Is this game worth buying?

[Rufus Honker IV 100]

Oddly enough my favorite mode of Civilization is the one city challenge, which is kind of like Simcity only you're dealing with the rest of the world instead of just your city.

[jddg5wa 0]

It's on sale for 25% off on origin right now. I'm tempted to get the game but I've read a lot of negatives things even now. Is it worth getting or should I wait until it's cheaper yet?

  Edited August 22, 2013 by Cyclone Boom  
Merged with existing topic.

[ghosty12 13]

Update 7 has made the game so much better a lot less hassles with traffic and so on.

[BiancaM 1]

@Mark_Kochan I'm glad you mentioned cities XL, almost forgot about that game. Just looked into it again....one of my latest maps was NY......I'm def. switching back, even do an upgrade. That game is more mature, diverse and has larger stunning maps. 

[pyanodon 218]

For OP, yes, unfortunallty, for me, the game was a wast of money and need to be improved a lot to be near the shadow of what SC4 became today.

  Edited August 26, 2013 by CaptCity  
Off topic comments removed.

[CaptCity 4,927]

Off-topic content removed. Remember to keep comments directed toward the intended topic - whether the game has improved. The business practices of EA and whether people in general should or should not play the game is not relevant here. 

[weixc812 509]

In my opinion, the initial point of the new generation SimCIty deters it to be a game like Simcity 4 or Cities XL. Those two have represented almost all possibilities as a balanced game of operation and aesthetics. There's no need to make a new 3D simulation game like that. That is to say, however the new game updates, it won't be a game worth that we make a website like Simtropolis to share and discuss anything. Neither will it last so long as SImcity 4 does. From the start, it's got to be a meteor.

[Cobraroll 138]

I think that you cold argue that the game both was a success and a failure. If you look at the numbers and the earnings, it was a success. It made a lot of money. Many people bought it. Many people enjoy it.

 

Though, looking at its legacy, I think it failed massively. There was a lot of hype for SC2013 when it was announced. The word spread to every corner of the Internet: "SimCity is back! Yes, THE SimCity!". We went nuts over hearing that EA was picking up the franchise again. So powerful was the legacy of the previous games in the series (Societies was played by few and enjoyed by even fewer, and was quickly forgotten). Just hearing that there would be a new SimCity installment, everybody had their own expectations, fond memories were revived, we looked forward to it, just from hearing the name alone. Let's face it, SC2013 was built upon the shoulders of giants. The legacy of the series generated way more buzz than EA's entire marketing department could have done with a new series, and that affected the sales massively. Lots of people bought the game because they had so much fun with the previous installments.

 

Then, the game was released. And as we remember, things went... turbulently. SimCity featured in a lot of media, and everybody were reporting the same stories: Troubles upon troubles, lies, and outraged fans. Comment sections everywhere were filled with rage. The game's ratings tanked on all the big sites. Gamers who didn't bother playing the game still heard a lot about it: That it was a terrible product, to say it bluntly. And then came the DLC...

 

The legacy of SimCity is far, far from that of its predecessors. When people hear the name SimCity nowadays, they think "EA crap, lol", and move on. The people who still play it report of expensive DLC, recurring bugs and things still not working optimally. It's universally agreed that the maps are too small. SC2013 severely tainted the legacy of the franchise, and the hype and buzz for an eventual next installment probably won't be anywhere near those levels we saw before this launch. The most recurring phrase will probably be "It better be better than the last one".

 

On the other hand, it did make a lot of money. Too bad it was always clear that that was the biggest concern and highest priority all along.

[ghosty12 13]

But a lot of people forget if not for the communtiy SC4 may have gone down hill too.  Remembering that SC4 was bug ridden at release too and even when Rush Hour came out it didn't help matters, it took 10 years of community support to get SC4 to where it is.. And thats why a lot of people still play it. As for SC2013 only time will tell to see what happens..

[Rufus Honker IV 100]

But a lot of people forget if not for the communtiy SC4 may have gone down hill too.  Remembering that SC4 was bug ridden at release too and even when Rush Hour came out it didn't help matters, it took 10 years of community support to get SC4 to where it is.. And thats why a lot of people still play it. As for SC2013 only time will tell to see what happens..

 

This a thousand times.  I didn't pick up Simcity 4 when it came out (was busy being a new Dad), but I remember reading all the annoyance online of what a terrible, bug-infested game it was.  By the time I finally got it in the Societies Pack it was a streamlined, nice game.

[reReticulated Spline 69]

You also have to keep in mind that ANY Simcity game would have massively dissapointed a lot of fans.  

