Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last Visited

About calpolyfan

  • Rank

Profile Information

  • City-building game(s)
    SimCity 4
    Cities: Skylines
    SimCity 3000
    SimCity 2000
    SimCity Classic
  1. I agree, they kind of blew it when they went for agent based, instead of just simulating/fudging population numbers based on a given structure. Because of the size and complexity of a city, it was quite silly for Colossal Order to try and simulate agents. Not sure what they were thinking, as that was the kiss of death for this game having larger cities and not getting too laggy. Which reminds me of another thing that is super annoying about this game - the "Reward" buildings such as the CO Office building are much too large and out of scale, as is pretty much everything in this game. The sense of scale was completely off, with huge roads compared to lots and tiny skyscraper lots etc. I agree with you that there wasn't much "simulation" behind the office buildings, and the education system was flawed. The "spaghetti" looking aspect that four deep zones are placed when roads are built also leads to rather fake looking cities, and zoning definitely could have been handled much better. It was kind of silly, when the fanbase kept asking for medium density during the development process, and CO kind of told everybody go get lost (kind of like the Chirp bird come to think of it).. Also, overall, I have to say, the base game graphics for this game are absolutely terrible, especially when zoomed out at a medium level. It really looks like the Easter Bunny took a dump all over the map with the pastel pinks and blues, edges to buildings and general graphical appearance of base game is just awful, headache inducing. By contrast, the night views can be rather stunning, and the different colors for different sized boulevards should be applauded. It's kind of a tale of Dr. Jekell and Mr. Hyde on this game, or the Seinfeld episode "Two Face" regarding day/night graphics. The transportation options, while varied, are extremely shallow simulation wise as well, with crazy busy bus stops, not much useable data, and not a very deep traffic simulation going on for anything except roads. Airplanes/ships use their pre-determined routes that are vectors, and clip through land if it is built, airports are one-dimensional, no correlation between air traffic and city size etc. ---- Which brings me to my final gripe: The base game isn't quite where it ever needed to be/didn't get tested enough to make this game "playable" without mods on release. That, combined with the Steam system, which constantly demands updates etc. and it doesn't feel like the "offline always" game we were all promised. The terrible interface with Steam Workshop, where unsubscribing to things takes forever and is organized terribly is cumbersome and annoying. The old SC4 Model - you know, where you actually own your game, there is a CD, and you can create a folder for plugins, and the game doesn't take three months to load was a lot more fun. I always find myself watching videos of people making amazing stuff in Cities Skylines, but when I try and get all the mods needed, sometimes I can't even start the game, so it's a bit "false advertising" if you will to many people watching these professional designers with super rigs online making cities that look great: Because 95% of the people playing this game will never have that experience. Anyway, this game while revolutionary in some aspects really is a shallow city simulation game, built by people who I don't think understand what a city building game is actually supposed to be about (no offense). I know this game sold very well, but it could have been a lot better. I hope the next people to try and do city building do it right, and take more commentary from their fanbase, instead of trudging ahead, not listening to the fanbase.
