The whole environmental bent worries me

[LivingInThePast 364]

OK, one of the big "features" of SimCity 2013 is the whole environmental bent of it, like dealing with natural resources and CO₂ emissions. But I'm kind of worried about it. First off, I'm reminded of SimCity Societies, which got that FOX News report a year or so back. But it was far too late to be relevant and was a lot of fearmongering and untruth. Now at the GDC event, they showed the trailer to An Inconvenient Truth (with even more fearmongering and untruth than any FOX News report you can name).

I really hope that it and "natural resources" aren't the case. First off, it's the whole "time" feature. By dealing with "real world problems", they're essentially saying you can't simulate cities of the past. Want to make an 1880s factory town, with more than enough natural resources to go around? Sorry, no can do. Secondly, with the whole "resources" thing, it makes it seem like that resources will eventually get used up between all players, like the old Mac game Spaceward Ho! in which you competed for resources and ships. Or "Settlers of Catan".

I just hope that the environmental message (no, I'm not saying saving the environment isn't good, it's just not what building a city is about) isn't shoved down our throats, like SimCity Societies.

More importantly, if they're developing all these features for "natural resources" and the like, does that mean that they're spending less time making the most awesome city simulator? It would seem that way.

[TekindusT 3,809]

I find them OK, provided a kind of "sandbox" mode is implemented which allows you to disable all these features and just enjoy your city. Who wants real life problems if you're building a futuristic city?

[Techleo 18]

Personally I was one of the people in the past which wanted them to add resources and environmental costs long before it became what it has now. To me at least, building a city requires consequences. Not just smashing numbers and coming up with the richest and most balanced cities. That was always one peeves of Simcity 4. Why doesn't materials run out? Why doesn't water run out? Id much prefer a finite amount of resources. People either compete or co-operate. We see it all around us in cities now. One city fights another for water. While two other cities work together and thrive.

Personally that a element Simcity just didn't have. Its like Simcity matured and is giving us access to more layers to see and learn from:D

Natural resources make cities. They are cities. Without them you just have a half simulated city. In my opinion of course hehe.

  Edited March 7, 2012 by Techleo  

[BurroDiablo 222]

I like the resources aspect, although I hope its implemented better than in CXL, I'd prefer a simplified Anno system. As for the environmental aspect, I don't think it will play a massive part, no more than any other SC game, I mean, Pollution in SC has always had a negative impact on the surrounding area, in SC4 it effected desirability, in SC3K it affected the aura, in SC5 it'll affect your Sims health and will probably make your city less desirable/lower value, but I highly doubt you will be forced at gun point to clean your city up by some eco-despotic game element like in Anno 2070.

[Azurespecter 506]

I'm also ok with having to deal with environmental issues as part of the city building process. But I don't want the game to be focused around those environmental issues. If I want to ignore environmentalists, I better be able to do so and still run a successful city. (Btw, this is just in-game ideology, i don't really hate environmentalists... most of the time)

[CommodoreTech 5]

I'd really like to see this put into the game in the form of ordinances, such as emissions regulations and subsidizing public transport. This is realistic.

What I fear it will be will be 'uh-oh oil is running out! build an oil well!' which frankly is not a city-building simulation issue. I want to build a city, not constantly faff around with a bloody resource interface! That is what I hated about Cities XL. No mayor has to build a coal mine, he merely permits it to be built. The economy worries about resources, it should only concern the player when the economy requires the players permission to exploit resources.

I'd love it if I was the mayor of a city full of coalfields, and coal companies kept asking me for mining permits, which aroused concern amongst environmentalists, and I had to act as a mediator. Do I tell the mining company to get stuffed? Do I permit them limited mining rights? Do I tell the environmentalists to get stuffed instead? This is realistic. However, I'd detest the game if it was 'Mayor! Mayor! we're running out of coal and are completely incompetent at running the economy! if only you took care of every measly task for us!'. This again is the failure of Cities XL, you had to control a basic and rudimentary resource system that was too simple to be fun and so time consuming and irritating as well!. This is, however, what I think EA will do. If they do, then I will personally fly to California and slap them all.

[Jazzmaster 716]

I find them OK, provided a kind of "sandbox" mode is implemented which allows you to disable all these features and just enjoy your city. Who wants real life problems if you're building a futuristic city?

I agree. And if there isn't a sandbox mode, let's hope there's a new equivalent to the Extra Cheats DLL, extra ordinances which enables players to turn the city into a sandbox (these would probably be developed by the community like they were last time).