 

SC4 had numerous people working on additional content for over ten years. No new game could possibly compete with the amount of manhours put into SC4. If Maxis stayed close to the SC4 formula and focused all it's energy on trying to include as much of the user-made content the end result would still have much less content then SC4. You'd trade lot's of content for better graphics and the joy of paying full price again. There would be very little reason to switch. No game is every going to be better at being SC4 then SC4 is, and fans would have hated it for offering nothing new.

 

Alternatively, if Maxis focussed on innovation and new things, they would have even less time to include SC4 content. Fans would hate it even more for missing content that was in SC4 original. Not to mention for each new thing you'd have scores of people saying it 'wasn't needed' or 'the series is taking the wrong direction'.

 

Damned if you do, damned if you don't. What many people really want is to keep EVERYTHING from SC4, including all the mods, and add better graphics and add more content like curved roads. What SC4 looked like during it's own launch is irrelevant to fans. Needless to say, such a request is beyond the budget of Maxis and beyond what can reasonly be done.

 

Of course Simcity 2013 got it even rougher than just dealing with an unpleasable fanbase. Some Suits at EA decided to save a few pennies on server capacity which backfired spectacularly and gave the game a terrible launch. Also, the game obviously had too small a budget for what it was trying to do, launching before many bugs where patched out. Was the budget too small or was the game too ambitious? I don't know. 

 

The only thing you could critisize Maxis' developers on, is not having terraforming tools or the ability to create a large regionwide metropolis (through bigger maps more adjecent tiles). These are obviously things many older fans care deeply about, and maybe they could have prioretized those above other features. Then again, time ran out and they needed to cut something.

 

I like this game. I like what it is tying to do. I prefer games that try to innovate and stumble on release over those that play it save. I do not compare how much content it has compared to SC4, I only compare how much potential it has to grow with a contributing community. If something important is not present yet, but will likely be added in the near future, I don't mind at all. I expect the game to continue in the same way as Starcraft 2 did, non-stop complaints from fans, while slowly everybody will switch within a few years. 

[ghosty12 13]

You also have to keep in mind that ANY Simcity game would have massively dissapointed a lot of fans.  

 

SC4 had numerous people working on additional content for over ten years. No new game could possibly compete with the amount of manhours put into SC4. If Maxis stayed close to the SC4 formula and focused all it's energy on trying to include as much of the user-made content the end result would still have much less content then SC4. You'd trade lot's of content for better graphics and the joy of paying full price again. There would be very little reason to switch. No game is every going to be better at being SC4 then SC4 is, and fans would have hated it for offering nothing new.

 

Alternatively, if Maxis focussed on innovation and new things, they would have even less time to include SC4 content. Fans would hate it even more for missing content that was in SC4 original. Not to mention for each new thing you'd have scores of people saying it 'wasn't needed' or 'the series is taking the wrong direction'.

 

Damned if you do, damned if you don't. What many people really want is to keep EVERYTHING from SC4, including all the mods, and add better graphics and add more content like curved roads. What SC4 looked like during it's own launch is irrelevant to fans. Needless to say, such a request is beyond the budget of Maxis and beyond what can reasonly be done.

 

Of course Simcity 2013 got it even rougher than just dealing with an unpleasable fanbase. Some Suits at EA decided to save a few pennies on server capacity which backfired spectacularly and gave the game a terrible launch. Also, the game obviously had too small a budget for what it was trying to do, launching before many bugs where patched out. Was the budget too small or was the game too ambitious? I don't know. 

 

The only thing you could critisize Maxis' developers on, is not having terraforming tools or the ability to create a large regionwide metropolis (through bigger maps more adjecent tiles). These are obviously things many older fans care deeply about, and maybe they could have prioretized those above other features. Then again, time ran out and they needed to cut something.

 

I like this game. I like what it is tying to do. I prefer games that try to innovate and stumble on release over those that play it save. I do not compare how much content it has compared to SC4, I only compare how much potential it has to grow with a contributing community. If something important is not present yet, but will likely be added in the near future, I don't mind at all. I expect the game to continue in the same way as Starcraft 2 did, non-stop complaints from fans, while slowly everybody will switch within a few years. 

This x1000,  And pretty much every thing you said I agree on..

[Cobraroll 138]

I agree that any SimCity would have disappointed some people. But few SimCitys would have caused as much disappointments as this one.

