I'm just not totally sold, and I want to be

[LivingInThePast 364]

OK, so, I have been part of the SimCity 4 community for some time (I joined nearly a decade ago, kids, a decade next month) but I haven't been playing SC4 all that much due to computer issues (again), and a WINE wrapper that I found just doesn't function all that well on the Mac side, because I also have an old laptop. My Windows XP installation worked for a while, then failed, then the second time it failed too and I didn't bother wanting to re-install it because of the issues with Boot Camp and everything. At the time I was finishing up college and felt that computer games weren't in my best interest anyway (gotta salvage that GPA). But I was intending to buy a new computer to play SimCity 4 and Skylines as soon as I got a new job (my Mac laptop, low-end at the time it was bought, is 5 years old at this point)

Well, that hasn't happened yet either. In the meantime, Cities Skyline is getting an expansion, After Dark. On paper it sounds great, what with taxis, bike lanes, and other stuff I'd come to expect in a city simulator in 2015, but to be honest, I look at the game, and I grimace. Now, I'm not talking about custom content here, and these complaints may be irrelevant when taking that into effect (but, really, you shouldn't have to load up a game with tons of mods to make it your taste, in principle) but one of the reasons why I was repulsed from SimCity 2013, a terrible game that sullied the good name of the 1989 classic, not to mention one of computer gaming's most respectable and long-running franchises, was that everything looked plasticky. Fake. With SimCity 4, and thinking of all those good times back in 2005, it felt more "real", like you could actually imagine being there, a great model railroad set. With Cities XL, SimCity 2013, and this, it just doesn't feel the same way and feels too smooth, slick, and artificial.

However, before you say, "yeah, that's just your imagination/unrequited nostalgia", I do think that the roads are definitely not at all how they should look, something SimCity 4 more or less nailed out of the box but nothing has come close since. I shuddered at one of the STEX entries for SimCity 2015 (a McDonald's), which, compared to kevdan's, was an awful, plastic thing (the differing, more modern architecture notwithstanding), but both fit the game, with SimCity 4 and that "look", while SimCity 2013's slicker but awful plastic aesthetic.

Like the topic says, I'm almost sold on the idea, but I still have reservations, you know?

 

 

[gviper 922]

Personally, there are some aspects to C:S that appeal to me, but not nearly enough. SC 2013 was an abject failure and ultimately until somebody comes out with a simulation that takes the graphical appearance of SC4 (as a floor standard) and melds it into a simulation like C:S; in expansiveness and detail, I will remain where I am at. I think this will happen someday, but technology needs to advance a bit further so that the systems it will take to run a game comfortably can be afforded by the broader market.  In the mean time I have been amazed with what I have been able to do in SC4 utilizing community creations and feedback.  Also, it might tick some people off and in reality this is merely my OPINION, but with most C:S creations If I have seen one; I've seen nearly all of them (a few exceptions). I wish you the best wherever you land in the ride that is city simulation/creation gaming.

  Edited August 26, 2015 by gviper  
changed wording to match intent

[ghosty20 150]

I find this interesting on that for years people had been wanting to get down to ground level with the previous Simcity games as the problem with them was the feeling of being disconnected from the city you were creating.. When Simcopter was released it was an awesome game addon to Simcity as you could get closer to the city you created.. And I know myself when playing Simcity 4 I had always wanted to be a lot closer to the ground and be able to wander around my city..

When SC2013 came out I thought my prayers had been answered, and in some respects they had just a shame it did not turn out that way.. Cites XXL came a little bit closer but I didn't like it.. When Cities: Skylines first showed up I know this would be the one and when it came out I was pleasantly surprised and I am enjoying the ability of wandering around my city and even better with the map tile unlocker I can have huge cities..

And I am eagerly awaiting the After Hours DLC as will make my cities look even better.. 

On a last note I like graphics just as much as anyone else, but if the game sucks no amount of great graphics will save it.. Also the one big beef I had with SC4 was that it ran like a snail on my system when working with large maps (late 486 then early Pentium 3) so I was stuck with small to medium maps and to say that SC4 looked realistic is a bit far fetched.. It was good for it's day but as technology improves so should the games and wanting a game to look like SC4 well yeah I won't go there.. If anything to have a city building game utilizing the graphics engine that Banished uses..

  Edited August 26, 2015 by ghosty20  

[gviper 922]

I find this interesting on that for years people had been wanting to get down to ground level with the previous Simcity games as the problem with them was the feeling of being disconnected from the city you were creating.. When Simcopter was released it was an awesome game addon to Simcity as you could get closer to the city you created.. And I know myself when playing Simcity 4 I had always wanted to be a lot closer to the ground and be able to wander around my city..

When SC2013 came out I thought my prayers had been answered, and in some respects they had just a shame it did not turn out that way.. Cites XXL came a little bit closer but I didn't like it.. When Cities: Skylines first showed up I know this would be the one and when it came out I was pleasantly surprised and I am enjoying the ability of wandering around my city and even better with the map tile unlocker I can have huge cities..

And I am eagerly awaiting the After Hours DLC as will make my cities look even better.. 

On a last note I like graphics just as much as anyone else, but if the game sucks no amount of great graphics will save it.. Also the one big beef I had with SC4 was that it ran like a snail on my system when working with large maps (late 486 then early Pentium 3) so I was stuck with small to medium maps and to say that SC4 looked realistic is a bit far fetched.. It was good for it's day but as technology improves so should the games and wanting a game to look like SC4 well yeah I won't go there.. If anything to have a city building game utilizing the graphics engine that Banished uses..

