My suggestion for Maxis

[runnerguy347 30]

Not sure if this has been posted here before or not, but why can't Maxis take advantage of this graphics engine. I would gladly pay $100 for a Sim City that looked like this.

[iamihop11 19]

That's very impressive, but there are a few reasons I can think of that Maxis hasn't taken advantage of it.

- Most importantly, because 95% of computers out there right now would have conniption fits. My computer would die as soon as it got a look at the box!

- Because it isn't theirs, and there's no way that they could produce something comparable for $100 a pop. Applications for this sort of cutting-edge software are more likely to be used by architecture/urban planning firms, or in academics; basically, groups that will sink $1000 into a program without batting an eyelash. Ever tried to get MatLab or ArcGIS for yourself? $$$

- I wonder if realism that striking would necessitate too much micromanagement. Since games seem to be headed determinedly toward pretty, cartoonish looks with shallow learning curves, I bet a lot of casual gamers would be scared off by something that feels so real.

While I, too, would love a simcity with graphics like that, I'd rather have an engaging, deep, and realistic gameplay.

Anyway, thanks for sharing. It gives an idea of what all games might look like in 10-15 years.

[The Avatar 1,089]

I think it will take a lot longer than 10-15 years for games to reach that standard. For one thing, most computers wouldn't be able to handle a game that has that detailed of graphics, and a rich simulation engine (in the case of CBG). Also, most game developers are not capable of making a game like this. This is a professional simulation program used in urban design and civil engineering; far from a game you could find on the shelves of GameStop.

But maybe someday...

[samima 92]

I think it will take a lot longer than 10-15 years for games to reach that standard. For one thing, most computers wouldn't be able to handle a game that has that detailed of graphics, and a rich simulation engine (in the case of CBG). Also, most game developers are not capable of making a game like this. This is a professional simulation program used in urban design and civil engineering; far from a game you could find on the shelves of GameStop.

But maybe someday...

True.

[Ltw 401]

Fifteen years ago we thought a game with a resolution of 840*480 had great detail. So I wouldn't be surprised if this will be for sale one day. I definitely would buy it. It looks awesome!

That's very impressive, but there are a few reasons I can think of that Maxis hasn't taken advantage of it.

- Most importantly, because 95% of computers out there right now would have conniption fits. My computer would die as soon as it got a look at the box!

- Because it isn't theirs, and there's no way that they could produce something comparable for $100 a pop. Applications for this sort of cutting-edge software are more likely to be used by architecture/urban planning firms, or in academics; basically, groups that will sink $1000 into a program without batting an eyelash. Ever tried to get MatLab or ArcGIS for yourself? $$$

- I wonder if realism that striking would necessitate too much micromanagement. Since games seem to be headed determinedly toward pretty, cartoonish looks with shallow learning curves, I bet a lot of casual gamers would be scared off by something that feels so real.

While I, too, would love a simcity with graphics like that, I'd rather have an engaging, deep, and realistic gameplay.

Anyway, thanks for sharing. It gives an idea of what all games might look like in 10-15 years.

Used ArcGIS, looks nothing like this.

I think it is realistic to think that games like this are on the shelfs in about 15 to 20 years. If you look at some games for the Playstation 3 and xbox 360 which are close to real, this is also possible (at least in the near future). The only problem is that there is a simulation engine behind it. This makes games like this much more challenging for your computer. But still, 10 years ago they would never think that they would build processors with 8 cores for your PC so I think the technology issue isn't going to be a problem in the future.

  Edited July 23, 2012 by Ltw  

[GMT 389]

the visuals are actually a walk in the park for the average of todays systems, of course, the better the system the better performance at the same lvl of detail.

what really cuts into th budget of the gamer and the performance - and therefore playability - is the underlying simulation engine and related calculations.

think of this: getting a state of the art pc onto its knees with a 3d benchmark might take some complex lighting and multiple very-high-poly geometries, but getting the same pc onto its knees with calculations only is as difficult as one mouseclick.

think of the zip-bomb 42.zip (DON'T EVEN THINK OF CLICKING ON IT!!!), no visuals at all but so much calculation that, to my knowledge, it has never been unpacked.

[iamihop11 19]

Used ArcGIS, looks nothing like this.

Heh, no, it doesn't. I was thinking more along the lines of "highly-technical piece of software with market dominance which can be sold for absurd sums of money"

Can you imagine doing spatial analysis in this sort of environment, though? I'd keep getting distracted by the bumper stickers on the cg cars driving past.

[Ltw 401]

Used ArcGIS, looks nothing like this.

Heh, no, it doesn't. I was thinking more along the lines of "highly-technical piece of software with market dominance which can be sold for absurd sums of money"

Can you imagine doing spatial analysis in this sort of environment, though? I'd keep getting distracted by the bumper stickers on the cg cars driving past.

It would cost me much more time if it looks like that. But for some reason, I wouldn't mind at all.