 

The insistency of forcing always-online onto a game that clearly doesn't need it would lay a dampener on pretty much anything. Especially when it backfires so horribly as it did here. That alone is a quite huge failure. SimCity has become a textbook example of a game launch gone wrong (even dethroning Diablo III, as far as I can tell - after all, you'd expect EA not to repeat the mistakes that made that launch infamous).

 

Insisting that the game be multiplayer led to many other flaws as well. Moddability goes out the window. As does custom region making (otherwise you could just create a bunch of resources and export to your heart's content). City-to-city relations are a vital part of the game design, but behaves buggy because everything has to go through a server. And let's not forget the inability to save your files locally. When EA turn off their servers one day, your game disc becomes useless (unless as some sort of fancy, yet ineffective, pizza cutter).

 

The sum of all this, and more, means that SimCity, as designed, never could do what made its predecessors great. You can't create a sprawling metropolis, customizing a region to make the city of your dreams is impossible, and the mods that made SimCity 4's legacy so good can't ever be implemented here. From the other games, I always got the impression that "You can do more. You can do this differently the next time. There are endless possibilities." Then you go on the Internet, where the wide range of mods say "Try me! I'll revolutionize the way you play/view this game - and I'm free!". From SimCity, the same voice says "Yep, this is it. Your city is inside this bubble.". Then I go on the Internet, where flashing banner ads for DLC say "Buy me! I'll add some visual changes to your city - if you demolish something to cram me in!".

 

In short, the other games all carried the promise that you had an entire world at your fingertips, and you could build whatever you wanted in there. SimCity has none of that, instead its restrictions glare at you wherever you look. Even if it was well meant, and added a lot to the graphics, I think it was a mistake showing you what's beyond your city border. In the previous games, what was outside didn't matter. The world was your canvas, its borders were gateways to other cities, where there was something else to paint. In SimCity, they show you what's out there - lots of empty land you can't build on. GlassBox was a nice idea, but I feel more like I'm trapped inside of it, looking at a world of possibilities outside I can't reach.

[ghosty12 13]

Um you forget that SimCity 2013 was not the first to be online, dont forget Cites XL was a MMO focused city building game and that you had to pay a subscription if you wanted to get the best from it (tho there is the SC2013 DLC)..

 

And that after the servers went offline they tacked on a single player mode but from what have seen most folks didn't think much of it...

 

Where SC2013 might get around it if and when the servers go is that you have a single player of sorts already in SC2013 with the private mode when picking your map and all they would have to do is I suppose make a patch that makes offline more feasible and well it has been proved it can be done..

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cities_XL

http://forums.galciv2.com/398668 (people thoughts of Cities XL's single player..)

[AkemiAzula 280]

It is my recommendation that somebody do as Brandon Smith did and start a Kickstarter. It's the only way we're going to get a proper Simcity 5. I can't because I'm not a US citizen. All we need is somebody to start a fund going and then we can hire whoever we want to make the game of our dreams. Waiting for EA/Maxis to do that, when they quite clearly aren't, is folly pure and simple. We've waited a decade. Ten year old people walking down the street, they weren't alive when Simcity 4 was released. Let's not have to wait any longer.

[MarcusOrilius 7]

GlassBox was a nice idea, but I feel more like I'm trapped inside of it, looking at a world of possibilities outside I can't reach.

 

That was deep!

[NudgeBo 0]

You also have to keep in mind that ANY Simcity game would have massively dissapointed a lot of fans.  

 

SC4 had numerous people working on additional content for over ten years. No new game could possibly compete with the amount of manhours put into SC4. If Maxis stayed close to the SC4 formula and focused all it's energy on trying to include as much of the user-made content the end result would still have much less content then SC4. You'd trade lot's of content for better graphics and the joy of paying full price again. There would be very little reason to switch. No game is every going to be better at being SC4 then SC4 is, and fans would have hated it for offering nothing new.

 

Alternatively, if Maxis focussed on innovation and new things, they would have even less time to include SC4 content. Fans would hate it even more for missing content that was in SC4 original. Not to mention for each new thing you'd have scores of people saying it 'wasn't needed' or 'the series is taking the wrong direction'.

 

Damned if you do, damned if you don't. What many people really want is to keep EVERYTHING from SC4, including all the mods, and add better graphics and add more content like curved roads. What SC4 looked like during it's own launch is irrelevant to fans. Needless to say, such a request is beyond the budget of Maxis and beyond what can reasonly be done.

 

Of course Simcity 2013 got it even rougher than just dealing with an unpleasable fanbase. Some Suits at EA decided to save a few pennies on server capacity which backfired spectacularly and gave the game a terrible launch. Also, the game obviously had too small a budget for what it was trying to do, launching before many bugs where patched out. Was the budget too small or was the game too ambitious? I don't know. 