Ultimately, advancing forward what I meant was that the base texture quality of Simcity 4 (which is amazing on some custom content) serve as a floor, without a doubt a better example of what I'd like to see is that photo manipulation to make S.F. look in miniature form as mentioned in another post on this forum.

[MushyMushy 3,618]

While I of course think that SC2013 was garbage from my own experience, C:S seems to be a good game from what I've read and looked at, but I'm going to pass for more reasons than just a toaster computer... but don't take that as me saying it's bad; I think it overall comes out positive, but the flaws it has are ones that make it unappealing to me myself. While C:S's simulation appears to be a better-done version of what SC2013 tried to do and I think the ease of modability was a great touch, the graphics just fall flat for me. I think the game's scale is nice, and is definitely an improvement over SC2013, one can really achieve a larger area with a SC4 region. The graphics just hit me the wrong way. I don't think computers are ready for high-quality 3D graphics for a city-builder on a large scale. As somebody who makes props for SC4, I really get a chuckle whenever I hear about the poly limit for growable buildings in C:S... what is it? 1,500 to 2,000 or so to avoid lag? I think I heard it's OK for one-off type buildings to be a little bit higher, but still. I made a van prop recently for SC4... the roof alone is about 1,000-1,500 polys. The overall model is about 21,000. As an artist, I'm a nitpick about graphics, and due to my personal preferences SC4 is the game I choose to play. One can make very high detail buildings, export them in HD, and plop 50 of them in-game and have no problems. That's what I like about the isometric graphics - polys are generally irrelevant. Until 3D city-building games get closer to that point, I'm more partial to the isometric method. Overall, I think it gives SC4 a more crisp picture. This isn't for everyone, and I know that - that's just my personal preference. On a final note in this paragraph, I like to Photoshop my pictures to have stuff that's not really possible in-game... or to just look better. It is exponentially easier to do this in a isometric game where things are all the at same distance and angle from the camera, unlike in a 3D world.

Really, I think C:S is a start. It finally brought the city-building genre into the 3D realm on what would appear to be a solid foundation. Due to my own pickiness and preferences, the game is not for me and I'll probably be waiting for a long time for a replacement for SC4, but I certainly do not think that C:S is a bad game in any respect.

[rsc204 21,857]

Firstly, I totally agree that the benefits of an isometric game are huge, a lot of people keep using the example of how many mods have come about so quickly as a means to justify that CS will very shortly overtake SC4 in this respect, but it won't unless you've a super computer to run it.

One thing CS has going for it, it's a very fun experience to play, but I found it really lacks any depth, once you get the hang of it, the whole game boils down to little more than a traffic simulator. Either your traffic flows fine and all is well, or it doesn't, causing everything to fall apart. This takes away a lot of the freedom to build cities how you want too, OK with a name like CIties Skylines I suppose it was too much to expect being able to make nice rural settings too? For example, past a certain population you can forget not having large motorways and spaghetti like junctions, traffic will simply not work otherwise. But this is the great thing about SC4, it's all things to all people, if you persevere past it's problems, most of which are solvable, you have a game with infinite possibilities. Add a little lotting/modding to your repertoire and you've the means to totally control every aspect of the visual part of the game.

I play CS occasionally when I just want to relax and enjoy a game, but SC4 is more of a passion, an on-going project that I've so many plans for, it will be years before I am likely to feel satisfied with some of my creations with it. I think if you just want to play, CS is much better for this, but what I'm doing with SC4 is more akin to computer-based modelling, trying to craft an entire region and obsessing over every detail in it. I honestly don't see CS as the right tool for the job in this respect, who knows maybe once it's matured it will be, in the meantime I'll just enjoy the game part every now and again and keep abreast of it's developments.

[LivingInThePast 364]

Really, what everyone wants is an improved SimCity 4, which could've been great (it makes me sad seeing things that were cut from development, and the fact that Rush Hour was the only expansion pack) but what's done is done. 

I guess what concerns me is the same thing that everyone else is already experiencing, the cartoonish graphics (SimCity 2013's is less cartoonish, but the game is ridiculously broken and is already DOA) and the 4x4 limitations. In many ways, I look at Cities Skyline and I see Cities XL.

Despite the graphics problem, I should also remember that the game came out less than a year ago. It wasn't until maybe mid-2005 when custom content came of age for SimCity 4 and the NAM started developing, which was (back then) a way to fix the highly broken traffic simulator. Should things go well, the next few years should be amazing for C:S.

[Linoa06 1,374]

Really, what everyone wants is an improved SimCity 4, which could've been great (it makes me sad seeing things that were cut from development, and the fact that Rush Hour was the only expansion pack) but what's done is done. 

I guess what concerns me is the same thing that everyone else is already experiencing, the cartoonish graphics (SimCity 2013's is less cartoonish, but the game is ridiculously broken and is already DOA) and the 4x4 limitations. In many ways, I look at Cities Skyline and I see Cities XL.

Despite the graphics problem, I should also remember that the game came out less than a year ago. It wasn't until maybe mid-2005 when custom content came of age for SimCity 4 and the NAM started developing, which was (back then) a way to fix the highly broken traffic simulator. Should things go well, the next few years should be amazing for C:S.

