Cities 2011 Questions

[Bountytaker 0]

I won't reply to that whole post now (not sure if its worth it anyway , but I will say this:

If MC didn't want to give any of the issues that are associated with giving a release date, then they SHOULDN'T have called the next game CXL 2011.  We wouldn't be saying a thing right now, if not for that.

ITS JUST THAT SIMPLE.

[City Planner 121]

Thanks for the reply Gregory.

Since things are so much up in the air, it seems that it would be pointless to subscribe for the last month to try to ensure that my copy of Cities XL is on the list for what is only a hopeful candidate to get patched to the full Cities 2011. Since it is unknown whether or not people that have subscribed or will subscribe during the last month of subscription to the PO, it seems it might just add another $10.00 onto whatever the costs end up being for Cities 2011, which might actually just tip the boat in the opposite direction that we'd want it to tip if we have to pay whatever the price is of 2011 Plus an extra $10.00 for that last month of subscription.

I can appreciate that you are explaining plainly that you really don't know. I think this is much better than promising us something that you will end up reversing a day or two before it's actual appearance and thus tee off more people. Better to say the truth that you don't know what is really going to happen with the prices or patches for free than to promise and break another promise.

In regards to the name, well, I'm used to that being that I grew up in the automotive industry (my father owned car dealerships) and so we get 2011 cars towards the end of the 2010 year so it just seems normal to me to name a product 2011 and release it in 2010, else by the time 2011 actually rolls around you've got a product that seems it's already over a year old.  I think that EA used to do this with some of their sports games if I'm not mistaken, like Tigerwoods PGA 2009 came out towards the end of 2008 etc.  Maybe I'm wrong but that's what I seem to remember happening so anyway, I don't take the name of Cities 2011 to actually mean that the game won't be released until 2011, I'd actually expect it to be released sometime between March 2010 and Nov 2010.

Being that the game is actually fully built already, I can't imagine it taking them 6 months or more to implement the features into the solo play game, I imagine that is actually one of the easier tasks that their developers will have to endure.

Thanks for your time.

[mentarman 14]

Originally posted by: Bountytaker

This is even more confusing, in the grand scheme of things.  The P.R. actually appears to be getting worse.

Why include info in a press release if things are THAT uncertain?  Why put it in an FAQ, with answers, which you are directing everyone to, if you can't say that those answers are in any way accurate?  Why put a "date" on the name of a project if that date isn't at all accurate?

Shouldn't the press release simply have been:  We're cancelling the P.O. due to lack of interest.  We have plans for the single player game that we think you'll find exciting.  Stay tuned for more news in the coming days/weeks.

Why the subterfuge and confusing info?  It does nothing for the players, and REALLY doesn't help the reputation of the company.quote>

What subterfuge? And how is your proposed statement less confusing?

I think MC are at least trying to give out some info, as much as they can with a bunch of stuff up in the air. Maybe some of it will change, that's life. I'm surprised your response to that is for them to give out even less info. Personally I'd rather have more info about what they are trying to do, even if it ends up being changed a bit, than no information.

Maybe some of the people who take everything said by a company as a solemn promise and then feel deeply betrayed when something changes just need to see more of life... Sadly there are now two groups of people like that, people who are angry that the game ended up being PO focused, and now people who liked the PO and feel the rug was pulled out from under them. Meanwhile the first group is dancing on the grave of the PO - yet still not satisfied with MC. Such an interesting process to watch...

[pete1061 0]

So, what I gather is

A: CXL 2011 will be out anytime in 2010, the 2011 naming is the same as the auto industry or other software (3DS MAX 2010 was released early in 2009), release date all depends on how smoothly tweaking it for pure solo play goes.

B: MC does not know how much the CXL 2011 update will cost anything said here is pure speculation.

C: CXL 2011 is more of an update than a fully new version essentially CXL version 1.5, it will contain much of what the PO had. I doubt there will be many radically new features.

I don't know about the rest of you, bu the only reason I subscribed was to specialize and trade between my own cities mainly. I didn't trade with others because i changed things far too often to be a reliable trade partner. The only other reason was access to bonus content.

