Kredit

your population screen actually shows you the total number of available jobs as well, so if you have just a few jobs left, you won't see them in the percentages, but you will see them there. Also, once you're in the higher population it doesn't matter that much, just try to keep unemployment between 2-5 percent for each class of workers and you'll be fine

wooded park area does work towards "enviroment satisfaction", it doesn't "remove" polution however

I think it's also important to get the right type of retail for the type of worker, this might be causing your problems...

Originally posted by: Androv I just assume that there are more suburbs off the map area which are contributing to population quote> Heh... that's actually quite a good idea! Now if they'd let met play those sub-urbs

Originally posted by: mentarman I just don't think the players would respond well to that. "I filled up my whole map! Woohoo!" "Yeah? What's your pop?" "I got to 150,000, yeah baby!" quote> Apologies for selectively quoting from your post, but I have 2 good reasons for it First of all, I agree with the rest of your post Secondly, this quote illustrates exactly what I;m trying to point out... apparently it is about the "artificial high score". If a city with 150000 doesn't satisfy someone, but the exact same city with a 0 added to the pop number does, it's not about realism, gameplay or system limitations, it's about people wanting "big numbers" (which to me seems a bit shallow...)

As someone else explained above, parks don't remove polution, they "compensate" for it. So, the red cloud doesn't get smaller, but citizens loose less satisfaction to it when there are parks in the area.

Originally posted by: Vorret Wow... seriously it seems like you read and understand what you want to understand. How can you create a realistic city if the population growth isn't realistic? He put. in detailed, the worse possible exemple of density yet the game is 3 times worse how is that even close to reality? Especially since as far as I know, we're not building poor cities, it's *rich* cities. He's not saying it's not "possible" but it just does NOT make sense.quote> I was starting to think I'd gone crazy, but apparently my point was clear Thanks!

Originally posted by: gyzzzmo Nobody here is holding you from building a realistic city, i dont know why you blame the game. Also your list about 'lack of realism' is incorrect. Cities in real life also exchange workers, zones for wealth is realistic, (MT? whats that?, leisure IS government funded. avatar looks is a graphics choise, location on planet does (kinda) matter and the road upgrades are realistic. And also if you're realistic city growth with a game's city builder growth...... A city in real life does not get designed by 1 person from scratch, and that person does not have hundreds of years to control and continue that growth like in the game. But i think that if some architect had unlimited funds and has to design a city for huge amounts of people on a tiny area, it would be possible to make a city with alot of high-rises and facilities to keep them happy. Maybe even by using megastructures like in Simcity 2, but building those isnt that much fun in a game, wich is also why Maxis didnt implement those buildings in the newer simcities.quote> That´s not entirely true, because if I have a city of, say, 500000, apparently my "1 family houses" allready hold substantially more than one family... (also, I don't "blame" the game, I'm just wondering why a certain choice has been made) And my list about "lack of realism" was a list of complaints from other people, that I've read here on the forums. And yes I agree most are incorrect, that was sort of the point And yes, once again I agree, there are a lot of other things that aren't realistic. Most concessions are made in favor of gameplay, which is good. This one concession I don't understand though, which is why I started this thread And, again, yes. That's most likely possible. However, it's not how cities are built in the real world now. And eventhough the whole concept of "building" a city as we do in this game is unrealistic, I got the impression from most of the game that the intention is to end up with cities that could exist in present-day reality. Of course, I could be completely wrong there, in which case my point is pointless

It's true that Dhaka isn't full of skyscrapers, though they do have some... but that's part of the point indeed. If we look at cities around the world, the ones with high population density are almost exclusively in third-world countries. Yes, NYC has loads of skyscrapers... but the population density is MUCH lower. Aparently, given any sort of choice, people avoid population densities that high... Conclusion (again ): The population density associated with a "succesful" city in CXL isn't realistic. As I said before, I'm sure it's theoretically possible to fit that many people in an area, however the infrastructure needed would be impossible and no-one would want to live like that. Now, since I can find no apparent reason why the game should not use "realistic" population densities and the game has to actually cheat to reach the population densities we have now... I can't help but wonder... Why? And that's really all I have to say about this It's not a very big deal to me, it just puzzles me. And what puzzles me even more is that apparently no-one else cares I've seen complaints about "lack of realism" relating to: trading workers, zoning for wealth, lack of MT, government involvement in leisure activities, the looks of the avatars, location on planet not mattering, the way roads are upgraded and many other subjects... However the fact that the size and shape of a building apparently bear no relation to how many people can live in there doesn't seem to annoy anyone but me /puzzled

Originally posted by: mentarman SimCity 4 was similarly unrealistic in populations in buildings. I don't know that it was nonlinear as you are saying CXL may be, but the populations weren't at all realistic. I think it's just a tradeoff such games make so that players can feel like they made a "real" big city when games at this point just aren't capable of actually duplicating the complexity and size of a real city. Ironically this realistic feeling of making a big city is done through unrealistic numbers for populating buildings..quote> And that's exactly what I think is weird... why not just make the map much bigger, or even have population numbers closer to "reallity"? Why do all cities have to have millions of citizens on 10x10 km? All this does, to me, is make the number of citizens a sort of arbitrary "high score", rather than an indication of the size of my city... What gives me a sense of size of a city, is the amount and size of buildings, and the size of the land... not some number that increases following some formula designed to "cheat" you into thinking you have a big city

