Future plan of CITIESXL2011

[chocolate_city 93]

I agree with Registering Sucks.... why go through all the wishing that MC does this and hoping that they'll do that .... when we all know that they "deviated" from what was promised before.... We all wanted Cities XL to be the next generation of city building games.... Not gonna happen.... guess what ... and of course this is just my prediction (or opinion) It's not gonna happen with .... what is it called again.... Cities XL 2011... give me a break....

[edcase2k4-thugangel1983 1]

Originally posted by: Ephemeron

Originally posted by: Herdervriend

if we all make a list here, and around page 5 make a summary, then we post them all to them and ready. That must work...Otherwise it's MC's own fault there so stubborn and they will fail then if they not listen to us NOW...

quote>

Monte Cristo had a whole forum of ideas. Anything we try to recreate in a single thread cannot compare to this. We don't know if Monte Cristo has kept an archive of it. When I found that the forums were gone, I took it upon myself to create a archive from the Google cache. The archive, though vastly incomplete, contains over 100 pages from threads, including the all-important concepts articles (tr0ub1e must have devoted so many hours to these), the archive threads (e.g. the mechanics archive) which at very least contain lists of important thread titles. I kept blog comments too, mainly as an indicator of peoples opinions. Lastly I kept copies of all the major complaints threads - I simply couldn't let these die. In summary, it's a piece of city-building-game history, kept in a dusty folder on my computer. I should publish it somewhere. Perhaps there could be a place for it in the omnibus.

quote>

i completely forgot again about uploading what i salvaged of my content from google's cache of the forums. there was just one article i wrote which i couldn't find included in the cache. anyways, i will try to remember to post what i've got to the forums here or something... i don't exactly know what can be done with some of it. but anyone in the community is free to do as they see fit with my work.

i really do wonder about MC's financial situation right now. they had a lot of investment from companies based on the entire Planet Offer/MMO concept. i'm sure they're investors are still currently out of pocket. i don't know if it has any implications and repercussions for MC themselves or whether it's just tough for them for investing in it. all depends on the terms of investments...

[morriswalters 16]

You don't seriously think that people loan millions of dollars without some type of security do you?

[edcase2k4-thugangel1983 1]

it depends. an investment isn't a loan. it's financial backing which will pay back revenue to the investor based on the success and profit made from the project in question. if an investor truly believes in the project and believes it has a very good chance of making large profits, then they invest in it because they will get a share of the large profits. there doesn't have to be any additional clauses which will guarantee the investor some kind of security and return on the invested finance should the product be a flop or financial failure. an investment is a gamble - but one done on close examination of all the facts and projections, not on a whim.

however, i don't know specifics for such large scale investments (that exceed a million dollars, for example). i have no idea if it is common practice to have additional security clauses in place to prevent massive loss for investors should the project invested in not live up to expectations.

either way, i imagine MC are not in the most desirable of financial situations right now.

they didn't learn from StarPeace - and i'd said that a long time ago. a city-builder MMO could be sucessful. it's not out of the realms of possibility. but in practice they certainly went about it very wrong. once again - as i'd said a long time ago - it seemed to me that MC was "MMO-obsessed". possibly because of an in-house passion for such genres of games, but more likely because of the belief that it was the next or is the current "big thing". you know, like the "internet boom" and all those countless failed internet companies from those days. they see the sucess of things like World of Warcraft and think they can replicate that in their own way and make huge profits.

the truth is they should have actually listened to the people who would ultimately buy the game or enjoy the MMO part of it. they never did this... and most game developers never do listen. they have their own ideas of what will work and what will make them money. it happens with just about every genre of game and specific games series. players constantly express their desires and wish-lists through online forums and other media... but very rarely to those request ever get any real consideration or make it into the games.

what makes a product sucessful is giving the buyers what they want or need, instead of trying to tell then what they want or force someone else's ideas on them. it doesn't work and the majority of new products are not a financial success because of this.

