snick25

The SimCity Beta is free. If you want it, go for it. It's not my cup of tea, however. Also, I think you meant Monte Cristo when you said "FHI", but I'm gonna say this anyway as more of a general comment. Two things: 1) I don't think FHI has any risk of going bankrupt because of the CXL franchise. If anything, their horrible customer support is to blame for any financial trouble they may face. I think most of us here have ventured to the Official CXL Forum at one time or another. Anyone seen it recently? It's pretty much dead, and the only real active members are spambots, and those who need customer support. Unfortunately, those who need support often don't get it, or get it several days/weeks after they posted their question. That, combined with all the other technical issues CXL faces and FHI's inability/refusal to fix them, equals bad customer support. 2) I don't think FHI has any risk of going bankrupt because of the CXL franchise. If anything, FHI isn't spending enough money on it! For whatever reason, FHI doesn't like to spend money on CXL. 2011 was a good improvement over 2009, but 2012 was basically an expansion pack with no new groundbreaking features. CXL has great potential, the potential to capture most of the die-hard citybuilding fans who are disappointed by the SC2013 flop. It has the potential to be the new top citybuilder, and, with the rate at which the fanbase is working on it and improving it, it just might be. Sadly, I'm very sure we will not be getting any official support from FHI, at least not until we've done much of the work and they see the game selling better. Again, not necessarily directed at your comment, just a more general comment about the state of FHI/CXL. EDIT: It's reality. It's already happening. Not even its expansions nor a 75% off discount can save it. I want to reply to this old comment I must have missed before, which is surprising, considering its blatant ignorance and aggression. I just want to say, jpjoe, I have rarely seen such a unintelligent and ridiculous post. Being a moderator on another site, I've deleted some pretty ridiculous stuff, but this must be one of the most ludicrous comments I've seen. Anyway, nice job on your attitude; you really do come across as a gentleman.

I hate the way that highway intersection looks! It's not even a proper interchange... As for the maps, unfortunately, Maxis has confirmed that maps will all be the same size as the one found in the demo, which is supposedly 4 square kilometers/SC4 medium city tile. You're not the only one to compare it to a small SC4 tile, however. The scale is probably different which means everything takes up more space, thus, while the map is in fact probably equivalent to a medium tile, the scale makes it seem like a small tile. If this picture you posted is indeed showing a whole city area, that's just pathetic. One of the many reasons I will not be getting this game. Anyway, thanks for the review. Despite having pretty much made up my mind, I still want to find something important to like about this game. However, most of the "big features" Maxis touts have no appeal to me.

Well... it's not 1 x 1 km, but it's almost as bad: https://twitter.com/...594511831236611 And it is the only size available... But he does say you can get much much higher populations in that tile. As I said in the Gamescon thread, this confirmation of a detail most of us suspected (and was indeed confirmed by Maxis early on, but due to certain definite statements that the "maps would certainly be larger" I was, along with others I'm sure, sucked into a pocket of false hope) is a deal breaker for me. Sure, it's better than 1 x 1 km, but not by much. That and all of that no-man's land surrounding each city will make this game completely unrealistic. At best, it'll offer you some interest with its flashy Glassbox simulation and its "wonderful Simcity World" trading feature, but that's pretty much it. The seamless region play/large cities so many potential fans wanted will never happen. Realistic recreation of real life cities is also off the table. Heck, we won't even be able to build highways for God's sake. Yeah, I think I'm done waiting for the train to crash. For all of those who want to stay on the burning wreck, all I have to say is good luck to you.

Really? In order to get anything larger than a small town (which I hear is what most players at Gamescon were getting using up half the map), you'd most likely have to build at least a few highrises, and if you want a million Sims condensed in to 4 square kilometers, you'll probably have to build a field of skyscrapers. Now, you tell me, how will that look surrounded by a field of no-man's land? I realize you have a different opinion of maps and aren't as concerned about the big picture (a.k.a. building up and connecting a region), but most of us are. Most of us believe that any city-building game marketed as a major alternative to what's out there currently (pretty much CXL and SC4) should give you the ability to create more than just one city with rigid boundaries. You should be able to build a metropolitan area, with multiple cities/suburbs connected to each other stretching over large distances of land (larger than 4 sq. km at least!) without any unsightly borders/boundaries. This was offered to us in SC4, so I find it hard to believe why the developers didn't take that very popular feature from the most popular game in the franchise and make it a possibility here. Yeah, I realize there are performance issues and all that crap, but, believe it or not, I'm sure there are many people out there that would be willing to sacrifice a little in the performance department to at least be able to make a city larger than this size of TinyTown USA! I was actually starting to get my hopes up for this game. I even started to get a little excitement back about it. I was even considering biting the Origin bullet and trying out the beta. Not anymore. This is a deal-breaker for me.

Don't you think that if they had larger maps they would have shown them off a bit by now? I mean, why show potential customers tiny cities on tiny maps when you could show them fairly decent-sized cities on larger ones? Unless they show larger maps tomorrow at Gamescom, I will take it that 2 x 2 km is the default city size.

