Disable disasters is coming (confirmed)

[Titan 8]

@MaxisGuillaume tweeted two hours ago that disabling disasters is coming, but it might not make it in the next patch. I would hope not. I feel they need to spend more QA time fixing higher priority issues.

 

Just figured I would post this since I hadn't seen anyone post it yet. I know there was a similar topic, but I don't know if it had been confirmed.

[icbear56 0]

thanks for that. I am not one of those who likes disasters - especially these Zombies (too too much)

[CaribbeanSail 33]

This is great news, thanks for sharing.  Not being able to disable disasters is one of my bigger annoyances

[Ghachii 16]

I'm interested in unlocking all of the disasters and seeing them once (although most have been disappointingly charmless compared to SC2000) - but beyond that they serve no purpose other than to frustrate. It's insane that the option to turn them off wasn't included from Day 1.

[Rhadamant5186 19]

Sweet! This now makes producing your own power through nuclear viable again. I stopped using nuclear plans after a tornado hit one in one city and a giant lizard hit another in a different city. It basically killed the whole 5 city region, seeing that 2 of the 5 cities were wastelands. Great news!

[Griffon 19]

the no disaster option is called sandbox mode, unless they mean to make the non-sandbox play have the option to turn off disasters too and I don't like that idea

[Cyclone Boom 16,829]

"I don't know if that's going to make the next update, but I'm hoping we can get it in at some point soon"

 [source]

 

It's good that this option is finally being considered, hopefully for both sandbox and the online modes. But really, as Ghachii said, this is one option that should have been included as a standard feature. Because they're automatic and so frequent, disasters can create major implications for a city. So I don't quite understand how other non-gameplay specific options, such as visual filter settings, were considered a priority.

 

Many players will be glad to finally have an "off" setting, and say goodbye to giant lizards!

[Turjan 1,048]

the no disaster option is called sandbox mode, unless they mean to make the non-sandbox play have the option to turn off disasters too and I don't like that idea

 

If it's an option, then don't turn it off if you don't like it?

[TuPhat 27]

I popped over to the EA forums and read through a couple recent posts (today) from eafrancois, who is stating that from what he knows, a big patch will be released within a couple weeks which will fix a 'host of show stoppers', one of them being tourism and casino profitability.   This guy isn't from Maxis but may be getting some inside information.     At this point, I wouldn't expect any patches for the next little bit.    While I wan't disasters out of the game too, it looks like Maxis is working on more pressing issues.  Yay!

[ScottyDoesKnow 8]

the no disaster option is called sandbox mode, unless they mean to make the non-sandbox play have the option to turn off disasters too and I don't like that idea

 

It's a good idea. I don't want to play sandbox, but disasters mean you can't build nuclear unless you want a random chance of your city being ruined forever. And I'm still pissed that my main city has an area that's forever unusable due to a meteor strike that left radiation.

[Ghachii 16]

the no disaster option is called sandbox mode, unless they mean to make the non-sandbox play have the option to turn off disasters too and I don't like that idea

 

Why don't you like the idea of being able to turn off disasters in standard play?? They've been optional in every SimCity title since the first one.

 

If they presented a genuine and satisfying gameplay challenge I would happily accept them, but they're don't. They're an unwelcome inconvenience over which the player has no control.

[Rhadamant5186 19]

the no disaster option is called sandbox mode, unless they mean to make the non-sandbox play have the option to turn off disasters too and I don't like that idea

 

Traditional SimCity games could be simulated in the background to elapse time while the user was not playing. If anything went wrong you could just revert to a previous save file and everything was back to normal. In the current version of the new SimCity you cannot do this safely unless you are on sandbox mode. I've had cities that have had city-crippling disasters happen while I was running it simulated and when I returned to the city the damage was so bad the REGION had to be abandoned. Events like Tornados and Giant Lizards hitting nuclear power plants or meteor strikes destroying my water table (game bug too).

[Radioactive Chicken 10]

I'm interested in unlocking all of the disasters and seeing them once (although most have been disappointingly charmless compared to SC2000) - but beyond that they serve no purpose other than to frustrate. It's insane that the option to turn them off wasn't included from Day 1.

^ This.  Zombies clearly out whole sections of the neighbour is kinda funny the first time.  The third time.. not so much. 

 

I never used disasters that much anyway and they are also kind pointless now.  Because of the lack of ability to save the city, obliterate it and then reload the previous save the disasters have been watered down to make them have less devastating impact on our city planning but doing so has taken all of the fun out of them. 

