SC5-Protest against Will Wright, Maxis and EA

[ggianfra 50]

The update of SimCity has always been the case since 1989.

All people who love to build and not destroy have followed the growth of SC.

Then it was over with SC4.

Only for commercial reasons.

For money.

Better to produce violent and destructive games ........ take home more money.

Few people are shocked by this.

No association raises the question.

Educational and relaxing games as SC are set aside by the media.

I would like all of us who love SC we did feel stronger our voice:

WE WANT SC5 !!!!!!!

all over the web, social networks everywhere ....

[Simtopia23 0]

i'm with u but if u want to spread this protest we must go in Darkspore forums because here we can find Maxis and someone who can tell why the game isn't already released.

then we must create a sort of banner to promote this protest in other forums and on facebook/twitter.

[Mark Waybill 242]

I joined all the Simcity 5 petitions and fb pages I've found, but they are all small or disconnected. What's needed is a single official page/petition/forum etc for the drive for a Simcity 5... A united effort.

[jacksunny 741]

I would be willing to make a website for a Simcity 5 drive, but I will not pay for it. It will have to be on a free web host unless someone else would be willing to host on their site or pay for it.

So what kind of things do we want on this site?

And I also agree with Simtopia23 that we must create some sort of banner.

  Edited June 8, 2011 by jacksunny  

[Mark Waybill 242]

I think free hosting is fine although it looks as cheap as it is if it's obviously free hosted. However if enough people of a dedicated nature got involved so there was constant activity there any new members would be more likely to join. An official website connected with the forum too, but yes I agree a banner/logo is also important. The site needs to be graphically layed out so as to look professional, so hey take it seriously.

My ideas as to features for the site would be from the homepage a link to the official one and only simcity 5 petition (I believe there's one called the official one with quite a few signatures already I signed years ago), link to the forum and link to an 'about the cause' page etc etc. If it was to be really proactive then contact details for EA, Will Wright etc on a page? Suggestions of a lobbying campaign? Naturally the only way we'll ever get Simcity 5 is to show EA it's a worthwhile investment. The way I see it, if you are the company that owns the rights to THE city sim game, and it works well and satisfies all reasonable demands from players- and is what we are all hoping for, then you are in a good financial position. Not only do you sell the game, but you have a monopoly of connected merchandise and these days the Internet/Facebook could help to spread popularity for the game to all corners of the world-

Also it would be easy enough to make and sell games within the game like SimCopter/The Sims type games which would also make a profit by their connection with the main one. I am biased because Simcity is my favorite videogame but I do think there's enough fans to show EA it's a worthwhile investment. I myself am not well off but back in 04 I forked out 80 dollars for Simcity 4, back then I'd be lucky to get 5 dollars a month. I think however the method by which they can make a good profit out of the franchise isn't so much the game itself. To make it prohibitively expensive would limit the playing demographic to those who could afford it, and expensive expansion packs wouldn't be a good idea imo, rather an Internet update system like Simutrans uses. Through Facebook or an official site there could be some sort of profit making venture connected but not actually an integral part of the game, and I'm sure they could make it profitable if they wanted to.

I agree Simcity 4 was rushed and released early, but having said that the whole point of this is that we now have the technology to do what we couldn't back in 03, and so I think if we are to move on from 4 it should be to 5, not to CityLife or Societies or some other rubbish excuse for a successor.

[astronelson 339]

To play devil's advocate, well, yes, it was purely for commercial reasons. Maxis and EA are commercial enterprises, what did you expect? Their job is to sell things to make money, in their case games. More is produced of what sells well, and what does not sell quite as well is discontinued. The Sim City series, while it does have a strong core following, does not really appeal to many gamers outside this group.

