The end of planet offer

[Stef42 0]

Originally posted by: Gregory_C

As mentionned it before: at this point there is no set date for Cities XL 2011. It might be next year or it might be this year. And there is no set price yet. We would like it to be free for current PO subscribers, but can't guarantee that right now.

What is sure is that on march 8th the current version of the game becomes solo only and will include Buses. What happens beyond march 8th hasn't been set in stone yet, we will tell you more as soon as we can.quote>

So, if Cities XL 2011, comes out in 2011 (for us the worst case), no extra content will be put in the game for a almost complete year.. 

[mentarman 14]

Originally posted by: Stef42

Originally posted by: Gregory_C

As mentionned it before: at this point there is no set date for Cities XL 2011. It might be next year or it might be this year. And there is no set price yet. We would like it to be free for current PO subscribers, but can't guarantee that right now.

What is sure is that on march 8th the current version of the game becomes solo only and will include Buses. What happens beyond march 8th hasn't been set in stone yet, we will tell you more as soon as we can.quote>

So, if Cities XL 2011, comes out in 2011 (for us the worst case), no extra content will be put in the game for a almost complete year.. 

quote>

 

Not necessarily. Maybe there will be updates or GEMs still or add-on packs in the short term. Who knows? That's the point of his statement that beyond March 8 nothing is decided yet.

We as a community seem to be having a hard time accepting that they don't know (or can't tell us right now) what will happen for sure... But in a way we asked for this. One way to make sure you fulfill your promises is to just not make many promises...

[zippaz 0]

Please forgive me for a couple of these questions:

I'm a veteran living with a traumatic brain injury (memory, some confusion). Do you all think I'll be able to play this game decently? Or will it be too overwhelming?

Also can we at least chat to other players after they force the game out of the multiplayer trade thingy? Or will it just be complete chat silence in the game?

Oh and I can't subscribe yet can I? I just discovered the release of this game

[MadBrahms 0]

Originally posted by: mentarman

Originally posted by: Stef42

Originally posted by: Gregory_C

As mentionned it before: at this point there is no set date for Cities XL 2011. It might be next year or it might be this year. And there is no set price yet. We would like it to be free for current PO subscribers, but can't guarantee that right now.

What is sure is that on march 8th the current version of the game becomes solo only and will include Buses. What happens beyond march 8th hasn't been set in stone yet, we will tell you more as soon as we can.quote>

So, if Cities XL 2011, comes out in 2011 (for us the worst case), no extra content will be put in the game for a almost complete year.. 

quote>

 

Not necessarily. Maybe there will be updates or GEMs still or add-on packs in the short term. Who knows? That's the point of his statement that beyond March 8 nothing is decided yet.

We as a community seem to be having a hard time accepting that they don't know (or can't tell us right now) what will happen for sure... But in a way we asked for this. One way to make sure you fulfill your promises is to just not make many promises...

quote>

We can be pretty sure on content, though, given that MC's own FAQ states that "until Cities XL 2011 is released no new content or patches will be published either for the current online game or solo game." I don't see Gregory's statement as superseding that, given that he's primarily addressing the CXL 2011 release.

In respect to Soltangris' previous comment (which I am having trouble finding to quote, must be losing my eyesight!) regarding the content previewed on German fansites, I'm actually rather optimistic that it will see the light of day, and I'm probably getting a reputation for being a naysayer in general. It's likely, though, that at least some of the content - especially landmarks - will be released in the paid add-on packs rather than the main game, which is understandable given that they would have originally been released as to PO subscribers.

I'm somewhat more worried, actually, that MC may not fix some of the nagging bugs and inconveniences but rather simply focus on things that are flashy in an attempt to lure more of us back in. I'll totally fall for it, myself, because I'm addicted to the core game, but my experience with CXLso far is that things like medieval buildings and new landmarks were released without fixing issues such as pre-filled plaza effects, public service effect radii, highway bridges, trade notifications (which are still incredibly opaque), and of course the infamous memory leak. Hopefully if we carp about these enough in the meantime they won't forget to fix them!