In previous games it was fun completely destroying the city for a minute, feeling a bit guilty and then reloading.  It's cathartic.

The SC disasters are a bit "meh" in comparison. 

[Griffon 19]

I never turned off the disasters in previous sim cities before and I never walked away from the cities for hours at a time, having no disasters seems too easy for me, sandbox was also too easy for me also, I like a challenge, I've got 48 achievements in 1 server and 43 in another and I've also maxed out the metals, electronics, and trade HQs before in standard play, for me it's too easy as it is and if you have devastating disasters in your city neighboring cities are suppose to send you money to repair your city for the good of the region, now weather other people give you money or not is a whole other thing

 

also you probably shouldn't build nuclear plants and if you do that means your taking the risk of it getting destroyed

 

this sim city was designed for neighboring cities in a region to help each other grow and come to the rescue of your city if you lose hundred's of thousands of money from disasters, but this rarely happens so you do have to abandon your cities if you lose too much money, but if it means less people abandoning their cities and more people getting better cities to help build great works, I'll say it's a good idea

[Districtopia 23]

I don't mind the natural disasters (tornado, earthquake, even fires) being on. But having zombies, a dinosaur or asteroids destroy my city is really annoying.

 

 

I miss the hurricanes from SC 2000....

[Cob92 360]

Only one I don't really like is the monster, since it can potentially smash half your city and there is no way to stop it. Fires and zombies can be countered if you have the right services in place (fire trucks to put out fires, police to kill zombies, plus you tend not to have zombie outbreaks if your healthcare is decent). The tornado is wimpy; I had one appear once and it only took out like half a block of apartments. The meteor isn't bad at all; I've had a bunch of cities get hit by them and they really just cause a bunch of fires.

[morriswalters 16]

My meteor left a nice patch of radioactivity.

[ScottyDoesKnow 8]

also you probably shouldn't build nuclear plants and if you do that means your taking the risk of it getting destroyed

 

Exactly. If you ever use nuclear, there's a random chance of it ruining your whole city forever. No matter what precautions you take. That's stupid.

[Yaffle 29]

re:zombies

As they need streets to walk on, just like people, cars, water, poop (eew) etc. The easiest thing to do is hit "pause" as soon as you see the "HEADLINE" and bulldoze the streets around the hospital. They will just walk randomly on that patch of road until dawn.

 

I think the option to disable is a good one. I assume it would be at a region level, much like sandbox. It has been frustrating to spend a significant sum on a big building to have it wiped out by meteors. Likewise, the nuclear power plants seem to be a magnet for these things, ruining a city pretty much forever.

If you enjoy them, just leave them turned on!

[NdRWgN 0]

I loved the disasters in SC2000.  When I was done playing for the day I'd back up my city, level it with disaster a few times, then restore and shut down. 

 

With Simcity 2013 I never intentionally launch a disaster, because there's no way to get my pre-disaster city back.  It's hard enough maintaining a region though the current level of bugs without intentionally making it worse.

 

Maybe if there were some reward for surviving disasters, like unlocking tornado shelters or the Transamerica Pyramid, or an asteroid crater tourist attraction...

[Buggi 684]

I had the lizard hit the same city twice. The second time he leveled a computer manufacturing plant AND my fully upgraded trade HQ with all the fixin's.

 

Cost me a cool 2 million to put it right.

 

I was not happy.

[Daxiongmao87 0]

I never turned off the disasters in previous sim cities before and I never walked away from the cities for hours at a time, having no disasters seems too easy for me, sandbox was also too easy for me also, I like a challenge, I've got 48 achievements in 1 server and 43 in another and I've also maxed out the metals, electronics, and trade HQs before in standard play, for me it's too easy as it is and if you have devastating disasters in your city neighboring cities are suppose to send you money to repair your city for the good of the region, now weather other people give you money or not is a whole other thing

 

also you probably shouldn't build nuclear plants and if you do that means your taking the risk of it getting destroyed

 

this sim city was designed for neighboring cities in a region to help each other grow and come to the rescue of your city if you lose hundred's of thousands of money from disasters, but this rarely happens so you do have to abandon your cities if you lose too much money, but if it means less people abandoning their cities and more people getting better cities to help build great works, I'll say it's a good idea

 

I don't see a reason for your argument as it will be presented as an option.  

