Spinmaster

Originally posted by: elle_driver I think they meant they were talking about why they didn't call it Sim City 5, not necessarily that it isn't Sim City 5...quote> That's what I thought too. Unless it flops I don't think there will be a "next iteration" that isn't based on SC:S. I'd so love to be wrong about this, but I haven't seen anything to give any official hope EA's even thinking about making another "realistic urban simulation" - they seem to think SC:S is it.

Originally posted by: drevilshenchman Originally posted by: Gridlock Il buy it simply for what it is , its the 5th sim city , so i will end up a guinea pig whether i want to be one or not.quote> exactly why I will tooquote> That's exactly why I won't. If it surprises the "realistic urban simulation" fans, including me, then sure, I'll buy it too. If not, then the only hope for a return to a true sequel lies with how many people deliberately avoid SC:S. If EA sees a lot of people who hate it but buy it anyway, then why make a separate, true sequel for them? Even if it is a smaller % of the overall market, it would still make decent profit... but why bother, if they can make their profit even off the backs of people that claim to hate the product's new direction? They won't be making it off mine, unless that surprise does come along. I'm not holding my breath about that though. Eh, this would've been so much easier if they had just said it was a new track, a parallel idea, but not intended to be the extension to the legacy. Some people would still hate it, sure, but I know I for one would probably buy it, if it gets good reviews, and I certainly wouldn't feel like I've been ignored by EA, they just had a new idea and they're trying it out... great, maybe I'll like it, but I still also want my realistic urban simulation. But as long as they keep telling me it's the new way-of-things for the SC line, I think I'd rather burn my $ on CL. Oh I wouldn't give up SC4 for anything, this is not an "I give up" post by any means. I'm just saying if I must try "something different" SC:S won't be my first choice. I know a lot of folks think CL stunk, but.. it was their first attempt, and it doesn't seem to be "all that bad" from what I have seen and read. With support, I can imagine CL2 might help to fill the void EA is intentionally leaving behind. I'm sure they've been listening to their CL fans about what they got right & wrong on their first try. And I wouldn't be surprised if they're watching us, too.

From what I've seen, there seems to be even split on this. 3D but realistically willing to sacrifice some detail for it? Or keep detail, but accept that it cannot be done practically in full 3D (yet)... so stay 2.5? It is a tough dilemma. Me, I'm not gung-ho that it must become 3D unless it can be done well - i.e. I accept some detail must be sacrificed to do it, but too much, and no thanks. But I don't mind it staying 2.5 as it is, either. So long as they don't change the foundation of the game itself, I'm not terribly worried about the graphics (provided they don't take a quantum leap backwards either). Oh wait, they are changing the foundation of the game, huh?

