Did SC2013 kill off SIMCITY?

[Essex 322]

So how are people seeing this game after actually PLAYING it?

[Catchin22 299]

So how are people seeing this game after actually PLAYING it?

The game is downright EPIC. It's incredibly fun. 2013 brought new life into the series with huge potential. I suppose some people would rather not have anything at all than an awesome game to play.

[Rogueleader89 0]

Not a chance this game will kill off simcity, if any game would have done that it would have been societies. There appear to be flaws to the game definitely, but the core gameplay looks good, server issues will eventually be fixed, and the impact of most of those flaws will be greatly diminished outside of the old simcity community (which will either like the game for other reasons or retreat back to simcity 4 while new players migrating from games like the sims play this one). Is this game going to be a massive success that the city-building community points to for years to come? Probably not, but simcity certainly won't die because of one highly debated entry into it. At worst I'd say, if the game is not a success, we might have a large wait until the next one (then again you don't generally code a whole new engine for use with just one game either, so I'm sure glassbox will show up again somewhere in the near future).

[ladehaug 6]

If anything, in the short term the failure of this game will reignite interest in SC4 (It has done for me) and even Cities XL, so that must be positive. Longer term, who knows. Hopefully,  a modern city builder will be made by someone, without the online all the time part that is.

 

Well, if we're lucky, a new modern city builder game will be launched within the next year or so. Have a look at Civitas.It looks very promising indeed.

[Catchin22 299]

If anything, in the short term the failure of this game will reignite interest in SC4 (It has done for me) and even Cities XL, so that must be positive. Longer term, who knows. Hopefully,  a modern city builder will be made by someone, without the online all the time part that is.

 

Well, if we're lucky, a new modern city builder game will be launched within the next year or so. Have a look at Civitas.It looks very promising indeed.

That game looks terrible. There's no proof that anything was even done with it. It would take somebody about 30 minutes to create what is shown on that page in Unity3D.

[velve 16]

Calm down man, there are other competitors in the market you know, also trying to make a living. Not just the new hype. 

 

But I am yet to see any development of civitas searching has yielded less than fruitfull results.

[BLANKBLANK 4,414]

The game is downright EPIC. It's incredibly fun. 2013 brought new life into the series with huge potential. I suppose some people would rather not have anything at all than an awesome game to play.

 

Not so awesome and epic when your cities and regions survival is based upon a whim of the servers; if they go your cities go.

 

I'll only be happy once a single-played mode version has been issued.

[Sunfighter 186]

So how are people seeing this game after actually PLAYING it?

 

Its okay for maybe 20-30 hours of gameplay. Gets boring pretty quick honestly.  There is only so many times you can watch your garbage trucks go around, only so many designs you can fit on a note card. Youll have one grid city, one curvy city, and one crazy city..then youll yawn and leave.

[Llamageddon 1]

EA has offered a chance to get refunds. I recommend that anyone who feels angry enough to request a refund and consider re-purchasing in the future once issues are resolved. If EA refuses to make good on its offer, dispute the charge on your bank cards.

 

edit: spelling and grammar.

As far as disputing the charge on your bank statement goes, an EA representative said disputing a refusal to give a refund "under their discretion" is a bannable offence. Talk about a PR disaster.

 

http://www.gamechup.com/ea-refuses-to-refund-user-for-simcity-threatens-account-ban/

[jigsaw 227]

i think they will definately create>release a sequel or expansion to this for sure. i just dont know what type of sequel, and what direction, shape or form it will take.

 

i've been around here for almost a decade now, and i only truly saw the size of the present simcity base this week with the launch (that's combining community/non-community numbers of people that are into simcity), and judging by the sales, pre-orders and sheer size of this launch (before it went to sh!t) you can see that demand for this game is epic... to sum it up; there is a lot of money in keeping this going, and millions of fans.

 

but here is the other half of the story;

 

yes they talked to the community, made themselves known and available. Sadly, it appears they had a inflexible agenda that was going to be pushed no matter how good or bad that agenda was (reminds me of my workplace at times). this agenda was never to be comprimised. the only contributions from the community were copying the most popular items released on the STEX/LEX over the last few years.

 

from the very beginning we warned them about the big mistakes they were making, and they either refused to talk about it and argued to support it, telling us that it was a good thing. and behold on release day the magnitude of their mistake was seen.