[Baracus250 0]

Originally posted by: zippaz

Please forgive me for a couple of these questions:

I'm a veteran living with a traumatic brain injury (memory, some confusion). Do you all think I'll be able to play this game decently? Or will it be too overwhelming?

Also can we at least chat to other players after they force the game out of the multiplayer trade thingy? Or will it just be complete chat silence in the game?

Oh and I can't subscribe yet can I? I just discovered the release of this game

quote>

I'm afraid you have missed the boat somewhat for the online / interactive component of the game - they have removed the subscriptions from their site so you can no longer sign-up.

As far as the game goes, I find it's a nice relaxing pace. There's enough to get your teeth into without it being overwhelming. It's fairly static unelss you do something (no disasters, no simulation over time) so the main things to manage are your various resources (inc. classes of inhabitants) so once you get over the initial hurdle of making some profit in the first few minutes of a new map, you can pretty much go at your own pace. Of course you can pause it on SP mode too

On the flip side - it is this static feel that will end up putting you off over a longer period of time until some new content or mods come out.

[rsd6000 8]

Originally posted by: zippaz

Please forgive me for a couple of these questions:

I'm a veteran living with a traumatic brain injury (memory, some confusion). Do you all think I'll be able to play this game decently? Or will it be too overwhelming?

Also can we at least chat to other players after they force the game out of the multiplayer trade thingy? Or will it just be complete chat silence in the game?

Oh and I can't subscribe yet can I? I just discovered the release of this game

quote>

the subsribtions was closed on 1st feb which you missed the boat

[zippaz 0]

Originally posted by: rsd6000

Originally posted by: zippaz

Please forgive me for a couple of these questions:

I'm a veteran living with a traumatic brain injury (memory, some confusion). Do you all think I'll be able to play this game decently? Or will it be too overwhelming?

Also can we at least chat to other players after they force the game out of the multiplayer trade thingy? Or will it just be complete chat silence in the game?

quote>

the subsribtions was closed on 1st feb which you missed the boat

quote>

that's a shame.    nothing I can do about it though I guess.

[mentarman 14]

Originally posted by: MadBrahms

Originally posted by: mentarman

Originally posted by: Stef42

Originally posted by: Gregory_C

As mentionned it before: at this point there is no set date for Cities XL 2011. It might be next year or it might be this year. And there is no set price yet. We would like it to be free for current PO subscribers, but can't guarantee that right now.

What is sure is that on march 8th the current version of the game becomes solo only and will include Buses. What happens beyond march 8th hasn't been set in stone yet, we will tell you more as soon as we can.quote>

So, if Cities XL 2011, comes out in 2011 (for us the worst case), no extra content will be put in the game for a almost complete year.. 

quote>

 

Not necessarily. Maybe there will be updates or GEMs still or add-on packs in the short term. Who knows? That's the point of his statement that beyond March 8 nothing is decided yet.

We as a community seem to be having a hard time accepting that they don't know (or can't tell us right now) what will happen for sure... But in a way we asked for this. One way to make sure you fulfill your promises is to just not make many promises...

quote>

We can be pretty sure on content, though, given that MC's own FAQ states that "until Cities XL 2011 is released no new content or patches will be published either for the current online game or solo game." I don't see Gregory's statement as superseding that, given that he's primarily addressing the CXL 2011 release.

quote>

Good catch, I hadn't remembered that (mainly because I don't think it will be 2011 before we see Cities XL 2011) but that does seem to support the point that if we don't see it until 2011, there will be no new content before that.

(I tend to think we'll either see it fairly soon or not at all, but what do I know.)

[DazzaDazza 29]

If they release new content in before CXL2011 comes out, there would be no point to CXL2011.........

[Shilka 0]

Well, they promised me monthly new content when I paid for my januari PO, and I never got it.

I fail to see what's logical about letting people pay for something, and then not giving it because you want to let them pay for it again in a later stage...

[USA_Pride 49]

Originally posted by: Shilka

Well, they promised me monthly new content when I paid for my januari PO, and I never got it.

I fail to see what's logical about letting people pay for something, and then not giving it because you want to let them pay for it again in a later stage...quote>

Nothing in January, nothing in Feb...