[Garek Maxwell 1]

I just want the following:

1. Cities Unlimited

Bring back the image and focused simplicity this game had before things changed and darkness swept over the forums and community.

[morriswalters 16]

I wish each and everyone of you good luck, me I think it's over.  By the way isn't that image a little dated now.

[pete1061 0]

I'm just trying to stress that game developers are not magicians. It takes an unbelieveable amount of work to produce a game as complex as CXL. And now with a very limited staff, MC is just plain not in a position to do very much with the game. The most we can hope for right now is greater stability & bug fixes.

I'm not saying to stop brainstorming, just keep things in perspective, don't expect too much. This info does provide good market research for whoever would be working on a city builder anytime in the future.

As far as MC obsession with MMO, the obesession is one from a business perspective, most game companies have it these days. The lure of monthly income is attractive to any business.

MC just over estimated, there was not enough subscribers to cover the expense of keeping the servers running, it costs a lot for the bandwidth and administrators to run it.

Maybe some day somebody will come up with a good approach to an MMO city builder, but it will be a real challenge. You are trying to force something which is naturally single player into multi-player.

Anyhow, a city sim is not so much a "game" as it is a creative application like photoshop or 3D studio.

We are looking at the community aspect of the genre right here on simtropolis. We go on message boards to show off city journals, trade tips & tricks, then go back and create our solo works of art.

If a developer is interested in ongoing income, it is better just to sell small bits of extra content on a regular basis.

Extra content we keep, not rent.

[ScaryMonkey 0]

I don't know, I would hesitate to say city sims are unsuitable for multiplayer based on this one poor implementation;  While I agree that the single player experience should come first, I think there are a lot of ways a good multiplayer setup can enhance the gameplay.  Sadly, I think this whole PO fiasco might end up convincing people that city sims and multiplayer don't mix

[Livin in Sim 83]

Hello, everyone.

It is fine to speculate about the future plans of Monte Cristo for CitiesXL2011.  Some of the things listed in this thread are necessary for optimum play in the current game.  But I think bringing back the "wish list" is only going to lead to disappointment.   I'm afraid if these wishes somehow turn into demands, when they are not fulfilled, developers may literally pay the price.

In general, companies should do what they advertise.  I believe MC's immediate goal is to bring the existing single player game up to good playability, and make it what it was advertised to be on the site.  It sounds like a fair number of members will be interested in this, so I hope they can get there.

Monte Cristo took a venture.  I can see their reasoning for taking it.  I believe it was to go with an online gaming trend, and to provide a revenue stream while they continued developing.  It was most likely released prematurely.  I am not prepared to offer an opinion or debate on the ethics of this.  It was misjudged.

The former statements are my own and in no way the official ST policy.  However, I can tell you that ST moderators began limiting threads on "SC5 wish lists" or related matters, because there really is no point.  We've also limited BAT wish lists.  I can see the same line of thought becoming necessary for "CXL wish lists".  If a developer asks for it , that will be different.  Unfortunately, bandwidth is not an unlimited resource. 

Thank you, and enjoy the forums.

--Liv

[City Planner 121]

Originally posted by: soltangris

Well, it does harm actually, if people posting these ideas also have the idea that MC are listening and gonna implement them. Because:

- MC didn't ask for input this time. And :

- When people don't see the ideas implemented they'll feel betrayed again.

Wishlists are all very good, but we have to be careful when comparing them to reality.quote>

You must have missed this part:

However with that said, it does no harm for people to put out their wish list ideas if it makes them feel good as long as they realize that it's not likely that any of them will be implemented.

However, because MC is not replying to people saying, "oh great idea, we're going to do that", it's nobodys fault but the wisher themselves if they believe that MC is really going to use anybody's ideas at this point.  I think it silly that anybody would think seriously that MC is going to listen to anybody's idea, in my opinion they are only skimming by to be able to put out 2011, and it will be epic if they can just transfer over the PO stuff to solo play at this point.

