EA canvasing player feedback on offline mode and content for future expansion packs

why not just ask a simple question, what picture looks better? a picture from simcity 4 or simcity 2013? answer on a postcard to EA deaf and blind centre, united states

 

That would go to SC2013, imo. My co-workers who also play say the new one is far superior than previous versions, visually speaking.

the problem is, that's meant we basically say a new game (nah, dude, we don't want another game, we want sc4 feature in new simcity (a REALLY REALLY great expansion can worth 50 bucks))

 

At least someone admits it. Unfortunately, this is why the new SimCity will disappoint some people - its not SC4 and in my opinion, won't ever be. Depending on who you are, that's a good thing or bad thing. For me, its a good thing. For others, its a bad thing. 

No matter what they do now, they won't convert the SC4 fan base.  To make a successor to SC4 is a huge undertaking, and one basically has to start from scratch.  It seems SC4 has reached a point where a general rewrite is needed just to correct its problems and to update it to modern technology, all without messing up the ability to handle existing custom content.  I don't think that is reasonably possible.

 

Interested parties might want to take a look at Boomtown.  This is slow going because it is a hard problem.  No quick solutions will be forthcoming.

No matter what they do now, they won't convert the SC4 fan base.  To make a successor to SC4 is a huge undertaking, and one basically has to start from scratch.  It seems SC4 has reached a point where a general rewrite is needed just to correct its problems and to update it to modern technology, all without messing up the ability to handle existing custom content.  I don't think that is reasonably possible.

 

If they sought out to modernize SC4, I agree, it would be an undertaking. I think some of the SC4 base have embraced the new version - I have and I've been playing SC since SC2000.

It would appear that the EA board is firmly in the clutch of the bean counters and MBA grads.  They seem to be chasing the buck down the street rather than running the company for the benefit of the shareholders and customers by producing quality product that will enhance their reputation and, therefore, the market value.  The best motto for any company is:

 

"Doing well by doing good."

 

Anybody at EA ever even looked at the ISO 9000 series of standards?  I'll bet they can't be bothered wading through all that tedious quality assurance stuff.

 

why not just ask a simple question, what picture looks better? a picture from simcity 4 or simcity 2013? answer on a postcard to EA deaf and blind centre, united states

 

That would go to SC2013, imo. My co-workers who also play say the new one is far superior than previous versions, visually speaking.

 

Please tell me you're joking right?... Visually speaking the new game looks absolutely awful as everything is too bright and plastic looking. There is far too much grass placed around the larger buildings, too little texturing and the tilt-shift makes it look like a kiddies fisher-price playset.

3D is overrated, I'll take the realistic looking 2.5D of SC4 any day, just compare the beauty of the CJ's between the two games - there is no contest from SC2013.

My pick would be to release the source code for SC4.

Maxis didnt learn anything from Montecristo. CitiesXL got the same wrong approach to the simulation. Again trying to change the singleplayer in a shared social platform, forgetting that simcity is mainly a standalone experience.

Please tell me you're joking right?... Visually speaking the new game looks absolutely awful as everything is too bright and plastic looking. There is far too much grass placed around the larger buildings, too little texturing and the tilt-shift makes it look like a kiddies fisher-price playset.

 

3D is overrated, I'll take the realistic looking 2.5D of SC4 any day, just compare the beauty of the CJ's between the two games - there is no contest from SC2013.

 

I couldn't disagree more. The details remain pretty good when zooming in, which is something I can't say for SC4. Though at the time of it' launch, SC4 graphics were good. As I mentioned, friends who don't even play the game noticed how nice the graphics (for SC2013) were when they saw it on my screen.

Fancy graphics are fine if that's all you want with a simplistic "game", but this is a travesty.  They tried to reboot the franchise, and I guess they were successful with some new players or those who want 3D or bust, damnit!

 

There are too many conditions attached to this little darling, let alone the general poor performance compared to SC4.

 

From the last commentary, I guess they have a success with their new "community".

 

Fancy graphics, however, and tiny universes of discourse do not make a "SimCity" anything.  Anyone who shoves money at them for this mess is welcome to purchase this nice land I have for sale in the middle of the Florida Everglades.

The truth is, Simcity 2013 was not a success money maker for EA otherwise they would not be canvassing our input. This means they are listening. So here's my input EA.

 

Offline mode is a really good first step to making the game better, the second step is to increase the city size considerably. If those 2 criteria are met and they work flawlessly then I would purchase the game.

 

Come on EA, you have millions of capitivated and loyal SIMCITY players that you can cash in on if you give us what we want. We are only asking for the same formula that made SC4 and the older versions so popular and fun to play.

 

Customization=Creativity=Fun

 

Please tell me you're joking right?... Visually speaking the new game looks absolutely awful as everything is too bright and plastic looking. There is far too much grass placed around the larger buildings, too little texturing and the tilt-shift makes it look like a kiddies fisher-price playset.

 

3D is overrated, I'll take the realistic looking 2.5D of SC4 any day, just compare the beauty of the CJ's between the two games - there is no contest from SC2013.