  2. Hey there everyone. Just found out about this new airport building game (in actual 3d) which is looking very promising so far: I'm personally very excited about this game, wishing the crew from Lithuania the best of luck becoming the next Colossal Order. Here is there forum, it's not too active, but they do reply on occasion. http://www.realwelders.com/forum/viewforum.php?f=3
  3. I am not saying I want an online-always game. Quite the contrary actually, I despise online always games, and I agree, that's definitely a major reason SimCity2013 failed (and the small maps). I generally avoid buying "online always" games, and that's why I was excited about Skylines, even though I was skeptical about it being on Steam - but then, after I got it on Steam I realized it wasn't really "offline always" as there were constant updates etc and login requirements on Steam that basically made it "technically offline" but essentially you needed to keep re-logging online to get it to work. That sucked. This was a pretty big let-down for me, as I like the simplicity of games like SC-4 where there isn't nonsense about updates etc, and the game just loads. You download mods and buildings when you want to be logged in and just do it manually, worked just fine. What I was saying is that I would love to see a large-scale multiplayer aspect incorporated into the city building genre. Imagine A big map of Europe, divided into 10KM squares. Each player chooses a start location , and is able to purchase squares directly adjacent, not unlike maps in Skylines, only on a much larger scale. Distances between cities on the map would be generated for trade deals, but the squares in between these distant cities would just be generated data - with the exception of shipping routes, and maybe train routes which would use pathfinding around the larger map. Players could play when they wanted to, and not play when they had things to do, only have the game update after they hit the "update" button which would require being online. When they logged back in, they would see the map update where other players cities had grown etc (maybe an infographic would be nice) and present the player with any trade deals (Shipping, Airport Slots/routes, outside rail or highway connection request, trash/power deals etc.) other players had proposed and they could either agree, or refuse said agreements with other players. Imagine you have an airport you built - There could be an aerobiz kind of slot selling component - and you could make deals with other players regarding setting up airline routes - trade deals regarding shipping, airports, and long-distance trains even, where other players trains/airplanes/ships from great distances pull into your seaport - Wouldn't that be cool?, where your painted ships/planes stand in stark contrast. Seeing your airport get demand based on the cities population and economy- and you would physically have to increase the airport size by adding gates - but there could also be an airline/company aspect to the game where you buy particular kinds of airplanes and assign them to routes to distant cities that either you build or make deals with other players on the map. The planes that pulled in and out of the airport gates would actually be run by you (and other players) and painted in your city/company colors.. Players with more influence would be known map-wide by their planes making more frequent showings at your airports.. same with ships, and trains. That would be a lot of fun for me.. and that's kind of what I've always hoped would happen with city builders.
  4. I think it's time that CO move on to the next game. They need a better engine or better way to reduce polygons or not actually to simulate every sim. in order to make this a fun game, where you can have very large cities. I would recommend making the scale of the next game 10KM by 10KM, so building regions and countries in a regional mesh would be easier accomplished. Also, a "sim" of rail routes and airplane routes/ ferry routes and shipping would be generated using these 10 by 10 squares as a distance for costs and travel times between distant cities on a much larger scale map. This way, you could have the actual use for an interesting airport. and shipyard. On a large-scale multi player map, trade deals would be made, as only the players who were online would be adding on during any given time.. and property could be bought/sold and deals made with utilities, airline routes, shipping deals etc. between cities on an enormous map, which was only updated when/if players were online.. When you think about it - "City Builder" Games really are the perfect thing for a multi-player game, but it has never been done.
  5. Hi There, Long time member on the forum, haven't commented in a while after the hype of Skylines wore off. I am watching the city-building genre kind of go stale. The last really good city building game was SimCity 4.. as Skylines is riddle with issues that make it (at least for me) annoying to play at best, but almost nonfunctional. Often, (when a smaller scale especially) visually cities can look pretty good from some angles, but the game isn't fun, and I think I have slowly put my finger on why that is. Cities Skylines was released at the perfect time to become hugely successful; a long drought in the City-Building Genre, combined with spectacular crash-and-burn always online annoyance of SimCity with tiny maps really alienating their fanbase, as well as the non-success of games such as Cities XL, and XXL. The media Hype was huge around Skylines, and enough people believed it appeared that the game would be the perfect replacement for SimCity 4 that sales took off. Right out the gate though, on the first day of gameplay