SimCity Store ?

[Superbacon 380]

Why should we? Anybody who buys the game will have already dished out $60 to $80 on the game its self depending on what version they get. There's no reason to pay for more basic content unless it's a proper expansion pack. Besides, if it's from EA/Maxis and you pay for it then I would hardly call it custom. Fan-made mods, now that's custom.

[macvirt 361]

Why? Because you are expected to. It is required. The triggers for that kind of behaviour are quite simple, even if the complexity of the range of those triggers is staggering. Only a minority of people adher to principalities. Most people even in establishing their personal point of balance effectively give in to one or more of those triggers.

I want to believe, show off, loose myself, give myself a present, share with a friend whom I could also just meet for real but owk, and so forth. We're human beings, we're actually quite easy

[Xenocity 343]

Simcity will probably go the way of Sims 3.

Sims 3 let you create custom content and upload it to the Sims 3 Exchange.

You could either sell your content or give it away for free.

You also had the ability to buy Maxis made furniture as well.

I mean I'd love the ability to buy DLC piecemeal instead of a whole $20 expansion pack.

[LillySatou 117]

don't give them any ideas..

[nhgriffith 179]

I doubt Maxis can compete the artists of Simtropolis. But it seems they want to try it by keeping the mod ability for themselves. .. at least at release.. I predict a painful death of DLC if it only contains more cartoon buildings.

Honestly, and no disrespect to the Simtropolis artists and modders at all, but if the people still out and about enhancing SC4 are so much better than the people at Maxis, then why don't the group up and make their Freeware SC5...? Everyone's got so many complaints about SC2013 and wants to talk about how awesome all the modders and artists here are compared to Maxis. Prove it. Go make your own game.

[LillySatou 117]

I doubt Maxis can compete the artists of Simtropolis. But it seems they want to try it by keeping the mod ability for themselves. .. at least at release.. I predict a painful death of DLC if it only contains more cartoon buildings.

Honestly, and no disrespect to the Simtropolis artists and modders at all, but if the people still out and about enhancing SC4 are so much better than the people at Maxis, then why don't the group up and make their Freeware SC5...? Everyone's got so many complaints about SC2013 and wants to talk about how awesome all the modders and artists here are compared to Maxis. Prove it. Go make your own game.

because they don't have the spare time, financial backing, or major publisher to distribute the game. what kind of question is that?

[nhgriffith 179]

So the only reason maxis gets to do this game is because they are professional programmers with the backing of ea and not because they have a 25 year history of releasing great genre defining games?

[Nique 291]

nhgriffith wrote:

Honestly, and no disrespect to the Simtropolis artists and modders at all, but if the people still out and about enhancing SC4 are so much better than the people at Maxis, then why don't the group up and make their Freeware SC5...? Everyone's got so many complaints about SC2013 and wants to talk about how awesome all the modders and artists here are compared to Maxis. Prove it. Go make your own game.

----------------------------------------------------------------


Well with all due respect but maybe you should look better before asking these kind of questions.
There have been many attempts. And the new one has just popped from the horizon and is much more promising than all its predecessors.

(what happened to simtropolis wysiwyg editor???)

  Edited February 8, 2013 by CaptCity  

[BravoGreenONE 120]

I could not vote because it really depends on a number of factors. Firstly the base game needs to be acceptable or im not buying it. Secondly if the game is acceptable the price has to be right.

Im hoping they can fix the map size. Id really like to be able to support maxis and buy the game and possibly expansions. Its really a matter of hope that that they will make critical changes.

[Hoipus 292]

So the only reason maxis gets to do this game is because they are professional programmers with the backing of ea and not because they have a 25 year history of releasing great genre defining games?

In a sense, yes. There was a point where they were almost down the toilet because of poor business decisions and multiple poor selling games.

[Jackbnimble 0]

My thought is they will sell an "incomplete game" and them, sell DLCs.

Ea has never sold an incomplete game  forcing you to buy dlc to complete it. Why on earth do you believe that they would even try to pull such a stunt now?