 

I couldn't disagree more. The details remain pretty good when zooming in, which is something I can't say for SC4. Though at the time of it' launch, SC4 graphics were good. As I mentioned, friends who don't even play the game noticed how nice the graphics (for SC2013) were when they saw it on my screen.

 

 

Hello sir. I beg to differ. 

 

Pictures by OlScare / Benoit: 

 

 

 

 

 

Now... I know what you are thinking: But, all of that is custom content!  

 

Look at this picture: 4 default Maxis buildings in the top picture. Look at the attention to detail. 

 

Picture by paeng:

 

 

 

Please tell me you're joking right?... Visually speaking the new game looks absolutely awful as everything is too bright and plastic looking. There is far too much grass placed around the larger buildings, too little texturing and the tilt-shift makes it look like a kiddies fisher-price playset.

 

3D is overrated, I'll take the realistic looking 2.5D of SC4 any day, just compare the beauty of the CJ's between the two games - there is no contest from SC2013.

 

I couldn't disagree more. The details remain pretty good when zooming in, which is something I can't say for SC4. Though at the time of it' launch, SC4 graphics were good. As I mentioned, friends who don't even play the game noticed how nice the graphics (for SC2013) were when they saw it on my screen.

 

 

Hello sir. I beg to differ. 

 

Pictures by OlScare / Benoit: 

 

 

 

 

 

Now... I know what you are thinking: But, all of that is custom content!  

 

Look at this picture: 4 default Maxis buildings in the top picture. Look at the attention to detail. 

 

 

 

Please tell me you're joking right?... Visually speaking the new game looks absolutely awful as everything is too bright and plastic looking. There is far too much grass placed around the larger buildings, too little texturing and the tilt-shift makes it look like a kiddies fisher-price playset.

 

3D is overrated, I'll take the realistic looking 2.5D of SC4 any day, just compare the beauty of the CJ's between the two games - there is no contest from SC2013.

 

I couldn't disagree more. The details remain pretty good when zooming in, which is something I can't say for SC4. Though at the time of it' launch, SC4 graphics were good. As I mentioned, friends who don't even play the game noticed how nice the graphics (for SC2013) were when they saw it on my screen.

I think most of the complaints about SC2013 are the cartoonish graphics.

Offline mode is a really good first step to making the game better, the second step is to increase the city size considerably. If those 2 criteria are met and they work flawlessly then I would purchase the game.

 

No disrespect, but this again looks like another ask for SimCity 2013 to be SC4. I agree with you on the city size thing, but couldn't disagree more on offline mode. I'm pretty happy my cities are still there when I have to restart the computer, or when the game crashes. You can see on this site how many people have lost cities in SC4.

The main objection to the save system in SimCity is you only get one slot, and there is no way to copy your saved city as a backup.

 

As for losing cities in SC4, the only way that ordinarily happens is when the player has ants in his pants and switches away from the game before a save completes. 

 

Insufficiencies in NTFS are another possibility, but that is inexperience on the part of the user.

 

No matter how you look at it, using a computer is not the same as using a home appliance.  Some knowledge is required besides button pushing and screen touching. 

 

Most users these days are not really prepared for a multi-programming, multi-processing environment supplied (unbeknownst usually) in modern PCs.

 

With NTFS disks, disk maintenance is required about once a week, and nobody bothers to mention that ordinarily.

I think most of the complaints about SC2013 are the cartoonish graphics.

That was my main put-off, but it's still a majorily flawed game for the reasons that have already been discussed at length.

 

 

Offline mode is a really good first step to making the game better, the second step is to increase the city size considerably. If those 2 criteria are met and they work flawlessly then I would purchase the game.

 

No disrespect, but this again looks like another ask for SimCity 2013 to be SC4. I agree with you on the city size thing, but couldn't disagree more on offline mode. I'm pretty happy my cities are still there when I have to restart the computer, or when the game crashes. You can see on this site how many people have lost cities in SC4.

 

That's why you should backup your cities every once and a while, also if the game crashes (which mine almost never does anymore) and corrupts a city it should save a copy of that city under a folder in your My Documents/Simcity 4 directory. The cloud's main problem is that you cannot experiment without making perminant changes, or play when your internet (or ISP) is playing up or slow.

Backups should always be local and to an external medium.  I use a free-standing HDD.

 

The "cloud" is controlled by someone else, often unknown to you.  Such trust is not in me.

the guys stating they are ok without offline mode are kidding right? You know one of the most fun things in SC is to destoy it with disasters completely when its not doing what you wanted and then just reload it. The cloud ruined that completely! And as for the crash save feature. Word has a backup system for documents, i'm sure that can also be used in games and afaik some actually have it like Black&White2 actually, autosave in the background every 2 mins.

And lastly, good that they finally do something but.. I dont think this is what tipped them of. EVER comment or picture posted on FB has tleast 1 person say "BIGGER MAPS" "Lacking bigger maps" best one today: "In before comments on bigger maps!!... of $%&^! too late" They know, they just dont care, they want money.