I started to notice a number of things that didn't feel good about the game: 1. Bad City Graphics (Usually I'm not a graphics stickler, but in a city building game the graphics are very important. The graphic style almost looked like a Mars Colony more than any city on Earth. The super vibrant pastel blues, greens, yellows, and pinks complimented soil that turns purple when it got polluted.. (interesting design choice). At many levels of zoom, obvious graphical switches between large and small model files loading really grabbed the eye, and sharp looks to many of the buildings (for some reason the graphics, even when on higher setting are headache inducing. To this day, the base graphics appear mostly the same as they were at launch, instead of say replacing them with better looking "Brooklyn/NY" designed sets for example, having paid the model designers a bit to use their sets commercially. Any mods added to the games already long load-times, which makes them not as fun as they could have been. Which leads to.. 2. Game Load Times Ridiculous It's hard to have fun playing this game, when even with the mod that speeds stuff up, game takes many minutes to load.. and what's even worse, when exiting the wait is excrutiatingly long. It's hard to have fun playing a game when load times are this poor and you're afraid to exit a city or do other things out of fear of waiting so long. 3. Game is Clunky - Over Ambitious / Under Optimized The Traffic in this game is both a high point and a low point - It's a high point in so much that laying roads is flexible and rather easy to do and cars are individually simulated. There are also individual sims being generated and followed around everywhere. Every agent you see is simulated, not procedural generated. Well, this is great in theory, but as the city grows, you can tell the computer isn't haven't too much fun playing 'simulate every little thing' on this scale. Usually around 100K population the simulation slows down, and thinks start getting clunkier. Around 250K things are pretty much unplayable (I bought a new computer for this game, apparently not the right one) to the point of generally being annoying in a 3D environment. This makes this game not so fun for building large cities - Not to mention a mod is needed to open up all the tiles on a map (come on guys). Simulating Flowing Water was ambitious, but it might be the straw that broke the camel's back computer performance wise, and is it needed really? Also, the joy of vehicles etc. quickly moving around your city is lost, as things run slower and slower due to so many agents being simulated. This is the trade-off on simulating everything down to the single agent. Which I think was a big mistake. Had they procedural generated some aspects such as general traffic maps and just populated areas with vehicles where the player is focused and just generally simulated traffic elsewhere I don't think this game would have been such a CPU hog and building truly large cities would have been more possible. For other areas, agents should have been simulated: Trains, Boats and Airplanes etc- these are large-scale infrastructure that people would pay more attention to on a larger map. Every single car on the other hand, let's just make this game playable and proceedurally create cars on the road when necessary to allow larger cities. 4. Very Large Cities Hard to Build Due to CPU Constraints. Kind of mentioned this above, but very large cities are hard to build due to CPU constraints. The cities in Skylines, while bigger than SimCity 2013 are actually smaller than a SC4 region for example. In this aspect, we took a step backward in the city-building genre, and arguably one of the main reasons people play city simuators is to make massive cities. Unless you're running this thing on a supercomputer, that's just not possible. 5. Zoning / Zone Depth / Lack of Skyline Simulation For a game called "Cities Skylines" there really isn't much skyline developing in any city you build, unless you plop buildings. There is a sea of "mid rise" skyscrapers topped out all about the same height- What a letdown! I was hoping to see a gentle arch toward the most expensive land values in town, and a corresponding skyline, but nope, there apparently is little, if any actual city simulation taking place regarding land values and other factors contributing to tall buildings. Zoning is more limited than previous city buildings, and zones are 4 (very small) boxes deep. Zoning left many players very discouraged, with hopes that the zoning issues could be fixed via modding, but apparently they can not. Both of these things are very bad for Colossal Order, as long before the game was launched people were pointing out the "painty" look to road placement, ergo "4 deep zones".. It just doesn't look right and creates for a repetitive/painted look to city growth. Even SimCity 4 would build in some generic blocks which is a much better method to placing zones and streets. 6. Really Bad Sound Effects I don't usually complain about sound effects in a game, but these are the worst sound effects I have heard in a game in recent memory. From the terrible bulldoze sound that is way too loud, repetitive, and just frankly annoying, to the sirens blaring way too loud and constant it's hard to be more annoying. Really nothing positive to say. How could it be this bad, and not fixed with an update? Yikes. 7. Stubbornness on the Side of the Developers Want 3 Zoning densities? Too bad. Want Zones deeper than 4 tiles? Too bad. Want realistic looking buildings? Too bad. Don't like the Chirper? Too bad. Don't want Pastel Colored Goofy buildings and vehicles? Too bad. Want the entire map playable? Too bad. There was a lot of almost cockiness/stubbornness with how the developers have interacted (or not) with the city-building fanbase. I think this team did an acceptable job making a city builder in 3d, but not an exceptional job in any way shape or form, and they have shown they really don't care what the majority of fans want or ask for, they're going to do it their way anyway. 