 

im not going to recycle the thousands of valid points we make, but i will say this; in comparison between SC4 and SC13, SC4 was a paint program that gave an artist a blank canvas, a palette of paints,colours and brushes to create their own masterpieces. the community expanded on this quite easily because of the incredibly high mod-ability that was built into the game (which is in the spirit of creativity). Anything could be created, the options were virtually limitless. 

 

blank canvas, paint whatever you want, however you want.

 

SC13 is not built this way. it was not built on creativity, it was built on controlled decision making. it is controlled by servers, it is controlled by regions, it is controlled in the gameplay itself. the whole concept of resource management is just another layer of control. the level of modability has not been revealed at the moment, but from what we have seen, you will need a Masters degree in quantum physics to achieve making a mod or lot because the actual design of the game, because it is built on control.

 

I also think they only see the STEX/LEX areas as a store, and a potential area to make money, not as an area to exchange ideas, creations, and collaborations.

 

Multiplayer for a city builder is just stupid, (yet at the same time it was one of the biggest side-projects the community was striving for in SC4) but not to give us a choice is just another layer of control.

 

again metaphorically, unlike SC4 which i just said resembled a blank canvas for artists, i see this game as an exotic connect-the-dots colouring book. it is mostly pre-determined, all you can do is fill in the gaps. and on that note, with multiplayer, do you really want several other people colouring in for you at the same time? is it not destroying one's creativity by forcefully sharing it?

 

what will the future hold? what are the ramifications for this?

 

well, i see 2 paths right now:

 

1. a 'Philosophical game revolution' of sorts takes place, EA changes their ways and the next version comes out with offline/online modes, single and mulitplayer options. EA will do a massive fanbase study by reading all the data online about what people want, and will strive to meet expectations. they will meet on common ground how to best protect against piracy, and 'let go' of some of the tight controls that is hampering the game.

 

2. they will spend a lot of money to cover this up and patch up the reputation that has been lost. the PR machine will be a full throttle and they will not change their stance, but will study on how to make their current approach more workable and improve on it. the control mechanisms will remain in force, but next time an enormous support team and resources will be at the ready. (EA interprets the launch disaster as a technical fault, not a philosophical one).

 

option 2 is more likely in the corporate world we live in...

 

the next 12months will be make or break. let's see how they deal with the community making stuff. let's see how Mods, BATs, LOTs etc and handled. will they take control of them, or will we be able to control them? will they let Simtropolis and other sites store game mods, or will it be centrally controlled????

[Essex 322]

I think option 2 is definitely the more realistic one. The game will run properly soon I think, but it will never last as long as SC4. People will get bored with it in a couple of weeks and jump on the next "cool" game that has come out and the old SC players will go back to SC4 again.

SC4 will just live on forever.

[fetkokko 6]

I think option 2 is definitely the more realistic one. The game will run properly soon I think, but it will never last as long as SC4. People will get bored with it in a couple of weeks and jump on the next "cool" game that has come out and the old SC players will go back to SC4 again.

SC4 will just live on forever.

 

My thoughts exactly. SC2013 is fun and the engine is nice. But unless they provide a God Mode and add a load of new content soon, it will die out. At least for the oldschool community.

And by making it a server dependant game, they have seriously hampered the possibilities of greatness.

[metarvo 710]

an EA representative said disputing a refusal to give a refund "under their discretion" is a bannable offence. Talk about a PR disaster.

 

What EA has resorted to here is tantamount to blackmail, if I'm not mistaken.  IMHO the last thing they need to do when sales have already been compromised is punish the gamers.

[NMUSpidey 3,956]

I feel like we're watching every game launch ever from now until the whole thing collapses and we're left with just Zynga style Facebook games and free apps for our smartphones.  This is the future.  This is what EA's president said he wants for all games published by EA.  There is no fixing this, and I have long since bought my final brand-new video game.  Someone mentioned Civ V on the previous page.  I didn't buy that one because I'm just not going to sign up for some stupid service I neither want nor need in order to rent a video game they can take away any time they feel like, either by shutting down the servers or by just assuming I broke one of their fine print rules and banning me.  It's ridiculous to treat me, a casual gamer with no history of pirating games, as a potential criminal by making me jump through DRM hoops.

