Cities xl 2011 online

[seekhunt 0]

Hey people. Since i cant get the search engine on the forum to do any of my searches because of a commen word i hope this topic dont bring up some bad stuff if it has already been answered.

But to the question. I havent followed on since CT-xl went offline. But with the new pickup i am playing again in solo mode. So with the new company and cities xl 2011, are we going online again and play and trade with each other or are the game only gonna be "single player" mode for now and ever.

[The_City_Builder 299]

Thats a very good question.

While i personally favor playing in Single Player mode, multiplayer city-builders could be the next "big thing". I think that Focus should create something similar to the Planet Offer in Cities XL, but tweak it a little bit more to add more features, and also make the trading between cities more realistic. Although, with all these game mods coming out, Focus may decide not to create an online version in fears of cheating...

[seekhunt 0]

Well cheats or not i dont care because i could never see how bad it was that some cheated for money etc. since this kind of game is not a competition etc. So you wont really gain any big advance with cheating.

But apart from that it was also ofcause IF the question have been answered :-)

Or is this still very new so "we" dont know that much about how the game will become ?

[The_City_Builder 299]

Well, the fact that the game was going to be made was just released a couple of days ago, and the only clues we have so far what the game will be like is just by looking at pre-release pictures.

[seekhunt 0]

OH well. i guess i havent been missing out anything then hehe :-P

But at least from my part i would love it to be online again. just for the sake of interacting with my fellow city builders :-D

[Cob92 360]

They'd have to dramatically expand the online portion if they ever expected to revive it as a subscription service. The original Planet Offer didn't really offer much for its price.

I'd rather they focus on putting out a CXL that's a solid singleplayer game and perhaps go a different direction with online functionality if they chose to retain it.

[mr-tom 2]

Agree. I would be utterly astonished if they went down the PO route again. It was a dramatic failure which (amongst other things) cost MC its existence.

For the record, I enjoyed PO and subscribed until they stopped it.

[seekhunt 0]

Well for running a game online in what 3-6 months is nothing. I was very surpriced. I mean people need to know about the game before they can make money. And to say after only 4 months that "oh we dont have the people we though" thats more strange to me than say we dont have the money.

If you only as a game developer have the money for a limited time before you really need to make money then i can understand why MC went bankrupt. If they had kept the forum at there home page and done some more with the game before release they would have a chance. And then after 1 year minimum they could talk about closing the PO.

Thats why i am talking about going online again, because with a game company who maybe have the money and time to let the players come and know about the game in the first place, i think some kind of PO would be fun and posible again.

[LivingInThePast 364]

I think it would be cool to play on a LAN, but not online as a scale. Here's why:

1) Cheating prevention blocks doing interesting things to your city (mods for instance)

2) People manage to cheat even if there are restrictions in place. Anyone who plays in Pok

[The_City_Builder 299]

I would like the online feature if you did not have to pay. In a lot of and in many MMO's, you dont have to pay. Talking about games Out-Of-The-Box, not seperate downloadable games that have a monthly subscription fee.

[seekhunt 0]

Money or not i just found the online part more funny than just the single player and building a city. With the online there was chat and interaction with people and you build your city not only for your own fun but maybe also to help others with tokens :-)

[mr-tom 2]

Originally posted by: seekhunt

Well for running a game online in what 3-6 months is nothing. I was very surpriced. I mean people need to know about the game before they can make money. And to say after only 4 months that "oh we dont have the people we though" thats more strange to me than say we dont have the money.

If you only as a game developer have the money for a limited time before you really need to make money then i can understand why MC went bankrupt. If they had kept the forum at there home page and done some more with the game before release they would have a chance. And then after 1 year minimum they could talk about closing the PO.

Thats why i am talking about going online again, because with a game company who maybe have the money and time to let the players come and know about the game in the first place, i think some kind of PO would be fun and posible again.quote>

There's ultimately a level of subscription that you have to achieve for the game ever to be commercially viable as an online offering.

My guess was that if it had grown significantly from the point of launch, then it might have done it, but instead it appears that it shrank significantly and quickly.

I think that no amount of patience would have made it a success - ultimately the online component offered too little, the customer base is too small any way and the game is niche.

