GenXisT

How about a full-on do-over? Let's just forget 2013 even happened and try again for 2014. That's like the only plausible way of saving grace, imo.

What an absolute joke. I just got an email from the Sim City folks talking about an update. I then read thru the blog posted in this thread. "No larger city sizes" Verdict = FAIL. The moment they headed down this path with this small city size nonsense, and then all the online stuff etc. etc... this game has been doomed from jump street. A catastrophic disaster. It literally isn't even worth opening up and playing anymore. How on earth does something that has 25 YEARS under its belt fail so spectacularly? This type of thing shouldn't even be possible! R.I.P. SimCiy... been with you since 1987... cannot continue our relationship.

I haven't played this game in ages. It's not worth the time. However, if they implement this stuff, then perhaps I'll play again. It will depend on how much they charge. I feel I already wasted $80. It's been more fun to watch Skye Storme on his YouTube channel than to actually play the game. That's pretty sad. $80 ticket to watch SOMEONE ELSE play a game! Bollocks. At any rate, the reason most people were ok with paying for Rush Hour shortly after SC4 is because SC4 didn't suck to begin with. SC2013 started out on the wrong foot, got worse, and afaik, isn't any better. They're going to have a really hard time convincing people to pay even more money for stuff that should've been in the game from the start. But as someone else posted, we're all suckers all will end up paying for it anyway... *sigh*

why would anyone want to stop a zombie outbreak? Wait a minute, maybe i'm reflecting to real life... hmmmm... nvm, carry on... lol

Why did my post get deleted? I didn't say anything wrong. Yes I'm interested in farms (on topic) No, i'm not interested in paying for them since they should've been included in the first place. So, full answer is that yes, I'm interested in farms DLC as long as it's free. They gave us free Leaf Chargers (lol)... at least farms would serve a purpose of some sort.

well there's an achievement i'm never going to get... shouldn't that be added as a disaster?

first of all, don't be painting with your broad-stroke brush of generalizations... I never even played SimCity Societies because, by its very name, I knew it wasn't going to even be SimCity. And yeah, it's called sim CITY... NOT sim Neighborhood, nor sim TOWN, nor sim RESTRICTED BUILDING AREA. And I'm mad about not knowing how cities work? Coming from the guy that, on more than one occasion, proclaimed to the world that cities don't terraform to build land and then further displayed his basic lack of knowledge of city scapes that have repeatedly employed this behavior. When you get to the level of play of the Sim City franchise that I'm on, then you can talk to me... Until then, you can quite right down, son. 24 years and counting... what do you have? a couple of months since the release of SC2013??? LOL... go on, son... This... almost exactly. By the name "SIM CITY" It has expectations... As I stated previously, Sim City Societies DID NOT have the same expectations because it was NOT the same name.... thus not the same game. This is, and it should live up to it. Up till now, it is not. If you bought Madden NFL, you'd expect American rules football. If you bought FIFA, you'd expect soccer. If you bought Street Fighter, you'd expect a fighting game. Even the Mortal Kombat iterations with adding the tag-team stuff STILL stayed true to Mortal Kombat... fight until "Finish Him" and had the same original characters while ADDING NEW ONES... not subtracting the old, well known and enjoyed originals... I have every right, as a consumer of the franchise, to hold them to expectations. It's the same with any long-running product. Some things are expected by the product touting the same name. There's a reason why MS got so much flack for taking away the Start Button in Windows 7. It made NO SENSE...and it was there previously. They didn't fix or make anything better by removing it. But they did certainly upset loads of people. Sounds familiar, doesn't it? Snugies, you can't tell me ONE thing that SC2013 does BETTER than SC4. I implore you to do so. Oh wait... you [probably] never even played SC4, or 3000, or 2K, or Sim City 1... ho hum... silly me for thinking you know what you're on about...

That mod was excellent...was just thinking about that too... being able to create a nearly precise landscape of how you wanted your plot of land to look. I even enjoyed the mod that changed the colors of the terrain... such wonderful mods created to improve the art of the game, as described by Superbacon. This game won't even achieve that greatness if it's just this simulation, devoid of any sort of stylistic and artistic freedom. At the end of it all, every city in this game currently looks just like every other city aside from the road layout. Whoodie Doo!!! That is NOT worth $85US. Don't be too quick to give up on it amigo. I wasn't talking about any previous mod; I've been looking at things with SimCityPak, and there may be a whole lot of things that could be done. I think that the scoreboards have tied the game in knots: seems to me that paranoia about the integrity of scoreboards could be what's hamstringing a lot of peeps desires; that and EA's fear of any modding in case you make something they may be able to sell you. And if they'd simply have expanded on the state of SC4 from say... 2009... then every one of us STILL would've bought it. I have no issues with buying expansive materials as long as those are worth the money. Rush Hour was worth the $40... it's STILL $40 today! I'd STILL pay for it. It's that good... that worth it... made that many improvements. It's not about the money when the product is worth its weight. I was TOTALLY excited about this game, rebuilt my gaming rig and everything. You cannot imagine the disappointment (or maybe you can, lol). I want to like this game. I really do. Because I love the 3D aspect and that you can get right down to street level and get involved with your city. Something that really needed to be added to the game. But the price paid for that one feature was immense. I boot up the game and play every so often. But i'm still frustrated by the limitations as you have described... all created by the ill-advised attempt to make a single-player game into multi-player. It's sort of like why every time they've tried to make Grand Theft Auto have a multi-player aspect, it's a monumental failure. I don't understand why gaming companies are unable to learn from the folly of others?