[A Nonny Moose 8,262]

Building a city has environmental implications no doubt. However, an emphasis on this beyond controlling zoning and development by means of requiring some kind of cleaning plant or garbage collection is not the purview of a city government. This is the purview of the overgovernment, and not directly within the city's control.

If this game has as much concern with environmental and social issues as, for example SC:S, count me out. Also, by the time this game hits the streets any such issues will either be outdated or moot.

The number one environmental concern to which we should all be paying attention is climate change which is now past the tipping point were we might have been able to do anything about it. We now have to learn to live with it, or we will be wiped out. Nature doesn't care about specific species.

Maybe what is really going on is that they want to atone for their stupidity in SC4 where their plants created too much pollution, and were not at all in tune with efforts to control it properly. Now they need to be concerned with stack-gas capture, heavy recycling, and returning things to the environment at least as clean as when they were taken up, if not better. Since this is being written in California, I expect to see the typical state of California parochial attitudes at play again. I am sick of building Silicon Valley. The lot sizes in SC4 are for the 1950s, not for modern cities.

There is too much micromanagement in the game now, so adding more will just make it that much more frustrating. If you are the chief executive, you will delegate most of the things they have the mayor doing now. He doesn't dispatch fire trucks nor police cars. He also doesn't issue building permits. Instead of "Advisors" he needs staff to manage and to whom to delegate things. Many of the aspects of SC4 are just silly make-work.

The mayor's job is to make policy and be a salesperson for the city and its good name. For this he may have a city council, but he doesn't normally have "Advisors" who carp and criticize. I would fire each and every one of them if I could.

  Edited March 7, 2012 by A Nonny Moose  

[Tarkus 6,933]

I like the resources aspect, although I hope its implemented better than in CXL, I'd prefer a simplified Anno system. As for the environmental aspect, I don't think it will play a massive part, no more than any other SC game, I mean, Pollution in SC has always had a negative impact on the surrounding area, in SC4 it effected desirability, in SC3K it affected the aura, in SC5 it'll affect your Sims health and will probably make your city less desirable/lower value, but I highly doubt you will be forced at gun point to clean your city up by some eco-despotic game element like in Anno 2070.

My thoughts exactly. This is simply a part of the gameplay mechanic of previous titles already--you build I-D zones, you get air pollution, water pollution, poor sim health, etc. Also, how many times have you had Neil Fairbanks pop up in SC4 and go all Kunstler on your posterior by telling you to increase density? How many times have you ignored him? He's had a fit with me and my suburb lovefest more times than I can count, but that never stops me. (Sometimes, I even get him on my side after awhile.)

While I didn't see the "GameChangers" event, I think Guggenheim's presence was mostly to a) market the game to green-types, b) show how SimCity can relate to these issues. Regardless of one's bent, the fact of the matter is, SimCity deals with something integral in our everyday lives, and fosters discussion from many angles. Maxis has generally done a pretty good job balancing the many sides in previous titles.

-Tarkus

[Thetford 22]

It also shows the reverse effects of environmentalism: industry produces more jobs and money, green businesses, less so. I believe it's in one of the articles.

Anyway, any games that involve political decisions are usually slightly to the creator's viewpoint. For example the citizenry's reaction to tax.

[LivingInThePast 364]

I think it would be nice if the environmental concerns were neutral, not the "correct" way as how California sees it. Chances are, if we did it their way, we'd all end up going bankrupt due to various fees and fines. (rimshot)

* on a related note, how about not LOOKING like California?

It would be cool if there was some sort of feature where you could discover natural resources as you were building your city, making the online component a bit like Settlers of Catan, which is great, because in SoC nothing truly "ran out", yet they could get extremely rare.

Also, the "place fossil fuel burning near your neighbors, your nearby Sims get sick" is almost like asking people to grief. I can imagine some people doing that JUST to spite someone else.

  Edited March 7, 2012 by LivingInThePast  

[mendota 1]

I think the OP is trying to politicize the game too much. The 'environmental bent" has been a part of Sim City since the beginning; it would be weird and dishonest to stop now. And it would be weird to continue ignoring a very fundamental part of a city's history and reason for being: natural resources.

Cities XL got it wrong with the micromanaging. But they got it right in realizing that cities have purposes and strengths depending on their environment. Makes me wonder if the current Maxis dev team has spent any time playing Sim Isle. There was a game that made great use of the "environmental bent."