Ok, what did I miss? A good fight? Dang, I always seem to miss them. Wait, what the heck am I saying? I don't know what the fighting is or was about, and I don't care. But let's see if my $.02 story helps at all. I've been wanting to say "why I'm here and why I wasn't before" for a while, but wasn't sure where... but this thread somehow seems like the perfect place for it, so here goes. I bought and played SimCity 4 back in 2003. Ok, the dirty truth - at first, I didn't buy it. Yep, a bastard was I, and still a tad ashamed , I am. But I didn't regret it at the time because a) it was the vanilla, and was seriously lacking stuff, b) I hadn't discovered (due to laziness) that there were sites like ST providing a vast wealth of add-on stuff to make up for it... so c) I played it for a few days and gave up. I hate paying $40 ~ $50 for something I don't end up using, and it's not like you get a "satisfaction guarantee" with almost any software, let alone games. Then Rush Hour came out. I didn't buy it - I bought the Deluxe, figuring "what the heck, why not get fully legitimate? Not like I'm broke or anything." I loved it, it added so much to the vanilla, played it for about 2 months, almost got fired at work more than once, and then... "now what?" hit me. Then I found ST. Wow... but I was already at my "now what?" phase with SC4, and didn't really spend much time to see what else this place had to offer. I can't even say I was lurking at that point, I just dropped interest in SC. Fast-forward to November 2006. Dunno what it was, but something bit me in the [pick a place] to check out SC4 again. Not to get into, just a reminiscing-session, install it, fool around until I get sick of it again, not expecting that to be more than a few days, and then I'm done with it. As a similar whim, I thought "I wonder what ever became of that Simtropolis site. Probably dead by now. Most sites like that pack up after a few years, fighting, lack of support, flooded by childish garbage and spam, any number of reasons, but I'm sure it's on its last legs if it even still exists. Well I'll look just for the heck of it." To my delight, I was very very wrong. This site has only gotten stronger and stronger over the years, and I don't see it going anywhere any time soon. I dunno what the fighting is about, and I don't care. People disagree about things all the time. There's a lot of passionate disagreement about SC:S right now, I'll withhold my own opinion on it here, as it's not the point of this thread in the first place. But what has kept this site so strong for so long is a level of maturity not often seen on any fan-based community like this. "I disagree with you whole-heartedly" is usually considered acceptable unless someone's had a really bad day. "You're a dumb-ass" is not, and there's never an excuse for it. I rarely see the latter here, unlike most every other game-fan-based site. That's why I've become increasingly active in the past 7 months. I was holding my piece(s) for a while because I was in a little dilemma... get good at SC4 when SC5 might be around the corner? Eh... I'm over that dilemma (again, nevermind how for now). I'm staying. I like it here. I like all of you. Even when things do get heated from time to time. Disputes are normal and healthy. Just please be careful how you conduct them. There is a fine line between passionate disagreements and hateful slander. I rarely see the latter, but I've a hunch that played a role in this thread's creation. To those responsible, please for the love of [insert favorite deity], don't ruin this place with fighting. Disagree all you want, and stand your ground if you feel the need, but watch out closely for that line, and try not to cross it. I've noticed a lot of folks similar to my own situation here lately. Long-time lurkers becoming more active, newcomers excited that they finally found a pseudo-home for their SC dreams, and even veterans returning from long absences. I'll bet the number of countries represented at ST alone outnumbers the unrepresented ones by a long-shot. There's a reason this site continues to draw new people in every day, from all around the world, brings some folks out of the dark corners, and even beckon back many old-timers who, for whatever reason, just had to go away for a while. As for "site wars" I don't understand that viewpoint at all from anyone who's taken even just a few minutes to poke around the different sites. I see a few symbiotic sites, such as SC4Devotion and Simpegasus, and a couple others. All excellent sites, but certainly neither in any form of "war" with this one nor each other, far as I can tell. I'm honestly not sure if any one of these sites (including ST) could stand on their own, they've each contributed (content and information) - and still do - a great deal to to the entire SC community and to each other. I don't see any of the SC fan sites competing with each other on any level, and most seem to partner together to bring the vast wealth of custom content and information to the entire SC world. That is the equation that has worked so well and kept ST, and the entire community, strong for so long. Partnering, not competing. If there are some sites that do "compete," well.. I haven't found one, so I'm guessing they're not doing very well. Some members have more affinity to one site versus another, usually for purely innocuous reasons, but it's never appeared to me that there was any "we're better than you" attitude from any of them regarding another site or even other members of other sites. Overall I see something very unique in the gaming world here, a whole community of multiple fan-based sites, all with intelligent rational members who truly support not just the sites, but each other, even when they do disagree vehemently. And all the sites seem to support each other. Some folks live in different houses, but it's all one very nice, friendly neighborhood. Please everyone, try to keep it this way. I like it here. (Dang... I had no idea how long this had gotten!!! Sorry!!! )

Originally posted by: bbfan02 I installed a version called: "Simcity 4 Deluxe Version" Does that include Rush Hour?quote> Yes. Is NAM installing to C:\Documents and Settings\<your-name>\My Documents\SimCity 4\Plugins ... ? It almost sounds like SC simply isn't finding your NAM files. SC assumes to use the current user's My Documents\SimCity 4\Plugins for all plug-ins. One other thing to consider. If you already have other plug-ins, especially any transit-related ones, take extra care to read the documentation in NAM about removing potentially-conflicting ones and follow those instructions carefully. ( Also... - please don't double-post i.e. post a separate reply immediately after your own. If the last post is yours, and you have something to add to it, use the Edit button and append to your post, rather than essentially reply to yourself. )

Originally posted by: SWAT-MEDIC you cant see the files, and you have to make the roundabout your self., the way to do that is make a circle with the road tool or anyother road tool, and then it will automaticaly make a roundabout for you. You can place fillers and stuff, good luck, pm me if that doesn't work!!!quote> Actually the avenue roundabouts are plop-pieces, but they do have to be selected when installing NAM (I don't remember if they're selected by default or not). For the other roundabouts, yes you just draw them. Streets & Roads make 2x2 roundabouts, no space to fill. One-way roads make 3x3 roundabouts with 1 empty tile in the middle, nice place for a piece of scenery (and there are some plug-ins made specifically for these roundabouts i.e. actual "round" things). Consider opiq's suggestion about potentially-conflicting plug-ins as well though, if you're sure you did select the avenue roundabout pieces when you installed NAM.