[macvirt 361]

My thought is they will sell an "incomplete game" and them, sell DLCs.

Ea has never sold an incomplete game  forcing you to buy dlc to complete it. Why on earth do you believe that they would even try to pull such a stunt now?

 

Actually, they have, and they haven't. DLC are by design strategy a part of specification. Their definition of "complete" has simply changed in comparison to that of customers. A complete title these days means the combination of title release (feature sets, content, art, etc) and that which was seperated from the specs to be releases seperate and that which is conceived to be added at a later stage. Three parts. The first two of those are actually what most customers tend to see as a the definition of "complete game", with the third being the "extra" cherries later on. 

 

By the way, it is interesting to make note of feature and function sets which were visible during development stages as well as in the marketing, which for the release have disappeared. Equally interesting it will be to see those elements resurface as DLC elements later on. From buildings via building styles via transit elements via infrastructural elements all the way to core elements like terraforming and moddability.

[Jackbnimble 0]

 

My thought is they will sell an "incomplete game" and them, sell DLCs.

Ea has never sold an incomplete game  forcing you to buy dlc to complete it. Why on earth do you believe that they would even try to pull such a stunt now?

 

Actually, they have, and they haven't. DLC are by design strategy a part of specification. Their definition of "complete" has simply changed in comparison to that of customers. A complete title these days means the combination of title release (feature sets, content, art, etc) and that which was seperated from the specs to be releases seperate and that which is conceived to be added at a later stage. Three parts. The first two of those are actually what most customers tend to see as a the definition of "complete game", with the third being the "extra" cherries later on. 

 

By the way, it is interesting to make note of feature and function sets which were visible during development stages as well as in the marketing, which for the release have disappeared. Equally interesting it will be to see those elements resurface as DLC elements later on. From buildings via building styles via transit elements via infrastructural elements all the way to core elements like terraforming and moddability.

 

Actually, no they haven't! Being incomplete would suggest that the game is unfinished. Day one , everyone will get a fully functional and completed version of sim city that doesn't require dlc to play.  Everyone may think that there is dlc that should have been in the game to begin with, and I am not saying they're wrong, but it doesn't make the game incomplete with out it.

 

I have been gaming for over 20 years , between steam, origin and psn, I have close to 100 games in my collection and most of them have the option for dlc and not one of those games is incomplete or even close to being incomplete. By the way, I rarely buy dlc myself, only for a very few select games will I ever buy any dlc .

 

This is the way the industry has been going over the last few years with dlc, Devs will try to nickle and dime you to get any extra money they can out of their customers, but at the same time dlc is always optional.

 

To your statement , there is no " they have and they haven't" (that doesn't even make any sense) , they either have or they haven't, and I can tell you "NO" they have NOT ever released an incomplete game. I don't know much about law, but I don't think that it would even be legal to do such a thing. 

[MPleines 17]

Who's to say if a game is 'complete' on release? Who determines what should be in and what should not be? Some say the new Simcity is incomplete because it doesn't have subways and some will say that it's incomplete because there's no terraforming or because the city areas are too small. But there's a lot of new stuff and even in the beta, with a lot of features locked and practically all of the new multiplayer action still missing, it was possible to build a working, growing city, so in a sense, even the very limited beta was a complete game. Not one with a lot of replayability, but with everything enabled the final game certainly will be, I'm sure.

Is SC4, even in its latest, fully modded version suddenly incomplete because you can't set up an entire production pipeline from raw materials extraction to bringing finished products to market? 

 

Sure, there are things that will probably be added later through DLC, but if they'd take the time to put in everything they could think of, we'd be kept waiting forever.

I'd rather have a solid game now and new content to enrich it later.

[Zpike 79]

Framing the debate on DLC as “nickel and diming the customer” or “EA is screwing us for money” is not rational. Maxis and EA are business and as such they need to make money to survive. Their goal is, as it should be, to maximize profit for their shareholders. In order to do that they must provide a viable product to the consumer. With that in mind, their goal is to provide what the consumer perceives is a great product at as low a cost as possible and sell it at as high a price as possible. If it’s possible to extend the revenue stream beyond the initial sale, so much the better. DLC content is simply a way to extend that revenue stream beyond the initial sale.