 

The only thing you could critisize Maxis' developers on, is not having terraforming tools or the ability to create a large regionwide metropolis (through bigger maps more adjecent tiles). These are obviously things many older fans care deeply about, and maybe they could have prioretized those above other features. Then again, time ran out and they needed to cut something.

 

I like this game. I like what it is tying to do. I prefer games that try to innovate and stumble on release over those that play it save. I do not compare how much content it has compared to SC4, I only compare how much potential it has to grow with a contributing community. If something important is not present yet, but will likely be added in the near future, I don't mind at all. I expect the game to continue in the same way as Starcraft 2 did, non-stop complaints from fans, while slowly everybody will switch within a few years. 

 

I have to agree on this comment too. I am happy that they tried to innovate and make things different. 

 

No doubt as money comes in, the system will get better, well one can only hope.

[USA_Pride 49]

 

In SimCity 2K, 3, 4 - Overpasses.

 

I'll make you a bet you're going to pay for the overpasses.  They're going to sell you what the game should be one peice at a time.  I've found the best way to send a message is not to buy the game.

 

They actually don't really need to do highways, because the world is so small it just doesn't matter.

 

Glad you were willing to go on record and say that you think the overpasses will be a DLC you have to pay for. Time will tell. 

 

 

Does update 7 make me wrong?

[specializedguy 193]

 

 

In SimCity 2K, 3, 4 - Overpasses.

 

I'll make you a bet you're going to pay for the overpasses.  They're going to sell you what the game should be one peice at a time.  I've found the best way to send a message is not to buy the game.

 

They actually don't really need to do highways, because the world is so small it just doesn't matter.

 

Glad you were willing to go on record and say that you think the overpasses will be a DLC you have to pay for. Time will tell. 

 

 

Does update 7 make me wrong?

 

I think so, being that you can make overpasses and you didn't have to pay for it.

[macscfan 117]

Interesting comment about modding from a prominent developer:

 

http://www.pcgamer.com/2013/09/05/dean-hall-if-dice-wanted-to-kill-arma-all-theyd-need-to-do-is-release-modding-tools-tomorrow/

 

Speaking at our PC Gaming World Congress last Friday, DayZ creator Dean Hall responded to an audience question about server-side games and what they mean for modding. Specifically, the question cited SimCity 4′s modding community and what’s happened with Maxis’ always-online SimCity reboot, which can’t support significant modding. Will the trend of developer-controlled servers mean an end to all mods?

 

“Well, I don’t want to kick SimCity while it’s down, but I suspect that was probably part of the design,” said Hall.

 

 

Chris Roberts, who’s currently working on crowdfunded space mega-game Star Citizen, also noted the private server solution. “I’m doing it in Star Citizen,” said Roberts. “You definitely can mod and you can run your own servers, but if you want to be on the big persistent universe everyone else is on, obviously you can’t mod in that situation, because it wouldn’t work if someone built a battleship that could blow everyone up.”

 

I have not heard that SC can't support significant modding, but in hindsight, it makes sense that there can't be too much modding since everything is located server side.  I wonder if Hall is correct and that it was by design?

[reReticulated Spline 69]

What we know about modding so far:

 

06/03/2013

"GlassBox was built from the start with the idea of modding in mind." 

source: Jasen Haber (http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2013/03/06/simcity-producer-jasen-ha_n_2818561.html)

 

06/06/2013

"From a development perspective we're not anti-mod. We've actually brought in some of our modding community before launch. We've talked to the modding community for both SimCity and the Sims, so it's one of those things that, we need to get the core product out the door."

 

"Valve's Steamworks didn't happen right away, these things take time and so we're already watching what people are doing"

 

"We're just not in a position right now to talk about modding in any real way just yet. We want to get the game solid and we'll move foreward from there."

source: Kip Katsarelis (http://www.incgamers.com/2013/05/simcity-interview-with-maxis-kip-katsarelis)

 

03/07/2013

"Below is a list of features that could be included in SimCity.Please indicate how interested you are in having each feature included in the game"

 

"SimCity Exchange: Download millions of creations to plug into your city from the SimCity Exchange. Build your own content using the same tools as MAxis, then upload your creations for millions to use. Buildings, Vehicles, Lots, Cities, Region Maps and more are available."

source: Reddit post of Maxis survey (http://www.reddit.com/r/SimCity/comments/1hjg25/potential_feature_changes_in_simcity_survey/)

 

Traditionally, each Simcity game has never launched with official modding tools, however, they have ALWAYS been added in the first expansion so this Simcity isn't even doing anything different compared to it's predecesors so far in terms of modding.