Now what happens with the first expansion pack if they are able to put one out remains to be seen.

It does no harm.  People that believe that MC is going to implement ideas they post to a wish list when MC doesn't say they are, are delusional.  Wishing in a wish list is like wishing for a million dollars.  Whom ever believes that they are going to get that million dollars (or their wishes confirmed in a whish list) are usually delusional and it won't do realistic people any harm to wish in a wish list.

If their wishes are not implemented, how would the possibly blaim MC?  If MC comes into this thread and acknowledges that they "even might" use some of the wishes, then MC is to blame not the person making a wish.  But at this point in time that just isn't going to happen.

As it was said in a movie... 'You can wish in one hand and poop in the other, then see which hand gets filled first".  I think everybody understands what that means.  Wishes are wishes, they are not likely to be implemented especially not at this point in time what with MC must be going through to try to reorganize.  These threads are now more of a "look at my great idea" more than they are in hopes of MC actually implementing anything (in my opinion)

[soltangris 42]

Well, City Planner, you're talking sense, of course. Unfortunately, some people are not that carefull in their approach to this whole matter as you are. They sweep in the forums, they see a 'Wishlist' kinda thread, and they automatically assume that this is something like a Santa Claus ordering list. It's childish, mostly, but it happens.... And children mostly expect their wishes to be fulfilled, right?

In this case the situation might get aggravated exactly because they know it's not a non-existing Santa Claus they're dealing with, but a game developer company that is working on a product soon to be released. So, they see the wishlist, and somehow assume this list is gonna make its way to the developers. No good trying to explain that this is all unofficial and stuff - there's still some kind of unconcious idea that, see - THEY're listening! And later - the disapointment.

I guess what I'm saying is that we should stress the fact that any advances in the game are tied only to MC now. It's unlikely that they'll try to implement any revolutionary new mechanics into CXL 2011, at least not before they convert the PO game into a fully playable solo game. Later, we'll see, but now any new expectations created might do more harm than good.

Right now, I completely agree with Living in Sim - we are at a very 'dangerous' crossroad (I mean MC and CXL, of course, no danger for us ), and the very future of a possible successor of SC4 is at stake. If we enter the 'expectations' market again, as we did in the last year, we'll create again a level of development expected that MC might not be able to meet. As a result of which, people will get angry again ('Those dam liars, they said CXL 2011 wil be ready in two months, and it's not' 'They said it will have this and that, and it doesn't). Followed by another 'rage quitting' when people decide not to spend any money for the new product ('because they didn't do what they promised'), followed by a complete financial meltdown for MC, followed by the end of CXL development. Followed by a black hole for the city-building genre.

Of course, I'm not calling for locking such threads, I guess I'm just trying to issue a warning - know that this is an unofficial wishlist that is by no means supported by the developers!

[cheuk18me94 0]

Originally posted by: Livin in Sim

Hello, everyone.

It is fine to speculate about the future plans of Monte Cristo for CitiesXL2011.  Some of the things listed in this thread are necessary for optimum play in the current game.  But I think bringing back the "wish list" is only going to lead to disappointment.   I'm afraid if these wishes somehow turn into demands, when they are not fulfilled, developers may literally pay the price.

In general, companies should do what they advertise.  I believe MC's immediate goal is to bring the existing single player game up to good playability, and make it what it was advertised to be on the site.  It sounds like a fair number of members will be interested in this, so I hope they can get there.

Monte Cristo took a venture.  I can see their reasoning for taking it.  I believe it was to go with an online gaming trend, and to provide a revenue stream while they continued developing.  It was most likely released prematurely.  I am not prepared to offer an opinion or debate on the ethics of this.  It was misjudged.