This is actually good for the consumer. We can see the benefit of extended revenue streams in Blizzard with WoW. That solid revenue stream has allowed Blizzard to provide arguably one of the best MMORPGs ever created. Customers are extremely happy with the product and Blizzard is making shareholders really, really happy.

 

If you want SimCty to become the best city simulation on the market over the next few years then you better be hoping they make lots of money. Complaining about it is counter productive.

 

[macvirt 361]

 

 

My thought is they will sell an "incomplete game" and them, sell DLCs.

Ea has never sold an incomplete game  forcing you to buy dlc to complete it. Why on earth do you believe that they would even try to pull such a stunt now?

 

Actually, they have, and they haven't. DLC are by design strategy a part of specification. Their definition of "complete" has simply changed in comparison to that of customers. A complete title these days means the combination of title release (feature sets, content, art, etc) and that which was seperated from the specs to be releases seperate and that which is conceived to be added at a later stage. Three parts. The first two of those are actually what most customers tend to see as a the definition of "complete game", with the third being the "extra" cherries later on. 

 

By the way, it is interesting to make note of feature and function sets which were visible during development stages as well as in the marketing, which for the release have disappeared. Equally interesting it will be to see those elements resurface as DLC elements later on. From buildings via building styles via transit elements via infrastructural elements all the way to core elements like terraforming and moddability.

 

Actually, no they haven't! Being incomplete would suggest that the game is unfinished. Day one , everyone will get a fully functional and completed version of sim city that doesn't require dlc to play.  Everyone may think that there is dlc that should have been in the game to begin with, and I am not saying they're wrong, but it doesn't make the game incomplete with out it.

 

I have been gaming for over 20 years , between steam, origin and psn, I have close to 100 games in my collection and most of them have the option for dlc and not one of those games is incomplete or even close to being incomplete. By the way, I rarely buy dlc myself, only for a very few select games will I ever buy any dlc .

 

This is the way the industry has been going over the last few years with dlc, Devs will try to nickle and dime you to get any extra money they can out of their customers, but at the same time dlc is always optional.

 

To your statement , there is no " they have and they haven't" (that doesn't even make any sense) , they either have or they haven't, and I can tell you "NO" they have NOT ever released an incomplete game. I don't know much about law, but I don't think that it would even be legal to do such a thing. 

 

You have managed to completely miss the point. A decade ago if we engaged on a venture for a title release we'd find our selves in plenty tight spots if we made the release without having met the targets set by the specification processes. In simple terms, if we released the title incomplete we'd have to spend quite a bit more (in resources assigned as well as costs which back then were always tallied seperate from the development costs) to deal with that in either a patch based approach or an enhancement approach. Both of which would take their own additional marketing campaign - either through community, support or mainstream channels or a combination of these.

 

Nowadays we do the speccing, we go through the entire process, we then decide which parts are considered "core" to the intended experience, which parts are considered crucial for the processes of customer acquisition / retention and which parts carry a distinct value beyond these parts.

 

We then cut those bits from the release planning, invest in a seperate planning mode for resource allocation, development and marketing for them, and call it DLC. We can do that because people are by now used to games being enhanced or complemented for both content and features after a title release with a very low resistance on a market level to these having a seperate price. That is what DLC technically is. We've just seen how we can save resources, deliver an incomplete title and make more money by completing it after the title release.

 

One of the biggest tricks, so to speak, is that intrinsic balance between determining the core elements of experience and that which a set of selected user types will crave when presented (ideally instigated by means of exactly those core experience targets). It is a fine line to walk. Most studios, and particularly the bigger publishers know that fine line very well. That is why even people with 20 years of gaming experience as a consumer rarely look up to ask questions about how these concepts like DLC have come to be and how they have changed (particularly over the last few years).