Yeah, at first SC4 was just as broken. Though I don't see anything similar, beyond the 3D engine, between CXL and CSL. CXL brought the city sim genre to the 3D world but CSL is already a lot more in depth, not to mention how CSL is more alive and its cities more unique than both its predecessor Cities in Motion 2 and the photogenic but ultimately just a 3D photo still CXL. 

Maybe it's indeed just nostalgia. If in principle you do not need to mod your game for it to be enjoyable, then you are probably incredibly picky as 1/ CSL is playable without mods and 2/ it took a decade for SC4 to get where it is today, and most of what people love about SC4 are in fact player mods (spearheaded by the ubiqutous NAM team)...

Guess in many ways, SC4 has become the stuff of unblemished and idealized nostalgia. It's quite unfair to rate a new game, however good it is, to this collective SC4 dream that in reality was nowhere as perfect nor complete when it was first released, nor for the 3-4 years that followed. (I got SC4 when it was first released - I had been saving to get SC3000 when SC4 came out - and my experience was probably similar to unmodded CSL before I found out about Simtropolis, and actually could speak its language properly enough).

  Edited August 27, 2015 by Linoa06  

[Mr_Maison 2,426]

I agree that SC4's textures and overall graphics have an advantage. But remember with SC4, you are loading pre-rendered images. That's why you can make models with 21,000 polys for it. Buildings for C:S are not limited to 1,500 polys. It's more of a suggestion to not go past 10,000 or basically make them as low poly as possible. Some creators actually made stuff way beyond 10,000 but it's just not good practice for the sake of the player base.....but it can be done. A building that is made with 10,000 polys cannot compete with one with 20-40,000. Of course you can go all out with models and textures on an isometric game, but you can't turn your camera in 3D and go to first person and ride through it. And to expect any system to run a full 3D city builder with thousands of buildings with deep simulation of traffic and citizens with epic poly counts is unrealistic to expect anytime soon. To me it comes down to textures and how talented an artist is to make a low poly model look like it have 10s of thousands.

I do agree that the texture system can use some work but some of us creators know how to work against the cartoony look and there's a big texturing guide in the works by some of us that will be released soon. We are also having discussions about texture systems with CO devs and they are engaged. So don't be too hard in comparing C:S to SC4.  There are pros and cons with both games.

In my opinion, C:S didn't take the crown yet but it's the best we have since 2003. And the same way this community made SC4 the legend that it is, I was hoping this same community would nurture what we been looking for for over a decade. If not this community to make the game better, then who? If we all waited for SC4 to get better, what would we have today?

  Edited August 28, 2015 by Mr_Maison  

[Marc Collins 36]

I guess what concerns me is the same thing that everyone else is already experiencing, the cartoonish graphics and the 4x4 limitations.

Yep, these two things prevent C:SL from ever supplanting SC4.  The graphics could eventually be fixed by modders if they really wanted to spend the time and effort to do so and we all have/get really high-end computers.  The 4x4 limitation can only be fixed by the authors and until they do, nothing resembling the spatial layout of a normal city will be possible.  This is way more of a deal-breaker than the graphics for me.

[gviper 922]

And ultimately the fundamental concept remains intact: you can add some graphical intensity to C:S, how much? I don't know; I don't play the game, but it will come commensurate to the capabilities of your computer's capacity.  Especially with a more detailed and robust simulation behind it.  Course this is true of nearly all genres of pc games, but more so ones that are centered around the player expanding the rendered/simulated domain as opposed to those that are more constant or fixed.

  Edited August 28, 2015 by gviper  

[ghosty20 150]

To those going on about how because of the 4x4 lot limitation is a deal breaker to them..  Ask yourselves this, why did they put in a lot size limit? Once you can answer that then you might understand why CO put in a lot size limit..

So instead of just fobbing off the game because of this actually ask CO why they put a limit on the lot sizes, I am pretty sure they will tell you why they had to do it like they did..

Even here http://steamcommunity.com/app/255710/discussions/0/611701999525048556/ https://www.reddit.com/r/CitiesSkylines/comments/2we1qh/lot_sizes/ someone asked why the limit of lot sizes some of the replies are quite helpful and will pave the way as to the reason for the lot size limit.. 

[MushyMushy 3,618]

Not trying to be blunt, but I'm not really sure most of the people who complain about the tiny lot sizes really care why it's like that, myself included. There are plenty of people who have read why, but that doesn't change their constant requests for larger lots, from what I read. Knowing why doesn't make it not a deal breaker for people.

If sc4 was limited to 2x2 buildings (the equivalent of a c:s 4x4 I think), they could have all the reasons in the world and I still wouldn't play it. 

[wallacet 336]

To those going on about how because of the 4x4 lot limitation is a deal breaker to them..  Ask yourselves this, why did they put in a lot size limit? Once you can answer that then you might understand why CO put in a lot size limit..

So instead of just fobbing off the game because of this actually ask CO why they put a limit on the lot sizes, I am pretty sure they will tell you why they had to do it like they did..

Even here http://steamcommunity.com/app/255710/discussions/0/611701999525048556/ https://www.reddit.com/r/CitiesSkylines/comments/2we1qh/lot_sizes/ someone asked why the limit of lot sizes some of the replies are quite helpful and will pave the way as to the reason for the lot size limit.. 

