Is SimCity Soceities underrated or a bad game?

[Mr Saturn64 742]

Icant help but notice that as a Sim City community, we tend to overlook Soceities. Is this because it's a bad game, or is it just underrated? I liked the sandbox mode, and I had a lot of fun with it, but I don't play it as much anymore.

[Indiana Joe 1,750]

Many SC4 fans don't like its style.  It's too casual compared to simulation games like SC4 and the better Tycoon games.  Some people do like it, but the overlap of SC4 and SCS fans is small.

 

It's not a terrible game by any means; it has decent graphics and isn't horribly buggy.  It just doesn't appeal to many fans of the genre.

[arcology 224]

I felt that it was an oversimplified version of the genre. 

 

The concept of watching your cities "change" based on your selections, was interesting, but became boring and tedious, pretty fast, for me.

 

I also, personally, did not like having to place every single building.

[Ocram's Razr 963]

It was overhyped prior to release so it would be hard for it to be underrated.

 

 

--Ocram

[SilverCyric 130]

Just held no replay value. I built one entire city, started a second and before I was even a quarter into it, I was back to SC4... I'm not trying to voice a complaint, but I just never got nearly as much enjoyment as actually building a city and watching it grow. Plus I really like a good decent road building setup... SCS seriously lacked in that department for me

[arozarker12 51]

I do kinda like to mess with it sometimes.  If I don't feel well enough to play sc4, I dink with societies.

[GMT 389]

just from the topic headline:
it's definitely not underrated... leaves only one option: bad game.

[simcity4deluxe 95]

I believe the director was different and she was probably horrible at building cities in the previous Simcity games and decided to use plopable building that have little needs to maintain and she thought it was fun because she could actually build a city for once, she has her silly explanation for saying why this game was good, so I have my explanations why this game was bad and besides when I first played it I thought the graphics looked cheesy.

[Jim14409 448]

Many SC4 fans don't like its style.  It's too casual compared to simulation games like SC4 and the better Tycoon games.  Some people do like it, but the overlap of SC4 and SCS fans is small.

 

It's not a terrible game by any means; it has decent graphics and isn't horribly buggy.  It just doesn't appeal to many fans of the genre.

 

 

I felt that it was an oversimplified version of the genre. 

 

The concept of watching your cities "change" based on your selections, was interesting, but became boring and tedious, pretty fast, for me.

 

I also, personally, did not like having to place every single building.

 

 

It was overhyped prior to release so it would be hard for it to be underrated.

 

 

--Ocram

 

 

Just held no replay value. I built one entire city, started a second and before I was even a quarter into it, I was back to SC4... I'm not trying to voice a complaint, but I just never got nearly as much enjoyment as actually building a city and watching it grow. Plus I really like a good decent road building setup... SCS seriously lacked in that department for me

 

You guys took the words out of my mouth! Together you all summed up SCS perfectly in my opinion. Unfortunately I see more of the same and more in the game due out next month. For me SCS was boring and I don't bore easily.

[AwkwrdPrtMskrt 22]

Bad, and overrated.

So don't.

[yayaya1 22]

bad, not too bad, but bad

Bad, and overrated.

So don't.

not sure if over rated, but bad.  signature ducky.

[Mr Saturn64 742]

I'm not exactly a very hardcore gamer, so I like having no limits in building a city.

[DazzaDazza 29]

Well from what ican remember it was a bad game, but them again I didn't really play it for very long, I think the graphics where o.k for it time, but the game play was bad. I made one good city but never really fished or spent time on the detail like I do with SC4and CXL city's

[Evil_One 119]

I wouldn't say it was a bad game, but it definitely was a terrible SimCity.

[Jim14409 448]

I wouldn't say it was a bad game, but it definitely was a terrible SimCity.

As much as I disliked the game I can agree with your comment.

[Zukunftstraume 220]

One of the biggest concepts in the SimCity series was that of zones.

 

So, when practically every building became a plop-able, the idea of building giant cities like in previous games was permanently discarded in that game, and the cities themselves were incredibly easy. No challenge, no thrill, nothing besides these cute things with different "themes" that made me feel like I was playing a slightly-better version of a facebook game.

 

I actually like the idea of having cities with highly unique characters, and I think they should've implemented that into the next SimCity, which they eventually did (the new game).

 

But as for the idea of building cities in at least a miniscule realistic fashion... They managed to suck all the fun out of building cities. It was just a colossal disappointment compared to what everyone thought it would be. I became bored of the game within hours of playing it and forever shelved it thereafter. The title for it was also highly inappropriate as well, nothing to do with the original concept of building cities. Just plop-ables... nothing but plop-ables! Very disturbing indeed.

[arcology 224]

I wouldn't say it was a bad game, but it definitely was a terrible SimCity.

As much as I disliked the game I can agree with your comment.

Me too.

[Mr Saturn64 742]

One of the biggest concepts in the SimCity series was that of zones.

 

So, when practically every building became a plop-able, the idea of building giant cities like in previous games was permanently discarded in that game, and the cities themselves were incredibly easy. No challenge, no thrill, nothing besides these cute things with different "themes" that made me feel like I was playing a slightly-better version of a facebook game.