 

The core experience is a balanced set of targets to provide the experience of a full game, regardless of whatever perception the marketing creates in servitude of sales venues. The magic of it is that this is exactly what enables the concept of DLC to be expanded, with the tresholds of resistance on a consumer level ever decreasing.

[macvirt 361]

Framing the debate on DLC as “nickel and diming the customer” or “EA is screwing us for money” is not rational. Maxis and EA are business and as such they need to make money to survive. Their goal is, as it should be, to maximize profit for their shareholders. In order to do that they must provide a viable product to the consumer. With that in mind, their goal is to provide what the consumer perceives is a great product at as low a cost as possible and sell it at as high a price as possible. If it’s possible to extend the revenue stream beyond the initial sale, so much the better. DLC content is simply a way to extend that revenue stream beyond the initial sale.

This is actually good for the consumer. We can see the benefit of extended revenue streams in Blizzard with WoW. That solid revenue stream has allowed Blizzard to provide arguably one of the best MMORPGs ever created. Customers are extremely happy with the product and Blizzard is making shareholders really, really happy.

 

If you want SimCty to become the best city simulation on the market over the next few years then you better be hoping they make lots of money. Complaining about it is counter productive.

 

 

Actually, it is very rational. The best way for a consumer to manage his or her own choices is on that basis of rationality. Emotions are after all exactly that which enables our marketeers and publishers to push buttons

 

And no, ultimately the trend of DLC is not good for either consumer or the actual industry and its market. There is a very simple reason for that. Human behaviour is never with balance built in. This is an industry. We treat and run it that way. That means that without built in balance the sole limiting factor is that of those interests that decide priorities. In simple terms, greed is that which decides.

 

And in our economics greed is a mere short term function. It has great power, and is usually coupled with efforts to shift costs beyond the short term scope (and thus beyond the parties active as instigators), but it never creates growth. It is one of the biggest myths consumers are taught from kindergarten upward. Greed serves the individual, for as long as he or she can shift the costs to another individual. It does not create wealth, it merely concentrates wealth. 

 

Our industry mirroring mentality as well as methods which consumers tend to only know of high finance is a one way road to destroying the very feeding mechanisms that exist. The short term focus is constantly to achieve dominance and control. Yet if our species is known for one thing in its history it is that dominance is never a given. The same for control. The irony is that aside of principalities and philosophy this is simple economics. If your aim is to create a lock-in market for the purposes of dominance and control you remove the very foundations of that which enables your initial growth, by means of instabilities that arise from excesses in behaviour. The two biggest companies to date to have achieved such lock-in market types, Apple and Amazon, have already learned the hard lessons in this, and have visibly been moving away from it. Yet the games industry is still ran by the investment mentality, and thus incapable of seeing further than the short term gain.

[Zpike 79]

Yea... Listen skippy, the guys at Maxis are just trying to make a great game and sell it at a profit.  I'm sure the steam of content updates paid for from DLC profits will do nothing if not enhance the product.  Dominating the world market for city simulations is just the gravy.

 

[Sunfighter 186]

Yea... Listen skippy, the guys at Maxis are just trying to make a great game and sell it at a profit.  I'm sure the steam of content updates paid for from DLC profits will do nothing if not enhance the product.  Dominating the world market for city simulations is just the gravy.

 

 

I disagree with you there. Using EA and Maxis past as an example. The Sims3 series my daughter plays to death and back. Ive gotten her pretty much every pack and a few things from the store ( i dont wanna look at the total cost, but im gonna say upwards of 300+ dollars spent). Sims3 as an engine has NOT improved very much since its release, theyve just added more content, but the engine itself is still as clunky as it was on day 1. It still has some of the day 1 bugs or "quirks" as the fanboys call them. And in fact a lot of the expansions introduce new bugs that unless they are game shattering they are ignored because they have a expansion to release in 6 months. To say that buying expansions means you get a great product is total BS. Heck even some of the game shattering bugs theyve ignored. I still remember my daughter crying like all day because I had to wipe everything she made and do a full reinstall due to an issue they introduced with another expansion where the game couldnt connect to the store and online if you used another hard drive other than the one windows was on...