I believe it was mentioned somewhere that the reason for small lot sizes had to do with the curved roads and the way larger lots would interact with them. Now before you say "But SC4 has curved roads and large lots!", remember that SC4 originally did not come with curved roads, and thus large lots were ok... it was only through the efforts of modders that the game has them now.

[Marc Collins 36]

Not trying to be blunt, but I'm not really sure most of the people who complain about the tiny lot sizes really care why it's like that, myself included. There are plenty of people who have read why, but that doesn't change their constant requests for larger lots, from what I read. Knowing why doesn't make it not a deal breaker for people.

If sc4 was limited to 2x2 buildings (the equivalent of a c:s 4x4 I think), they could have all the reasons in the world and I still wouldn't play it. 

+1

  Edited August 29, 2015 by Marc Collins  

[TPB 563]

I've already said this but I'll repeat it here, in my opinion, C:SL hasn't only taken the crown, it is also driving the cadillac hearse to SC4's funeral. It's time to confront reality, guys. The only people who are still playing SC4 are hyper-realists(which personally I fail to understand, since always looking at something isometrically feels incredibly fake to me, especially since you can't even zoom in, walk on the streets or do even a fraction of the things you can do in C:SL), die-hard fans, and the people who spent a decade developing mods and content for SC4 who understandably feel sad or disappointed that this vastly superior game is about to make most of their work fall into the annals of history. And for that, I am genuinely sorry. But make no mistakes here, new generations of gamers will go for C:SL over SC4 any day, especially with the difficulty of installing and getting SC4 to run at all, not to mention the incredibly tedious process trying to get a workable installation of the game to run on modern machines. Also, most of the niceness of SC4 comes from the user-made content, and hunting for dependencies for them to get rid of brown boxes, crashes, etc is something I would not have my worst enemy go through. SC4 is  dead, the sooner we face this fact the better for all of us. It deserves the greatest eulogy ever, and it will always have a huge place in many people's hearts, but make no mistakes, in 2 - 3 years' time no one will be installing this game, mainly because it won't even run on new generation computers.

So how about instead of holding back progress we all join the party and work together to make C:SL and its successors the games we want them to be, as many are already doing? We need your help guys! Bring your experience and knowledge to the table! To be honest, any respectable modern game that aims to great graphics requires top-end machines to run, if you have a powerful machine you can probably use mods to make C:SL much more realistic looking than vanilla. Then you have the totally insane moddability, you can do pretty much anything you want to this game for crying out loud, except the 4x4 lot size, which is entirely irrelevant in my opinion since you can just make the larger buildings ploppable and that's the end of it, come on, you really want 5 large shopping malls growing next to each-other like in SC4? Just plop your large structures, what's the problem with that? If you don't like roads, use a mod that enables zoning on pedestrian paths and problem solved. 

As for the "cartoonish" graphics, well, you can't have your cake and eat it. Once computers are fast enough we'll be able to have hyper-realism in a simulator with this level of complexity. In the mean time many people(many of whom are part of our community) are already dishing out top-quality content to help improve on that aspect!

Of course, all this is just based on my opinion and observations, and I could be terribly wrong, only time will tell. Meanwhile, have a wonderful time playing whichever game your prefer

 

[MilitantRadical 2,844]

I've already said this but I'll repeat it here, in my opinion, C:SL hasn't only taken the crown, it is also driving the cadillac hearse to SC4's funeral. It's time to confront reality, guys.

I don't get this mentality. Why can't the two just exist side by side? Why does one have to die?

Are a lot more people playing C:SL these days sure, but that doesn't mean SC4 is "dead". Yes, the golden era of SC4 is over, but it is far from dead as long as there are still people who still enjoy it.

The only people who are still playing SC4 are hyper-realists(which personally I fail to understand, since always looking at something isometrically feels incredibly fake to me, especially since you can't even zoom in, walk on the streets or do even a fraction of the things you can do in C:SL), die-hard fans, and the people who spent a decade developing mods and content for SC4 who understandably feel sad or disappointed that this vastly superior game is about to make most of their work fall into the annals of history.

That doesn't eve make sense. Hyper-realists? You can do a lot more in SC4 than just "realism".

Is C:SL superior? In many ways yes it is. In others it still has a long way to catch up to SC4. But just because C:SL is superior doesn't mean SC4 has to be abandoned all together.

And for that, I am genuinely sorry. But make no mistakes here, all new generations of gamers will go for C:SL over SC4 any day, especially with the difficulty of installing and getting SC4 to run at all, not to mention the incredibly tedious process trying to get a workable installation of the game to run on modern machines.

It isn't hard to install, that's just silly. As time goes on people will find a way to make it work, or they'll just hang on to their older machines for a little longer. There will be new people who discover it and will want to play it. "Retro" always comes back in fashion. Remember there was a time when CDs killed tapes and records. Well guess what? Records are back in fashion. People still collect them. A good record player and a good sound system will deliver some top quality audio.

Also, most of the niceness of SC4 comes from the user-made content, and hunting for dependencies for them to get rid of brown boxes, crashes, etc is something I would not have my worst enemy go through. SC4 is  dead, the sooner we face this fact the better for all of us. It deserves the greatest eulogy ever, and it will always have a huge place in many people's hearts, but make no mistakes, in 2 - 3 years' time no one will be installing this game, mainly because it wont even run on new generation computers.

Getting dependencies and stuff isn't hard at all. If you've downloaded a bunch of mods and you have brown boxes everywhere then you're just not very smart. Been playing for 4-5 years and have never had any brown box, or crashing problem, that I couldn't easily be solved.