NAM

Originally posted by: WaiSech So I'm pretty much screwed, eh? Fine...not much point downloading BATs if you can't really use them in the night. I'm done with this game.quote> Well that attitude ain't gonna help you with much, nevermind games. All you have to do is register your legally-purchased (right?) game on the official site - takes only a few minutes and costs nothing extra. If you can't do that right now (let's just say "for whatever reason") ... it's not an expensive item these days, you can probably pick it up for under $30 (I've seen some reports saying under $20) and register on the site. Not many things provide so much entertainment for so long for such a low price. If you're feeling "screwed" ... well all I can say is, nobody here is doing it, so....

Originally posted by: Meastro444... you know what we have seen? graphics only, nothing elsequote> Umm... actually we also saw several statements from EA and TM, both stating that they're basically taking away the things most of us love about SC4 in favor of features we never cared about and most still don't, not at the cost of sacrificing the parts of the game we've grown to love. do you know how it will play? as much as i do!quote> I don't know how Doom 4 would play without all those guns, either... but I'm pretty darn sure I wouldn't like it. Not as a sequel. A separate game track with a "Doom-like theme" to it? Maybe. But Doom 4 itself? Uhh... no. Just... no. (Might be fun to use a BFG on one of those gingerbread houses though.) Same thing with SC:S. Take out what I enjoy about the entire series? That's all I need to know. SC:S as a separate game that doesn't abandon the hope of a true realistic urban simulation to succeed SC4? Great, I might try it, probably would. This is the new direction for the series as a whole? No. Just... no.

I've followed most of the threads, and even put my 2 cents in several of them. I think there's misconception that a majority even here flat-out hate the game. A few do, and a few certainly have gone too far - and still do to some extent - with their disdain for it. But from what I gather, most folks don't seem to hate SCS, they just don't accept the notion that it is or should be a "Sim City" sequel. For the moment I'm ignoring all the posts for and against the graphics. 1) I actually think they look pretty good and I realistically understand some degree of detail must be sacrificed to go full 3D ... some are ok with this, some not. 2) while a few do seem hell-bent on damning the graphics, the graphics hardly seem to be the core of discontent from most of the posts I've read. The focus of discontent is this: Sim City original: "ooooo... I can build a city"Sim City 2000: "ooooo.... look at all the new things I can do to build a city" Sim City 3000: "ooooo.... look at all the new things I can do to build a city" Sim City 4: "ooooo.... look at all the new things I can do to build a city" . Sim City Societies: "ummm... ok great, I now have to care how my people feel about each other, sounds interesting... but I have to give up all those things I like to use to build a city?"quote> I'm not trying to represent anyone in this post, not even myself. It's just the facts of the progression of this game over the last 18 years... until now. And that last part about SC:S is paraphrasing (with bias, admittedly, but I don't think I'm stretching it much) EA's and TM's own statements - that they're, by their own statements, taking out a lot of the "micromanagement" features and other aspects - things that were progressively added to each sequel in the line. The focus of the series has always been on building the city, until now. Interesting you chose a famous artist for your member name. A lot of the long-timers, and even the committed newbies here, regard their SC experiences almost like art. They're quite understandably upset that EA, while giving them a nice new canvas and a bright new studio, is taking away most of their favorite brushes and replacing them with crayons.

Originally posted by: bosiydid I also hate everything I've seen and heard up 'till now. This game has been gutted of all things that made SimCity, SimCity. Shame on EA, this is an abomination! This game smacks of Roller Coaster Tycoon.quote> Except with RCT3, at least you were still focused on building your dream amusement park. Granted, it was plagued with problems initially, especially performance and some hair-tearing bugs, limiting you to a dozen or so rides at best ... most of which were fixed, though still the game takes serious hardware, which is understandable considering its complexity. And the variety of rides and scenery was abysmal at first, compared with its predecessors. But the focus of the game did not change. I bought RCT3. And I still enjoy it from time to time. If they put out another expansion pack (unlikely, it's been what, almost 2 years since the last one?) I'd buy it. And if they make an RCT4, I'm reasonably confident I'd buy it, provided they don't change the fundamental reason for the game's existence. With SCS, that's exactly what EA appears to be doing. I wouldn't go so far as to call SCS an abomination unto itself though. It does look entertaining - on its own. But if EA keeps saying it is a true sequel to SimCity - then that is the abomination, to me, and they can forget about my $$$.