D:I don't think MC is or will be totally bankrupt. Looks like they recently went into survival mode and massively scaled back. There probably we're not enough subscribers to pay the monthly cost of the servers and server administrators. Regardless, someone at MC will retain the CXL copyright and the game will continue on some level. Worst case it goes on hold for a bit until new updates/content can be sold.

[mentarman 14]

I'd agree except for point D). I think it's possible that they don't have the capital to put out CXL 2011 at all, or that if they do, that they will then run out of capital to do much more unless they find a way to monetize it correclty.

This is why I have no problem with paying a bit for updates, as it gives the company an incentive to stick with the game. I hope they can make that happen.

[Evillions 552]

MC has brought themselves into their own mess...

[bourneid 13]

I fell so great... payed $60 dollers for a online city building game and got a broken single player beta.... now I get to pay again for the crap I already bought... stuffed into 4pay download packs...... and pay anouther $60 for then game I wanted in the first palce......

NOT A CHANCE IN HELL! Monti CHristo..... you will not see anouther damn dime from me... thanks for putting out a crap game, and killing the city sim gener. who out there thinks that any other developer is going to risk putting out another one now....

[pete1061 0]

Originally posted by: mentarman

I'd agree except for point D). I think it's possible that they don't have the capital to put out CXL 2011 at all, or that if they do, that they will then run out of capital to do much more unless they find a way to monetize it correclty.

This is why I have no problem with paying a bit for updates, as it gives the company an incentive to stick with the game. I hope they can make that happen.quote>

They probably are very tight on money right now. Thats why CXL 2011 and content packs will be in the form of a download driectly from them. They don't have the funds to do a release of physical disks.

I just don't think CXL will completely disappear, someone there still owns the title and will do what they can to eventually make something off of it.

[Bountytaker 0]

Originally posted by: mentarman

Originally posted by: Bountytaker

This is even more confusing, in the grand scheme of things.  The P.R. actually appears to be getting worse.

Why include info in a press release if things are THAT uncertain?  Why put it in an FAQ, with answers, which you are directing everyone to, if you can't say that those answers are in any way accurate?  Why put a "date" on the name of a project if that date isn't at all accurate?

Shouldn't the press release simply have been:  We're cancelling the P.O. due to lack of interest.  We have plans for the single player game that we think you'll find exciting.  Stay tuned for more news in the coming days/weeks.

Why the subterfuge and confusing info?  It does nothing for the players, and REALLY doesn't help the reputation of the company.quote>

What subterfuge? And how is your proposed statement less confusing?

I think MC are at least trying to give out some info, as much as they can with a bunch of stuff up in the air. Maybe some of it will change, that's life. I'm surprised your response to that is for them to give out even less info. Personally I'd rather have more info about what they are trying to do, even if it ends up being changed a bit, than no information.

Maybe some of the people who take everything said by a company as a solemn promise and then feel deeply betrayed when something changes just need to see more of life... Sadly there are now two groups of people like that, people who are angry that the game ended up being PO focused, and now people who liked the PO and feel the rug was pulled out from under them. Meanwhile the first group is dancing on the grave of the PO - yet still not satisfied with MC. Such an interesting process to watch...

quote>

The subterfuge comment is in regards to their hinting at bigger financial problems, without going into it, and their failure to clarify if 2012 is on the table for a release date.  I didn't mean it as intentional lying...just that facts were clearly left out on purpose.

I think its bad PR, because at a time when they are admitting failure to the pubic, and generating questions about their stability, the release info that sounds unsure and unclear.  When asked for clarification, they release more info that gives even more hints into their stability problems.  At a time when you've hit a low in your career, its not a good idea to invite more questions/concerns/worries onto your business.

I tend to agree with you...there are just a few ways to go here.  I'd say three, actually.  Give no info, give half the info, or give all the info.  In other words, tell folks pretty much nothing (what my statement earlier attempted to do) and hope that folks see the one point in your disclosure (the cancelling of the p.o.) as positive.  Choice two, give half the info.  Try to tell them enough about what's going on to give them confidence, but still be vague so they don't find out about the negatives.  Choice three...tell them every last detail, and, if its mostly/all bad, hope that the fact you were honest wins you enough points.