So how about instead of holding back progress we all join the bandwagon and work together to make C:SL and its successors the games we want them to be, as many are already doing? We need your help guys! Bring your experience and knowledge to the table!

How are SC4 players/enthusiasts holding back progress? Progress is happening, it has happened. I don't see why people need to abandon SC4 simply for the sake of this alleged progress.

You think if all the people making content for SC4 shifted over to C:SL that all of a sudden it would just magically transform into the super awesome game you're envisioning?

As for the "cartoonish" graphics, well, you can't have your cake and eat it. Once computers are fast enough we'll be able to have hyper-realism in a simulator with this level of complexity. In the mean time many people(many of whom are part of our community) are already dishing out top-quality content to help improve on that aspect!

One of the things that makes SC4 great and that gives it longevity is that it doesn't require a super pimped out computer. As someone who doesn't give a damn about the PC Master Rat-Race, I love SC4 precisely because I don't have to worry about having "fast" computer to make it look good.

 

 

[MushyMushy 3,618]

I think you're greatly overestimating how many people have left SC4. If it's dead, why are there still newbies who just bought it making accounts to ask us how to install it on their new machines?

I also think you're pushing your opinion that SC4 is bad and Skylines is great a bit much. It's your opinion and that's great, and there are likely others that share it, but that doesn't mean we all agree with that. Since this seems to be something where we're not looking at both sides of the coin for the most part, I'll just look at it bluntly from one side instead of two like I usually do...

all new generations of gamers will go for C:SL over SC4 any day, especially with the difficulty of installing and getting SC4 to run at all, not to mention the incredibly tedious process trying to get a workable installation of the game to run on modern machines.

There are young people who take an interest in old games, you know. There may be less of them than the mainstream type, but they do exist. And unless you're talking about the ever-problematic new versions of Windows that I refuse to use, I really don't know what you're talking about. I have a CD-ROM that I got as a present back in probably 2005 or so. It was installed on my old XP computer easily. About 4 years ago the dinosaur died so I got a Windows 7, which I proceeded to install SC4 on. I didn't have any difficulty at all, and while I know a decent amount of stuff about CPUs for my age, I'm no IT wizard-type.

Also, most of the niceness of SC4 comes from the user-made content, and hunting for dependencies for them to get rid of brown boxes, crashes, etc is something I would not have my worst enemy go through.

Well, one could arguably say plenty of C:S's niceness is from mods as well. Unless of course you like seeing the same midrise building about 5 times per block nad like making "big" cities that have 0 skyscrapers because the base game didn't have any. Crashes can be easily dealt with by A. saving, and B. reading about what causes them. I used to get them frequently because I was doing dumb things with the NAM like putting puzzle pieces next to transit-enabled lots. Not wanting to search for dependencies isn't the game's problem. They're usually not hard to find either, as modders will usually give a link, and if it's broken, searching for them isn't tough. Keep in mind that this will likely happen to C:S eventually, as people will probably make prop packs eventually and modders will proceed to use them. Then one will have to suffer through the horrors of typing something in a search bar.

So how about instead of holding back progress we all join the bandwagon and work together to make C:SL and its successors the games we want them to be, as many are already doing?

Eh, not everyone adopts the crowd mentality. Just because everyone I know has an iPhone doesn't mean I have to get one too, and I won't.

except the 4x4 lot size, which is entirely irrelevant in my opinion since you can just make the larger buildings ploppable and that's the end of it, come on, you really want 5 large shopping malls growing next to each-other like in SC4? Just plop your large structures, what's the problem with that?

I'm pretty sure the problem with ploppables in C:S is that they have no jobs. Yeah, it's great that people can get past the 4x4 barrier with ploppables, but without jobs it's a waste of space. In SC4, most of the mega shopping centers are ploppables, not growables. The difference is that they're not eye candy and actually have jobs and contribute to the city.

As for the "cartoonish" graphics, well, you can't have your cake and eat it. Once computers are fast enough we'll be able to have hyper-realism in a simulator with this level of complexity. In the mean time many people(most of whom are part of our community) are already dishing out top-quality content to help improve on that aspect!

Admitting the fault kind of defeats the argument. That's like going up to somebody who only likes 3D games and telling them "play SC4, it's great and even though it's 2D you'll like it anyway!" Some people just value graphics too much to embrace the cartoonish, plasticy graphics that C:S currently offers. It will be a while before computers are to the point you describe, long after C:S and probably after several more games come out. Computers right now are just nowhere near being able to run, in full 3D, the kind of high-poly models that most SC4 creations involve.

----

So that's the end of that blunt rambling. All of those points were simply my opinion presented without my usual consideration for the other side. My apologies if it came across as rude in any way; if one wants to see how I feel about it overall they should refer to my first post on this thread. My last comment was not meant to be a jab, if anyone took it that way, at C:S modders either, I think the stuff they do is great considering their constraints.

  Edited August 29, 2015 by MushyMushy  

[TPB 563]

Ok I may have exaggerated... by the tone of your replies I most likely did. My apologies if it felt as an attack... I didn't mean it as such. I just wish we could have the talent of the SC4 modding community join us in improving what *I* consider the rightful heir to SC4, that's all. Right now I need to head to work but I'll when I get home I'd love to reply to you both with a bit more time. Again, apologies.