Educational games I agree are declining, primarily because they're more education than game. I don't play games to learn, I play games to have fun. Learning something is a happy bonus. Relaxing games, however, are going quite strong - casual gamers make up a significant proportion of the gaming population, and an increasing number of games that cater to this demographic are being produced. These games generally do not require the effort that the Sim City games do. This does not count against them at all. Their target audience is people who wish to be entertained without investing too much time into something, rather than to spend hours sculpting a city. It is akin to find-a-word puzzles and crosswords - both are valid forms of entertainment, but one is quicker and easier than the other and they appeal to different audiences.

While I would like a SC5 to be made, I doubt it will unless it appeals to a wider range of gamers. This would be difficult to do, as you really cannot please everyone, and I do not think the company evil in deciding to not continue the franchise. But who knows? Maybe if it sells well on Steam we'll get another instalment. I wouldn't hold your breath though. Duke Nukem Forever took over a decade to be released.

[SimHoTToDDy 2,939]

These threads are silly...

Companies don't release games (that is, spend money) unless they can make a buck off of it. SC5, in what form we want, would take a rather large investment given how complex it would have to be (if they even go that route). Until they think they can make a sizable profit from the project, no one will bother making it no matter how many petitions, demands, and complaints they get.

[jacksunny 741]

Any ideas for a website name?

[Mark Waybill 242]

'We Want Simcity 5'? lol.

Well while I agree with the financial reasons EA won't undertake this, it doesn't stop a group of people from making the darn game anyway. Simutrans is getting by quite well from that system of development, so just because a big powerful company won't do it (and yes I understand they have valid reasons etc etc) doesn't mean it can't be done.

I do agree on the issue of complexity/education gaming etc. While one of my favorite aspects of the Simcity series has been it's realism, indeed that is the one main thing I hate about games as they are oft unrealistic games. However a game can be realistic and thus educational without being a teacher whacking a blackboard with a cane and interrupting our daydreams. If a game happens to be realistic enough it will be subconciously educational, and it needn't be viewed as being an educational game just because it is realistic and we learn about stuff.

What I mean is that doesn't have to be the reason the game exists, and the thing we get most out of it. I remember when I first played Simcity 2000, having always been interested in town planning and similar areas, it was a Godsend. I daresay had mr Wight not conceived the concept when he did I would have created this game, as it answered all that I asked for in that I liked to create 'imaginary' cities, but if I just drew them or wrote about them or mademodels they were not alive and were thus not proper cities just ideas. What Simcity did was make these ideas come alive, and also it was indeed interesing to see a basic idea of how these things actually work in real life.

I don't think the issue would lie with complexity and difficulty. It's easy enough to have settings so that more laid back gamers can lose control over things and go with the flow, and allow more serious players or those with an interest in town development and so forth to have more control over precise elements of the simulation. I really can't see why that can't be achieved.

Putting aside the financial perspective as if it was community built it would be built not for financial gain but as an artwork as it were- and I am sure that if enough people with the right skills got involved who had the time free... It could be done. If it was community built it would be best to make it a free game, especially during it's development. Then again that is from the perspective of the city building enthusiast, not the financial advisor.

The difficulty part of Simcity to me seems unimportant, as it is easy to make a tutorial so that even the most ignorant players will know what to do. As long as the UI isn't overly complex, and laid out simply, and the complex realistic controls are toggleable (sp?) that shouldn't be an issue. It wouldn't have to sink to the level of realism of Cityville to appeal to a wider demographic, but merely be as easy to play. And besides, if you play a game and find it easy to play, and ALSO have realism as an added bonus, who's complaining?

One last thing... Simcity 2000 imo was the best version so much as enjoyability is concerned, but I don't think one has to lose realism in order to make a game more enjoyable. However I think... this is after all a game not a textbook on city building... and while tip top realism should be in it, I don't see why we shouldn't have the option to build fantastic arcologies or have dinosaurs roaming the city streets either, as an option. People want to spend some time, of varying lengths, on making their dream cities come to life. That concept surely doesn't have to be challenged by 'difficulty'.