 

Just as importantly, the constantly-social aspect to every single game that's coming out just irks me.  My PS3 used to post on my Facebook page (I've since turned it off) when I do something no one cares about at all in the stupid games I played.  The Wii U loads up into basically a giant, public digital plaza where you can see any of a zillion online conversations going on.  SC2013 is always-online.  I realize that I'm probably a bit old-fashioned, but I have no interest whatsoever in a SimCity connected the entire time I'm playing that's forcing me to compete/cooperate with others.  If I were to decide it'd be fun, that is a different story, but there's no decision being made on my part here, is there?

The game looks cool.  I'd love to play it, to give it a chance.  It even looks like it'd be a good way to resurrect the franchise after the DOA SC:S.  But while it's always-online and run through EA Origin, I will stay away, the way I am staying away from all games for the time being.  I see it hasn't killed SimCity for many of you, but it has for me.

[macvirt 361]

SC2013 is a nice game, well tailored for EA's strategic directives, and very much in tune with the artificial trends instigated for the industry today. It delivers exactly what is required to function as a cash cow for a volume market of leisure and casual consumer gameplay. 

 

It's a reboot execution, for today's trends and a stepping stone to build towards EA's desired trends of tomorrow. Nothing less, nothing more. It looks ok, it functions, and once you strip away all the marketing it does what it sets out to do. 

 

But that also constitutes the limits of the game.

 

A lot of people expected SC2013 to be SC5, an expectation Maxis strongly stimulated by means of marketing in order to generate exposure, messaging and to utilise the strenghts of communities which had nurtured an end of life product (SC4) to fruition. We can argue about whether that is bad or immoral or smart, it does not matter, this is how marketing functions in our industry. 

 

A lot of people embraced SC2013 in spite of not being comfortable with the paradigm shifts in DRM, online play, modding (*poof gone*) exactly because SC4 had become an immersive game beyond its intended lifecycle, not because of the actions or inactions of the studio or publisher, but because gamers took it on and nurtured it. It was time to take that nurturing to a next step. Unfortunately, as is now clear, Maxis and EA used that sentiment only to make a reboot instead of building on top of that potential. 

 

Which is only logical. For every gamer who goes deep, you have to realise that you have to spend quite a bit more money for support and development after release on that type of gamer than on the type who does not go deep. Plus, for every deep gamer studies show the prospects of the global volume market where you find roughly 4.5k users who do not go deep. It's math, it's money. 

 

Aside of the frustrations over the deliberate decisions to create launch issues (as part of a very common school of thinking in marketing as well as service modelling in business management) a lot of people are finding out now that SC2013 does not allow them to go deep, and that it solely rests on a magic promis to somehow magically enable the user to buy a lot more building blocks that might perhaps allow him or her to go deep. Sure, if we forget about EA's announced directives, Maxis's own continued admiration of the pre-corrections Spore model, the track records of EA in support and studio development and so forth, that sort of magic might actually ride in on a unicorn with wings from cloud nine. Some day. 

 

But let's be honest, that requires a change of thinking on levels where the decisions have already been made. SC2013 is tailored for an eventual introduction of the next incarnation of The Sims 3 custom content exchanges. Not moddability as users - especially SC4 users - know the concept. 

It does not pay for either Maxis or EA to provide the raw power of moddability to SC2013 as SC4 users created for and with SC4.

 

Overall SC2013 is a fine social game. No big learning curves, easy to get in to, and easy to get out of. Ideal for grabbing the wallet for shinies to polish the town created, and to blurb about it on social media. If that is what you like, and you don't really want a giant or complex challenge or puzzle, SC2013 is a fine reboot. If you want more than the casual online play DRM concept, it is not the game you are looking for. In that case you might want to look more towards grabbing the heads of people behind (for example) NAM and hook them up with the folks in Austin Texas and jump on the kickstarter project of Civitas. But please realise that you all are now a niche market. You are no longer the focus of mainstream gaming. A very viable niche market, but just not of interest for the big publishers. 

 

The irony is that immersive god gaming puzzle challenges, so to speak, are no longer a volume market exactly because people buy the provided casual online play microtransaction games. The volume market exists because people buy without much thought of what publishers (who score worse on brand value and support rating that the worst corrupt and fraudulent banks) want to sell and how that is going to play out for their entertainment in the long run. 

 

In a nutshell it is simple. If you don't mind that SC2013 is just a quick shiny game, buy it. If you want more, do not reward companies that want to sell you more by giving you less. Pure and simple. The trend only continues as long as people buy into it. 

[Essex 322]

Great comment, macvirt. That is how I see the gaming industry go in general. But also with a lot of other industries. Social Media has made everything much more "streamlined" and easy but also a lot less deep.