Even ignoring that the game wasn't finished, it looked doomed before it was launched, but as I said previously, I had very good fun playing with it whilst it lasted.

Your suggestion that somebody with deeper pockets could make the online component work does have some merit, but as a business they need to see a likelihood of a return.  Pretend you're selling the game in the Dragons' Den.  They'd never invest as it just offers too little reward for too much risk.

[MandelSoft 2,769]

Well, the PO trial was not so much fun to me. In fact, it feels more like a obligation to me to play the game in the seven days of free trial I had. That's not really pleasant. I want to play the game in it's full potential when I want to. And that's not worth 7 euros a month. By the way, we still don't have:

- the long-promised, but never released Multiple lane tool.

- ambient sound.

- trains

- the PO Maps.

Is this caused by work on the PO? Probably yes, but would we have them now if they didn't work on the PO? Who knows...

Anyway, single player will be my style forever.

[seekhunt 0]

It surely was a very slow start game wise. And i would not recommend it either when my friends asked me.

But i can see your point. So maybe later next year when the game has been out there would at least be more to the singleplayer and not would might get people to play and hence make a small window for a future "po" CXL game

[pete1061 0]

Though I had no use for the PO myself, I paid for it so I could have access to the extra content. I think an online option would be good for those who want it. Many games have a function to host your own server with a smaller limited number of users. That's probably the best way to go.

That way those who want multiplayer can have it, and those who prefer single player don't feel coerced into paying for something they don't want just to get extra buildings. On top of that the publisher/developer of the game doesn't have the extra overhead of running big central servers.

[IntoxiNation 0]

Originally posted by: pete1061

Though I had no use for the PO myself, I paid for it so I could have access to the extra content. I think an online option would be good for those who want it. Many games have a function to host your own server with a smaller limited number of users. That's probably the best way to go.

That way those who want multiplayer can have it, and those who prefer single player don't feel coerced into paying for something they don't want just to get extra buildings. On top of that the publisher/developer of the game doesn't have the extra overhead of running big central servers.quote>

I was just thinking the exact same thing. Do a LAN type option that can be used over WAN. They could use a lot of the funcionality built into the PO stuff to build that and it wouldn't cost them much at all. Then if the game really grows in popularity, they could look at opening up more premium hosting, or even just host a feature where you could download and go through other people's cities. That's the part of the PO I miss the most - not the trading, but being able to visit other cities.

[Stewy13 0]

LAN mulitplayer/LAN regions would be awesome!

Wonder if that could even be done with our current game?

[Msprintz 25]

Originally posted by: 1701adguru

While i personally favor playing in Single Player mode, multiplayer city-builders could be the next "big thing". "

quote>

I don't see any mutiplayer city simulations hitting it big, at least not until the economic model is improved dramatically.  I hate to admit it, but the economic model is the biggest fault in both CXL and SC4. 

The basic or susbsistance economy relies on raw materials ( mineral deposits, agriculture ), then you have the primary industries ( oil refineries, steel mills...) and support industries ( garment factories, jewelry factories... ).  After raw materials and industires comes commercial, where the basic function is to sell the products to consumers or produce services for other businesses. 

If an economic chain such as that is included, it might be possible to make an online city simulation.  The backbone of such an online system would be the economic engine ( that would also ultimately determine the look and feel of cities ).  From there you can add other multiplayer features such as constructing regional transit systems and airports.  Will people be left out in some way, probably ( can't connect every city to a highway network or a rail network ).  However each city would play a vital role regardless.   

Personally I see something like that as being at least 5-10 years off, if not more. 

[masochist 111]

Originally posted by: mks24

I don't see any mutiplayer city simulations hitting it big, at least not until the economic model is improved dramatically.  I hate to admit it, but the economic model is the biggest fault in both CXL and SC4. 

The basic or susbsistance economy relies on raw materials ( mineral deposits, agriculture ), then you have the primary industries ( oil refineries, steel mills...) and support industries ( garment factories, jewelry factories... ).  After raw materials and industires comes commercial, where the basic function is to sell the products to consumers or produce services for other businesses. 