  Edited June 10, 2011 by astronelson  
Fixed formatting tag problem.

[jacksunny 741]

'We Want Simcity 5'? lol.

Yes I thought of that one, just wanted to see if someone could come up with a better name.

EDIT: Link. It's obviously not completed yet though...

  Edited June 10, 2011 by jacksunny  

[Mark Waybill 242]

I've created an account.

[ggianfra 50]

A friend of mine created this banner.

link http://ggzagor.deviantart.com/art/Banner-WE-WANT-SC5-212802874

To understand who we are, I pray all who read this topic to leave a reply, with a simple "I agree"

[NMUSpidey 3,956]

My big thing about this is that I don't think city building franchises sell very well anymore. Did Cities XL sell well? Nope, Monte Cristo was shuttered over a year ago. I didn't see any headlines proclaiming the greatness of CXL 2011, either (and I didn't buy it because what does it really have over SC4 besides being fully 3d?) Make no mistake, I'd LOVE to have a new SC5 to look forward to, to play and be excited about all over again, but I think we really need to be asking a different question: What could possibly be added to the experience that SC4 doesn't provide? And to put that a bit farther, what could possibly be added to SC4 that the BATers and modders haven't already done? Think about the NAM, the incredible buildings available from people around the world, and the vast array of options available to us already is just amazing. We have a uniquely enjoyable game that's going to be ten years old that gives us an experience on par with modern games. What other franchise offers that to its fans? Mario, maybe. Zelda, the Civilization series (people still love Civ II, and I still love Civ IV). It's a mere handful. Instead of damning Maxis and EA for not giving us MORE! perhaps we should be thanking them for delivering such a great game with such a long lifespan.

Of course, if there were a SimCity 5 (a real one, not a "SimCity Societies" or whatever such nonsense) I would totally buy it.

[jacksunny 741]

A friend of mine created this banner.

link http://ggzagor.deviantart.com/art/Banner-WE-WANT-SC5-212802874

Do you mind if we use that for the site? It would be greatly appreciated.

And just to let everyone know, the forums aren't completed yet so please don't post there. Thank you.

[ggianfra 50]

jacksunny : anyone can freely use the banner "We want SC5" - no copyright - no credit

I do not think it an easy job to implement SC4 and the wonderful work done by modders (NAM team, Pegasus, etc.)..

And I do not think that the evolution of SC4 can be integrated only with 3D (as CitiesXL or Tropico3: with a beautiful 3D but not playable at the level of SimCity).

Only the genius of a person will define the specifications of SC5: Will Wright.

[jacksunny 741]

So if you go to the site, you probably won't be seeing any major changes anytime soon, I'm currently in the process of putting together the CSS files. I'm also experiencing database problems, plus the fact that any images I upload to the hosting account seem to get corrupted isn't helping!!!

[Mark Waybill 242]

Well it's a start at any rate. I like the banner, very straightforward and simple.

[Ocram's Razr 964]

1. Will wright did not help make SimCity 4.

2. What do you want for SimCity 5 anyway?

3. If it comes out with all the features you want, would you be willing to pay $80 for the full game (with expansion packs)?

[Ryan123220 18]

I've said it in every SC5 thread I've ever seen, I think we would be much better off with the source code then we would with a new game. With the source code we could pretty much do what ever we want. Id much rather the 2.5D we have now in SC4 over a full 3d view, it would take up resource power that could be much better used to let the game run smoother and faster. And I also think we have a better chance at the source code then getting EA to make a "perfect SC5". We want to much, and this "to much" is pretty much all available in SC4 with all the mods and bats.

[Mark Waybill 242]

Well naturally the source code would be useful. Creating Simcity 5 ourselves is no stranger of a concept to me as I'm working on doing that myself. Not that I have any hope it'll ever be that good. But certainly a community built game could work well, and would have the added advantage of constant updates.

[Simtopia23 0]

i've created a post in darkspore forum

My link

and of course i've created an account in the new website.

