Jump to content
  Help ST with a Donation

Ryno917

Member
 View Profile  View All Activity

  • Content Count

    276

  • Joined

  • Last Visited

Everything posted by Ryno917

  1. Because of the resemblance to Toronto's streetcars I automatically hate it. Nice work! haha
  2. Oooo, happy to see my light pillars are getting some use! Good stuff! CS (with a few choice mods) really gives us some great freedom when it comes to making some huge airports.
  3. Great stuff! I, too, love reading your 'thinking out loud' stuff. Great insight!
  4. Absolutely fantastic! I bet the SC3K devs must be getting a little teary-eyed seeing so much love being put into this to bring their assets up to the modern times.
  5. Stunning work!
  6. Awesome, awesome stuff! Thanks for getting this rolling!
  7. Looks fantastic!
  8. Awesome!
  9. Great stuff! Loved the original, but this is even better!
  10. I really do have to commend you guys on your approach to DLC. Obviously I don't have the numbers to compare to other methods to see what is better from a financial perspective, but you guys definitely win out in a consumer loyalty perspective for that. Hands down. As for shouting loudly... Those. I want canals with real water, and I want mixed zoning. Every major city I've ever been to has residential above shops throughout a lot of the city. I think it's hugely important because the current high density commercial just makes absolutely no sense. Malls do not exist as high-rise towers with relatively small footprints. They just don't. Currently, though, we have to have that in our cities to satisfy demand. The better option would be for large ploppable malls that act as commercial, as well as shops in the first few floors of residential buildings. Thinking out loud, that could potentially be a new zone type - high density commercial/residential in one zone. That way we can still have pure residential towers as well as the mixed ones with full control.
  11. Yea, the only thing about this DLC/patch that I'm interested in is the trams (and, I guess, rain and fog could be cool if they look nice). I don't care about snow (especially as a separate biome), and the heating requirement just sounds like a pain in the arse more than an interesting gameplay feature.
  12. OT I know, but this surprises me. Your English is very good!
  13. Yes, but LRT is only one of many different methods of rail transport. While you could use it as the be-all and end-all for rail transport in the game, you'd be missing huge swathes of transport options, and therefore, doing that could be called lazy game design, too.
  14. Combining a bunch of different real world transportation methods into one can very easily be called lazy game design, too.
  15. I see noise pollution the same way you're describing, but the terminology bothers me. lol It should be something more generic. Even at that, though, I think the whole getting sick because you live next to an office is a ridiculous mechanic, regardless of what the cause or the terminology used is.
  16. That, again, is an anomaly. That is not common practice among most of the world's cities. And like I said - I would prefer it to be combined in the game as well, but the decision CO took is perfectly reasonable and logical given a look at the usual systems in the real world. By 'emulate reality' I'm talking about the execution of different forms of transportation. Obviously some concessions are made for gameplay and scale and the like, but my point still stands - in the real world, these networks are usually separate, so it's reasonable and logical that they would be in the game, too. As mentioned, though, I agree combining them would be a better option for gameplay, but what we have now is perfectly logical in its execution, regardless of being ideal or not. As for DLC - like it would be less work and easier to combine them all from the beginning, it would be less work to add in trams to an existing combined network as well. The fact that it comes later in DLC is neither here nor there. This case is actually more work from that perspective, too, since it requires coding a new network in addition to building new assets. If it were a combined network it would just be new assets and possibly a bit of new code to tie it in, not an entire new network.And from the economic perspective less work is more valuable, especially for a DLC pack where time in development is more crucial than pre-game-release. IRT the Rush Hour El-Rail to Subway, wasn't that essentially considered a 'station' where the elevated rail train would end its line, and a subway line would begin? The same method was used for the 'Big Dig' project where vehicle traffic would travel to the tunnel entrance (which was essentially a subway station) where the people in the cars would leave their vehicle and get on the subway. At the exit of the tunnel the opposite would happen. That's a different situation because the el-rail isn't then running underground, it's that the passengers change to a different travel method entirely. A similar 'solution' could be used in CS I'd think, but it is, of course, less than optimal. I'd imagine CS's agent-based simulation could make it more difficult, too.
  17. I absolutely agree that from a game design perspective that some rail networks could in fact be one network in the game, and the 'difference' comes in your choice of network setup and vehicle choice. But CO has taken the approach that SC always did to this: separate networks. And that choice is logical when you're trying to more or less emulate reality, because those networks are usually separate and distinct. The thought to combine them for simplicity may have never occurred to them at all, because they're not the same in real life. Their decision in this case is perfectly reasonable and logical, that's my point. I agree it would be better from a game design perspective to be combined though, for sure.

  18. Show us your airport.

    Ryno917 replied to mr.v's topic in Cities: Skylines Showcase

    I was curious so I browsed the website trying to find it. Interesting proposal, but I think it's a horrible inefficient use of land. There's probably a better way to negate cross-winds that making an airport 10x the size (and then only using a couple runways leaving the rest dormant). Interesting none-the-less, though.
  19. Not having a world-wide standard does not lead to a game considering everything to be the same. That's a giant leap in logic. It would be hugely beneficial if there was some kind of standard that applied in all situations and somehow managed to satisfy every eventuality, but the reality is that there isn't, and this game is aiming to simulate reality. In the real world, real interconnectivity is comparably rare - rare enough to be ignored. In the real world, full size rail, inter-town/city commuter rail, metro and tram networks are usually completely separate networks. Just because a tram can go underground doesn't mean it's the same as a metro. Just because a metro can operate above ground doesn't mean that it's the same as an inter-city train. They are very different forms of transportation with very different considerations and design criteria, and in choosing and designing these networks from the game CO has taken that real world precedent. CO hasn't added excess barriers - they've executed the work based on the majority of the precedent set in the real world. Not what you/I/we/the community wanted, maybe, but it's not really a lamentable decision - It's a perfectly logical and reasonable one for CO to have made.
  20. Because they are different networks in the vast majority of cases, with different standards. It's absolutely not an obvious move. That's the point.
  21. I read that about 1/4 was the sweet spot for this mod + time warp. I'm yet to try any of it myself, though.
  22. When I build my next city, I don't think I'm going to have any room left for the city part of it. I want to build a race track, a large airport, a large port and now you've gone and added a golf course to the list! Nice work!
  23. Because expecting to be able to do everything is completely unreasonable? The reality is that most current tram systems in the world operate completely separately from conventional train systems (and usually make use of completely different track gauges and guidelines), and as a result that is the logical method of implementation from the devs. It'd be cool to be able to replicate the kind of weird things shown in the last couple pages of this thread, but the reality is that those examples are anomalies. They are strange, and unusual - expecting the game (especially one built by a small team) to be able to replicate all of those kinds of things is kind of ridiculous, to be frank. That kind of stuff could possibly be taken care of by modding, if anyone wanted it bad enough.
  24. Great stuff!
  25. Agreed, that bollard is my favorite one!
×