Well, if that is indeed how it looks in-game and not just something added to the trailer, we'll see what that means for map sizes. I do think possibility of arcologies isn't so far-fetched; I remember in the intial game trailer many people thought they saw arcologies included. I would be a bit more interested in this game if they decided to include larger city sizes, however, and I hope that is the case. I'm sure by the end of tomorrow we'll have some more gameplay footage and hopefully a definite idea of map sizes and a whole host of other aspects of this game.

Exactly, well put. If only Maxis got rid of that ugly "no-man's land" separating each city, this wouldn't be that big of a deal. However, it looks like it is here to stay. So... concerning regions, with this "no-man's land" separating each city from its neighbor(s), the recreation of real life cities is made impossible. For example, how is one supposed to realistically create Chicago when you have no terraforming tools? Unless Maxis creates the map themselves (or creates a Modding tool which would allow players to do so - unlikely, considering the strict online multiplayer nature of this game), you won't be able to create it. And even if the map was available, how would Chicago look with a giant empty space separating the Loop from the South Side or northern skyline? BLSmith2112 at the Official EA Forums posted a great visual example: So, you end up with tiny pockets of skyscrapers (1 x 1 km or 2 x 2 km, still small either way) with giant gaps of emptiness in-between. Yep, that's definitely Chicago all right.

I'm not so sure about that. There are three categories: Rank, Region, and Population. Therefore the population appears measured by region, not city.

I look forward to seeing these!

Of course the core base doesn't like it, consisting of mostly hardcore SC4 fans who will only accept an updated SC4 (with better graphics) and nothing else. Personally I think those are pretty narrow expectations. I have no problem with them doing something different for the new game, after all, the SC4 all of you love so much is now a decade old. I can't see why the devs wouldn't do something a bit different. With that said, the direction they are taking the game in is disappointing, to say the least, for most of the core fanbase, myself included. One of the directions they are trying to take this game into is more mass appeal and that means making this game more "fun" and MMO-like than realistic, which means while alienating the core base, they will probably still have a good level of support from new/passive players of the genre.

I think we all gave this game a chance. Those who are now frustrated with it have good reasons and valid opinions backed up with facts. I will say that the new gameplay video (SimCity World) looked rather appealing, but unless some things are changed about this game I will not be buying.

I haven't played City Life so I can't really say what the differences are between the two. And I agree, CXL is more of a game for city planners/designers, and focuses less on the simulation than the SimCity series does. However, it does still have a decent simulation, one that is certainly structured differently from SC with different concepts, and although many don't focus on it and the game doesn't make it necessary you pay much attention to it, I've heard several people say that it is an improvement from SC4. Of course, I'm sure the Glassbox will be a step forward from both of them, although it does have several faults, the biggest of them being the 200,000 agent limit, which, along with performance concerns (also due to the Glassbox), is most likely one of the main reasons for the limited map sizes.

Well, considering how it's supposedly only able to handle the simulation of up to 200,000 agents, it would make sense that it's one of the chief reasons for limiting the map sizes, among other things.

I don't think comparing different images from two different games and directly comparing them is the best idea, especially since as some have pointed out it's not clear whether the SC2013 screen even shows a complete city. However, even if this new speculation isn't true, the reality isn't much better. Of course only 1 sq. km of land to build on would be a joke, a disaster, but 4 sq. km (which has been confirmed as being the only city tile size so far) is still pretty weak considering you won't be able to create seamless cities at all with this "no-man's land" between each tile. So, take that fact verses CXL's 100 sq. km maps or SC4's even larger regions and there is already no comparison. SC2013 loses.

If anything, those who absolutely adore the new "game" are the ones slandering those who aren't so excited. Yeah, it happens both ways, but those who are looking forward to the game generally tend to treat any doubtful/negative comments about the game as uninformed and unimportant. Then, they turn around and pretend to be the victims. I've in fact seen very few "supportive" posts that are backed up by anything other than speculation. That's because there's really been nothing good confirmed for this game, therefore those who still adore it make up theories as to how the game will be "improved with DLCs", or how it's "still in development" (which is probably nearly finished at this point). I've even see people resort to "well we gotta support EA/Maxis if we want them to continue making SimCity games". That last one is utter rubbish if you ask me; it just goes against plain common sense.

Waiting for the lock...

Wrong mod. Here's the correct link: http://xlnation.net/content/mod-twin-towers-wtc-very-beta-no-night-texture

Uh... yeah, this game actually does fit in with that definition even if you're plying a region by yourself. Take some time to think about it. Every player influences the sim global economy, and every player is affected by it. So, even if you think you have a region all to yourself, you are in fact interacting with thousands of people, all online. All saves are online, on EA's servers. I don't see how this game could get any more multiplayer, except becoming an MMO, and that is where they're trying to steer the franchise. So, the main point to take away from this is that your cities WILL BE IMPACTED BY OTHERS whether you want it or not. There is NO single-player mode no matter how you try to slant it, as you will never be playing the game without being affected by others.