[GMT 389]

although I am totally with this pro-sc5-screw-you-ea-for-killing-it-thingy, I think it's not worth the while. sorry.

Thing is, like mentioned plenty times before, it's a niche genre and therefore pretty much down the list of "interesting" investments for producers/publishers (I don't go into detail as how the games have changed over the past 20 yrs (that I witnessed myself) from many business, few action, to the exact opposite).

Further, even if you think of this niche, to sell means to have a name (think of anno series, civ series et al. more or less the same niche product but with a good selling name) and frankly, EA f*cked up the good name of the Sim City franchise with societies, creator and whatnot. This forces you to not just put a truckload of green into the production to live up to todays excpectations, but also into re-introducing the name to it's long gone glory.

and the 3rd and probably worst factor that speaks against it, the company holding the rights to the SC franchise/name is called EA. nuff said.

but I really really hope to stand corrected one day. sooner rather than later...

[cowcorn 11]

As usual I see quite a few arguments that say that this is not worth it. The problem I see is that if all humans thought like that much of the great evolutions of mankind would not have happened. Very great things have started from hopeful people who were willing to fight for a cause even though the odds were stacked against them. I am usualy one of the pessimistic but in this case I am willing to hope.

As for the financial reasons EA would have for not doing Sim City 5 I think in the end they are poor excuses. How many copies of Sim City 4 have been sold since 2003? Thats how much people would be interested to buy a new Sim City if it was well done. Ultimately the reasons why we did not have a real successor to Sim City 4 were technical up until now. If this is a start for a real lobby campaign than I propose that we get organized. There are quite a few ideas floating around; let's put them to work.

[ggianfra 50]

Have you seen the new games presented at E3-2011?

Well, that's what the future holds.

And that's what the market, or the vast majority of us players, requires.

And of course the manufacturers invest money to make profits and thus, producing games that the market requires.

At this point I see two solutions:

1) the player "not destructive" go out into the open, make their voices heard and be counted. How many are we? The number is likely to make a "mass of profit"?

2) the player "not destructive" are few..... and large manufacturers, however, invest in games "ducational" benefit of tax advantages such as for donations.

I'm daydreaming, I'm sorry.

ps: thanks, thanks very much to all the modders of SC4, really thank you for your work!

[jacksunny 741]

i've created a post in darkspore forum

My link

and of course i've created an account in the new website.

Can you please mention that the website is not yet completed. Thanks.

Regarding the fact that it might not be worth it, we will just have to wait and see. Even if EA doesn't want to make a new game, perhaps the site will make them consider releasing the source code. With that we could basically transform the game into Simcity 5 ourselves. Another option would be to make another expansion pack or release another update.

As for the financial reasons EA would have for not doing Sim City 5 I think in the end they are poor excuses. How many copies of Sim City 4 have been sold since 2003? Thats how much people would be interested to buy a new Sim City if it was well done. Ultimately the reasons why we did not have a real successor to Sim City 4 were technical up until now. If this is a start for a real lobby campaign than I propose that we get organized. There are quite a few ideas floating around; let's put them to work.

I completely agree. The "financial reasons" are poor excuses.

As for the website, sorry it is going along so slowly. I try to work on it as much as possible, but with exams quickly approaching, I don't have much time.

[Frdm920 50]

Sorry but this is getting ridiculous.

As for the financial reasons EA would have for not doing Sim City 5 I think in the end they are poor excuses.

It costs on average US$20,000,000 to develop a new game and can take several years to do so. Now yes EA has the resources available to them to do such a thing. However, put yourself in their position, would you honestly invest 20 million dollars and several years into something that is unlikely to ever recoup your losses? Why dedicate the resources to that, when they can instead focus on developing and publishing games that will sell and will break even? That's what a commercial entity is ALL ABOUT.

How many copies of Sim City 4 have been sold since 2003? Thats how much people would be interested to buy a new Sim City if it was well done.