 

 

 

[Linoa06 1,374]

To those going on about how because of the 4x4 lot limitation is a deal breaker to them..  Ask yourselves this, why did they put in a lot size limit? Once you can answer that then you might understand why CO put in a lot size limit..

So instead of just fobbing off the game because of this actually ask CO why they put a limit on the lot sizes, I am pretty sure they will tell you why they had to do it like they did..

Even here http://steamcommunity.com/app/255710/discussions/0/611701999525048556/ https://www.reddit.com/r/CitiesSkylines/comments/2we1qh/lot_sizes/ someone asked why the limit of lot sizes some of the replies are quite helpful and will pave the way as to the reason for the lot size limit.. 

Afaik, SC4 also has lot size restrictions, which work in somewhat the same way as in CSL, so I don't get why it's a bad thing in the latter game and a non-issue in the former. 

[MushyMushy 3,618]

Im just curious here... What lot size restrictions? Isn't the cap like 60x60 tiles or something? The hkbat team released tons of buildings on odd large growable lots like 5x7 or even bigger. Some of them were over 10 tiles on one side. Some of the ploppable lots I have reach about 20x20 tiles. A lot i made for a competition was around 15x30. The only reasons stuff will tend to be broken into multiple lots is if A. The person hits the prop limit, B. The lot needs to be something other than rectangular, or C. They want it to be modular.

[TPB 563]

I've already said this but I'll repeat it here, in my opinion, C:SL hasn't only taken the crown, it is also driving the cadillac hearse to SC4's funeral. It's time to confront reality, guys.

I don't get this mentality. Why can't the two just exist side by side? Why does one have to die?

Are a lot more people playing C:SL these days sure, but that doesn't mean SC4 is "dead". Yes, the golden era of SC4 is over, but it is far from dead as long as there are still people who still enjoy it.

The only people who are still playing SC4 are hyper-realists(which personally I fail to understand, since always looking at something isometrically feels incredibly fake to me, especially since you can't even zoom in, walk on the streets or do even a fraction of the things you can do in C:SL), die-hard fans, and the people who spent a decade developing mods and content for SC4 who understandably feel sad or disappointed that this vastly superior game is about to make most of their work fall into the annals of history.

That doesn't eve make sense. Hyper-realists? You can do a lot more in SC4 than just "realism".

Is C:SL superior? In many ways yes it is. In others it still has a long way to catch up to SC4. But just because C:SL is superior doesn't mean SC4 has to be abandoned all together.

And for that, I am genuinely sorry. But make no mistakes here, all new generations of gamers will go for C:SL over SC4 any day, especially with the difficulty of installing and getting SC4 to run at all, not to mention the incredibly tedious process trying to get a workable installation of the game to run on modern machines.

It isn't hard to install, that's just silly. As time goes on people will find a way to make it work, or they'll just hang on to their older machines for a little longer. There will be new people who discover it and will want to play it. "Retro" always comes back in fashion. Remember there was a time when CDs killed tapes and records. Well guess what? Records are back in fashion. People still collect them. A good record player and a good sound system will deliver some top quality audio.

Also, most of the niceness of SC4 comes from the user-made content, and hunting for dependencies for them to get rid of brown boxes, crashes, etc is something I would not have my worst enemy go through. SC4 is  dead, the sooner we face this fact the better for all of us. It deserves the greatest eulogy ever, and it will always have a huge place in many people's hearts, but make no mistakes, in 2 - 3 years' time no one will be installing this game, mainly because it wont even run on new generation computers.

Getting dependencies and stuff isn't hard at all. If you've downloaded a bunch of mods and you have brown boxes everywhere then you're just not very smart. Been playing for 4-5 years and have never had any brown box, or crashing problem, that I couldn't easily be solved.

So how about instead of holding back progress we all join the bandwagon and work together to make C:SL and its successors the games we want them to be, as many are already doing? We need your help guys! Bring your experience and knowledge to the table!

How are SC4 players/enthusiasts holding back progress? Progress is happening, it has happened. I don't see why people need to abandon SC4 simply for the sake of this alleged progress.

You think if all the people making content for SC4 shifted over to C:SL that all of a sudden it would just magically transform into the super awesome game you're envisioning?

As for the "cartoonish" graphics, well, you can't have your cake and eat it. Once computers are fast enough we'll be able to have hyper-realism in a simulator with this level of complexity. In the mean time many people(many of whom are part of our community) are already dishing out top-quality content to help improve on that aspect!

One of the things that makes SC4 great and that gives it longevity is that it doesn't require a super pimped out computer. As someone who doesn't give a damn about the PC Master Rat-Race, I love SC4 precisely because I don't have to worry about having "fast" computer to make it look good.

 

 

Alright here goes, sorry I still haven't learned this new website system and can't figure out how to split quotes yet, I guess I'm too dumb, so I ask you for patience and all that, hopefully this will make sense.

 

When I say dead I meant that it doesn't have much of a future, much like Latin is a dead language, you can keep studying and enjoying it, and it is a magnificent and beautiful thing, but it's not going to evolve very far from where it currently stands.