[hamsterTK 93]

Its not ideological, beyond the marketing anyways. Simcity has always been about micromanagement far beyond what a mayor or government should be allowed in real life. Its what makes the game a game. And what I see is fertile grounds for gameplay here.

Also most of the talk about modding has been about changing the way the core simulation works. If having to deal with resources restricts your ability to build the city you want, find a mod that changes the resource values.

  Edited March 8, 2012 by hamsterTK  

[SimCoug 5,976]

Perhaps they can get Al Gore as the new environmental advisor.

[Jahnri 21]

I guess the city I live in is a bit different then some as far as resources go.

We actually do manage resources on a city level. Gravel, sand, lumber and such is under city control or at least managed. *shrugs*

With us knowing for a fact players need to manage resources like a currency it sets me into a happy dance about now.

[AddisonWesley 2]

I just hope that the environmental message (no, I'm not saying saving the environment isn't good, it's just not what building a city is about) isn't shoved down our throats, like SimCity Societies.

Environmentalism and sustainability are two major philosophies that inform contemporary planning- if you've ever been enrolled in a town planning programme you should know this. Resource management, whether it be of oil and gas for electricity, or just land itself, present serious constraints for all *modern* metropoleis. This is fact and reality. That being said, I very much doubt the new SimCity will have any more of an environmental 'bent' than the previous iteration of this game. It would be great if a real world timeline (along with associated limitations in technology) were included in the game as this would better reflect the growth patterns of cities from the past to present.

[Jahnri 21]

It seems to me they didn't make it so much make the game about evironmentalism. Simply they made the simulation show the impacts more realistically.

Soil nutrition, Water and pollution all mixing and impacting each other. Its really quite beautiful. If you haven't watched the videos about the glassbox engine, please do.

I think it'll relax anyone worried about there being to much of a political or philosophical bent. Its just more natural.

[Jamonbread 222]

No matter your views you have to admit the whole environment aspect is a cool gameplay feature. My personal opinion is if you still don't believe these things to be important to a city you've gotta be out of your mind. However no disrespect to anybody of course. Worrying about what fox says though is absolutely stupid... No one gives $$$$. I'm sure they will whine about sc5 and that's ok because I will laugh at their pathetic logic behind everything they say and then share it on Facebook with my lefty friends and have another laugh.

[Techleo 18]

Frankly Im thrilled because Ive wanted to run a logging city for a looong time in Simcity.

[Cob92 360]

To me it sounds like you can do whatever you want, but you have to live with the consequences. So if you have a mega-heavy-super-china-industry city, you're going to have to deal with health problems, smog, and so on as a result of the path you chose for your city. And because the regions are fully integrated, your choices are going to impact your friends' cities as well. I like that much better than a boring no consequences game where you just plop down stuff and watch it go.

[Jazzmaster 716]

To me it sounds like you can do whatever you want, but you have to live with the consequences. So if you have a mega-heavy-super-china-industry city, you're going to have to deal with health problems, smog, and so on as a result of the path you chose for your city. And because the regions are fully integrated, your choices are going to impact your friends' cities as well. I like that much better than a boring no consequences game where you just plop down stuff and watch it go.

^ The thing is, SimCity 4 worked a lot in this way too. You had to deal with all of the decisions of your building.

What most people do now is cancel out all the pollution etc. with mods because they're focused on heavily customizing their cities for themselves and/or for CJ's; which is fine, by the way. It's just gotten to the point that I think most members don't even remember what SimCity 4 is without mods, and that the game they revere so highly is SC4Deluxe+mods.

[Mark Waybill 242]

I have only just learnt the good news about 2013, so I can hardly say I can be authoritative on this point but I think if its done realistically and within reasonable limits an 'environmental' simulation is a progressive feature, however like the OP said, I would want the ability to create historic cities, and certainly would hope this eoc feature was tweakable or possibly editable in a god mode type feature

[Cob92 360]

To me it sounds like you can do whatever you want, but you have to live with the consequences. So if you have a mega-heavy-super-china-industry city, you're going to have to deal with health problems, smog, and so on as a result of the path you chose for your city. And because the regions are fully integrated, your choices are going to impact your friends' cities as well. I like that much better than a boring no consequences game where you just plop down stuff and watch it go.

^ The thing is, SimCity 4 worked a lot in this way too. You had to deal with all of the decisions of your building.