Looks like Trolca's ... it's not part of the NAM at all (nor is pegagus' MTP). Even the ANT in the NAM, without the rural highway add-on, only draws what appears to be a normal-looking black-top road. No idea if it's functional at that point or not, as I've only ever used it for a) making smooth slopes with a slope mod that uses it or b) the rural highway add-on. But it certainly isn't dirt. Two suggestions: 1) with Trolca's mod, the dirt roads get replaced with regular paved streets if you put almost any RCI development (except agriculture) or eye-candy alongside it (e.g. flowers, ploppable trees, parks, fences, etc...). They stay dirt if: a) they touch agricultural zones, b) they don't touch anything at all (no zones, no park pieces, no power lines.. literally nothing), and c) IF you put the "also in R$" part of Trolca's mod AND they touch R$ (and d) occasionally with some commercial areas, but you'll usually want black-top roads around those anyway (this is the bug sc4portugal mentioned). With this knowledge, you can (usually) easily keep the dirt roads where you do like them, and force them to reappear as paved streets where you don't. Also, you can simply replace any true offenders with the regular black-top roads, if all else fails. I also hated this mod at first, until I learned how to easily control where the streets appear as dirt and where they don't. Now, I love them - they add a lot of realism in the right places. If anything, my only complaint is that I cannot put any rural-looking fences alongside them without them changing to paved - I like rural fences along my dirt roads. (Can anyone suggest fences that do work with the dirt roads? ) 2) If you still really really don't want them at all - delete the plug-ins for them. Again, I'm 99% sure you have Trolca's Street Mod. If you can't find the plug-in files on your computer, re-download the package for a reference to find and remove the files from your plug-ins. You may have to bulldoze and re-draw the offending streets though, for the default street-textures to appear.

1) The short answer is "no." But the real answer is "sort of." Demand and occupancy in a neighboring city does influence demand in the city you're currently playing with. If for example there was high CO$$$ demand in your neighbor city, it's effectively transferred to your current city, and you'll see CO$$$ sprout up like weeds if you zone for it and provide its needs. Meanwhile, the game interpolates some demand in your current city being satisfied by the neighbor, if there is enough undeveloped capacity in it (e.g. undeveloped zones, low-stage development, etc...). But if you then load up that neighbor, you won't see any new development immediately, no new buildings or anything... as if it was "frozen in time." You may see the same affect happen in that city though, and you will see the demand graphs change immediately, and new development spring up based on what you did in the other city, which is now "the neighbor" - rapid development stemming from the additional demand created by development in the other city (if any), while that city is now frozen in time. 2) I feel i need to use most of the space to meet demand.quote>Yes ... but in order to meet that demand, some of that space must indeed remain empty or filled in with parks, trees, etc..., to deal with issues such as pollution, traffic noise, congested networks, etc... not to mention managing desirability - people love wide-open parks. How spread-out you want things is pretty much up to you in the end. Some people like sardine-city with all high-density condos and skyscrapers, some enjoy rural boonies-like villages, some prefer sprawling low/medium-density suburbs... some like it all. As to what model is more realistic .. they all are. Some cities, you go half a mile outside it and you'd swear you're the only living person on the planet. Others, you can go 200 miles before seeing a single open field. It's really up to you as to how you want your city/region to develop. This is the beauty of SC4 - it really is your game... set your own goal and go for it!!

I love SCS as a new game with a new direction - and I think the screenshots are great, for a new game experience. But I don't like it as an intended sequel which takes away the very things I enjoy about SimCity (all prior versions) in the first place. If I want to build societies, then I'll buy and play SCS. And maybe I will want to, it does sound interesting, yes. But I also want to build cities without really thinking much about what moods my people are in. I've done this with SC classic through SC4, and I still enjoy it as strongly as ever. For the life of me, I don't understand why the two concepts have to be in competition with each other, with the new idea literally throwing the old tried-and-true experience in the trash. A city forms around and grows with the societies within it, true. But societies also form within and are influenced by cities they're in. Which one do I want to pay attention to? Which one is my goal, a nice city with "whatever" society happens to grow in it? Or do I want a special type of society, and I'm willing to sacrifice my desires for the city to satisfy the specific cultural needs of my desired society? It's a chicken-vs-egg paradox. But I don't care which came first - I like chicken, and I like eggs. I would enjoy TWO games, to allow me to focus on either angle. Or if a single game can provide game-play from both angles - by NOT taking away the "complex micromanagement" tools I enjoy (and call "a wonderful array of options") - then even better, and I'd probably enjoy that immensely. But if I'm forced to choose between "build a society" with no realistic city-management tools vs. "build a city" and to heck with society ... I choose the latter. If they'd market it as a new track, in parallel with the legend, and a true sequel focused on realistic city building is at least on the horizon somewhere, I'll probably buy SCS. But I won't support SCS' success with my $$$ if indeed they continue to push it as THE sequel. If as a sequel it's a smash, then pretty much all hope of SC returning to (or reincorporating with) the realistic micromanagement aspects I enjoy will pretty much die - until some competitor (old or new) fills the void EA is creating, themselves, by this shift. This is not hate. I wish TM and EA success. I just have no intention of assisting so long as they ignore my desires. I know they don't have to, but... I don't have to buy the product, either.