Many of the arguments I see against C:SL have a lot do do with realism and the graphics not being good enough to please CJ'ers and people who look for realistic looking screenshots etc, so I used the term hyper-realism, you make it sound like a sin and say I don't make sense, I respectfully disagree. Can you tell me in which ways C:SL is a long way from catching up to SC4, because beyond MMP'ing(oh wait, that has been done already, a mod is out there which allows you to use props in the game!) and some sort of perceived graphics superiority which unless you are a very experienced SC4 player, it's very difficult to achieve that realistic feel anyway; I'm afraid I don't see all these ways, maybe because I'm not "smart" enough, right?

I don't expect for SC4 to be abandoned and I'm sorry if I sounded that way. As you say they can and are coexisting side by side but it would rock if we had the talent, experience and dedication that we've seen from SC4 veterans roll over to the new generation replacement instead of clinging on to a 12 year old game that is headed nowhere(imo).

Ok I may have mispoken about everyone needing to join the bandwagon and adapt, I went too far, but it saddens me to see people bashing what I consider to be a great next step in the genre just because of a couple of easily overlooked and probably fixable limitations. Maybe they aren't holding anything back, but imagine what we'd achieve if they were more enthusiastic?

Just because you may be a tech savvy person doesn't mean the game is not hard to install/get it working properly for some people and that difficulty doesn't make them "not smart" in my view, and this is evident by the amount of topics we have here on how to install and configure all kinds of things in order to make the game enjoyable by the average person. 

Can we agree to disagree without calling people "not smart" because they can't be asked to spend hours on end hunting for dependencies? I don't have brown boxes either, but it took me a considerable effort to get there, with the amount of custom content I like to use, if that makes me dumb then I'm dumb, whatever.

The first post on this thread clearly exemplifies the difficulty of running SC4 even with OLD machines, so I don't see how what I said about this is wrong at all. And sorry but the whole dependency business is hard and overly complicated if you want to use more than a couple dozen mods/addons, have you tried switching to sandstone sidewalks for example, and having all your stuff match with no white sidewalks anywhere? That takes an insane amount of effort, end of story, you even need to learn some Japanese, so there you go. If it wasn't for rsc204's help I would have never been able to achieve it, again, that makes me stupid apparently, cheers. Learning to use the Nam also requires a master's degree in SC4 engineering to get anything close to realistic, as you can easily tell from browsing the Show us your interchanges thread.

Anyway, that's my point of view and I'm sorry if you felt hurt by what I had to say on the topic, but this is a forum and I have the right to post my opinion, however much you feel hurt or offended by it. I also try hard to redact my writing to make it the least offensive possible, as I'm given to "salt" and angry language as you pointed out in the other thread, but I'm not trying to start a war, rest assured, so please, chill out, I'm not here to fight.

 

 

 

[MilitantRadical 2,844]

Anyway, that's my point of view and I'm sorry if you felt hurt by what I had to say on the topic, but this is a forum and I have the right to post my opinion, however much you feel hurt or offended by it. I also try hard to redact my writing to make it the least offensive possible, as I'm given to "salt" and angry language as you pointed out in the other thread, but I'm not trying to start a war, rest assured, so please, chill out, I'm not here to fight.

I'm chill. You're projecting a negative/hostile tone on my comments.

I wasn't hurt by what you said. I just disagreed. You indeed have a right to your opinion, that doesn't make your opinion "right".

I'm sorry I said: "you're not very smart", that was too much of an insult and I guess you took it too much to heart. Was merely trying to point out that getting dependencies isn't that hard. It takes some effort, but it isn't hard. Yes, some dependencies can be difficult to locate, but most BATs and mods on places like the STEX and the LEX have dependencies that are very well sourced - it hardly takes hours. Also, when I said "you" I wasn't talking about you specifically - it was a general "you" referring to these hypothetical people who are allegedly incapable of getting SC4 to work. Sure, some people have trouble installing the game or some mods, but with a little help and some intuition they figure it out most of the time - it doesn't require any technical expertise.

Ok I may have mispoken about everyone needing to join the bandwagon and adapt, I went too far, but it saddens me to see people bashing what I consider to be a great next step in the genre just because of a couple of easily overlooked and probably fixable limitations. Maybe they aren't holding anything back, but imagine what we'd achieve if they were more enthusiastic?

Maybe you're taking criticism of C:SL a bit too personally. If you love it, then just love it.

Can you tell me in which ways C:SL is a long way from catching up to SC4, because beyond MMP'ing(oh wait, that has been done already, a mod is out there which allows you to use props in the game!) and some sort of perceived graphics superiority which unless you are a very experienced SC4 player, it's very difficult to achieve that realistic feel anyway; I'm afraid I don't see all these ways, maybe because I'm not "smart" enough, right?

I meant in terms of custom content. SC4 currently has way more custom content that allows for a wide range of styles. It's going to take 2 or 3 years for C:SL to have that kind of diversity and quality.

I don't expect for SC4 to be abandoned and I'm sorry if I sounded that way. As you say they can and are coexisting side by side but it would rock if we had the talent, experience and dedication that we've seen from SC4 veterans roll over to the new generation replacement instead of clinging on to a 12 year old game that is headed nowhere(imo).

That talent will come, don't be so impatient. Rome wasn't built in a day - as they say.

The game is what you make of it. Where it is headed is where you take it. SC4 has many limits, and it has had those for years, but as long as people still make BATs or use the Lot editor to create custom content, the game isn't going to die.

They're just games. I don't see why we have to pick sides or to let one die so the other can flourish. Both have their virtues. If people want to keep making content for SC4, god bless them, then let them be.

