ratsportrm

I really enjoyed the review, Dirk. Sure looks like this will be a fun game. Now I cross my fingers that my computer specs will be enough to play it.

Originally posted by: xBONESstyle On your first post, there should be a link next to "Reply | Quote | etc..." that will let you delete. But hey, if you're willing to hear one more opinion. I think SimCity developers can keep the core of the game while making it more approachable for newcomers. Make revamping transportation in an established city less difficult. Like a tool, or a preplanner or something. Some more information about what's going on in a city could help a ton. Especially regarding zots, demand, and growth requirements. The UDI missions didn't hurt the game IMHO. More things to do while you're mulling over what to do with your town can really help keep interest, especially as someone new to the series. There has to be a million things like this they can do, all while adding to the depth of the game for those ready to explore it.quote> A very good point. If they want to make SimCity better, it needs to actually resemble the way most cities are... they don't immediately start building four-lane roads and six-lane highways because they think they might need them in the future. Real life cities, for the most part, evolve and things change over time. Regarding the roads and such, they could introduce a concept of acquiring rights of way, as happens in real life, to allow players to widen roads and highways. There are so many other concepts they could do to model real life... obviously, there's a question of how much they can fit into the game... but while real-life cities have master plans put together, they aren't put together with the idea that the city will grow from a population of 1,000 to a population of 25,000 in X number of years. These master plans change as the city changes. At any rate... SC should be about how your city evolves and making it less complicated to accommodate changes, rather than thinking ahead so far into the future. That doesn't mean make it like SCS, but make it where it is easier to make changes as the city grows.

That's pretty interesting that others have mentioned that R$$$ homes will develop on a 2x2 low density lot. In the suburbs I develop, I never have that issue with lots two deep from the streets, despite plenty of demand for such housing and desirability not being a problem. Of course, as I said earlier, I've only done those size lots with low density zoning. I usually end up doing them in long rows as well. Who knows... maybe orientation is the problem, or having 2x2 lots that bump back to back with each other. I only tend to be an occassional visitor, but if I remember to, maybe I can upload a screenshot of how I've laid out such zoning to see if it might help others.

One of the things to keep in mind, particularly with a developing city or a suburb, is that R$$$ sims want a minimum lot size of 3x3 for their homes, so by avoiding 3xX lots, that will help. Of course, I've only tried that with low-density zoning. I don't know if it works with other densities.

I first played SimCity in 1990 when my friend at college got it for his computer. It was highly addictive. I can remember playing it later it in 1992 after I spent time looking at strategy guides and reading up on advice and getting a city that did very well in terms of profit, even at a 5 percent rate, and my friends thinking I used the embezzlement key to get that big cash reserve. Hehehe. Also had a lot of fun with playing the SNES version and I remember how great it was to beat the scenarios, including Las Vegas (which, once you figure out what to do, isn't really that hard). Between SimCity and the original Civilization, you can imagine what my spare time was occupied with back then.

OK, long thread and I won't be able to read everything, bit here would be my suggestions. 1. Make it approachable to newcomers while satisfying hardcore players. I'm not talking about difficulty levels, but the scope of the game. For example: Allow the option of developing one single city (in which you get just a single "city square" to develop) or a region. That allows newcomers to learn the concepts of single-city development, then get into regional development when they are ready, while hardcore players can dive right into regional development. 2. Utilities: Allow the option to require residents and businesses pay for them, just as in real life. But do it so that a balance is struck netween usage and what you charge for them (in other words, high rates aren't tolerated in smaller cities because usage isn't as high). 3. Transportation: Include the acquisition of easements/rights of way when it comes to widening roads. Not every city in real life sees four-lane or six-lane roads plopped down before development takes place... there are always the cases of roads starting as two-lane and getting widened. Ditto for highways, same with certain mass transportation networks... not everything is planned out so far in advance right from the start of a city's development. 4. Development of buildings should not be based on the desire for a certain wealh-level building alone. Demand for jobs/availability of jobs should be accounted for. Ditto for park and rec structures... high-wealth buildings should pretty much demand they be nearby or they aren't likely to develop. Land value seems to default to high in SC4, but the default should be low, and it should have an influence on what will develop. The player should be able to gain more control regarding what types of buildings develop, rather than the simulator just whimsically picking it and leaving the player feel the only thing he/she can do is just deliberately ignore a part of town and make it rundown because too many people are building big mansions and then can't find jobs. 5. When querying places of work, breakdown the number of jobs taken/unfilled by wealth level. This would help further in determining exactly what wealth levels need to be attracted to fill available jobs. 6. More realistic number of residents per home. A single family home should never have more than two people working, at least until the kids are old enough to take jobs. 7. I like an idea earlier suggested about zoning areas specifically for shops and for offices. SC4 seems to have this bias to keep turning shops into offices simply because demand suddenly goes up a slight amount for offices. 8. Don't make certain government buildings as rewards. City halls, courthouses and such should be building that the player can put in the city because they provide services that residents will need. 9. More variety on the ordinances and do introduce some more that allow the player to earn money. Perhaps the charging for utilities could be done in this way. Also, junior sports programs are something people should pay money for, as is the case in real life (I know a few free programs exist in real life, but not one city makes every such program free). 10. Streamline public services a bit. Fire stations tend to pop up throughout cities, but with police, you mostly have main stations then substations popping up. The police kiosk introduced in Rush Hour was a good idea. Schools should be set up more with the idea that they can serve more students as you increase individual funding, but that there will be a point reached where residents don't want them to be too far away, depending on the type of school. Hospitals can be under a player's control, but private practices should spring up in commercial services or zone areas where private practices can go (and they would pay taxes like in real life). I'd just like to see them done a little more like in real life, where you know, for example, you can't just stick with one elementary school and keep expanding it, but you shouldn't have to plop them down every so many blocks because the simulator thinks it should serve more than just actual K-8 students. That's what I have at the moment.