 

 

Sorry, but I think they are gonna follow the Sims business model for simcity. The engine will never be fixed but they will release a ton of extra content to keep you occupied till the next expansion....yet the bugs, the day 1 issues..will never be wholly addressed.

 

Not only that, but i think tons of expansions and DLC is actually COUNTER-PRODUCTIVE to making a great product, because just like the Sims, EA and maxis will be HIGHLY reluctant to release a NEW game. Think of it like the gaming consoles, The devs wont want to update so soon because they have so much invested in the original infrastructure. It gives you a stale product that outlives its intended date. Not only graphic wise, but engine wise. I mean look at the consoles..they are a decade old now...Whats sims 3 now? 4-5 years old now? had not many of these expansions existed, wed probably have Sims4 by now running on a newer engine (or at least refined and updated, fixed, optimised) with various new elements. Instead we have Sims 3 and its billion expansions running on an outdated engine that chugs along even on new hardware because it has limits on what it can do no matter the hardware.

 

Yes, I believe this will be the same fate as this Simcity.

[Zpike 79]

I hate to break it to you but The Sims 3 is one of the most popular game franchises on the planet.  I'm a 54 year old man and I've even wasted hours on it and bought all the expansions just to have some fun on a slow weekend.  The game is fantastic.  My niece plays it so much her mother has to drag her away from the PC.

 

  In a couple of day I won't have time for these arguments any more because I'll be playing with my new city.

[Hoipus 292]

It may be popular, but it still heavily flawed. I find it disgusting that it has to be fanpatched if one wants to play the game for more than a few hours without it bloating itself to death.

[SGTMECKP 0]

The difference with simcity is that it can be modded, and the developerts said they will support that. You couldnt have a store and try and sell little changes, like how buldings look, because someon could mod the changes for free. I would buy a dlc, if it added bigger cities and new things to build.

[Xenocity 343]

The difference with simcity is that it can be modded, and the developerts said they will support that. You couldnt have a store and try and sell little changes, like how buldings look, because someon could mod the changes for free. I would buy a dlc, if it added bigger cities and new things to build.

Actually Sims 3 has a modding communit as well.

You can create  your own content in the Sims 3 if you wish.

 

@sunfighter

 

Simcity 4 is still the buggiest game Maxis has ever produced and they gave up fixing it.

 

Also Maxis had originally planned numerous expansion packs for Simcity 4.

Due to low sales of Simcity 4 and even lower sales for Rush Hour, those expansion packs were canned.

Imagine if we would have gotten those expansion packs...

 

Anyways I'd rather Maxis release expansion packs/DLC for the new Simcity then produce a new Simcity game every 3 years (they did until Simcity 4 tanked).

[Kythlyn 80]

I can't really answer yes or no to the poll without knowing exactly what will be available and what it will cost. If there is worthwhile content and not just palette swaps, I might spend some money. But if it's stupidly expensive like The Sims 3 store, I won't spend a dime for anything short of an expansion.

[Hellken 1,658]

I doubt Maxis can compete the artists of Simtropolis. But it seems they want to try it by keeping the mod ability for themselves. .. at least at release.. I predict a painful death of DLC if it only contains more cartoon buildings.

Honestly, and no disrespect to the Simtropolis artists and modders at all, but if the people still out and about enhancing SC4 are so much better than the people at Maxis, then why don't the group up and make their Freeware SC5...? Everyone's got so many complaints about SC2013 and wants to talk about how awesome all the modders and artists here are compared to Maxis. Prove it. Go make your own game.

What kind of question is this? Maybe it's because they have their own jobs and lives and they don't have millions of $$$ in their bank accounts to develop and publish a game. Making a model in BAT and creating a game are two different skills. The "challenge" is so asinine. 

 

Seriously.... 

So the only reason maxis gets to do this game is because they are professional programmers with the backing of EA ...

Therefore, they have absolute responsibility and no excuse with the quality of their games.

...and not because they have a 25 year history of releasing great genre defining games?