  Edited August 29, 2015 by MilitantRadical  

[crishy 57]

The only major issue with CS is the relatively small size of the cities/regions. Sure, 25 modded tiles is a lot for the average player, but nearly not enough for me, especially as these tiles are only about the size of medium SC4 cities. There is an 81 tile mod but performance issues arise long before the 81 tiles are close to being filled in, not to say that that is still too small for me.

Also, no inbuilt terraforming ingame?

3D vs. 2D is the perennial gameplay/graphics debate, though as a heavy Google/BingMaps (I use the latter more as otherwise I would spend too much time in the former lol) user I am more than ok with 2D with sharper graphics.

  Edited August 29, 2015 by crishy  

[Linoa06 1,374]

Im just curious here... What lot size restrictions? Isn't the cap like 60x60 tiles or something? The hkbat team released tons of buildings on odd large growable lots like 5x7 or even bigger. Some of them were over 10 tiles on one side. Some of the ploppable lots I have reach about 20x20 tiles. A lot i made for a competition was around 15x30. The only reasons stuff will tend to be broken into multiple lots is if A. The person hits the prop limit, B. The lot needs to be something other than rectangular, or C. They want it to be modular.

I believe they were referring to growables, given those have the 4x4 limit. Bit small, but by no means impossible to get around given people can build bigger lots, just not growable. I just don't see the point.

Then again people could try to better either game and will instead argue endlessly about which is "better". CSL is the way of the future, whether this game or another one, but it's firmly anchored the genre in the 3D era (mostly by being a good game and going back to the basics)...that was about time.

[TPB 563]

Ok, apparently my ability to communicate in a calm and mature manner is dismal even after redacting my messages several times over(my SC4 is dead post above was actually the 4th version, thank goodness I didn't go for the first, ha!) and since it's not my intention to cause angst even if it may come across otherwise, it's best for all of us if I just go back into retirement/lurking mode. Sorry all. No disrespect or offence was intended, just wanted to share my point of view. Have fun everyone.

[LivingInThePast 364]

Having no jobs with custom content is a bit of dealbreaker. It's like the SC3K landmarks, where they are merely eye candy and do absolutely nothing. In many ways, SC4's custom content was the best, to not only provide buildings with jobs and being "shuffled into the deck" of growables and not a tileset. I'm also of the opinion that super-high polys aren't necessary, and in many ways good texturing can be just as good. Items before they're turned into SC4 objects can look terrific as gmax models, and if well-textured items are used, that complaint about CS can disappear.

There's a lot to SC4 I haven't explored yet, so for now, I'm going to do both when I can. Until I can actually play CS for myself, I'm not even sure the "successor" title is worthy, as there have been a massive number of "false messiahs". City Life, SimCity Societies, Cities XL, SimCity 2013, Cities XXL. Right now, SimCity 4 seems like an old king with grey hair but still very much alive, with more years than anyone predicted on him. Cities XL was the rebel leader who was crushed internally. SimCity 2013 is SC4's bastard son, who ensured that the family name would not continue. Cities Skyline is the first elected leader, but he's just not there yet in terms of where he needs to be. You could say that there's a schism between the old king and the new leader, but really, they're both on the same side and many people support both.

Again, I think that from what I have learned from this thread, CS is worth a try, but it's time to chuck SC4 yet.

[Ocram's Razr 964]

Now, I'm not talking about custom content here, and these complaints may be irrelevant when taking that into effect (but, really, you shouldn't have to load up a game with tons of mods to make it your taste, in principle)

I find this statement ironic. Since 2005, I had to load up SimCity 4 with tons of mods to make it fit my taste. I require fewer mods to enjoy Cities: Skylines than SimCity 4. I can play Cities: Skylines out of the box without mods but even in 2004, SimCity 4 was unplayable to me without Rush Hour and NAM.

Also, Cities XXL without mods is leaps and bounds more realistic in appearance than SimCity 4 with tons of mods.

 

That means that I can say "yeah, that's just your imagination/unrequited nostalgia" without hesitation or regret.

People who have never played either game (making them impartial judges) agree that screenshots of the Cities XL line of games (Cities XL 2009 and Cities XXL 2015 are not that different) are far more realistic than SimCity 4 with similar levels of modding and photoshopping. My sister (who hates video games) couldn't tell an unaltered screenshot of Cities XL from reality, saying something along the lines of "Those Asians sure live in huge, crowded cities" but can easily distinguish even the most touched-up screenshots of the most heavily modded cities built by the best players from reality.

 

Really, the only things needed to make Cities: Skylines perfect for me is for it to have filler textures/parks for gaps caused by uneven roads, support for more lot sizes and shapes (it is currently impossible to build most buildings on the inside of a curved road in Cities: Skylines but is easy and good looking (for the game) in SimCity 2013), more realistic production chains (food processors should only accept agricultural products, furniture warehouses should only accept forestry products, etc), and separation of wealth from density (ideally have 5 wealth levels and 3 growth levels per zone). The sad thing is that After Dark does not address any of these issues as far as I can tell, however it does bring some features highly requested (that even I requested).

 

--Ocram

[Mr_Maison 2,426]

Also, no inbuilt terraforming ingame?

We are terraforming in game....there's a mod for that. http://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=411095553

[crishy 57]

Also, no inbuilt terraforming ingame?

We are terraforming in game....there's a mod for that. http://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=411095553

Well, I did say inbuilt, as in out of the box, sorry if I was not clear about that.