 

I actually like the idea of having cities with highly unique characters, and I think they should've implemented that into the next SimCity, which they eventually did (the new game).

 

But as for the idea of building cities in at least a miniscule realistic fashion... They managed to suck all the fun out of building cities. It was just a colossal disappointment compared to what everyone thought it would be. I became bored of the game within hours of playing it and forever shelved it thereafter. The title for it was also highly inappropriate as well, nothing to do with the original concept of building cities. Just plop-ables... nothing but plop-ables! Very disturbing indeed.

That's something I actually liked about the game, you have no limits. But as much as this is true, plopping every building was a nuisance at times. Thats something I like in Cities XL, you can choose to plop or zone.

[Zukunftstraume 220]

One of the biggest concepts in the SimCity series was that of zones.

 

So, when practically every building became a plop-able, the idea of building giant cities like in previous games was permanently discarded in that game, and the cities themselves were incredibly easy. No challenge, no thrill, nothing besides these cute things with different "themes" that made me feel like I was playing a slightly-better version of a facebook game.

 

I actually like the idea of having cities with highly unique characters, and I think they should've implemented that into the next SimCity, which they eventually did (the new game).

 

But as for the idea of building cities in at least a miniscule realistic fashion... They managed to suck all the fun out of building cities. It was just a colossal disappointment compared to what everyone thought it would be. I became bored of the game within hours of playing it and forever shelved it thereafter. The title for it was also highly inappropriate as well, nothing to do with the original concept of building cities. Just plop-ables... nothing but plop-ables! Very disturbing indeed.

That's something I actually liked about the game, you have no limits. But as much as this is true, plopping every building was a nuisance at times. Thats something I like in Cities XL, you can choose to plop or zone.

 

It's like, can you imagine how terrible SC4 would be if we would have to plop every single house, store, and factory onto a 4x4 map!?!

 

I just didn't understand the logic behind calling a game SimCITY and making the game turn out to be some incredibly small unrealistic thing.

 

If I do recall though, I think the textures for the game didn't turn out half-bad.

[Hoipus 292]

I tried the demo. It just felt like placing a bunch of buildings to satisfy some number requirements to be rewarded with the ability to be given some more number reqirements. Granted, SimCity in general works somewhat like this (lots of numbers to keep things flowing), but the numbers didn't feel like they actually meant anything. What the hell are social energies? Plopping down a clock tower gives more authority. How? It just does. I guess it looked kind of nice (to me), but that was about it.

[AwkwrdPrtMskrt 22]

The only game worse than SimCity '13, if my Sim-senses tingle right.

[cirugo 1,889]

It's not that bad but the roads...oh man the roads...

the limitations were so frustrating.

[pressure 2]

I refused to support it when it came out.  It was insulting to call it Simcity.  Even for the developer, Tilted Mill, it was crazy casual.  Funnily enough, Maxis went with the Tilted Mill system of using agents for everything (like Caesar IV) in the new Simcity.  Which also sucks ass.  Now that a few years have gone by and I've relaxed a bit, I'm a little curious about Societies but I refuse to add one more penny to EA's balance sheet.

[Motina 77]

The concept and environment was neat, but plopping every building was just too tedious for me. I had installed it again a few month ago, but the plopping just drains my enthusiasm of the game. I played it for a couple of hours, and then didn't touch it until I uninstalled it last weekend.

[omnivoreceo 54]

A gigantic waste of my money is what it was. A major disappointment.

[Matt20030 6]

Was a bad game for the following.

 

1) Calling it a Simcity game due to the fact It lacked pretty much everything we knew in simcity before, power lines, water, sewage, urban planning... etc.

 

1.5) Calling it a Simcity game and not doing it justice by providing what all simcity games prior to it had... big ones being RCI and actually planning.....

 

2) As i remember being a fully priced game

 

3) Was for most systems at the time resource intensive.

 

4) Felt much more like "sim plop" than a simcity game.

 

5) No real modding community as i know of.

 

6) no multiplayer (as i remember)

 

7) Very hard to micromanage your city once it started to fully develop.

 

Didnt live up to the hype of simcity games.

 

9) Simply was not fun.

 

I think those are valid reasons why i consider it pretty bad and a huge dissapointment.

[EndlessCity 0]

So disappointed with this game, that I wish I could return it. It is oversimplified and geared too much towards casual gamers, it also barely innovates except 3D graphics, but graphics don't make a game.

[yayaya1 22]

It's not that bad but the roads...oh man the roads...

the limitations were so frustrating.

I feel your extreme pain

 

So disappointed with this game, that I wish I could return it. It is oversimplified and geared too much towards casual gamers, it also barely innovates except 3D graphics, but graphics don't make a game.

same exact thing is happening to Simcity 2013. They focused mostly on graphics and they decided "HEY GUYS! Lets make this awful game even worse by making the tile size small and try to convince the public into buying it by making the graphics extreme!" "But sir, won't people hate it if there is no gameplay?" "Well, lets make the price 60 bucks to make seem better than it is! Oh yeah, one more thing, your fired." ...... (akward silence) "CLAP!" clap,clap,clap.