Smells like a Scam Offer!

But look at the bright side, you'll lose all your cities unless you use an unsupported transfer method that may or may not work.  That's Monte Cristo's way of thanking you for all your dollars!

[morriswalters 16]

Grab the pitchforks, grab the torches, lets go to the castle and get em!!!!!! 

[IntoxiNation 0]

Originally posted by: USA_Pride

Originally posted by: Shilka

Well, they promised me monthly new content when I paid for my januari PO, and I never got it.

I fail to see what's logical about letting people pay for something, and then not giving it because you want to let them pay for it again in a later stage...quote>

Nothing in January, nothing in Feb...

Smells like a Scam Offer!

But look at the bright side, you'll lose all your cities unless you use an unsupported transfer method that may or may not work.  That's Monte Cristo's way of thanking you for all your dollars!quote>

Well the have been saying March 8 is the big day. Hopefully they will make up for it with whatever they are releasing on that date. On the bright side, they could have just said "screw it", filed for bankruptcy and we would be left with nothing at all. At least it looks like MC is trying something here and that is good news.

[Andre090904 0]

@USA_Pride: You may use this simple method to import your PO-city into SP.

[soltangris 42]

Grab the pitchforks, grab the torches, lets go to the castle and get em!!!!!! 

 

Hahahaha, well said!

Aren't you used to them already, Morris? I stopped paying atteniton already...

[Shilka 0]

Don't get me wrong, I can understand what MC is doing here from a bussiness point of view with the ending of the PO offer and all, but I thought it would have been decent to have the content updated untill the ending of PO, not stop adding content 2 months before. You won't hear me complain about the game itself, I always do with what I get.

I already had the game, got PO so I would get added content, and ended up paying januari PO for nothing (no updates, except the removal of the xmas content).

I'm not into complaining about games at all, but having people pay for extra content, and then keeping the content away from the people that have already paid for it in advance isn't a good thing in my book.... that's all.

[City Planner 121]

Originally posted by: mentarman

Good catch, I hadn't remembered that (mainly because I don't think it will be 2011 before we see Cities XL 2011) but that does seem to support the point that if we don't see it until 2011, there will be no new content before that.

(I tend to think we'll either see it fairly soon or not at all, but what do I know.)

quote>

I have to agree here that we'll either see it fairly soon (within 3 to 6 months) or not see it at all and it will just quietly go away with a bit of a whimper.

Obviously as many others feel, I'd love to see it fairly soon rather than never at all, but if it takes a while and they actually produce something of quality in 2011, then so be it.  If on the other hand, 2011 is a buggy piece of tripe, then why even bother, the word would get out so fast that sales would just be dead flat (imo)

(all my opinion here only)

MC has the opportunity to redeem themselves, but the tightrope that they will be walking requires them to make all the exacting right moves, one (substantial) screw up could jeopardize any possible gains for them with 2011.  Do it right, (as I think Dredgren (sorry spelling mate) mentioned) and put it into the communities hands now and they could redeem themselves over the course of time, allowing them to continue selling and garner a dedicated fan base to the game.

The game needs substantial additions (and I don't just mean mass transportation) to make it be the game that is going to sell like SC4 has sold for all these long years and could continue to make MC money into the forseeable future if they happen to hold the rights to the game exclusively and will be the primary source of selling said game, it's gems, expansions and addons.

If they mistep off the tightrope this time, Im afraid it is the worst for this game, I won't pretend to know their financial position for all we know they don't have all their eggs in one basket at all and CXL was just one portion of their projected revenue, they may have any number of other games up their sleeves that they have or are in the process of acquiring funding for.

Personally, I think there is going to be this huge sigh when March 8th is here and 2011 is not available for download or purchase as it seems there is a fairly large audience that thinks that 2011 might be released on that date even though Greg has stated that they don't know if it will be this year or next when 2011 comes out.