I think number one, especially with this audience, is the way to go here.  Three isn't great...but at least I'd respect them for it.  Two stinks, IMO, even though it gives you a chance to come out wth the biggest win.  Why does it stink, IMO?  Because it creates posts like this:

I fell so great... payed $60 dollers for a online city building game and got a broken single player beta.... now I get to pay again for the crap I already bought... stuffed into 4pay download packs...... and pay anouther $60 for then game I wanted in the first palce......

NOT A CHANCE IN HELL! Monti CHristo..... you will not see anouther damn dime from me... thanks for putting out a crap game, and killing the city sim gener. who out there thinks that any other developer is going to risk putting out another one now.... quote>

His response is mostly emotional..because he doesn't have all the facts.  And, an emotional response, when you are admitting failure to your customers, is a bad thing.

(Not trying to pick on the poster I quote above at all.  Actually, he may be 100% right, in the end, about everything.  He may, acually, speak for us all.  But, as of right now, no one who agrees, or disagrees, with him can say anything for sure.  Because he/we/they don't have all of the facts...we have half of them)

IMO, that press release was just poorly stated...especially since it had a month to be crafted, and the immediate flood of questions, I think, supports that.  MC has a tendency to "quick respond" to questions, and the answers, again, don't seem well thought through.  I was simply pointing out that, in trying to put out a fire with his answer, Gregory's vagueness may actually do more damage for THEM at this time.

[mentarman 14]

Originally posted by: Bountytaker

The subterfuge comment is in regards to their hinting at bigger financial problems, without going into it, and their failure to clarify if 2012 is on the table for a release date.  I didn't mean it as intentional lying...just that facts were clearly left out on purpose.

quote>

What kind of detail about the direness of their financial situation do you really expect a private company to make in this situation? Things are bad obviously, things didn't work as they hoped, they have a plan they are hoping will help them make some money and hopefully please us at the same time. I don't see why they would say more about any "bigger financial problems."

I don't know where you are getting the 2012 stuff from. Do you have some reason to believe we are two years away from this product?

Originally posted by: Bountytaker

I tend to agree with you...there are just a few ways to go here.  I'd say three, actually.  Give no info, give half the info, or give all the info.  In other words, tell folks pretty much nothing (what my statement earlier attempted to do) and hope that folks see the one point in your disclosure (the cancelling of the p.o.) as positive.  Choice two, give half the info.  Try to tell them enough about what's going on to give them confidence, but still be vague so they don't find out about the negatives.  Choice three...tell them every last detail, and, if its mostly/all bad, hope that the fact you were honest wins you enough points.

quote>

Well, you've left out the possibility that they are just being honest about what they can, and some things are up in the air. But you seem convinced they are hiding things.

Originally posted by: Bountytaker

His response is mostly emotional..because he doesn't have all the facts.  And, an emotional response, when you are admitting failure to your customers, is a bad thing.quote>

Let's be honest, you are going to get posts like that no matter what considering the attitude of some people and the current relationship between MC and fans overall.

I'm not saying you're being completely unreasonable or anything, but put yourself in MC's shoes for a second and it sure seems like they are damned if they do, damned if they don't. They took a route a lot of people didn't like and they got mad. Now that route has failed and so the people who did like the route are also mad, while the first people are dancing on the grave of the PO - happy in a sense, but in an emotional, vindictive sense, not in any sort of way a company wants to make customers happy. They try to give information about the future, and it's "they didn't give enough information," no, "they gave too much information."

You honestly think if they'd taken your route of almost no information, there wouldn't be complaining? People are upset, venting, some even delighting in this turn of events, and that was going to happen to some degree no matter how they came out with a statement.

Too many people are emotionally involved in this at this point. We can pick apart the way things MC does things but quite honestly no matter what they do at this point it will be criticized, short of them handing out $1,000 in cash to each and every person who has ever heard of CXL, and still someone would complain about the denominations it came in.