That mod was excellent...was just thinking about that too... being able to create a nearly precise landscape of how you wanted your plot of land to look. I even enjoyed the mod that changed the colors of the terrain... such wonderful mods created to improve the art of the game, as described by Superbacon. This game won't even achieve that greatness if it's just this simulation, devoid of any sort of stylistic and artistic freedom. At the end of it all, every city in this game currently looks just like every other city aside from the road layout. Whoodie Doo!!! That is NOT worth $85US.

Oh, so you did some research? Well done. You're being EXTREMELY PEDANTIC, atm... (look that one up) You're taking the literal "city" and applying it to the overall argument of terraforming. We're not talking about a city as a person having money to build something. Cities don't exist in a vacuum. that's a no brainer and it completely outside the scope of this discussion. CitIES do have the money to come together to terraform the land. This is about the act of terraforming the land, by whomever does it, even if it's some bloke in his back yard with a back-hoe and a pile of dirt building up a playground for his kids. HE's STILL TERRAFORMING!!! Christ! And even all of this is still outside the fact they the took the feature of terraforming that was present and very effective and necessary in a previous iteration of Sim City and removed it from the new game. This alone is cause enough for most, if not all, SC4 players to shelve this game until Maxis/EA sort themselves out. This doesn't even touch on the other stuff removed that needn't have been. This game does add some things that were ok. No need for water pipes. No need for power lines...though there were mods that made the power lines look really cool. Curvy roads The Ave with the light-rail line included 3D But they removed CRITICAL items: ONE WAY STREETS... and give us a game littered with gameplay breaking traffic issues. Farms - so you no longer have an actual region/town Highways/Subways/El Trains etc - again, traffic issues. Items that MAXIS themselves put into Rush Hour. Then the terraforming...

Perhaps you need a reminder of the question you asked? What does funding have to do with the the fact that the cities pictured terraformed their own terrain? lol... but i suppose when something stated / asked is so blatantly wrong, it's better to argue something that was neither mentioned, asked, nor argued... nor has any relevance whatsoever to the original postulation. I believe they call that a red herring.

umm... Dubai??? Guess i'll just post this picture again: And yes, i'm deliberately ignoring the rest of you post because item at index[0] is false. Therefore, the ENTIRE statement is false. There is, was and never will be a plot of land on this planet that looks like an effing palm tree UNLESS HUMANS BUILD IT THRU TERRAFORMING: Japan's Airport: This was built entirely on the water... made by putting LAND (aka "terra") there IN ORDER TO BUILD more Dubai: Please note that they have also built, using land, a reflection of the continents on this planet in the ocean where they are BUILDING homes and commerce. Are planet, while great, is not arrogant enough to make a replication of itself in the water so that we can build on it. a "canal" BY DEFINITION is a MAD-MADE RIVER. ca·nal Noun An artificial waterway constructed to allow the passage of boats or ships inland or to convey water for irrigation. LA has one: So does Panama: How many man-made ski hills (mountains) are there? Lots. A reservoir is what? Oh, yes... a MAN MADE LAKE. So don't sit there and ask such monumentally ignorant questions, for the sole purpose of being snarky and sarcastic ... when you quite clearly do not know the answers and can't even be bothered to do even 2 minutes of research.

fair enough... however the way your sentence was written really came across as you saying you cannot terraform. Had you written it like this: "Some people say this game is unrealistic for the following reasons: - can't terraform - city is too small - fire trucks all go to the same fire - can't turn left - blah - blah - blah" it would've been much more easily discernible that you were, in fact, referring to what people are saying about SC2013, rather than how it came across as you saying there is no terraforming in real life. Sorry for derailing the thread, and yes, it is a fault of this textual medium that causes all sorts of meaning to get lost in translation. Carry on...