[macvirt 361]

Great comment, macvirt. That is how I see the gaming industry go in general. But also with a lot of other industries. Social Media has made everything much more "streamlined" and easy but also a lot less deep.

 

It's the mindset today. Shallow behaviour and thinking equals more sales at lower costs. My industry is no exception to any other industry in that regard. It is today's incarnation of the ancient Roman instrumentation of bread & circusses. 

 

The problem with it is that it a) does not create wealth, it only concentrates wealth and b) the more such trends become part of a society's economy the quicker the path for the attached society to become increasingly poorer. Ultimately defeating the circle of greed as wealth evaporates. But that is fine, because those whom the system serves are excempt from that anyway.

 

The gaming industry is very interesting to observe for trends like these, because it connects so very close to home of the consumer. For decades the general entertainment (tv, movie) industry was the only industry where you could collect tangible data on variables usable for instigating such trends, while other industries were predominantly restricted to balancing derivative variables. But the gaming industry enables an amazing direct insight in and control over the means to instigate consumer trends on a behavioural level. Most interesting of all is that in contrast to other industries it pays much more directly to invest in these matters, because the link is so short. Other industries for example have levels and tiers of sectors and distribution networks and retailers or resellers between them and the consumer. Incidentally, this is one of the biggest reasons why EA puts so much emphasis in its investor briefs on the prospects of consumer behaviour management and consumer profiling. It is the next cash cow, one which in terms of prospect revenues is prone to dwarf the revenue streams of games themselves. 

 

And that is why EA is making these shifts towards online play, casual play and platform service modelling. It is a required step to becoming what was once jokingly described at GDCC as "the google of our industry, but efficient and all encompassing". A speech that yielded massive applause. 

[stephen_wren 11]

Well, if we're lucky, a new modern city builder game will be launched within the next year or so. Have a look at Civitas.It looks very promising indeed.

You know, I've even pledged my $ 25 on this, but they are so vague about pretty much everything (starting with who they are and what game development experience they have) that I've downgraded my pledge. I don't know whether they're just some high school kids that sincerely have no idea what it takes to create a full-fledged city building sim (time wise and money wise alike) or they are trying to make some quick buck on the massive disappointment with SC 2013 and then go off into the blue. They'd better to present something substantial in their updates.

[ladehaug 6]

Well, if we're lucky, a new modern city builder game will be launched within the next year or so. Have a look at Civitas.It looks very promising indeed.

You know, I've even pledged my $ 25 on this, but they are so vague about pretty much everything (starting with who they are and what game development experience they have) that I've downgraded my pledge. I don't know whether they're just some high school kids that sincerely have no idea what it takes to create a full-fledged city building sim (time wise and money wise alike) or they are trying to make some quick buck on the massive disappointment with SC 2013 and then go off into the blue. They'd better to present something substantial in their updates.

 

Yes, I think you're right about your concerns. Regarding Mr. Smith (the project manager), I can't find any references or any other information about earlier projects that he has been involved in. I think the future of such a project will depend on skilled people with good experience in the gaming industry, and whether he will be able to attract the "right" people. $250K is enough money for hiring 2 professional employees for a year. I'm afraid he's going to need more resources than this in order to create a really interesting game. If modding the game will be simple (and well documented), then a lot of work could be done by the players/users themselves, just like we've seen happening to Sim City 4 over the years. There's a lot to consider, and I think the most important factor is to create a solid fundation (an underlying game engine) that is both flexible and intuitive for users and modders that want to add extra content. A huge challenge, that's for sure...

[Charizard 284]

 

Well, if we're lucky, a new modern city builder game will be launched within the next year or so. Have a look at Civitas.It looks very promising indeed.

You know, I've even pledged my $ 25 on this, but they are so vague about pretty much everything (starting with who they are and what game development experience they have) that I've downgraded my pledge. I don't know whether they're just some high school kids that sincerely have no idea what it takes to create a full-fledged city building sim (time wise and money wise alike) or they are trying to make some quick buck on the massive disappointment with SC 2013 and then go off into the blue. They'd better to present something substantial in their updates.