I just think people have gotten too wrapped up in this emotionally. I've been accused of defending MC, because it seems like you are either picking up a pitchfork and lighting your torch, or you must of course be defending them. Instead, all along I've hoped for the best, taken them at their word with the understanding that things change in the business world, and thus haven't been destroyed when some things didn't turn out as I'd hoped. At the end of the day, they're a business, I'm a customer, and they're making a product that I'm hoping will satisfy certain desires. We'll see how it goes. If they can satisfy me and get paid doing it, everyone's happy. If not, I leave a bit disappointed and perhaps they pay the price businesses with failed products pay.

[cheuk18me94 0]

The best way of solving this problem is to create more games.

[ACEH 0]

Hey people, instead of discussing our criticism and negativism about Cities XL 2011 I will make a proposal. Let's everybody make a suggestion what he wants to see in the future game - what modification, what new content, what type of mass transit and so on. The chances MC to hear us are not quite big bu at least we should try.

So I will start with my suggestions for the game:

1. First I want modification in the road networks - new overpasses for the highways (these are quite big now), new interchanges for expressways (now we can only build a crossway), roundabouts, bug fixing for highway bridge.

2. Second - change the system public and leisure services work - they should have smaller range and lower price. A control for funding will be nice - if I need hospital to serve bigger area to have the opportunity to raise its budget. This will bring more realism to the game. Now one hospital can serve whole city.

3. More park and plazas - some statues or decoration will be fine.

4. Trains, subways and so on - I'm sure they will implement this in the game, but make your proposal - what kind of trains, what kind of metros, can they be interchangeable and so on. Here I have a proposal for the trains - there should be 3 types of them with variety in the capacity - commuter trains, passenger trains (which will bring passenger service to the center of the city) and freight trains (which placed between you industries will greatly reduce truck traffic on you roads)

5. Bug fixes and stabilizing the game - this is a must

OK this is from me and if somebody have their proposal it will be good to discuss it here.

[soltangris 42]

I see how another thread is quickly turning into a fighting match.... Oh well. There are sooo many philosophers saying that you can't satisfy everybody.

ACEHE, I completely agree with your proposals! Some comments:

2. Maybe it's not that much HOW they work, but really more mycromanagement options. Although I never really liked the way SC4 mycroed the services, something more sensible could be invented. For example, pump up financing to enhance satisfaction level. Or pump it down to lower it, together with the area-of-effect (this could correspond to more/less teachers/personel). And, for sure, I'd like to see more general financial myvromanagement, starting with taxes broken up by cathegories.

4. Well, that's a complex question for sure. Your train proposal is more than sensible, although commuter trains=passenger trains (unless you mean one type for intra-city transport, and a second for inter-city). I could add: metro - light metro interchangeable system (this is underground - above ground system like in SC4). Also, there's the question of stops and stations - I'd like to see one major type of stations (with bigger capacity and larger area coverage), and train stops, with limited capacity and area coverage. It could also be nice if the train stations have the ability to connect trains and metro.

Hihihi, it would also be nice to see a tramway system, like in so many cities in Europe (including Sofia ). Then there could be an avenue with integrated tram rails in the centre.

Ahhh, dreams!

[ACEH 0]

Hi Soltangris.

About the trains - yes I meant exactly that - commuter = intercity trains and passenger = transport between cities that will raise nearby passenger services just like the airports and city connections does. For another types of transit I agree with you - the above and underground metro is a must (above = elevated train in SimCity 4). The idea for the trams is great - for example on the existing large avenue there is a space between the roadways filled with trees now. This can be used for the trams lines. I hope it isn't too complicated for the developers to do that. The idea for common rail and metro stations is also very good.

I hope these things will not stay in our dreams only - they should be in the game

[DazzaDazza 29]

well I would mind a new zoning system, not that different to what they got just no square lots, e.g make all zoning like the farms, have a base texture and props and the building grows out of that "lot" so it can be any size any shape like farms, it's not going to happen but I'm just putting it out there (again)

[ACEH 0]

mrdazza_460, all you mentioned is already in the game - the free zoning tool. With the Advanced Zoning Options mod you can even choose a type of roads for the free zone.

[Winter Dragon 0]

My support ticket to MC:

Clarification request for last answer in FAQ /

Dear Monte Cristo,

I have two unanswered questions to the last part of your FAQ on the end to planet offer.