You should also register with the main site and get the official updates as well. In particular: * the official patch * two "buildings as props" packs (both on the Lot Editor page, Cool Stuff -> Tools -> Lot Editor; you don't need the LE itself unless you want to make your own plug-ins, but the two "building as props" items, you do need) * this one I'm not sharp on, but there's also an official update re: lights on BAT-created plugins; I think it's part of the BAT Update (which means you do have to download and install the BAT and its update).. I'm not 100% sure about this, I did "something like this" a long time ago and haven't questioned it since These updates are required for many/most of the plug-ins here in the STEX. Plus you'll likely need to go to the official site for at least some of the official landmarks as well; many plug-ins depend on one or more official landmarks (usually this is specified in the readme). You don't have to get all the landmarks, just the ones you like and whatever a STEX plug-in specifies, but you do need to be registered on that main site to get them. (p.s. has anyone gotten bullet-lists to work in this reply box? I get a different wrong result every time I try)

Originally posted by: DOXXP29 I think Vgcpapa put it very well and summed up my thoughts about the next version. I'd like to see some social dimensions ADDED to the existing game in a logical manner. It would make the game more interesting for me as long as it didn't get too ridiculous or overwhelming. However, adding the social element at the expense of removing or minimizing other existing game elements is something I definitely do NOT want! I'm much more interested in the city planning, infrastructure, growth, etc. than I am in extraneous social issues. Then there's always a bit of concern that if politics and social dimensions are introduced, there's always the possibility that the citizens might revolt and vote me out as mayor!quote> My short reply to that: ditto. Add culture & societal factors to the game? Great - that IS something that has been missing since the beginning. I plan and build my cities, and the people take on a culture that is either desirable or not depending on what I wanted. I can see this being a very interesting component that has indeed been lacking since the original SimCity. But the key is "I plan and build my cities." Not plan and build the societies. Actually, the sims build most of the city, the RCI parts, which is currently the only true reward - do they help me build the kind of city I hoped for or not? But they don't currently, and never did, develop any true culture based on that city. I can definitely see having some cultural aspects added to supplement that. But I don't want the focus changed to that. This is why I keep saying, I wish they'd extend SimCity rather than change its foundation. Give me the city management, including all the complex micromanagement (or as SC fans would say, "wonderful array of options"), which I've enjoyed the past 20 years. Add the cultural & societal affects, add some intelligence so the "too complex" features can be optionally handled by the game instead of the player; so new or casual players can use them but realistic-simulation fans don't have to. This would actually make things more realistic - the mayor does not wear all the hats in most cities, the "advisers" (council, commissioners, directors, etc...) in fact do most of the management, he/she just makes the big yes/no decisions and manages the city as one overall unit. Maybe I like planning exactly where every bus stop should go. Or maybe, I want someone else to figure that out for me and just ask "shall we do this?" and let me approve or veto it and put my own. Or maybe I say yes, but then destroy/move some of the stops I disagree with. The people can respond to my management of the city and my "people" - via a true society which develops in response to my actions (or inactions), and I get a city full of well-behaved citizens or just a bunch of criminal pinheads. And if I've done a truly horrible job and they do revolt and vote me out... ok, I can accept that as an added feature, right now bankruptcy is the only way to really lose. But the key remains: let me focus, with all the existing options and more, on building and managing the city; let the sims themselves develop their society in response. Reward me with something more than a Mayor Rating, but an actual society that develops based on what I've done. That, I would enjoy tremendously, but not if I lose the tools I need to build the city.

