead is the fact that it can align to the newly-curvable roads. That's a plus, but not a big enough one to overcome the lack of flexibility.

Another step backward is in the area of information presentation.  Many of the complaints I've seen (and made) about CXL is that you're not given any real information.  There's a lack of water?  Okay, so how many water structures do I need to build to take care of it?  No idea, because we're not given any data on output or consumption. Where are the charts and graphs we've become accustomed to?  There are some there, but they all seem to lack some critical information.  The simulation is not very deep, as others have mentioned.  It mostly boils down to "build what satisfies them."  In SC4 a whole myriad of factors could affect your city and what happened in various parts of it.  In CXL... not so much. CXL seems more sterile than SC4, less alive.

It also seems more like a model set than a sandbox.  In SC4, one of the joys for me was never knowing what new building might appear, or when an area might upgrade itself to higher wealth, or whatever.  In CXL, you pretty much know what to expect from the moment you place a zone. It's only one step away from a system in which you manually place every single building. I always avoided custom RCI buildings that were only ploppable in SC4 for the precise reason that I don't WANT to plop every single thing. I'd rather have them grow naturally when conditions are right for them. Nothing like that happens in CXL. And while SC4's development engine could sometimes be overzealous in building and rebuilding an area, I prefer that to the static, unchanging neighborhoods in CXL.

I had high hopes for CXL.  I really did. Monte Cristo's early involvement with the community made me hope that they would get it right where EA screwed it up. I was dearly hoping that CXL would be the city builder that would finally dethrone SC4 as the reigning king of city builders.  In part, I had these hopes because I'm petty and I wanted to see a smaller developer bloody the nose of giant EA in a genre they have a virtual monopoly in, especially after they released the crap that was Societies and dared to stick the venerable SimCity name on it.

But I don't think it's going to happen. CXL has some definite positives, but in most of the areas people are looking for, SC4 still reigns supreme.  Gameplay can keep ancient games alive; I know of several active gaming communities surrounding games that are now over a decade old (one I'm thinking of was originally released on DOS for frak's sake), and it's because the games they center on were so well made that even though they look very dated now, they're still great fun to play.  SC4 is pretty much in that category; it's showing its age, but it's still so fun to play that thousands of us continue to play it. The proof is in the size of the still-active fan community.

I wish Monte Cristo had paid more attention to the fan community in the end. I think CXL would have a better chance at longevity if they had.  They did a better job than EA did with Societies, no doubt whatsoever about that.  But for me, at least, and many other gamers I've discussed this with, they have not managed to replace SC4. Not yet.  Maybe they will eventually when more of the content is released, but as others have said, I'm not willing to pay for a half-finished game. Give me a final product that has what I want in a city builder and you'll have a fan for life.  Until then, I'll stick with SC4. No "crying" here, just a simple statement of fact.quote>

I think you hit the nail on the head there!

[simidavid 0]

There is no comparison between SimCity 4 and Cities XL. Its obvious that SimCity 4 beats Cities XL by a mile! Sure, Cities XL has its advantages, such as 3-D graphics, more realistic economy, and better layout system. But what ruined it the most was the fact that only Planet Offer subscribers get access to the new mass transit system. Also, to get the most out of the game, you have to pay a monthly fee, which sucks! That is why I prefer SimCity 4 better, but also because of its superior mass transit systems, zoning and rezoning system, and the thousands of mods and downloads that take it the extra mile.

P.S. I own and play both games, so I can legitimately tell the differences between the 2.

[Mikie 9]

Well.. for those who are looking for a SimCity 5.. its definitely possible.. if maxis looks at the Revenue people are WILLINGLY spending for online gameplay.. I can tell you they will definitely jump at such opportunity.. why wouldint they?

[longhorn 25]

It will be a sad day when I finally say goodbye to SC4. I've been working on the same region since it came out, and put countless hours painstakingly crafting it. Upgrading it when Rush Hour came out, expanding it (much too big, in fact), building new NAM cities, and retrofitting and revitalizing cities when new mods and bats came out. Its a project that has no ending. I've never put so much work and really, love, into a game before. I put a lot of time into SC3K too, but each city was self contained, and when I filled the map, I was done. I could start a new city, but take that to completion as well. Not so with SC4. If not one single piece of custom content more was created, I could still play SC4 indefinitely with what this community has produced already. While improvements can certainly be made, 3D, curved roads, I'm not certain I even want an SC5 because I would hate to say goodbye to my region.

[Craig-Abcvs 1,595]

Unpinned.