Originally posted by: Partydude67 Your forgetting something about this game obviously.The people in the city aren't the only ones who make up the traffic in the city,its the tourists,other people stoping at your city,people who come to your city for work like industry or the offices.Freight also makes up your traffic,so that could be realistic.People coming from the next door city,from the link of the city.Also one small density could hold dozens of people like you said,thats how some cities are in reality.Oh and just because the population density isn't like New York,it doesn't mean it has to be the same.One residential high rise skyscraper could hold thousands of people,one resdidential medium household could hold hundreds of people,and low residential household could hold like tens or dozens of people.Ive seen in reality in cities with more than 20 people in one household.So cities xl could possibly be realistic like reality.I consider it to be much more realisic than any other city simulation game.Hope this could of helped.=)quote> I'm sorry but I have no idea what you mean...

Originally posted by: Okeanos I'm not starting a discussion about the pros or cons of the way citizens are implemented in citiesXL. But I want to give some informations on how it is working internally. Maybe it is easier to understand the hole concept. CitiesXL is using something you might call a "citizen unit". It is the base unit which is used for the "size" of a city. And it is also used in the demand calculations and within the economy in terms of required amount of workers. So you may call it more appropriatly "worker unit". I give you an example: T1 (Tier 1) industry buildings (heavy industry) requires 2 units of unqualified workers. Other buildings and other building sizes have different requirements in type (unqualified, qualified, executives, elites) and amounts. But they are always the same, in cities with a population of 1.000 or a population of 1.000.000. A T1 residence for unqualified workers have a capacity of 1 unit. Therefore you need 2 buildings. T2 residences have a capacity of 2 und T3 a capacity of 5 units. The total amount of citizen units within the city is the true city size indicator and it is linear. And it is also the base for the needs-table. The core problem is how many citizens do you want to put in a residence. 1, 4, 10? And if you do that, do you really want to force the player to build 10 Mio. buildings with 1 or 1 Mio. with 10 or even 100.000 with 100 to get a population of 10 Mio? The "simplyfication" to have a fixed/linear "citizen unit" which scales up the population count in larger cities is quite brilliant. And it simplyfies the requirements for buildings with workers greatly. The needs table stops at 40.000 citizen units. This should be something around 28 Mio. or so, I'm not sure. Hope this helps a bit ... -Okeanosquote> Thanks, that clears some things up I guess. Still doesn't change the fact that apparently, a house which holds, say, 16 people at one point can magically hold much more later though (I could maybe understand that a bit if the building actually changed), which I think is really strange. Effectively, if what you say is correct, you would have to look at the number of citizens per worker unit at close to 0 pop and then divide your population by that number to get a realistic population... What I don't get here is that in a game where realism is important, and it's all about creating "lifelike" cities, am I really the only who's put off by the fact that as your city grows, more and more and more people stuff themselves in houses that were full just a minute ago?(up to the point where your economy colapses because no new workers can move in to the existing building... unless you build a new building next to it, then all of a sudden more people fit in the old building...) Also, for me it ruins the realism of things like traffic, enviroment, services etc. as well... Especially traffic. Real cities' populations aren't so much limited by the amount of housing you can build, but rather by the infrastructure around it. Sure, I can build a whole city full of skyscrapers as high as I can, and stuff those as full of people as I can... that's all fine, if they never leave their house. But they will. They won't get very far though... Which is why I don't get that if the number of people in my HD zones increases as the total pop increases, but the roads don't get bigger, why don't the clog up completely after a while? I've had roads in residential zones that were orange at 200k pop, and are still orange at 1 mill pop.... without any changes to the infrastructure. But, aparently a lot more people are now living in that zone... I guess they can fly! That, or the road's capacity magically changes with pop as well... Bottom line: If I build a two-story, four bedroom house, that will hold 1 family. It might, in times of need, hold 2. But to assume that that same house will hold, say, 10 families at some point (in a stable, profitable city...) is silly.

I'm using windows 7 (ultimate), I

Originally posted by: gyzzzmo Sounds you're doing more a Dhaka promotion than adding anythign to the discussion since you cant compare a High-rise city in Cities XL with your Dhaka, that has few Highrises that are in the game.quote> Excuse me for asking, but what's your point exactly? Dhaka is the most densely populated city in the world. It is not even close to being as densely populated as an average "big" city in CXL. Conclusion, densely populated cities in CXL are not reallistic, as there are no such cities, or even anything close to it, in the real world. And no, there's no highrises in Dhaka that are in-game... so? Are there anywhere else? Nope... Also, I think you fail to see the significance of the most densely populated city in the world (and most of the top of the list, for that matter) actually being in a third-world country. Finally, it's not "my" Dhaka, rather, "my" city is The Hague, for which I also specified the details in a previous post

And, even more interesting facts! My own city, The Hague (The Netherlands), currently has a population close to 500.000. The area? About 100 square km just like the maps in CXL (though without the mountains...) I can assure you, we have pollution issues, trafic issues, even housing issues... and it's quite crowded I'm sure the population will grow the next few years... but to say I could imagine 5 or 10 million people living here... or even 15+ million? Uhm... the whole country only has about 17 million (incidentally, if someone from MC is reading this and thinks "but the maps are 50km * 50km!, what's his problem!", please post! )