This may now be nothing more than a sideline project for them and they have to go on to other projects to make their earnings.  I know of other developers that produced some games and could not put out any more patches to fix the glaring bugs that were still in their software because like MC they were a rather small(ish) developer and had to move onto other projects so they could survive.  Their old game which had huge interest in the beginning died out over the time span of about a year to where now the once active communities are all but dead other than a core group of 10 or so users.

The way that I see it is that the longer MC needs to produce 2011, the less interest their will be for it, and I think that MC fully understands this.  Bad press is better than no press at all as some people like to say, strike while the irons hot and all that.  Delaying 2011 into the year of 2011 does not benefit MC or the players of CXL at all, but it may be an unfortunate necessity to try to produce the game on the side of whatever else they might be needing to work on to keep floating along as a company.

I hope for our sake and at least a bit for MC's sake that they still have the manpower, willpower and desire to pump some serious time and dedication into 2011 to get it out fast, AND as a solid and well transformed single player solution to CXL, it's for everybody's benefit, theirs and ours alike that they do.

Good luck,.

[edcase2k4-thugangel1983 1]

not wanting to create an echo-chamber but really if one way to help redeem and boost sales for CXL is to engage the existing city-building game fans then yes, what MC really needs to do is implement the things that SC4 already provided but what CXL failed to provide. no point focusing on massive wishlists and innovative desires with new transportation features and customisation, zoning customisation, because the fundamental core mechanics of the game are lacking in quite a few departments... and as far as i can tell - it is that which is always the biggest put-off for me and many other potential players.

the fact is that CXL actually did innovate and provide new features in some areas (3D graphics, free rotation for content placement, different climates, and amongst other things). if they could bring the rest, that is to say - the core mechanics - up to scratch in order to match SC4, and make some of its features more user-friendly, then the game would become a lot more appealing to the wealth of the city-building players who were disappointed in CXL like myself and still rate even the unmodified SC4 as a better game.

i'm not gonna bother listing what things they are which need to be improved because its all been said before. i will say this though - i think that fixing these things will definitely warm more of the countless existing SC4 players to purchasing CXL. would that creatae enough sales to help MC though? i dunno... something tells me, not.

[USA_Pride 49]

Originally posted by: soltangris

Grab the pitchforks, grab the torches, lets go to the castle and get em!!!!!! 

 

Hahahaha, well said!

Aren't you used to them already, Morris? I stopped paying atteniton already...quote>

Sorry, I have a bad track record on predictions and accuracy...

Oh wait...

I was right that the PO would fail because it's a rip off and scam.  I was also right that having all your work tied into a subscription plan was a bad thing because MC controls it and not you.

You'll never see anything bad about MC.  I can't believe the MC faithful see no issue that all your cities will be lost unless you use an unsupported method that folks report only works some of the time.

Face it, MC, while I wish them the best of luck, have mis-managed themselves into oblivion.  Terrible customer relations, horrible pricing model.  Buggy product.  Exploited the single player game.  Memory leaks.

Game over.

There will be no Cities XL 2011.  You can stick a fork in Monte Cristo.  They haven't been able to profit with the PO, and now that they've ditched out on everyone and everyone will be stuck with an incomplete single player game they aren't going to sell enough copies to finance Cities XL 2011.

Seriously, after the way that Monte Cristo has treated the community, they deserve to go bankrupt.  Not that I wish that on them and the families supported by the company, but they failed.  I hope they're all able to find jobs elsewhere.

[CZAR ALEKSANDER 0]

here again is USA_Pride spewing fowl remarks and wishing bad things on people

the endless debat of planet offer coming to end is now getting out of hand

it is time move on something new usa_pride or get a life

[morriswalters 16]

USA Pride

I probably shouldn't have posted that little diddy.  It was amusing to me but served no reasonable purpose.  I just plain don't care if you were right or not.  I frankly don't care what anybody thinks of the game other than me.  I bought it,  I paid for it, and I have had a lot of fun on a lot of levels.  Both talking about it with others, taking apart the game and exploring it's limits, and just making pretty pictures.  In terms of how I feel about the people who post here, I'm only really intersted in those who bring something positive to the table.  Who share ideas that add something to my picture of the game.  What I not interested in is being reminded that some people think my opinion of the game makes me somehow less intelligent than them.  In terms of Monte Cristo, at least in my experience they have been no better or worse than a lot of people with whom I've had dealings.  Perhaps I was lucky.  Again though, I don't care.  Other than the fact that I wish bad days on no one, I am utterly unconcerned about Monte Cristo, since I don't own stock.  I've finished the game, unless something new comes along.  And if I never play again, that's okay.  I'm sorry your unhappy.  I promise that for my part I'll leave you alone.

