Fader

Unfortunately for us, EA's take on any game is that there are tried and tested formulae in every genre for 'what works.' Add to this their ethos that 'simplicity is profitability' and we have some very big problems. EA are not risk-takers. They find franchises and concepts that work, and they squeeze and squeeze until there's nothing left but a dried-out old husk that nobody wants any more. But the gaming community is changing, and EA don't seem to realise this. The average age for a gamer is going upwards at a steady rate, and churning out cookie-cutter kiddie-crap just isn't going to cut it any more. Case in point: RPGs. everyone knows how a European RPG plays... it's about dice-rolls and forests and yada-yada-yada, you know the routine. It's a gaming formula that works. Why tamper with it? So why is The Witcher such a bloody god game, if it goes and takes strides into uncharted RPGing territory? EA have the position of power and the resources to create games like Thw Witcher, that push in new directions, utilise modern technology, zeitgeist and other forms of media to produce truly groundbreaking pieces. Instead, they string up the carcasses of our beloved games like pinatas, beating them with tired and predictable programming until all the money's fallen out.

Originally posted by: calvinhsv Originally posted by: Fader calvinhsv, the reason this site appears to be so much more negative about SCS is that this site contains the fanbase of SC4, who love SC4 because it is probably the most accurate city building simulator available. The people here played that game, made mods, designed buildings, and generally brought the SC4 experience even closer to what it is to actually create a city, from that first little farming village to a thriving, pulsing metropolis that works because of the hundreds of intricate balancing acts going on throughtout it. Then we get a 'sequel' that firstly, is so simplified that it is insulting to those people who expected so much more, and secondly, bears no relation to how real cities work. The forums at TM have a much higher percentage of people new to the SC franchise. They have nothing to compare the game to, and so their expectations are that much lower. Also, can you really believe that the forums of the game developers would be completely impartial, and that at least some of the more negative posts don't somehow just 'disappear?'quote> Well, this isn't exactly tilted mill's first game. There are MANY games to compare societies to, SC4 is not one of them. As for game developers deleting negative posts, you can go to the official EA forums to see that is clearly not the case. I think its absurdly illogical to think that just because theres so few negative posts there that the forum administrators are deleting them all. There are negative posts on the TM boards, and they are handled well by the positive retorts of the community. Thats basically the crux of the issue you want to bring up. TM boards are comming from ceasar and other city building games. SC4 has a big community here, but lets face it, on the whole for video game market, you guys are small fries. Sure, you are still important, and you shouldn't think I am belitting your site, efforts, or creations, its just that theres not enough of you to make a SC5 the way you want it profittably. While we could argue that issue all day, its NOT what I am concerned about in the slightest and I don't appreciate the derail of the conversation from an arguement you don't like, to one that you do. My arguement is simply there will be little to no modding for societies here because the fanbase of SC4 is not interested. TM has a fanbase that is interested and is currently working on and producing mods on a regular basis. If you want mods for the game, go there. If you have any questions or comments concerning this PARTICULAR point, feel free. Otherwise, take it to another thread or continue on your tirad and leave me out of it.quote> Well, shucks calvinshv, it sure is mighty good of you to come on down here with us small fries to try and edumacate us all to why we done gone wrong with our hating. Now, if you could knock it down a notch or two on the HaughtyMeterTM you'll be able to respond with something that has a little more thought behind it, rather than making backhanded remarks that do indeed belittle the years of work the thousands of members have poured into this game for no other reason than because they love it. Your comment that 'there will be little to no modding for societies here because the fanbase of SC4 is not interested.' is almost correct, but you fail to see the why of your point. We are not interested in creating mods for this game, because it insults our intelligence. The modders and batters of this community have been creating new content for a game that required real thought and balance, and half the challenge was to create content that maintained that balance, rather t

Thanks for receiving my review so well, guys. I know that there are a lot of other reviews out there on the forums, but this game's rare and extraordinary talent is that it brings out so many wild and varied negative emotions in all of us, that everyone apparently has slightly different reasons for hating it. At the end of the day, it's just such a shame that EA's general policy is to stick with tried and tested formulae, and to keep kicking that poor old cash cow until it's no longer sicking up dollars. Even less fortunate is that it appears to have backfired in a most spectacular fashion this time. They thought they were bringing the SimCity franchise back to a wider audience, when in fact it's left his wider audience feeling patronised. Frankly, I've seen more complex gameplay in Disney video games. I decided to give it another good try today, and although I can see that EA have tried to implement some kind of depth to the different game elements, the fundamental flaw shared by them all is that they can be completely ignored. Health, education and public safety were all essential to creating a city that didn't descend into anarchy and chaos in SC4. These concepts are still in the game in SCS, but simply by making sure that there are enough department stores for your Sims to go shopping in (department stores that provide absolutely no employment to your workforce), your Sims are more than content to wander from place of employment to venue to home ad infinitum, all the while sickly, stupid and with absolutely no public safety infrastructure. I bought this game because I like creating cities that are an emulation of those that exist in real life. Indeed, I did manage to create several very beautiful, realistic-looking citiesm (all way too easily, even with difficulty set at maximum). But not a single one of them functions according to any set of real-world rules.

calvinhsv, the reason this site appears to be so much more negative about SCS is that this site contains the fanbase of SC4, who love SC4 because it is probably the most accurate city building simulator available. The people here played that game, made mods, designed buildings, and generally brought the SC4 experience even closer to what it is to actually create a city, from that first little farming village to a thriving, pulsing metropolis that works because of the hundreds of intricate balancing acts going on throughtout it. Then we get a 'sequel' that firstly, is so simplified that it is insulting to those people who expected so much more, and secondly, bears no relation to how real cities work. The forums at TM have a much higher percentage of people new to the SC franchise. They have nothing to compare the game to, and so their expectations are that much lower. Also, can you really believe that the forums of the game developers would be completely impartial, and that at least some of the more negative posts don't somehow just 'disappear?'