Oh yes, of course! How blind of us potential customers not to realize how lucky we are that Maxis decided the new game would have any landscape variety at all! You know, I also think we should be happy that we're even getting 4 sq. km cities instead of 1. Hell, let's just be celebrating that we got any room to build a city at all! Let's also be thankful that Maxis had the foresight to make each micro-city separated from each other, across vast distances of no-man's land, so that all those people playing multiplayer out there (and of course, EVERYBODY wants to play multiplayer!) don't run into each other. And, while we're at it, let's thank Maxis for laying down all the roads, railroads, and waterways connecting each micro-city, as we obviously are too dumb to do that ourselves! Let's be happy about every single fact that comes out about the new game, and when others dare to criticize it, let's try to find some redundant silver-lining! Thanks Maxis, for everything!

Nope, this will be nothing like Cities XL, as CXL + mods is a pretty darn decent game. It's certainly a hundred times better than this game will be. In fact, if it continues going in the same direction it will not be a game, but a monstrosity. Sure, CXL didn't allow you to terraform and that's still the case but at least they gave you 100 sq. km instead of a measly 4.

Who is that guy? If he is a developer, or someone working with EA/Maxis, then that is absolutely disgusting behavior. He should be given a nice, long vacation with no pay, if not a permanent one. First of, CXL is NOT a "boring nightmare". And if he's implying that the fans made it that way (btw, "conservatives"?! Not every fan of CXL is a "conservative", so not sure what he meant by that...), then he is obviously delusional. If he indeed works with EA/Maxis, he shouldn't have gotten that job in the first place. What an idiotic lunatic. Unfortunately, this isn't the first time I've seen such immature comment coming from someone (I assume) is working on the game. Some other person said something similar about people who were complaining about the direction the game was going in. Seriously, what the hell is wrong with these people?!

I do think that that the features being sacrificed to solve problems for the multiplayer parts of the game will be a loss for everyone, whether you're playing a region by yourself or with others. Also, not to mention the loss everyone will suffer if, god forbid, EA shuts down the servers. I'm certainly unhappy with it, but as you said there's not much we can do about it other than discuss and complain about it here. If the new game sells well they probably will keep going in that direction. I agree, city-building is definitely a niche market but depending on who you ask (*cough*EA*cough*) making it into more of an MMO-type deal (which is actually how the game was envisioned in the first place by Will Wright), while certainly deterring the fanbase to a great extent, would probably generate more interest in the genre for the more casual and less gamers, and thus more sales. Of course, the core fanbase still serves an important role and is often very vocal when they dislike something, which can deter sales and generate negative reviews... so, I guess what i'm saying is we'll have to see how well this game sells and what the reaction is from EA/Maxis. Needless to say, I hope they don't keep moving in that direction but I'm really not expecting anything worthwhile from any major game company these days anyway.

I'm pretty sure there's tourism and high-tech cities you can create. I think education-based cities, healthcare-based cities, as well as commercial/office centers will also be a choice. I imagine some cities based around military bases could also work. There's tons of possibilities, finance, telecommunications (probably lumped in with high-tech), agriculture, etc. I doubt it'll be able to solve the sprawl problem though, but we'll see.

You're not taking into account how there really isn't any single-player mode at all. Yeah, you can still have a region to yourself, and that's fine, but you're still online, you're still connected to Origin, and you're still interacting with everyone else out there in the "global economy". It's even stated in that interview that your'e still part of the "SimCity world", and by that they mean the online network. Your cities are 100% on the cloud, not on your computer, all of your progress is recorded and stored in the EA servers whether you decide to play a region by yourself or not. There's nothing horribly wrong with that itself in my opinion, but now the developers are sacrificing tons of features that could be implemented into the game just to "enhance the multiplayer experience". For example, the quote in question came from a thread discussing the inability to customize regional connections. Why would the devs do that, you ask? It's because they now have have to solve the potential problem of different people expanding different cities and running into each other. Thus, the static regional connections. Thus, the small city sizes. Thus, the big giant gaps that can be thought of as "no man's land". This game is going in a new direction. I get that, and I have no problem with that in and of itself, but it's WHICH direction they're going in that bothers me. I feel that this game is attempting to turn the franchise in the direction of SimCity Social. That, I believe is the ultimate goal, to have a multiplayer-only game where everyone is connected to the internet at ALL times via Origin or Facebook or MySpace or MyFace or whatever (none of which I have any desire to use), and no single-player mode is offered at all, not even the ability to play your own regions. A direction in which the devs scoff inwardly whenever they're asked a question about having a single-player mode (which they already are).

IMHO it is. So far, at least. One of the many reasons I will most likely prefer CXL over the new game. More realistic graphics, and properly saturated colors. Oh, and no tilt-shift! Does that graphics style suit everybody, of course not. Does the more cartoonish/miniature-world feel suit everybody, of course not. You shouldn't expect it to.