25 years? Reputation does not guarantee magic results.

"An artist is only as good as his last work."

[mk11232 105]

I would like to say 'No' but the game hasn't even come out yet and I'm already sweating thinking about the extra tilesets available in the digital deluxe edition (since I just preordered the normal version). If DLC or expansions add more tilesets (I would love an Asian tileset like in SC3000UL) or expands the city size then I have to admit I will be all over that.

My fear is that we might see a 'Simsesque' type of DLC/expansion which is really ridiculous.

And this is the attitude EA wants to foster.  People who are willing to pay $60 for a base game and then $5-10 here and there for more visual goodies.  Before you know it in 6 months you'll given EA over $200 to make the city look the way you wanted, a way that was free before, and thank them for the opportunity.

[wokisan 9]

I would like to say 'No' but the game hasn't even come out yet and I'm already sweating thinking about the extra tilesets available in the digital deluxe edition (since I just preordered the normal version). If DLC or expansions add more tilesets (I would love an Asian tileset like in SC3000UL) or expands the city size then I have to admit I will be all over that.

My fear is that we might see a 'Simsesque' type of DLC/expansion which is really ridiculous.

And this is the attitude EA wants to foster.  People who are willing to pay $60 for a base game and then $5-10 here and there for more visual goodies.  Before you know it in 6 months you'll given EA over $200 to make the city look the way you wanted, a way that was free before, and thank them for the opportunity.

Nope, I don't have $200 to spend and I will not pay $5-10 here and there for just 'more visual goodies'. And saying I would 'thank them for the opportunity' is an unfair exaggeration.

[Xenocity 343]

I would like to say 'No' but the game hasn't even come out yet and I'm already sweating thinking about the extra tilesets available in the digital deluxe edition (since I just preordered the normal version). If DLC or expansions add more tilesets (I would love an Asian tileset like in SC3000UL) or expands the city size then I have to admit I will be all over that.

My fear is that we might see a 'Simsesque' type of DLC/expansion which is really ridiculous.

And this is the attitude EA wants to foster.  People who are willing to pay $60 for a base game and then $5-10 here and there for more visual goodies.  Before you know it in 6 months you'll given EA over $200 to make the city look the way you wanted, a way that was free before, and thank them for the opportunity.

Umm this is not entirely true.

 

Simcity came out then 2 years later Maxis and Nintendo co-developed the much superior SNES version with loads of new content.

If you wanted all the content it costed you $300!

 

Simcity 2000 had an expansion pack.

 

Simcity 2000 also had:

• Simcity 2000 Special Edition
• Simcity Gold/Network Edition

Each edition had the content of the previous edition plus new content.

Quite a few people bought each of them spending a lot of money.

 

Simcity 3000 was cut short by the release of Simcity 3000 Unlimited (which contained extra title sets and building mod to create your own buildings)

 

I like a few others bought the original then unlimited version when it came out to get the extra content.

That costs about $90.

 

Simcity 4 with in a year got the Rush Hour expansion pack thus many people spent $70 to get all the content.

Maxis also announced they had more expansions in the works, which would have added another $50+, but they didn't come to pass.

 

Us fans that have been with Simcity from the beginning are quite used to dealing with expansion packs and new versions with added content within a year of release.

 

The only difference with the new game is the fact you can buy individual content instead of the whole pack.

 

If you really want the French, German and UK building sets, you can buy the pack for $20 in origin if you have the limited version.

 

I mean we didn't get free content until modding took off for Simcity 4.

[Towel 76]

Perspective is the first thing to go ... Unfortunately

[Zpike 79]

You get nothing for nothing and it you want something you have to pay for it.  It's as simple as that.  Maxis is in the business of making great games and you have to pay for that. Crying about it is just ignorant.

 

If SC 2013 turns out as good as It looks i'll gladly plop down cash for expansions and DLC packs.  In fact, I can't wait for the first expansion as it will most likely contain expanded city sizes, teraforming, and enhanced region tools.

  Edited February 15, 2013 by CaptCity