What most people do now is cancel out all the pollution etc. with mods because they're focused on heavily customizing their cities for themselves and/or for CJ's; which is fine, by the way. It's just gotten to the point that I think most members don't even remember what SimCity 4 is without mods, and that the game they revere so highly is SC4Deluxe+mods.

Well, I play a mostly unmodded SC4 Deluxe, since I find the game to get boring very quickly if all the obstacles in the simulator are turned off. So when I hear about environmental consequences, it really doesn't bother me at all. In fact, I welcome such things; they add depth to the simulation. If people just want to sculpt stuff without a simulation to deal with, CXL offers just that and more cosmetic mods are being made for it every day.

[jacksunny 741]

I don't know what all the fuss is about. SC4 had environmental features as well. If your city was heavily polluted, you wouldn't get high-tech industry, you would have low desirability. It sounds like SC13 is implementing the same ideas. I think it is good, it makes the game more realistic.

[tykho 3]

I don't think that in Sim City, you take on a role of a mayor like an IRL mayor. You are the builder and manager of the city, the sim city mayor, and you deal with stuff real life mayors don't and don't deal with stuff real mayors do. Even if you have the title Mayor, I think you take on a role as either an "almighty" mayor, or as the whole local government/whatever by yourself.

Like someone pointed out earlier in the thread, it's what makes a game a game. Sending out firetrucks, police cars, trying to deal with pollution for a healthier city (preferably) and so on.

OnT: Yes hopefully your city won't crumble because of some pollution. Sure, health goes down but that's what it's like in some places of the world, and their cities seem to "work" still.

  Edited March 8, 2012 by tykho  

[GrimJr987 15]

They're Worse in Tropico 4, They're all like "Please stop the development of your nation so we can make love to trees" and "please tear down all your buildings and wear no clothes and walk around in forests"

All the time I'm ANGRY because of them. Sunny Flowers gets on my nerves, with her "Peace and love, Presidente, Have this flower and pretty please stop burning down the forests"," HOW ARE YOU SUPPOSED TO SURVIVE WITHOUT WOOD?!?!" I say, "Also you're a traitor to your own cause by picking a flower out of the ground!".

[A Nonny Moose 8,262]

As more information becomes available, what I am seeing is a level of detail greater than that in The Sims. The animation prototypes were very interesting in that you can enhance a building with additional parts. While I rather like the idea of piecemeal building, I question the validity of this because this is supposed to be the duty of the building contractor. This thing is starting to look like an erector set with obstacles.

As for the transportation capability, I don't see anything that might simulate the daily traffic flow that occurs after the daily rush to and from work. It should be possible to create both a busy metropolis complete with appropriate issues and a more bucolic setting with villages, towns, farms, and local industries such as resource extraction without having a large city. That is, in addition to being able to build NYC, I want to be able to build Huron/Perth.

Example: Goderich is the largest port on the Canadian side of Lake Huron and it has a salt mine under the lake. It is also a grain shipping point and handles both lake freighters and salties. The next big town north is Kincardine whose main claim to fame is the largest Nuclear Power Station in the country (Bruce Nuclear). To the south, the town of Bayfield which is mostly farming and retirement with a large tourist trap on the main drag, and so on until you reach Sarnia, a city that specializes in oil refining.

  Edited March 8, 2012 by A Nonny Moose  

[tSlater 134]

Ah but any building contractor knows that the one commissioning the building (as the city would be on a civic building) always wants to make a change here and a change there until they like it. Also, since building codes and form-based master plans are way out of the scope for a sim city simulation yet, this seems like the best way to give a smidgen of that sort of control until custom content becomes so numerous you can pick and choose over picky details.

[The Bluejay 40]

To be honest, I'm not terribly bothered about whether or not SC5 exactly conforms to the conventional role of the mayor, and I think that to expect it to is fairly unrealistic as well as flawed from a gameplay point of view. I want the game to be enjoyable, whether than means cost speadsheets, customising buildings or sculpting terrain.

[Motina 77]

I downloaded logging and mining buildings from the STEX, LEX and simpeg because I want my cities to show some sort of resources base development of the regions. Oh, and grain silos. I certainly hope farming is part of this. Which I'm sure it is, since the GlassBox presentation showed food. So, that's. One thing about agriculture in SC4, with the addition of the mods was, do you actually have enough, or perhaps too much. the RCI graphs, and statistics do not show a good enough simulation of this.

I am pretty sure you can mix and match certain industries to have both clean and dirty industry. As for pollution, umm not CO2, but pollution has been in previous games, so what is the big deal?