[mentarman 14]

Whoopdeedoo, you were right about some things along with tons of other people. You're a modern-day Cassandra. Your special I-was-right badge of merit is in the mail*, now can you stop harping on about it? I'd gladly pay you the cost of a month of PO to can all the negativity.**

*not really

**really

[Asheroo 53]

Originally posted by: USA_Pride

Originally posted by: soltangris

Grab the pitchforks, grab the torches, lets go to the castle and get em!!!!!! 

 

Hahahaha, well said!

Aren't you used to them already, Morris? I stopped paying atteniton already...quote>

Sorry, I have a bad track record on predictions and accuracy...

Oh wait...

I was right that the PO would fail because it's a rip off and scam.  I was also right that having all your work tied into a subscription plan was a bad thing because MC controls it and not you.quote>

Yeah yeah, so what? Anyone could of had been right, but all in all, we have opinions and we have estimates. Although I hoped and estimated for it to only just be successful, I did think the PO was "crap", especially for a fee per month system, but I expressed it in a civil way so MC will be able to learn on from me. Do you really expect companies to listen to people going "You suck, your product is crap" at them?

You'll never see anything bad about MC.  I can't believe the MC faithful see no issue that all your cities will be lost unless you use an unsupported method that folks report only works some of the time.quote>

Lol, gotta love the changing statements, "MC are bad because they are making you lose your cities" > "MC are bad because they are making you lose your cities unless you use an unofficial method". I've got an idea, how about one of us sends a ticket to MC on the official website through our account suggestion that they put up an article on how to transfer your cities to single player?  

Also, it's just a game, just a city that was built. Ok, you took some time, but you had fun, and that's what it's all about. It's a creation, time to move onto another piece. If you really are that sad about it and crying and complaining because your cities mean your life to you, that really is just sad. Hopefully no one feels like that though.

Face it, MC, while I wish them the best of luck, have mis-managed themselves into oblivion.  Terrible customer relations,...quote>

And since when were you a victim of that? Yeah, ok, a few people reported the odd few mistakes, we all make them, it's what's called being human beings, and it's much better than receiving support from a robot. Also, on the news, they report the car crashes, but do they ever report the millions around that don't crash?  

There will be no Cities XL 2011.  You can stick a fork in Monte Cristo.  They haven't been able to profit with the PO, and now that they've ditched out on everyone and everyone will be stuck with an incomplete single player game they aren't going to sell enough copies to finance Cities XL 2011.quote>

Assumptions, assumptions, assumptions. So, you assume that because MC have quit with the PO, they will lose funds because you assume everyone hates the game and that they all think it's an incomplete game so because of this you assume, even though MC have confirmed CXL 2011, that it will never happen and say this is definitely going to happen? Speak for yourself, please, one thing I hate hearing in the forum is people assuming that because they, and maybe a few others, don't like something, everyone else doesn't either.

All in all, I hate it when people assume, that's what destroys this world.

PS. USA_Pride, take a read again so you know what I'm saying. You've basically misunderstood us all "positive" people, and misread our posts, or skipped and assumed. Yes, of course you can have a negative opinion, Yes, of course you can express it, Yes, you can hate everything, But, you must express yourself with care, by expressing it in a civil manner and being constructive with reasoning. And No, us "positive" people do not go around to every thread going "MC rule! They are the best 4ever! I love them and CXL!".

Anyway guys, I'm probably going to contradict myself saying this (I've been known to instantly contradict myself ), lets not argue again about each other. We should just ignore any of the " unconstructive spam", there's no point arguing with a continuous repetitive message, or simply arguing with something so unconstructive. Even better, if you're really that offended by it, there's a button saying "Report" or similar, it's a very useful button and is very effective as well, and it does the better for everyone.