 

Yes, I think you're right about your concerns. Regarding Mr. Smith (the project manager), I can't find any references or any other information about earlier projects that he has been involved in. I think the future of such a project will depend on skilled people with good experience in the gaming industry, and whether he will be able to attract the "right" people. $250K is enough money for hiring 2 professional employees for a year. I'm afraid he's going to need more resources than this in order to create a really interesting game. If modding the game will be simple (and well documented), then a lot of work could be done by the players/users themselves, just like we've seen happening to Sim City 4 over the years. There's a lot to consider, and I think the most important factor is to create a solid fundation (an underlying game engine) that is both flexible and intuitive for users and modders that want to add extra content. A huge challenge, that's for sure...

There are actually 6 people on the team. The project lead Mr. Smith linked his facebook. They are professional gaming developers who have recently been laid off or are going to start fully working on this game. The problem with Civitas is that it's truly a kickstarter in the sense that much has yet to be developed. But the community will be part of that development. Brandon said today that he will update the main page with the names, pictures, credentials, etc. of the project devs. Hopefully that'll get more people to pledge because it looks like this game is garnering a lot of interest from people who want an alternative to SC2013. It's basically the SC4 successor we've been looking for. But I agree they need to be more transparent if they have any chance of succeeding.

[Essex 322]

Let's be hopeful and actually back up the project, it's really the only thing we have left. Might as well give them a chance and see what they come up with. CitiesXL was also a stand alone project by Monte Christo and I think they did quite well despite the online nonsense.

[Write 9]

I have no problem casting off this iteration of SimCity if they don't continue to support it and fix it's glaring problems but I will think twice about buying another game from Maxis or EA.

 

I would also recomment taking caution abou that Civitas project. I had a conversation about it on a different site and there's just too little information about that game to warrant a pledge. There's no information on their team, their homepage is just a countdown timer, and all their doing seems to be the opposite of what SimCity did; there are already city sims games that do that SC4, Tropico, and Cities XL. If there not going to push the genre forward or add something unique it's not worth it.

[Catchin22 299]

You would have to be crazy to give them any money. It's actually sad to see people so gullible enough to hand over what they have. Unprofessional page, no proof of identity or skills, no actual showing of progress, bad formatting, bad GUI design, bad Graphic design.

 

Seriously, ANYONE could have made the page they did with an hour or two of time, and they are asking for $250k! This is a big scam waiting to happen, only possible because of 2013s problems.

[Tito85037 2]

In my opinion if you have to apologize and give someone a bribe, "aka Free Game" you obviously done something that has destroyed the franchise.

[Charizard 284]

You would have to be batshit crazy to give them any money. It's actually sad to see people so gullible enough to hand over what they have. Unprofessional page, no proof of identity or skills, no actual showing of progress, bad formatting, bad GUI design, bad Graphic design.

 

Seriously, ANYONE could have made the page they did with an hour or two of time, and they are asking for $250k! This is a big scam waiting to happen, only possible because of 2013s problems.

 

Actually if you look on their forums several of the team members have posted their bios. And the lead designer (Brandon) has linked his Facebook account. And I don't think you exactly understand what a kickstarter means. I think the lead designer stated it best:

 

We want lots of feedback and great ideas from a very involved community. That is why we are starting this kickstarter so early in our development. We are not using kickstarter as a "store" to sell an

already finished product through the reward system. We will let other people abuse kickstarter that way. Our game is very early in development. We hope that anyone that contributes to help us achieve our funding goal, will also help us make Civitas the great game we know it can be. We didn't want to build 90% of the game, and then hit you up for money. That wouldn't allow anyone to help sculpt Civitas. This is a true kickstarter, we are all starting this together.

 

This game is in its very early stages which is why the models may look shabby or why they don't have much to show off yet. It is a true kickstarter in a sense that much of the game still has to be developed. And the great thing is is that the community will be part of its development. The page may look unprofessional because the lead designer didn't think this would even get off but it did so because of the SC2013 fiasco. The lead designer has apologized for this and said he is working on making the page look more professional and the team being more transparent because they honestly did not expect SC2013's launch to be that much of a disaster. Plus many of the project members are currently employed somewhere else but will switch over to working on this game once the fundraiser goal is met. I think it shows however how much people were disappointed with SC2013 that the kickstarter has already made $70,000 in a week. Just because you might not like to see someone else build a city builder (a better one imo from what the plans are), doesn't mean that anyone who contributes to their kickstarter is bat**** crazy or gullible. The terraforming looks great from the video (which isn't even present in SC2013) and I love the idea of building permits. I love having control of the land, being able to save my city on my machine and reload it, building large expansive cities, using custom content, and these are indeed features many people on this forum were expecting in SC2013 but didn't get. People were waiting for the true successor to SImCity 4 and they didn't get that, so now they are supporting these guys. If anything, the people who blindly pre-ordered SC2013 or bought it on day 1 are just as gullible since they ended up with a broken and faulty product that was in many cases unplayable. People in many cases are forking over their money to these 6 guys instead of EA, which I think is a great thing in the support of indie gaming.