Altering the EXE is ILLEGAL... but what if we do not alter and only analyze the code? That way when reimplementing our own code....quote> This is actually the primary reason for the "do not disassemble" clause in most EULA's. They're not so much worried about someone altering the executable, as they are about someone using their own code, algorithms, etc... - read "trade secrets" - to essentially build a competing product (or disclosing said secrets such that an existing competitor can use it to their advantage for the same purpose). Even if the end result is "free" it's still competition. Consider the very premise of this thread: to build our own alternative to SCS... so we don't have to buy SCS, whether "Simtropolis 1000" becomes freeware, shareware, or a full-blown commercial product. If this project succeeds, many of us may buy SCS anyway under the premise that it's a "different game" anyway, but many simply don't want the "different game" in the first place, and thus won't buy it if they have an alternative (and some won't buy it at all, in protest... I think I'm of those, but I haven't finished mulling it over yet). But... I ain't no party-pooper. I do see the exe being useful, but in a legal way (I think). What about using the existing code to tag-in with our own? No changes to the existing exe, no blatant using of its code in this project, both of which would violate the EULA. You can probably get away with simply looking at it to get your own ideas, just watch that fine line between "learning something" and "plagiarizing." Instead, building an additional module which uses the existing exe as a base and extends some (possibly a lot) of its functionality. You launch the "new" game, it loads the existing exe, using the best parts of the existing SC4 et al (thus avoiding the "reinventing the wheel" syndrome for functions that are already good), while overriding and enhancing the functionality we want. e.g. override the graphics engine for the 3D concept, if it can be done practically, adding and enhancing networks, a new grid system, customizable menu features, the pathfinding.... oh wait, isn't this effectively what mods are doing anyway? Except the mods are taking advantage of existing tags in the code, exposed for the purpose of overriding. Many features don't have such tags, hence why they cannot be overridden by mods. I'm not sure how practical this is. I mean, if 95% of the existing code ends up overridden then we didn't really save anything. But... has there been serious consideration of this option? (I'm not asking in any form of sarcastic tone, just floating the idea and wondering if anyone discussed it yet; I honestly haven't read every single post in this 16-page thread yet ).

Originally posted by: King Daily What should I do if I have more jobs then people available and yet I still have a lot of unemployed people. As a side note I used the Super Demand mod. So I have about 16,000 C/I jobs and about 14,000 people. I hate when this happens!quote> Patient: "Hey doctor, it hurts when I do this."Doctor: "Then don't do that."quote> The Super Demand mod is basically a "cheat." Not that cheats are bad mind you, to each their own. Some "cheats" are simply necessary, if you prefer not to deal with some aspect of the game that otherwise prevents you from enjoying it. But that one's purpose is to ignore carefully (some would say "tediously") balanced demand in favor of rapid, unrealistic and unmanaged growth of RCI growable buildings. But if you don't like its results...stop using it. (beware though: the very nature of that mod means, taking it away after building a city = massive negative demand and widespread abandonment in response to buildings your sims aren't naturally ready for and can't use; in this case, it may indeed be better to just obliterate it, you'll probably end up bulldozing 90% of it anyway if you take that mod off now).

Skyfire2275: None of my cities have 500.000 inhabitants! The highest nr. of inhabitants I have is 300.000 and I have loads of skyscrapers!quote> Skyfire means regional population. That could be all in one city, or divided between a few, but regional population is what drives the stage caps. lliane777: also, you have to zone high-density. Take care you have a good population though. It's true that, at as little as 40,000 sims you could get a skyscraper. But skyscrapers have thousands of residents/jobs - and suck up R and C demand fast. If you have 500,000+ people, that's good. If you only have 40,000, your demand could tank if too many skyscrapers pop up at the same time... then you can enjoy a lesson many others learned the hard way (including me): it is possible to satisfy demand too much, too fast. Morale: when you're ready, zone high-density... but slowly. One or two blocks at a time, let 'em develop and settle in for a month or two game-time, check your demand graphs, make sure you still have demand before you zone another block. (You can rezone existing areas to higher densities without affecting the existing buildings).

Originally posted by: Pixelrage Originally posted by: crushedcar it stops SC4's annoying trick of replacing all low wealth areas with high wealth ones.quote> this was an issue that EA/Maxis should have patched for SC4, along with bug fixes. It could have simply been a tweak in game rules...quote> In fact, there are mods for that on STEX, or at least one that I know of (Less Abandonment Mod). I think there are others as well. We don't need that fixed, someone already fixed it. We just don't need it un-fixed either.