The former statements are my own and in no way the official ST policy.  However, I can tell you that ST moderators began limiting threads on "SC5 wish lists" or related matters, because there really is no point.  We've also limited BAT wish lists.  I can see the same line of thought becoming necessary for "CXL wish lists".  If a developer asks for it , that will be different.  Unfortunately, bandwidth is not an unlimited resource. 

Thank you, and enjoy the forums.

--Liv

quote>

Well?I just think that what MC really adopt our opinions expect curve road and realistic graphic. Even there isn't any mass placement tool, no subwat and even no tree planeting too.

MC, can you listen to our voice and don't just neglect our wish and try to fulfill our wish.

It is going to off topic. Please talk back to the wish of citiesxl2011.

To USA Pride. It seems to be impossible to recover the information in offical citiesxl forum for the offical forum was deleted and all information there was removed.

[City Planner 121]

Yes, I fully agree that people do need to fully recognize that this is a wish list only and that there is nothing official about it, MC has not asked for any wishes, nor are any wishes here likely to ever make it into Cities 2011. Of course there is the possibility that somewhere down the line, 6 months , 1 year, 3 years after release of 2011 then some ideas may make it into 2011, or 2015 for all we know, but at the moment, anybody who thinks that their ideas posted here in an unasked for wish list is not likely to make it into the 2011 game whenever they end up releasing it.

So, we agree about that. People that rage quit because some idea they posted for a game that never was even considered for the game well, they are just numbskulls. If the developer came in here and promised that xx idea would be put in the game and then they back out on that later on, then the person in my opinion has justification to be disapointed in the game and the developer but as we all know, MC is not going to come in here and start promising things that they isn't already built into the game, they can't possibly be stupid enough to do that (possibly twice depending on how you wish to look at their past involvement) when in my opinion, it's quite likely that their firms survival may well rely on 2011 recooperating any further monies they need to collect to make the difference between a total write off and showing some kind of profit for the entire Cities XL, 2011, Unlimited line.

Anyway..... There we have it. An unofficial, non requested, wish list for people to get their cookies for cooking up some good ideas that will not likely appear in 2011, or it's addons in the forseeable future (in my opinion).

[poshbakerloo 186]

Things I would like to see...

. Different lots sizes, some tiny, some medium, some huge, some narrow, some wide etc...

. Lots that fit better with curved roads...

. When building road through built up areas, it demolishes the buildings, but keeps the lots in place (just smaller like in SC4)

. Better terrain tools...

[RegisterST2 0]

Making wishlists in an of itself doesn't lead to disappointment, anger or anything. People post wishlists all the time about pretty much everything.

It only leads to anger and resentment when the developer asks for your input, sets up a forum for you to post your input, interacts with you about your input, indicates a fair amount of the input will be used in the final game, then includes almost none of the input.  That leads to people feeling like they've wasted their time.  That's what happened last time around.

This is quite different.  This is people posting their unsolicited wishlist on a third party site (although it is semi-official I guess).  MC has asked for no input, so anyone posting their wishlist should have no expectations.  This is very different from the last time around (although just as pointless if not more so).

I don't see the point in posting these wishlists, but I don't see the harm either.

[Ephemeron 17]

Originally posted by: chocolate_city

Not gonna happen.... guess what ... and of course this is just my prediction (or opinion) It's not gonna happen with .... what is it called again.... Cities XL 2011... give me a break....quote>

Sure it won't, but if it doesn't they'll follow it  with... Cities XXL 2012... and then if that doesn't work.... Cities XXXL 2013. That's assuming that Monte Cristo actually lasts until said dates.

[gspang4207 0]

I agree with many of the other posters here...why create a "wishlist?" They are not taking the plant offer away to work more intensely on the game...they are taking it away because they are not making money...People looked to this game to be an extension or new version of Simcity, and it is not that at all. Like I said at the beginning (and everyone yelled at me), this game is headed for the $5 bin at Walmart...While the intentions were good at MC, they didn't come through...we are looking for a true city builder game, not avatars and pay for content stuff...let's face it, the game is a flop.