[soltangris 42]

Anyway guys, I'm probably going to contradict myself saying this (I've been known to instantly contradict myself

), lets not argue again about each other. We should just ignore any of the " unconstructive spam", there's no point arguing with a continuous repetitive message, or simply arguing with something so unconstructive.

 

I wholeheartedly agree! ?If us 'positive' people stop answering the teasing, this thread will die by itself. Otherwise, we'll be stuck in a meaningless discussion for months, as has happened before already.

Just shut your ears, guys. Let's wait and see.

[DazzaDazza 29]

Yah, yah.........., YAH, take that USA_Pride, we got the smell of blood now………

 it's all your fault……    Stuff MC let just get that US guy……….    

        



 

[dedgren 830]

Yep.  Put your hands over your eyes.  Put your fingers in your ears, too.  That'll help.

Jerome Gastaldi, CEO of Monte Cristo to Rock, Paper, Shotgun

[

linkie

]: 

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

Hubris is a terrible thing.

Jerome Gastaldi, CEO of Monte Cristo to GameDebate

[

linkie

]: 

If you look around, there is so much you can add to a game, why wouldn't you? The last real benchmark in our category is Sim City 4, a game that is now 6 years old. Do we think there is a lot of new stuff to be brought to massively expand this style of product? Yes, most definitely.

and

At its core, CITIES XL will offer all the city building features known to fans of the genre. If you want to play a solo city builder, you’ll certainly be able to in the game.  But we've gone to great lengths to expand upon the genre, to bring in other gamers who might not normally find themselves playing a game like CITIES XL

.

After more than two years of this, I'm afraid there's abundant support for the folks in the "if Monte Cristo's (corporate) lips are moving, MC is lying" school of thought.  But don't believe me.  Believe more than two years of screen grabs, saved threads (MC may have sent its forums down the memory hole- I didn't) and archived emails that I'm pretty sure would serve to help straighten out anyone who would be genuinely confused by any of this.

Cities

Unlimited

XL is a single-player city builder...

CXL

is a single-player city builder with the option to play as a MMO...

CXL

can be played either as SP or an MMO...

CXL

is a city builder MMO that has a (castrated) single-player mode...

CXL

(2011) is a single-player city builder.

So the circle goes 'round and 'round.  What will tomorrow's truth be?

There's a couple of folks who've posted on this thread who ought to be ashamed in light of things (documented things, I'll add) that they've said previously, that's all I'll say.

Except that the buses are definitely coming March 8. Coming six months late, but they are definitely coming.  MC told us that they were.

Unless they don't.

David

[Asheroo 53]

Dedgren, I don't think MC could be that stupid now. They're on the verge of bankruptcy, the last thing they want to do is to try something again which already failed with CXL. Also, they've announced CXL2011 as a full single player city builder game, whereas CXL was officially announced as a single player city building game with a multiplayer side (of which you have to pay a fee). Everything before CXL was officially announced was unofficially and bound to change, and MC even said that themselves, but I've said many times, people just got too hyped up, misreading information and thought they were for sure going to get this. I think all game developers can learn from this, never, ever, show a game in such an early stage, and don't show it too often.

MC have certainly learnt on now. CXL 2011 will definitely be a single player city building game, ain't no doubt about it. They've announced it in full detail. MC aren't that stupid to redo CXL as an MMO, ok so they have done it before, but they're on the verge of bankruptcy, and they aren't that stupid, it's a shame such people think so. If MC would still want an MMO city builder, they would of had not quit with the PO, but they have and are now focusing on single player city building.

It's really been such a shame seeing how badly people think of MC just because of their own personal expectations of the game after misreading, misunderstanding and misjudging on MC and what they truly say. In future, maybe MC should expand that "Work in Progress" sign in their pictures and blog entries to the size of the screen, maybe bold it too and underline it in Caps Lock, maybe even in 3D for those who have the correct glasses, maybe have it flashing as well.