8. Limited Transportation/ Lack of Sim. Ships at ports will drive over land if land is terraformed, limited shipping aspects, trains run way too frequently it's almost a joke, and don't really serve much of a purpose. Airports are a joke, super tiny. No ferry options. No zoning of Aiports/ Seaports. Trams etc. are an extra money-grab. etc.. Especially the trains aspect was seriously botched in this game, and generally any type of transportation that isn't a road seems pretty flimsy/not simulated or thought about very well by the developers. 9. No Large groweable buildings Since zone sizes are 4x4 and there appears to be no real building simulation running in this game (whereby downtown areas would get taller buildings than other areas) the only way to make a "skyline" pop is to add plopabble buildings. This is a huge letdown for most city building fans, as growing taller buildings is pretty much the entire purpose of a city building game. I've said it before, but city building is more like gardening than anything else.. You create the conditions necessary for development, but have to wait for it to grow to its potential. Just selecting a building and plopping it completely misses the boat on what the purpose of a city building game is. The anticipation of seeing what a new large skyscraper will be, as it grows from foundation up is a huge aspect of city building games which is generally overlooked. Not to mention, the lack of building height variety, and this game is a complete let down, with repetitive looking cities with buildings all on pretty much the same lot size and no focus to the skylines and urban development. Really, really bad. Yes, CO was able to sell many copies of its game, but after playing for a while, I think most city builder fans clearly understand this game is not "the one" by any stretch. Because Skylines was marketed so well, came into the market at the right time, etc. it gobbled up a majority of the city building fanbase.. Who were "happy enough" with it to not ask for a different game.. The irony is, Skylines might kill the city building genre for a while. Had this game not come out, I wonder if we all might be playing a much more fun, actual city simulator game that for all intents and purposes could be a better City Builder right now. I personally think this game is not fun, has a number of serious issues, and is actually fundamentally irritating at times, unlike anything I experienced with any SimCity game. I think the City-Building genre has shown a very rabid fanbase that will spend money on a good city building game. Let's hope we get that game. Or Maybe, the fact that Cities Skylines sold so well, and really wasn't a finished city-building game and could have been a lot better will interest some other game designers to try their own attempt at a city-building game? Hard to tell whether Skylines will dominate the city-building genre for a while longer, or whether another developer thinks they can do better and the market is still viable. If Skylines has shown one thing, it's that City-builder games can and will sell, and make plenty of money. The super-shooter/racing etc. gamer needs are met, but city-builder fans have been under appealed to, making the opportunity still there for a very profitable city builder if done correctly.
  6. Stadium Building Game? - Can We Make One?

    Bleacher/cement sections to build the stadium, ammenities, bathrooms, concessions stands, etc.. Parking.. ramps to get into the stadium etc.. This could be a lot of fun.. guess you're not a Stadium guy BO?
  7. Hey everybody.. Just wanted to float an idea that I have been brainstorming for a while.. It's a Stadium building game- As far as I know, nobody has ever done one. With the popularity of Football/Soccer/Baseball even Cricket and Rugby- Why is it you don't think there has ever been a stadium building / stadium management game created? The stadium would start as just a field, with some temporary bleachers.. Players could add concessions, sideline advertising, more bleachers etc. Bad management would lead to lower attendance (too many/too few concessions, restrooms in bad locations/ limited/ too many (cost over runs) . Aspects of the fan experience, such as comfort (add enough extra seatbacks if demand requires it, eventually Luge seating, and private boxes, that go all the way to VIP would be very expensive to construct, but good for high end donors) Video boards/ audio equipment should be an element to "entertain" the fans.. Of course, a good stadium layout, combined with good stadium flow (enough vomitoriums) and not too far a distance between rows and an exit/pathway should be considered, as well as line-of sight. Furthermore, building some sort of roofing for stadium might also be in consideration, increasing attendance vs. very hot/sunny, or rainy game days.. Simulated Game days would be a net gain/loss in total budget.. Parking/ shuttle services/ tailgating areas.. Creating very unique/interesting/ exciting stadiums of various types, all centered around the original field built would be very fun for most sports fans.. Why hasn't this been done yet? Anybody with a programming background interested in getting this going with me? It seems like an obvious game to make.. and a very fun one, slowly building the stadium from a prep/high school/ club level all the way to the biggest stadiums at the top levels? This could be a great game.