[Sunfighter 186]

lame, it was about the only hardcore thing about this game.

[NCGAIO 562]

I never turned off the disasters in previous sim cities before and I never walked away from the cities for hours at a time, having no disasters seems too easy for me, sandbox was also too easy for me also, I like a challenge, I've got 48 achievements in 1 server and 43 in another and I've also maxed out the metals, electronics, and trade HQs before in standard play, for me it's too easy as it is and if you have devastating disasters in your city neighboring cities are suppose to send you money to repair your city for the good of the region, now weather other people give you money or not is a whole other thing

 

 48 achievements in 1 server and 43 in another ? griff_on or _ing  who knows!.. But are you sure that simulators are good games for achievements?

 

It seems that if caused disasters or pollution or crime or traffic does not seem the best way to contribute to the region, if this is the spirit of course!

 

Unfortunately, as many have already discovered the network is not only composed of behaved and collaborators  players

 

As regards the disasters off ... it should already be there. Just was left for the same reasons all the rest, ie to mask what is incorrigible!

[Griffon 19]

I've taken a lot of criticism on this, but I'll say that if having the option to turn off disasters, help people with their cities so that they play longer in the region, I think it's a good idea, however to me that's not challenging enough and I will continue to use them regardless, I also think to make it fair they should limit the achievements you get for turning the disasters off (kinda like how they turn all the achievements off in sandbox mode) and for the most part when I play the game I rarely encounter disaster anyways so this option would make no difference to me

 

 

I never turned off the disasters in previous sim cities before and I never walked away from the cities for hours at a time, having no disasters seems too easy for me, sandbox was also too easy for me also, I like a challenge, I've got 48 achievements in 1 server and 43 in another and I've also maxed out the metals, electronics, and trade HQs before in standard play, for me it's too easy as it is and if you have devastating disasters in your city neighboring cities are suppose to send you money to repair your city for the good of the region, now weather other people give you money or not is a whole other thing

 

 48 achievements in 1 server and 43 in another ? griff_on or _ing  who knows!.. But are you sure that simulators are good games for achievements?

 

It seems that if caused disasters or pollution or crime or traffic does not seem the best way to contribute to the region, if this is the spirit of course!

 

Unfortunately, as many have already discovered the network is not only composed of behaved and collaborators  players

 

As regards the disasters off ... it should already be there. Just was left for the same reasons all the rest, ie to mask what is incorrigible!

btw what were you trying to say? I couldn't understand it and with the achievements apparently they don't sync between servers and I wasn't trying to brag, I was just using that to make a point that it's easy already, I wasn't event trying to get them and I was just saying that most people I played with on the public games I find open (which isn't very often) that they don't normally help each other out, the games I joined where I was invited to, we usually helped each other out often

 

and sorry for all the negative posts and comments I caused and said before, if they want to make the option to turn off the disasters then I'll say it's a great idea for whoever it helps with their cities (regardless if they make the achievements limited or not if you use that option) in the game and that it'll make it extremely safe to use nuclear plants

[ItsShane 18]

Thank god. One of my cities was getting a meteor hit every 30 minutes, it was so annoying.

[Cob92 360]

Maybe if there were some reward for surviving disasters, like unlocking tornado shelters or the Transamerica Pyramid, or an asteroid crater tourist attraction...

 

What about getting a cash reward disguised as "disaster aid"?

[NovaBlazer 10]

Glad to hear that this option is being included.

 

Nothing ruins your day more than having your city hall get smacked while you went downstairs to get a drink.

EVERYTHING in the darn city turns off.  Sewer, Power, Univ, Advanced Fire, Medical, Police.... sigh... it was a mess.

[Phenom Anon X 2]

I welcome this change. Actually, although the event itself is not predictable, the path it takes is. I've built my city to absorb these random events to minimise the damage.

[Cob92 360]

I think that a random disaster would only really bug me if it caused irreversible and irreparable damage to my city. Most disasters can be recovered from, especially if your city has a decent cash reserve built up from the good times. Last time a meteor hit my city, it caused zero damage except for a pumpjack that was destroyed when one landed in the middle of my oil fields. The last zombie attack I had killed a grand total of 4 people and left only one building abandoned. But I hear about disasters targeting nuclear plants and leaving cities completely unplayable, which I think is kind of ridiculous. It's something the player can't control, can't defend against, and can't recover from, no matter how skilled at the game. That's not fun in any sense.