[N106 10]

Let me explain to everyone what CXL 2011 really is:

Monte Cristo is trying to cut their losses. They realize that their game has failed, and are going to try to get out of it with as little of a financial loss as possible. They went wrong when they started ignoring the community.

Even worse, I get the feeling all other gaming companies are probably seeing the futility in trying to make a city-builder game.

The second Monte Cristo stopped listening to the community is the moment when it became obvious that there will be no successor to SC4.

[DJ1 0]

I hope they skip "XL" for the next product. The name stinks cause of the way MC has handled it.

As someone requested. Change name. "Cities 2011" would be simple and good!

[Tuesday 0]

Originally posted by: Chiverito

Customization tool so you can name Transportation networks and districts in your city... MC please don't charge me for every form of mass transit...quote>

This!  The more personalised, the better in my opinion.  Custom buildings are also important but I imagine implementing naming areas/streets would be much easier to code in.

[cheuk18me94 0]

It is off topic.

Hope CXL 2011 can be SC5.

[DazzaDazza 29]

Originally posted by: cheuk18me94

It is off topic.

Hope CXL 2011 can be SC5.quote>

NO it wont be, any suggestion that it will be, is lodicules

[legoman786 1]

What do I want out of this new game? I want it to run as smooth as Dirt 2 (maxed) compared to watching paint dry.

[cheuk18me94 0]

The graphic is good. I just want another SC4.....

Don't try to cheat money from CXL2011 please.

[Soviet779 1]

Originally posted by: cheuk18me94

It is off topic.

Hope CXL 2011 can be SC5.quote>

I hope that too, but i doubt it will turn out like that

[SimFox 804]

I strongly believe that all these I want threads should be pay ones... I mane you want to publish you list of "wants" - pay some...

Otherwise it seem people only know how to want things, and expect others to jump on command to supply all those wants...

[soltangris 42]

Yeah, very true SimFox. People want, people request (which is free), and when companies don't deliver (after years of hard work), they get condemned Can you immagine what a frustration for a game developer? That simple guy that has just put 100+ hours of programming time in something, and then another guy just goes in the forum X and announces all his work is crap....

I actually know firsthand how it feels - I'm a musician. I bust my ass preparing a concert, it's months and months of hard work, then I go and present it to the public... The next day some critic that hasn't done anything but be present in the audience goes online and writes an article about how the presentation sucked completely..... welcome to the world of music!

[CSanchez 0]

Although I very rarely post, I do read this forum often. As an outsider what I see most is a lot of people with a lot of negativity and that is a shame. MC produced a game that is 75% there. It has some really ground breaking concepts and is graphically superb. I think a lot of people here have almost talked Cities XL into the position it is today. All of us here belong to a very a very select, even niche gaming market and we should embrace it and not be this negative. I paid for the PO, proud of doing so.

Because city building is SO niche and will not appeal to the mass market (we have seen this now) we should expect to PAY for ALL further developments on this product. I am VERY enthusiastic for the game to continue. You see I would welcome having a superb Solo game, but I pay monthly for regular updates and future development. Believe me there IS NOT going to be another city building game on the market, no one would invest money in it, not based on what has happened to Cities XL. So what we NEED to happen is for MC to maintain development of this game, it is our only future.

Come on guys pull together, where is the community spirit. Help MC and be positive.

If MC can produce Cities 2011 then I expect it to only consolidate the solo player game and include only a few additions of new content. I also insist to pay for it too.

[bluespottedhorse 49]

Yup all of the above,

I wonder if that means we'll have another beta testing for CITIES 2011!

[Chiverito 11]

MC created a game that did something new and you can't blame them for that despite the warnings from the community. I think from this Loss MC will take the community into consideration when Creating Cities XL 2011. If we help make Cities XL 2011 a success and make it into something "BIG" then MC might be willing to expand on a Brilliant Franchise. The only question is will MC deliver...

Beta will be interesting....