If an economic chain such as that is included, it might be possible to make an online city simulation.  The backbone of such an online system would be the economic engine ( that would also ultimately determine the look and feel of cities ).  From there you can add other multiplayer features such as constructing regional transit systems and airports.  Will people be left out in some way, probably ( can't connect every city to a highway network or a rail network ).  However each city would play a vital role regardless.   

Personally I see something like that as being at least 5-10 years off, if not more.  quote>

That's how it works in CXL's Planet Offer, actually. You chose a map upon which to start a city based on a particular industry/commercial prospect (how much oil was underground, if it could be built up as a tourist city, whether the land was good for farming, etc.). Once you had established where you wanted to build a city, you built the buildings to take advantage of the resource (oil refineries, hotels, farms, etc.), which in turn provided jobs and helped support a city through trading. It didn't get much farther than that with CXL, and the trading model was flawed, but it did follow the principle pretty closely.

But there are, of course, exceptions to the rule. Las Vegas, for example, was founded as a trading post on the route between Salt Lake City and Los Angeles...just a rest stop. It didn't really have anything going for it in terms of resources, but it started to grow when the depression hit. Boulder Dam (later Hoover Dam) was commissioned to be built 25 miles away to create jobs (and dam the river, of course), and the workers who lived in Boulder City went to Las Vegas to gamble. It grew from there, using pretty much only tourism as its main economic draw.

[mr-tom 2]

Originally posted by: Stewy13

LAN mulitplayer/LAN regions would be awesome!

Wonder if that could even be done with our current game?quote>

Or even a Simtropolis planet...

[sparky66 0]

I remember reading somewhere a few days ago (I can't find it again, try searching google) an interview with focus home interactive about their games and they said something along the lines of  'We are not fans of MMO's, we prefer to let players compete and show their work through leaderboards and blogs and believe that the single player experience should not be negatively affected by any online features, and that the online features should remain optional to all players.' I don't think it was directly about Cities XL 2011, but it was a recent interview, and so it could be a reference to the direction they are taking with the game.

Personally I think a free optional built-in feature that lets you take screenshots and write about your city in game whilst you are playing and then seamlessly upload it to a dedicated online city journal would be nice. Definately no more excuses for MMO's and paid subscriptions though. If Cities XL 2011 has more than a hint of 'Planet Offer-ness' about it, then I will probably not bother buying.

[Jesse Swiss 6]

what was the multiple lane tool? like you said mtnrnln

[The_City_Builder 299]

Originally posted by: mks24

Originally posted by: 1701adguru

While i personally favor playing in Single Player mode, multiplayer city-builders could be the next "big thing". "

quote>

I don't see any mutiplayer city simulations hitting it big, at least not until the economic model is improved dramatically.  I hate to admit it, but the economic model is the biggest fault in both CXL and SC4. 

The basic or susbsistance economy relies on raw materials ( mineral deposits, agriculture ), then you have the primary industries ( oil refineries, steel mills...) and support industries ( garment factories, jewelry factories... ).  After raw materials and industires comes commercial, where the basic function is to sell the products to consumers or produce services for other businesses. 

If an economic chain such as that is included, it might be possible to make an online city simulation.  The backbone of such an online system would be the economic engine ( that would also ultimately determine the look and feel of cities ).  From there you can add other multiplayer features such as constructing regional transit systems and airports.  Will people be left out in some way, probably ( can't connect every city to a highway network or a rail network ).  However each city would play a vital role regardless.   

Personally I see something like that as being at least 5-10 years off, if not more. 

quote>

True, but you never know! The next sim city could have a MMO off-set.

---

[MandelSoft 2,769]

Originally posted by: Jesse Swiss

what was the multiple lane tool? like you said mtnrnlnquote>

That was an advanced road system, which was cancelled when the PO was announced.

[Livin in Sim 83]

Heads up, incoming topic.

[Davir 1]

also why not set po in free mode,

also so it free a play in po

[mr-tom 2]

Because somebody would have to buy and run some very big servers.

Feeling rich?

[Davir 1]

No i mean why mc or focus home not do it, so we can play po for free

[Ocram's Razr 963]

Is it not completely obvious? It costs money to run the servers.

[Livin in Sim 83]

Merging topic with Cities xl 2011 online, it's the same subject.