[Jayded1 26]

You would have to be batshit crazy to give them any money. It's actually sad to see people so gullible enough to hand over what they have. Unprofessional page, no proof of identity or skills, no actual showing of progress, bad formatting, bad GUI design, bad Graphic design.

 

Seriously, ANYONE could have made the page they did with an hour or two of time, and they are asking for $250k! This is a big scam waiting to happen, only possible because of 2013s problems.

That's exactly how I feel about SimCity 2013 (Toytown Edition)  You would have to be batshit crazy to give them any money for a game you can't even save on your own machine & not allowed to play it where & when you want! 

[catty-cb 4,411]

Well, if we're lucky, a new modern city builder game will be launched within the next year or so. Have a look at Civitas.It looks very promising indeed.

You know, I've even pledged my $ 25 on this, but they are so vague about pretty much everything (starting with who they are and what game development experience they have) that I've downgraded my pledge. I don't know whether they're just some high school kids that sincerely have no idea what it takes to create a full-fledged city building sim (time wise and money wise alike) or they are trying to make some quick buck on the massive disappointment with SC 2013 and then go off into the blue. They'd better to present something substantial in their updates.

 

Anything with an April Fool's date always makes me think its a scam of some kind, but I could be wrong they just might have picked the date without thinking ...

 

This project will only be funded if at least $250,000 is pledged by Monday Apr

1, 11:44pm EDT.

[Write 9]

 

Actually if you look on their forums several of the team members have posted their bios. And the lead designer (Brandon) has linked his Facebook account.

 

I've been on their forums and there's hardly anything about the team or the game itself. There's a meet the team thread that has no information. Brandon Smith posted about his experience, about 3 years making mobile games and he's suppose to be leading this game?! Then he talks about some guy named Mark George, generic name much, who has no experience making games. This just has scam and vaporware written all over it.

[DazzaDazza 29]

This whole thing is reminding me of the release of Civilization V. It was released to tremendous backlash, especially from online fans. Even now, after a couple of years and an expansion pack, there is still a regulalrly updated Civ V rants thread sitting in the top 20 threads on CivFanatics. Civilization V was divisive to say the least, and time has solidified that division, not weakened it.

 

I feel the same will happen here. The server problems will get fixed, updates and/or expansions will add things we want (bigger cities and so on, perhaps offline play), but it will still be divisive. There will still be a large number of people who see SimCity 2013 as a scab on the franchise along with Societies, and that SimCity 4 was definitive (which it is IMHO).

 

I for one, have not played it yet (hoping to tonight once Amazon have delivered it), so I can't comment on the game itself, it's just that the trend is very familiar with what happened in the Civilization community.

 

I for one hated Civilization 5 by the way, and Gods & Kings did little to improve it for me, and I'm back on Civilization 4 and its' many, many great mods. However, there are a lot of people who love Civilization 5 and I expect in a couple of years, the trend will be very similar for SimCity 2013 and SimCity 4.

 

JM2C

 

Oh, and hello by the way!

 

The game also reminds me of CXL launch, people where upset with the sever, people where upset with the game in general, they were unhappy about key features city

building games being left out, they were unhappy about having to “pay” for thing that should have been in the game Already (witch I complained about a lot) , they

even where complain about the city size, when you look at it the games aren’t to dissimilar. Like MC I think it comes down to, Maxis / EA have completely

missed the point on why people play SimCity, they wont to make realistic looking city’s that like they belong somewhere in the world, not a block of buildings

stuck in the middle of nowhere, you only have to look at any SC4 journal to see why people play SC4.

[Larks2242 251]

If simcity was going to die, then this game, no matter how it turned out, would be the one to do it.

I don't think it will though.

Its only been a couple of days. There have been server issues, but these will be gone very soon. The reviews were intially good, but have only been reduced because of launch problems.

Give it a few months, I'm sure by then we can say if it was sucessful or not.

 

Also, I believe many negative reviews are directly related to the internet on issues.