Originally posted by: aaaaa From information posted above and other postings of Simtropolis and Tilted Mills forum site, I guess that SimCity : Societies is NOT THE sequal of SimCIty 4. SimCity : Societies is just new spin-off game of popular SimCity series. The SCS game described above shares virtualy no resemblance or commonality with SimCity series as we know it except that it bears SimCity in its name, belongs same city simulation genre (but with complete different focus), and published by same publisher (E.A.). EA may hope to milk some extra money from their prestigious SimCity name brand. I can not find any indication that SCS is the sequal of SimCity 4 in the words from EA or TM regarding SCS. They deliberately avoid using word SimCity5 or sequal, and call it specifically "SimCity Society". So, we have absolutely no reason to feel sorry about SCS, TM or EA, We should better to welcome and embrace SCS as new cousin of our loving SimCity family. With some luck, the game may turn out to be as well-made and enjoyable as SimCity series. I also hope and guess that EA/Maxis will announce real successor of SimCity 4 within a couple of years. Please, be patient until the day come. quote> I still pray this is true, but there has been no evidence of this from TM or EA themselves. And don't tell me contractual obligations would prevent someone from clarifying, is this a sequel or another branch? If they tell me it's a "different game" and another true Sim City will come along to continue the legacy, sure... I'll try Sim City: Societies. I don't think anyone here is necessarily mad if they make a new game similar to Sim City, even borrowing some of its name recognition, so long as they don't say "it IS Sim City, but not really." Some will still refuse, but only because it's just simply not their bag. Me, I'll likely try it, and I'm sure plenty of other folks would, too. But don't tell me it's IS Sim City. That's the part pissing me and a lot of folks off, and there's no chance I'll buy it in that case. None. They could sooooo save face and make their precious $$ (and that is not a complaint, to me - EA is a business, so to all you "they just want money" whiners... damn straight they do, and why shouldn't they?) by just clarifying this. Tell me this is a different game, a real true sequel to Sim City will come later (with things added, nothing taken away), and I'll try SCS and patiently await the next Sim City. Tell me SCS is the next full Sim City, and I'll continue telling you what you can do with it. Sorry if that sounds rude, but telling a massive veteran fan base with nearly 20 years experience with the franchise to "just swallow the blue pill" ... well that's not exactly cordial, either.