  8. could use a larger variety of buildings, and hopefully more dynamically created yards, instead of being so uniform.. If you could do that.
  9. I would be happy with maximum 8X8.. 4x4 is too small for most American cities. There is hardly any variation.. makes all the lots "stack up" as well, creating a generally bad look to a game. This is real-life (in America at least, not Hong Kong, Benidorm, or Sao Paulo).. Lots are not puny 4x4 sizes.. Notice the image above.. there's a 4x8 (at least) and a lot more larger than 4x4 essentially sized lots. The fact that you can't admit this game is limited is kind of telling.
  10. Few cities in the world have such narrow (4x4) lot sizes all over the place, and no wider buildings. Also, no "large compound" type neighborhoods, to look forward to with sprawling yards etc.. Remember SimCity 4? Those yards were perhaps ahead of their time. Huge yard neighborhoods were so rewarding to achieve in that game.. Miss that with the 4x4 nonsense being passed off as a city sim.
  11. I can see your point. For me, building an airport (and seaport) could be one of the most interesting/fun parts of a city building game like CS- They are areas which have been so ignored for so long that players don't even realize what fun potentially is there. It's amazing to me, we have a city building game in this day and age which really has no freight transfer element. I mean, A-train was in 1992! 24 years ago, and they had freight transfer: Today, we can't have white freight containers for imports, and green freight containers for exports? Freight is completely ignored. I guess I'll have to wait and see how Transport Fever works out- it isn't look so great right now on the city building side.. but is looking good on the freight management side. in general are interesting because they are unique with their concourse layouts and designs, so I really think this would add a lot to gameplay. If it was easy to build a unique airport, and expansion of the airport was actually part of the economy, this could be a ton of fun. I definitely agree with you that the main game should be focused on city building, and a better city simulation than what we have now.
  12. Hey thanks! I don't think I'm going to bother- There's plenty of very good content for this game in the rowhouse looking department.. I'm not too worried about it. But thank you. ------------- Regarding Airport Construction- After the player clicked the "build an airport" icon, a menu would pop up asking for a 3 letter aiport code - Say your town in Forest Valley, I guess FVX would be a good one. Also, a full airport name would be asked for. After that, you would have your Airport nice and named, with the Airport code all nice and set up. Now, there would be a few steps to creating the terminal.. Steps for building the terminal building: Step 1: Place the main terminal lobby- This is the point at which humans will enter/exit the airport and go to the street or other transportation beyond the airport. This section can be dragged in order to increase lobby space, individual terminal lobbys could also be built. Step 2: Drag the Passenger Concourse Structure - Either from the main Passenger Terminal, or just have it as an island, which will be connected via shuttle. Step 3: Place the individual gates, and draw a path line from gate to main runway/tarmac paths. Steps for building the runway (flat land required for entire airport): Step1: Click and drag the length of the runway Step2: Connect runway to tarmac and terminal. Step 3: Connect paths between the runway beginning and end and terminal. If one concourse or the airport gets too busy, it's time for an addition.. This would be fun for a player, as needing to add another concourse would be a sing of a growing economy and larger airport- Concourses could be extendable to any length.. so players could build more real-life airports. Of course, the player would also have the option of building underground tunnels to concourses from the main terminal building: Final Step: Build one of a few types of airport control towers. --- Like I said previously, demand for maintenance hangars, other hangars and some other support buildings might also be included- Commerce would be constrained in 3 ways: 1. Inadequate Passenger Terminal Space/poor transportation interface 2. Inadequate runway length for larger airplanes 3. Inadequate gates for airport volume 4. Inadequate freight transfer areas Your airport would receive a star-level, or efficiency rating. Have a good rating, expect higher and medium wealth commercial and residential to get a boost. Have a low efficiency rating and expect commerce and industry to suffer. The "dragging" of concourses from the main airport terminal could best be compared to the process of building a harbor in Anno 1404 who have played this game.. Think of the Harbor Master's office as the main passenger terminal, from there, piers can be drawn, which usually connect, but don't have to (the concourses) to the Terminal.. You get the idea (if you've played Anno)
  13. Blender is an extremely hard to use modeler as well. Maybe that's why it's free. Blender is far from user-friendly or intuitive. I spent quite a bit of time trying to figure out how to model in it, watched a lot of YouTube videos, and never got the hang of it. Also, excuse me for pointing it out, but has CO released even one tutorial on how to import buildings from Blender? I don't think so.