[mentarman 14]

Originally posted by: dedgren

Yep.  Put your hands over your eyes.  Put your fingers in your ears, too.  That'll help.quote>

Your mistake is that you think we're all closing our eyes to the flaws of the game and of MC. Most of us are just trying to shut out the constant droning of people who keep posting the same negative things over and over. We can be sick of that without being blind to the many faults of MC, CXL, the PO, etc. But it seems some people take it as some sort of accomplishment that they are actually more annoying than MC or the game's many faults. So congrats to those people I guess.

[Tarkus 6,933]

I'm going to add my 2c in here as well . . .

The problem right now facing MC and any other would-be city-simulator developer is as follows.

PREMISE:  SC4 is in a dominant market position, despite being 7 years old, due to continued availability at a low price, as well as gigabytes of quality, free custom content and easy mechanisms to make more.

ANALYSIS: Any new city simulator would have to, in some way or another, surpass SC4 in just about every way--in other words, be "the mythical SC5" (or at least an "SC4.X") or create a very different but equally (if not more) appealing gameplay paradigm.  Due to the graphics-centric mentality present in the market and with game publishers, said new game would most likely have to be in full-3D (like CXL).  However, given that city simulators are very complicated and dynamic programs that are quite taxing on computer systems, the specifications of the average consumer's system is absolutely key to being able to have market penetration.  If your game takes a supercomputer to run, no matter how great it is, it is only going to have a small niche market among power users.

With regards to the specs end of things, in order to reliably pull it off a full-3D SC4-type experience and get enough market, the "low-end" of the systems market will most likely need to have quad-core or even hex-core processors, 8GB of RAM and 2GB of graphics memory.   This will likely happen by 2013 or so, +/- 1 year. 

The first consumer market hex-core CPUs, including Intel's Core i7 "Gulftown" series (list price $562-999) and AMD's Phenom II X6 "Thuban" line, won't be out until later this year.  Graphics cards have stalled at the 512MB-1GB range for the past couple years.  And 8GB of RAM is still a relatively high spec for most computers currently.

Paul Pedriana, the lead programmer for SC4, basically predicted some similar benchmarks for the feasibility of a full-3D simulator back in 2003 [source]:

A conservative estimate would be that the game would require about 4-8GB of disk space, the video card would need to have about 1-2GB of RAM, and the video card would need to be about 10-20 times as fast as a current GeForce 4 card. And AGP is going to have to get 4-8 times as fast is it currently is.

quote>

If anyone is wondering why EA hasn't bothered trying to make a "real" SC5 yet, there's your answer--they know it's not feasible.  SimCity Societies was simply a matter-of-fact "spinoff" to make a few quick bucks in the interim (which it did--albeit SC4 was still slightly outselling it even in its prime), and as dreadful as it may have been, it was never intended, nor promised, to be anything more than that.  Much of the furor that surrounded it was simply because of pipe dreams that it *might* be "the mythical SC5". 

I think Monte Cristo severely misjudged the market and the considerable difficulty involved in putting a game like this together.  The bar is just unbelievably high.  There's a myriad of reasons why the Planet Offer did not succeed and MC is in this current predicament:

1) 2009 was too early, as the average computer was not (and still is not) able to fully handle a "next-generation city-simulator" (henceforth NGCS).  Had Monte Cristo been able to resist the temptation to publicly reveal what was then Cities Unlimited back in 2007, they could have continued working on the project without much in the way of outside pressure or demand, perhaps revealing it when they were closer to the "magic date" when the NGCS was feasible.

Of course, they have investors and publishers to keep happy . . . perhaps they simply didn't have the cashflow in order to properly "hold out" for that long without releasing a product, and they had to get *something* out the door.

I almost have to wonder if SCS might have even forced Monte Cristo's hand, thinking that EA was going to seriously tackle an NGCS and they needed to compete, or even easing them into a false sense of security after more details about SCS were revealed.

2) The aforementioned theory that city-simulator enthusiasts wouldn't go for an MMO-CS like CXL's Planet Offer is fairly valid from what I've seen, and judging by what I've read on these threads, such an approach is primarily supported by a small but loyal faction of CXL "diehards".