Mr Beebe, Mr Beatrice, and everyone else at TM and EA: I want Sim City Societies to succeed. I really really do. a) Many people do like to plop everything. Most of them get bored fast. The only reward in 100% plopping is making exactly what you want. But you made it. Nobody rewarded you with it. Some people like that. I'm not one of them, and from most accounts here, I'm in the majority. Part of the enduring charm of the game is plopping some things to influence inspired growth. It is very satisfying when a player-mayor creates a little paradise or ghetto with parks and other mayor-chosen buildings, and then watches the people decide to build something amazing. If I want a beautiful mansion, I can plop it. I'm already bored just saying that. I want to make a nice area and watch the sims appreciate my work by building a beautiful mansion, or towering skyscraper, or even a nasty filth-belching factory, if that's what I was going for. And this is part of the realism - City Hall makes big decisions about civic buildings, transportation, etc... The people build what they want based on what the city heads allow, and what services and amenities are provided. Build a ghetto, get tenements and trailer parks. Make a paradise, watch the sims thank you with beautiful condos and mansions. THAT is its own reward, and it's very satisfying. By taking away zones and making us plop everything ourselves... Leggos would keep my interest longer, I think. Allow it? Sure - as I said, some enjoy that. Make that the core of the game? Good lord, please no. b) Dunno about this, I will say the graphics are clearly more stunning than CL. Anyway I don't like to complain by comparing two games. Sim City is Sim City. City Life might actually be excellent for all I know, so long as I don't approach it expecting a Sim City type game. But there's the problem with SCS: with the next officially-titled "Sim City" game, I am expecting a Sim City type game. So is everyone else who enjoys it today. Even the ones that don't play because it's "too complex" - they still wish they could handle it. c) Some people like a game you can "win." Sim City is not nor ever was one of those games. It's a game of creation. As such, it's never the same game twice. Why? Because what you call "complexity" we call "options" and "features" and "choices." To a creative game-player, reducing his/her palette is simply intolerable. This is the key point being missed, I think. This is what a and b stem from (and why d is a concern as well). But - I understand the need to simplify things a bit. Question: instead of taking away the palette the veterans love (and by the way, veterans were new players once, too) and continue to love to this day, keeping even the oldest versions thriving for decades, have you considered simply adding some brushes? Some way to let the game "think for you" to handle the issues that are too complex to some, but still let those of us who actually like the micromanagement to continue it? Heck I'd love to have an advisor become a "director" and handle keeping my 50+ schools budgeted correctly. Some like doing that, I don't. But I do like other micromanagement features. Maybe another director proposes a new mass transit network, and I just say yes or veto it and build my own, or tell that director to leave me alone. This would make new players happy, and not take anything away from the vets. Putting "helpers" in would satisfy everyone, new and old, "just a fun game" and "realistic simulation" fans. Consider this, PLEASE. d) Nothing to refute here, I understand your necessary silence. I do feel the need to emphasize how important this issue is though, and why. Understandably, no development company can come up with so many varieties of buildings, parks, power plants, etc... all by their lonesome. A lot, sure... but there's a limit, and it's quite understandable. And asking the public for suggestions wouldn't work - you'll have way too many of them and have to disappoint 99% of them. Letting the public make their own (and also with a large palette) is crucial. The initial variety in SC4, frankly, wasn't great. But I'm not complaining, because there's 1000x more "stuff" made by skilled fans - exactly as it should be for something of this scale. Without the custom content, I would've given up Sim City years ago. Actually I did, before I rediscovered Simtropolis and all it had to offer, followed by several other sites. Note that it's not necessary to make customization duh-simple. Too simple will mean it's all garbage. Those with skills make incredible stuff. Me, I can't make a dern'd thing, and I know it - but I still love the game because of how much wonderful custom content there is from those who do possess the skills. Even crap, I appreciate, 1) because it's better than anything I made "I don't even have a piece of [crap], I have to envy [be grateful for] yours" 2) they tried, and often they succeed later, or inspire someone else to make something incredible. Nobody is taking SC4 away from you.quote> A-men to that. But I want you to inspire me to leave SC4 on my own, for a bigger better playground. You're not going to accomplish that by taking away the sand. I hope this isn't regarded as a flame, it's a serious wish, I WANT SIM CITY SOCIETIES TO SUCCEED. I want to want it. No - I want to need it. But if you take away an artist's brushes, he won't really care how much better the canvas is. If you do this with SCS, it will likely end up in the bargain bins within a year. I don't want that. But it's what happens any time the overall foundation of a game is taken away, and "the whole point" is essentially discarded. Imagine ID Software says "Doom 4 won't have so many guns." Or EA says "Madden 2008 won't make you deal with a play-clock." Do you honestly believe the fan-base will just swallow it?

SimCity won't die. SCS will be a painful scar on the series. It may be some time before a new true sequel appears, but if we all stick together (and make donations), ST will be around I think. It's actually good if SCS turns out to be a total disgrace - many more people will stay with SC4 and we'll have mutual support and new content for years to come. Yes, better would be if SCS somehow surprises us and IS truly a new Sim City, but that doesn't seem likely at all. I find nothing terrible about being "stuck with" SC4 for a good while longer. If we stick together and keep SC4 strong, despite the disgrace SCS brings, maybe EA will take note. "Gee, nobody is buying our new title, they're still playing the old one strong 5 years after we released it. Ooops." They do want our money. They won't get it with SCS, not all of it anyway. And even those who do buy SCS... well that doesn't mean they won't buy the next next sequel, and EA will know that. I don't think this series is going anywhere - unless WE give up on it. I don't plan to.

I don't blame EA. Are they putting this out for money? You betcha ... but why is that a problem? Hello, it's a business. Good for them, if they can make another buck. I don't blame TM. They are building a "new idea." For a new true sequel, it must be a completely new game, not just SimCity 4.5. It needed a fresh idea. And I'm sure TM could do fine job to make the real thing. I just don't think they have the right idea. I echo the sentiment, it's very disappointing that they're essentially going backwards to make this turn. Taking away things we love, rather than keep what we love and add what a newer audience may need. They're sacrificing the veterans, not listening to them. I don't think it was a conscious decision, but a colossal mistake and a bad business decision. The veterans know that the seemingly-overwhelming array of "complexities" we call "options" are what make the game so interesting years after its release. People are STILL buying SC4. Veterans aren't going to buy less than what they already have. The "newbies" will quickly get bored if it's whittled down to a kindergarten wooden-blocks type game. SimCity <anything> could be a blockbuster if it stayed true to its niche. But I see this thing in the bargain bin within a year. Maybe then I'll buy it, if I find enough spare change in my couch.