The reason The Sims sold so well and thus justified the expansion packs (both the original and The Sims 2) is that the base game is still a great game that is perfectly playable out of the box. The expansions add to the experience, rather than completing it.

This game could possibly be the most frustrating game in the world, as it frustrates me on so many levels, and for reasons I could never have anticipated. I'll try my best to stay on one point before going onto the next, but after a week of playing, I have so much bile to vent that it may just go everywhere. Technical: I'm running this game on a pretty high-end computer, with Vista 64bit, and even after the v1.1 patch, I can maybe get two or, if I'm lucky, three hours tops out of this game before it either hangs and forces me to restart, or I get a CTD and the program gets closed down. Now, I know Vista isn't the most stable gaming OS, but the only game I've played with worse stability on Vista is Railroads! which grants me half an hour tops before grinding to a halt. I know this is an issue which will probably be patched in a few weeks, but EA seem to be relying more and more on patches to rectify issues that were shelved during development because they set deadlines too tightly. Receiving a game only half-finished surely breaches several trading laws... Graphical: A full 3D game of this size was always going to have graphics a step back from the fixed-point gorgeousness that was SC4, and like most other tycoon/builder games making the leap to 3D, taking a more cartoony approach can mask a multitude of graphical sins, but the game really does take it too far, and I expect more than a few meshes were rescued and recycled from Simsville before that got shelved. The variety of building styles is impressive, but maybe instead of including several of the more extreme fantasy buildings, the developers could have added a few more options for the more mainstream buildings. Interface & Menus: The interface itself is insulting in its childishness to anyone over the age of ten, with oversized buttons and primary colours that makes the interface and menus used by The Sims suddenly seem sober and grown-up. The drive to simplify everything to the nth degree begins to show its dark side here, when suddenly, an hour into playing, you realise that you're spending almost as much time searching through the bloated , endless lists of buildings, with only very general filters. The pre-set city type filters are more a hindrance than a help, as often I've found myself having toturn this off, as I've begun to paint myself into a corner when it comes to the different 'energies' requirements. In short, just five menus isn't enough. Gameplay: Oh. My. God. The first word that comes to mind is 'patronising.' SC4 did manage to alienate a few gamers by being too complex, and complaints that the element of fun rated low. Comparing the two games, you could be mistaken for thinking that SCS was a knee-jerk response to those criticisms; yet the amount of time it took for this incarnation to appear tells us this can't be so. And the fact that several other concepts (Simsville) were tried tells us that EA really were looking for a new direction that was going to work, and ultimately settled on this. This game cannot be called a city simulator (the two words that actually give us its name), but rather a city builder. The gameplay is now so simplified and devoid of subtlety that it almost makes me wish I'd never played SC4, just so I could stop comparing how awful the playing experience is when stood up against its predecessor. A lot of the decisions do, in fact, have a reasonable basis, but every one of them goes too far. For one, utilities. Placing power lines, water pipes, worrying about waste disposal and juggling the right balance between too much and too little was something in SC4 that, while requiring time and thought, offered few dividends in the fun department. But to sweep away everything beyond making sure you have enough power (and having incredible surplus is absolutely

I'm just downloading the BAT and GMAX today, and I'm pretty apalled how badly-linked the main site is. Not only do you not realise you need an external download until you go to install the BAT, but the link is pretty well hidden, and there has been NO update since GMAX was made into a pay product... So without the help of ST, I'd have given up!

I like the fact that they look similar, but still a little different... They'd work really well placed together in a sports complex type thing...

Ach, that's a shame... but thanks for the reply... But I still think a city planning bureau would be a good idea... could be linked to all the things a good city should have; size, low traffic, low pollution, high mayor rating... A nice glass&steel building maybe...

Yeah, I know about holding down shift, and about Alt and about ctrl, but these are things you have to do every time... I'm talking about turning off those streets permanently... I always place my roads by hand...

SimGoober, I admire your work and have most of your lots, and was wondering, if I may be so bold, as to whether I might suggest a project... Or ask if it is possible. Now that lots which give information on things that you could only vaguely determine beforehand (population breakdown, farm types etc), I was wondering if there was any way to display a breakdown of the levels of building in your city. I imagine it to be something like a city planning office, and whilst relieving demand caps across the board, also shows you how many stage 6, 7 and 8 buildings for R & C are in your city. Not as useful as some of the other 'data-lots' but a good one for all those who like to brag about the verticality of their cities...

Oh my god, is that really how we used to play this game when we first got it? Zoning huge tracts of RCI and waiting for something to happen, then throwing as many civic buildings as possible at it? Whoever made the game footage didn't have a clue... And BTW, is there really no way to turn off auto-streets? I heard there was a key combo...