The other complication is the fact that there is a considerable number of under-18 individuals who make up the market, who don't have credit cards (or parents willing to fork them over) to pay subscription fees.  The largest market of people playing MMOs like World of Warcraft is those over 18.  According to Dr. Nick Yee of the Palo Alto Research Center [source], the average age of MMO players is 26.

It's also been said that city-simulator types are more "solitary" players--I think this is true to an extent.  I do see how a multiplayer experience could be interesting, as I'm sure others do (see the various "collaborative efforts" and City Journal unions about), but the MMO approach was not the way to do it. 

It came at a price to the players, who had to pay subscription fees, and at a price to Monte Cristo, who had to pay for all the servers.  Going the "self-service" route by allowing for player-controlled IP/LAN games would have eliminated those costs and still allowed for a new experience of collaboration and competition, without any real effort on the developer's part.

3) Cities XL did not have enough distribution to gain a considerable market share.  Right now, it is not possible to go into a store in North America and simply pick up a hard copy of Cities XL.  (Unlike the case with MC's previous effort, City Life, which I still see on store shelves here in Oregon on occasion).  The only way North American consumers could purchase CXL was via the internet.  While digital distribution is gaining in popularity as a means of selling PC games, it still means that the game will, at best, obtain a moderate niche market at this point.  Most PC games that sell successfully through digital distribution have strong "brick-and-mortar" distribution as well.

4) The game was rushed, buggy and did not have many of the features that were initially advertised to the community, with MC claiming they'll "add more to it" with future addons.  Now, if one were making a free and/or open-source game, some "incompletion" is to be expected.  The developers are doing things voluntarily, in their spare time, and the thing's free. But Monte Cristo is paying developers, and more importantly, the consumers are paying good money for CXL. And in the case of the Planet Offer, MC was as well to maintain those servers.

Monte Cristo would actually probably be best served by taking a lower profile right now.  It's a drastic step, I'll admit, but at this point, they need one in order to survive.  I can't blame them for wanting to try to actively befriend customers and tailor the product accordingly--that was actually a rather nice touch.  But it ended up being a huge pitfall for them.  The expectations they had to meet were already extraordinarily high and the odds very long, and their regular contact with the community and apparent "feature promises" simply heightened them.  And regardless of the developers' actual intent, there is always going to be an underlying base assumption from the general city-simulator community public that any developer making a new city-simulation game is effectively making "the mythical SC5".  Mr. Gastaldi's comments simply further this point.

I think calling their next product "Cities XL 2011" was a big mistake, since including a chronological date in the title generally implies a "promise" of a "release date".  MC should not be making "promises" given their current predicament, and 2010 or 2011 is still too early for an NGCS to be feasible, so there's a good likelihood of cart-before-horse-style failure.  And unless they hit the ball completely out of the park and within the timeframe they imposed upon themselves, which would likely involve a miraculous level of optimization in order to produce decent results with current-day hardware, it will simply lead to a further decline in reputation.

In short, Monte Cristo, while they may have had rather ambitious and noble intent with Cities XL--which, at least on some level, you have to admire them for--simply jumped into the market at the wrong time and with the wrong strategy.  The city simulator market is an extraordinarily tough one--one that, right now, no one can win.  3 years from now, maybe, but not now.

-Alex (Tarkus)

[DazzaDazza 29]

Asheroo Wote:

 They're on the verge of bankruptcy

 

We don’t acutely know that……. unless your there crunching the number with them ,you don’t know that.  

mentarman wrote:

Your mistake is that you think we're all closing our eyes to the flaws of the game and of MC. Most of us are just trying to shut out the constant droning of people who keep posting the same negative things over and over. We can be sick of that without being blind to the many faults of MC,

CXL

, the PO, etc. But it seems some people take it as some sort of accomplishment that they are actually more annoying than MC or the game's many faults. So congrats to those people I guess.

 

I agree, people seem to confuse the difference between likening the game “Cities XL” and likening MC, I personally don’t think much of MC, and I read most of there statements with some distained.. But I like the game.