This assertion is wrong, plain and simple. Neither you, nor me, nor EA can claim that number of copies sold = number of people who would buy SC5. Why? Well consider these parameters:

• 
  
  
• How many of those copies were people re-buying the game because they lost/broke their disk?
  
• How many of those copies were bought, played once and forgotten about?
  
• How many weren't even played?
  

Put simply, there's too many variables for one to claim that if a Sim City 5 was to be released it would sell at least the same amount of copies as Sim City 4 has sold.

Ultimately the reasons why we did not have a real successor to Sim City 4 were technical up until now.

Whilst there were probably some minor technical barriers to a new Sim City game the main barrier has and always will be: Financial. As I mentioned above a huge amount of resources goes into developing a game. A commercial entity is unlikely to take such a risk when they don't need to.

Even if EA doesn't want to make a new game, perhaps the site will make them consider releasing the source code. With that we could basically transform the game into Simcity 5 ourselves.

Unlikely to happen, why? Because releasing the base game code and allowing an open source construction of a 'Sim City 5' (which wouldn't be allowed to be called that anyhow due to copyright/trademark/patent restrictions) would pretty much render SC4 obsolete, hence stripping EA of a (minor) source of income. I don't see many other commercial entities doing that...

[cowcorn 11]

Frdm920 :

I was trying to put back some hope and convince people that if we work together we might a have a chance (even though remote) to persuade EA into making a new Sim City. However since the reply I get is demolition then I must say I would not pursue this for now. For the record, I am not even a bit surprised to get such a response. The overall tone in the community on that subject is that of an old man convinced that nothing can change and that the best is behind. I have heard your arguments numerous times before and sincerely I don't care about them. You may wan't to reply to this post but it will be lost words because I will simply ignore it.

Jacksunny :

Sorry I had not seen your post before writing the first part of this post. My view on this is that if there was a will on the part of EA and Maxis to make it happen there would be numerous ways to make it profitable. We tend to think in very limited terms. Railworks 2 is a game for the passionate to say the least. The basic game is priced like any game but there is tons of DLC to choose from at a cost. The Sims uses a similar commercial model. Now I would not go to these extremes for a SimCity game but it would definitely be a way of making it profitable. A basic accessible game and them a few DLC packages for the passionate. Mind you that publishers get a better profit margin on online products than on physical releases (another big evolution since 2003). Even though that would raise the price tag for the core players I think most core Simcity fans would buy it. The logic is that hardcore fans will find the money even if it's painful.

  Edited June 15, 2011 by cowcorn  

[Mark Waybill 242]

''The logic is that hardcore fans will find the money even if it's painful.'' Well that is certainly true. Back when I bought SC4 it set me back 80 dollars, and plus Rush Hour at 40 or thereabouts, and back then that was over a year's savings gone.

The source code notion seems to me the most likely, as if EA did consider making a SC5 it would be controlled by EA not us and thus might turn into another societies. They'd make it profitable by hook or by crook- leading to less realism and more 'challenge' and 'mission' type gameplay like in Cityville, or Sim it up into an online multiplayer social simulation to make the cash. Zynga games at Facebook show what is popular and successful. But I doubt anyone here would want to spend an income on their cities, even if it wasn't absolutely necessary. With the source however there would still need to be a united effort to produce something good, and so a strong central core of devoted players with coding experience would have to be formed as a sort of parliament with various areas of speciality- and work together to creating something very good that could the be updated regularly. Simutrans I believe is a good example of a community built city game.

The one thing that a open source internet available game lacks is publicity, the great thing about a commercial enterprise is it is advertised and in the public eye. Attracting new players to an open source game might be difficult. Simcity 2000 didn't get to prominence by lurking in some community website tucked away where nobody could find it. The advantage of a source code being made available is one can have a connection with a famous franchise.