Had been lurking around this thread and just wanted to chime in with some quick thoughts. I certainly sympathize with those who watched SC4 get followed up with SCS. What really seems to be the problem is that EA tried to make a SimCity that was more friendly to newcomers to the series, but then the problem was they made it _too_ easy. I bought the SC Box to get SC4 and out of curiosity about SCS. After looking at the SCS manual, I doubt I'll ever try it because it just didn't look like fun, but I'm enjoying SC4 for the most part. That being said, I can see why some newcomers to SC might seem turned off by SC4... the region concept is a good idea, but I wonder if some newcomers might feel overwhelmed by having to develop an entire region when they may prefer to just develop one city. Also, the new "wealth" system might be a bit complicated for some people, especially since it doesn't have much correlation with land value, and the land value concept might be easier for newcomers to understand how to control and manipulate. I look at the Civilization series and each one has added complexity without being too overwhelming, at least IMO. Certain tactics players used in one Civ game didn't always work in the next game, but that's because developers want to force veteran players to concentrate on new strategies. But at the same time, the concepts each one introduced are easy enough for new players to understand without feeling overwhelmed. Well, that's how I see it, YMMV. But that being said, whatever Cities XL ends up, I hope it's something that will satisfy both SC veterans and newcomers to city building games alike. Appealing to a core group is fine, but you also want to expand on it to ensure the most success with a game.

First of all, I will say that I'm a veteran of past SimCity games and loved them all... took me time to get the ball rolling on a city, but after reading strategy guides, and for SC3K, theories and tips on the Internet, I was able to put together some really nice cities. I didn't buy SimCity 4 for a while, though, but when the SimCity Box finally came out, I decided to give it a try, plus I was curious about SCS and wanted the Spore Creature Creator as well. Most of my time has been spent trying to get an initial city off the ground, using the strategy of developing a small city for DI and MI while leaving everything else in the main city. Here is where I run into problems: I can never figure out a proper amount of commercial and IHT zoning to ensure that my demand for jobs is mostly satisfied. Seems I either end up with too much commercial and then get stuck in what seems to be a "perpetual recession" in whcin only low wealth commercial is demanded and nothing else. Or if I try to go easy on zoning, I can't keep up with the residents moving up in wealth and complaining they have no jobs. My problem is not with desirability, civic services or any of the other basics, and I have used the tactic of zoning to dissuade high-wealth residential early on. It just seems that "overdevelopment" bias in the simulator and the fact that you should provide education for Sims leads to too many medium wealth Sims griping about lack of work and me never knowing when to stop zoning commercial without ending up with what seems to be a never-ending recession. So any rules of thumb regarding how much to zone to ensure job demands are mostly satisfied without overdeveloping? I really do like the concepts in SC4, but I'm getting frustrated trying to figure out how to get that proper balance without overdoing it (and really, I don't want to go play SCS, because just looking at the manual, I was immediately disappointed). And on an unrelated note: What's up with the simulator showing that my Sims are taking the bus to the industrial city, but when I load up the industrial city, the buses magically turn into cars, despite the fact I put the bus stations in the industrial city as well? Thanks in advance for any advice.