 

 

 

So no, Hall is very very likely not correct. The notion that Maxis is purposely making modding impossible is one that is being posted on forums a lot. Just like how, before the game was out, it was constantly posted that you wouldn't be able to make regions private. 

 

What is talked about in terms of modding is interesting though. In the past, you could mod anything provided you could 'crack' the sourcecode. Now with on-server games, potential modders are unable to reach all the source code in the first place. This makes them more reliable on what IS being released by the game. That doesn't have to mean the death of modding though. Many developpers are very supportive of mods. The most obvious example is Blizzard, who benifited greatly when modders created DotA. In fact, a large amount of the WC3 sales can be contributed to that mod alone. Needless to say, they have been active in supporting the modding scene for Starcraft 2. Maxis is more conservative with their support, but the above quotes show that they are very aware of the benefits of modding for their own product.

[Hybr1d 20]

Why was my topic title changed from " Is this game still full of fail? " to " Is this game worth buying? " ???

[CaptCity 4,927]

If memory serves (it was done a while back), this and a couple other topics were headed in the same direction. All were merged and the title was changed to more accurately reflect the type of discussion occurring.

[KaOra 4]

Modding will happen everyone in a  management position at Maxis and EA will be aware of SC4 modding success and see a potential cash cow. I see something like the Valve Hammer editor but it will be available via DLC, mods will produce some form of revenue stream and in the games locked down state we may have to submit mods to them to be audited by them to be signed off for use in the game. After all they are proving to be control freaks this time round.

[macscfan 117]

I do think any modding will be driven through Origin, similar to Steam, and I think it will all be approved by EA.

[Indian007 25]

you are oh so right, people keep supporting them and their downloadable content and no space to put the darn thing. And I think 10 bucks it way too much for just what they give you. I need bigger maps and highways before I buy anything else for this game.

[reReticulated Spline 69]

I am, and into the forseeable future, still surprised by the high cost of most DLC. I would expect they could get much more profit from a lower price. I have trouble believing $10 is on the top of the profit curve. I would think DLC would work best as an impulse purchase. Something you'd do in a moment because it's so cheap you can't really regret it, but which stacks up if you get a lot of DLC. I've played Magic the Gathering. I know how to suck people dry little by little.

[Rufus Honker IV 100]

I am, and into the forseeable future, still surprised by the high cost of most DLC. I would expect they could get much more profit from a lower price. I have trouble believing $10 is on the top of the profit curve. I would think DLC would work best as an impulse purchase. Something you'd do in a moment because it's so cheap you can't really regret it, but which stacks up if you get a lot of DLC. I've played Magic the Gathering. I know how to suck people dry little by little.

 

If they knew what they were doing they'd start dirt cheap and work their way up.  $10 is 1/6 what I paid for the full game.  If it was $2, I'd bite.

 

What am I paying for with this $10?  It's not like they spent a year developing the theme park and had to ship units out to stores.

[Xenocity 343]

Um you forget that SimCity 2013 was not the first to be online, dont forget Cites XL was a MMO focused city building game and that you had to pay a subscription if you wanted to get the best from it (tho there is the SC2013 DLC)..

 

And that after the servers went offline they tacked on a single player mode but from what have seen most folks didn't think much of it...

 

Where SC2013 might get around it if and when the servers go is that you have a single player of sorts already in SC2013 with the private mode when picking your map and all they would have to do is I suppose make a patch that makes offline more feasible and well it has been proved it can be done..

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cities_XL

http://forums.galciv2.com/398668 (people thoughts of Cities XL's single player..)

Actually Cities XL was not the first game to be online.

 

Simcity 2000: Network Edition was the first city game to go online by back in the 1990s.

 

back on topic: Update 7 fixed many of the remaining issues making the game quite stable and fun.

 

Also if you hate the price DLC, it regularly goes on sale for 50% off (I hate DLC).

I'd complain about it, if I wasn't guilty for buying all those Maxis Expansion packs over the years.

[tnobles 38]

Actually, you are being forced to buy DLC's. Let me explain;

 

The game was made (designed) to be multi-player.

 

However, if you are playing in a region where players with DLC's abandon cities, you cannot claim these cities, unless you also own the DLC's.

 

The workaround; don't play public, go private and have only friends that don't have DLC's.