The niche issue I think is very much an issue of this era. After all back in the day people were content to play chess or cards to pass the time. The violent and quick satisfaction games available so much these days will never die, and after all theres nothing wrong with a good old shooting arcade game where you blow up space ships with lasers. But the issue I think is relativity. While most game players will play a shoot em up game or a fantasy reality game, few seem interested in playing a realistic game, even if just like a rpg it allows them to assume a fictional character and do fictional things (in many cases far more powerful things than in a rpg) The core concept of Simcity, the building of ones very own city, one having such power... Surely should appeal to these young video gamers? The problem I think does lie a certain extent in complexity and also time.

If it takes a few hours to get a realistic profit earning city running a video gamer will have spent that time rather bored and wishing for his/her city to grow already. However if he/she is rewarded by realistic features and entertaining simulation of minor things he/she will not find it such a drag. I don't think anyone, even a hardcore l33t gamer who enjoys blowing up zombies day in day out, could resist the core notion of simcity if it were presented to them properly in a way they could understand and appreciate. One gets to lord it over a whole region, deciding what happens, and gets to build a city entirely by themselves. Surely these gamers must appreciate what that implies? Creating a city... When one considers how long and how difficult a real city is to create... Take New York for instance as a prime example... Surely the magnitude of this concept should appeal to a wider demographic than it does? And in my humble opinion thereason it doesn't is that people these days have presented to them options like societies that aren't essentially city building games but socially centered simulations. Social simulation is great, I say bring on the integration of Simcity and The Sims, but unless that fundamental concept is appreciated, that of creating a city- so simple yet so godly a concept...

The answer in my opinion has always been to make the simulation as interesting as Simcity 2000s was. Now I know this isn't the 90s, but I first played 2000 in 2003 and it remains my favourite video game of all time. I think that we can learn a lot from this game. I think making gamelay easy is a good idea, to the extent that it is easy to understand how the basics work. Then a uninterested player can build a workable city and experiment at this or that and blow it up, whereas a more fanatic city builder can gain added tools and use their experience to do more complx things. To make the game available to a wide demographic as well as marketed to a wide demographic is the key to success.

The 20,000,000 dollars mentioned before does not phase a hardcore 'we want simcity 5er' such as myself. Quoting big figures is all fine and dandy, but the game will at least break even if marketed properly. Inside all of us, even those who were tempted by the zombie killing side of the force, there is a person who would find the core concept of city building very interestin if they could appreciate it. I think if we could appreciate just what we were doing represented... when we destroyed a whole town with a hurricane... or developed a large plain into suburban sprawl... or saw our first commercial skyscraper after so many years of simulation... I think if the game was not only realistic but simply prepresented the core concepts...

To get someone interested in the process of city building and of course city management (both things that to young gamers should appeal??? power on such a level as opposed to the mere handling of a semi automatic in a dungeon filled with vampires? with zoning powers you can tell said vampires where to build their dungeon! Surely this power, this importance the 'Mayor' has in the running of things, if marketed and presented properly, would attract hordes of young gamers? Or are we so full of decadent food we can not appreciate fish and chips these days?

Ah well... I've ben ranting about Simcity 5 and what it should be like since 2005... But I think one day EA will give up the source code. Let's just hope it doesn't take as long as the original version did!

[Simtopia23 0]

Can you please mention that the website is not yet completed. Thanks.

Regarding the fact that it might not be worth it, we will just have to wait and see. Even if EA doesn't want to make a new game, perhaps the site will make them consider releasing the source code. With that we could basically transform the game into Simcity 5 ourselves. Another option would be to make another expansion pack or release another update.

Maxis have closed the topic

[Djohaal 121]

Personally I beleive it's well past time that we stop moaning about why maxis/EA won't make a simcity 5 (they won't, and if they do it'll suck as much as civ V, modding for it is dead thanks to DLC). It's well past time we created our own citybuilder game, such as a simcity 4-inspired but improved clone...