@VanGioRoNelli While I appreciate the spirit of your post, you're not going to convince any of us that Maxis/EA had the gamers in mind when they created this garbage. I'm not sure how old you are, but I have been playing Sim City for 24 years... since I was in the 8th grade. You basically cannot and WILL NOT get any more "hardcore SimCity fan" than that. I'd literally have to die, today, right now... and you'd still have to wait 24 years and 4 versions of this game to catch up to me... What they've done here is cast an incredibly wide net to dupe would-be new customers into spending between $60-$80 on a game that, unlike actual Sim City fans, will only play for a couple of hours and then move on. While this model works on a financial standpoint, it really makes companies look like right tossers. Do you seriously think they would LOSE money if they'd have created a game that should have been the actual sequel to SC4? They'd have still had the "new" players, and they'd have all the same old-school players that would buy the game anyway. So those items are equal in and of itself. It's a new game... it's a new Sim City game... both of those items would bring in the desired revenue just by virtue of being both "new" and "sim city." Because of the way this game is, there will NEVER be any "hardcore" fans of this style of play. Not for this game. And if you're going to suggest the numbers say otherwise, well that can be chalked up to the simple fact that there are more actual gamers in existence today than there were when SC4 was released 10 years gone. To suggest Maxis/EA wouldn't make money on just SC4 fans is like saying Blizzard wouldn't make money if they made a quality Diablo experience for their fan base. They even pay a fee. Say there are 10M fans of SC4 And ONLY SC4 players bought this game Each paid $60 for the game - $60M Guess that's a horrible amount of money... and we all know there are WELL more than 10M SC4 fans and a heck of alot more people that bought this game. Sort of what you're arguing here is what "making money" actually means. So let's then assume this game was actually quality (which we all know it is far from that)... how much easier would it be to charge people for any future DLC when the PRODUCT THEY ALREADY HAVE IN HAND is good? An example of this would be that EVERYONE that owns SC4 ALSO has a copy of Rush Hour... which cost money to acquire. Everyone with a copy of this game would buy it. Put whatever price you want on these additions, and you see how the money just keeps rolling right in, right? I bought every single expansion pack to Roller Coaster Tycoon back in the day because it was such an awesome game... until the last one, where they sorta messed it up. Any future iterations of that game for me will be via "Let's Play" videos only... but you get my point... Residual income from a gaming franchise in inherent in producing a quality game as well as not upsetting your supporting fanbase...the ACTUAL fanbase... Therefore, EA/Maxis didn't do themselves any favors by alienating those that have supported this franchise for 2 1/2 decades, and attempting to replace that dedicated fanbase with a whole bunch of new folks that wouldn't spend 1/16 the time playing as we would. They've succeed only in ruining a game that was once amazing. Ruining a game that had the support of 10s of 1000s of modders that would continue to FREELY dedicate their time in helping the paid Maxis developers make a great game. If they didn't care for the modders opinions, then fine. But you have to know that isn't true. There's massive input from places like this site that gets used when developing the game, surely. Why on earth would they want to start completely over, and leave all the knowledge gathered from SC4 fans in the dust? It's not only bad practice from a gaming standpoint, it doesn't even make good BUSINESS sense. So, McDonald's knows it'll never make fries like they used to... so let's scrap the fries and make potato rings because surely there are enough NEW people that will like potato rings!!! Really? (silly example, but do you see what I'm saying?) So you tell me... who actually has won here? EA/Maxis still gets paid... great! They're a company... they'd have gotten paid anyway. But you seem to lack the knowledge of this "niche" fan base. They don't exist. Companies stay alive by catering to their dedicated fans... not by selling one-offs to dabblers that barely know how to load the game. Those games are left to iPad/iPhone/iPod and Facebook. And what's worse... some of the new city builder games on those platforms are FAR BETTER than SC2013. There is no "winner" here. But there most certainly is a large "10M players" loser...

Speaking about himself in the 3rd person, agreeing and disagreeing with himself in both the 3rd and 1st person and subsequently calling this whole thing a "retardo-fest" ultimately initiated by me "skim reading" the original post??? What planet is this?! "You cannot terraform the land before you build..." THIS STATEMENT IS FALSE: Adjective Not according with truth or fact; incorrect. Not according with rules or law. Anything you've stated after this is suspect, and therefor completely irrelevant, because it fails to address a very basic premise that has allowed us as humans to sustain life and shape the earth to suit our needs. Whether or not you've stated this within the confines of SC2013 vs Real Life (which you didn't) doesn't really change this fact. SC4 allowed for terraforming, which is a real-life activity, believe it or not. Look at the pics or don't. Watch the video or don't. SC2013 doesn't allow it, so yes to answer your question, SC2013 should indeed be more realistic, like SC4 and Earth and allow terraforming. The other things you've mentioned with the councils and such are totally not the point of the game, never have been so no reason to bring that in. This isn't an MMO, despite their incredibly failed efforts to try to make it so. This is a single player game, with one person (Mayor) YOU, the player of the game, making decisions about your city... regardless of the suggestions of the mock-up "council members". Cities are indeed built within specified boundaries, but they don't instantly stop and then have emptiness until you run into the next city with its specified boundaries. Believe it or not, most cities even run right into each other. And a further shock is that almost NONE of them are a perfectly shaped square. Additionally, very FEW of them have a highway entrance/exist... unless there just happens to be a highway that passes thru the city. We all know this is a game and as such is naturally unrealistic. However, it is a really BAD game when compared to its predecessor. The level of nerfing in favor of ... ??? well, who knows? There's no real advancement in this game vs SC4. Remove the farms, remove the highways, remove the terraforming, remove the mods, remove the region view that actually resembled a real-life regional map from anywhere in the world, remove all of the stuff that made SC4 nearly perfect and replace it with .... ????