Your FAQ says:

"As a Planet Offer subscriber, once Cities XL 2011 will be released you will be automatically granted with all the content present in the European Pack which will include new maps, Megastructures and the Old England building pack."

1. Does 'Planet Offer Subscriber' cover anyone who subscribed before February 8th? Or does it only cover subscribers who paid from February 8th onward? This needs clarification.

2. The way your FAQ reads, Cities XL 2011 could be a whole new game coming out next year, or it could be a free content patch for those who have already bought the solo game. Can you tell us which it is? There is much speculation on this issue.

Many thanks indeed,

Dragontooth

And their reply:

Dear Dragontooth,

regarding your first answer, the "Planet Offer subscribers" are necessarily those who have subscribed before February the first, as the possibility for subscribe will be removed starting that day.

Regarding the questions on Cities XL 2011, all the info will be made public through our website as soon as possible.

Best regards,

the Cities XL team

The ticket was closed before I could respond further. I feel the second question could have been answered in simple terms without going into specifics, and like the FAQ I'm left feeling confused and stonewalled on what should be a black and white issue. "As soon as possible" ...well that's a little vauge isn't it? (..!)

[morriswalters 16]

To Bountytaker

Don't be surprised that your getting confusing  information about what's happening.  Customer service is the least of their worries about now I would imagine.  As is the case with most businesses the customer is always on the bottom of the pile when the **** hits the fan.  You come after, Debt holders, rights holders, investors, and employees.  That they are talking at all is an indicator that they are trying to do the right thing.  I worked for a major retailer at one point.  The company was dying.  The store I worked at was closed one day.  No one was notified until 5 minutes before the store was to open.  That's how it works.  I imagine the negotiations over contractual obligations, debtors, and how rights holders will be compensated for parts of the game developed by third parties is ongoing.  The outcome of these negotiations will determine the pricing.  That is if the company has failed or is failing.  Of course it may be that I am wrong and they are really as dumb as you think and the condition of their finances has nothing to do with what is going on.  By the way.  Some people will still have active accounts when the servers are shut down.  That would be the Germans who bought the lifetime offer.  As you can imagine they aren't happy either.

[DazzaDazza 29]

Originally posted by: ACEH

mrdazza_460, all you mentioned is already in the game - the free zoning tool. With the Advanced Zoning Options mod you can even choose a type of roads for the free zone.quote>

that’s not what I meant, your sill only placing squares lots, but it doesn't matterr   

[LivingInThePast 364]

I have a feeling that Cities XL 2011 will be a full game.

But I have a suggestion for MC...do what EA did: discontinue the original Cities XL, and release a new updated version of CXL (CXL Deluxe) and an expansion pack (CXL 2011). Give former PO subscribers a coupon for a free copy of CXL 2011.

Problem solved.

[Partydude67 0]

ummmmmmmm hello we dont need facts,isnt it obvious this game is crappy?!?!?!?!?!

[mentarman 14]

Originally posted by: Partydude67

ummmmmmmm hello we dont need facts,isnt it obvious this game is crappy?!?!?!?!?!quote>

No. Isn't obvious some people disagree, or feel they'd like to discuss the situation?

No one's making you play the game, like it, or read these forums.

[MadBrahms 0]

Originally posted by: mrdazza_460

Originally posted by: ACEH

mrdazza_460, all you mentioned is already in the game - the free zoning tool. With the Advanced Zoning Options mod you can even choose a type of roads for the free zone.quote>

that’s not what I meant, your sill only placing squares lots, but it doesn't matterr   

quote>

I don't see this ever being updated in CXL, and I don't think it's realistic of us to expect it. It would be a major change in some of the underlying game mechanics, I think.

I also doubt we'll see any sort of rail mass-transit in 2011, though we might get intercity freight or passenger rail, since it seems there's already a layer in game that shows you possible rail connections (NOTE TO MC QUALITY CONTROL: Take out exasperating teasing fatures like this!)

[Wrightguy0 40]

What about those of us who bought Cities XL but didn't get the PO, will they release a patch for us to give us all the content PO subscribers got, because I don't really think it's fair to give one group premium content free, and then expect another group to buy a whole new game to get the same content.