  14. Yeah, this game crashes all the time.. Pretty much a piece of garbage.. Takes about 7 minutes to load a city, upon loading, alerts to you errors, then crashes upon exit or trying to load another city. Larger cities run at a crawl- that is, if they don't crash completely. This game is totally unstable, and to make it playable you need mods.. if you subscribe to any mods though, it becomes more unstable, and load times become ridiculous.. It's pretty much a catch 22 crap shoot.
  15. So, here are my main problems with this game: 1. Maximum 4x4 zone grow size. - No larger compounds on large lots, no large mansions with lush grounds, no larger commercial skyscraper lots, no larger industry groweable zones. This is a massive failure. This really hurts the overall sense of scale that exists in game, and makes the urban area look very fake and cookie-cutter. 2. Game seems generally unstable, and is a memory hog - The game design doesn't "feel" solid, the game doesn't run very well. I did buy a new computer for this game, and it's still laggy, crashy, and after subscribing to a few mods gets a lot of error messages. Game crashes on exit.. Doesn't seem like this game works very well. Larger cities slow to a crawl. Perhaps over-ambitions generating every sim? 3. Lack of regional play/interaction - No larger region to connect your city to.. SimCity4 generally got this right.. CS took a step backward. Even more could have been done with regional interaction, including freight, and airport elements. This really could have added a whole new level of gameplay 3.5: A missed opportunity for a larger multi-player game, where mayors could propose deals with other mayors for garbage, water, electricity, freight, and even airport room/ airport slots. This is ambitious, but seems doable in this day and age. 4. Lack of Freight/trading/Import/Export of goods: When games as old as A-train, can create generic "goods" at least "import/export" goods should be visually manifested by containers.. Goods should be either imported/exported into the city via rail/road/ship/airport, and should have good storage yards, or warehouses (public, or private) in order for the economy.. Which brings me to shipping/airports: 5. Airport design, Seaport Design very crude. There was a huge missed opportunity here, regarding airports and seaports: Airports: Building an airport should not be a "one click" thing- Players should have to lay out a runway- dragging it to a certain length (extendable if larger planes are needed), and that runway should connect to a terminal building- The terminal building should be modular, consisting of a central terminal building, and terminal "wings" that should be draggable .. Then, players could place the gates from those arms. Different terminal wings would be fun to construct. If an airport terminal doesn't have enough gates, commerce should be capped.. Every airport would be unique, airport terminals would all look different. The larger the airport traffic, the more gates needed, terminal room, Hangars, maintenance Hangars, etc. Eventually, if traffic became too high, another runway would be needed. Longer runways should of course be necessary for larger airplanes to land. Selling slots to different cities' airlines would have been a fun component as well.. Finally, every airport should have at least one control tower.. larger towers for better visibility at larger airports. You get the idea. This would have been a fun game within a game as well. Similarly, Seaports- Players should have to build enough dock space for the level of commerce they experience, and should also have to build enough cranes to move goods. The larger the economy, the larger the container storage space needed at the shipyard. Seaports are one of the saddest areas of CS.. 6. Paths for seaport/airport are terrible - Seaport paths are pre-determined at game start time, so if land is changed, ships just "drive over land" to get to their point.. Really? Even SC4 was able to draw paths.. CO can't do this? 7. Game interface/design is really bad: I haven't seen a game recently with such a poor job with overall design- Trying to find a park, or what have you involves scrolling endlessly, a lot of the icons don't exist, and overall, just not an intuitive user interface. 8. Poor soundtrack/building/bulldozing/audio sounds - I know, I sound nit-picky here, but I have never heard a more annoying bulldoze sound in a game, the music is awful, and there is generally no ambience.. "Background noise" and "siren sounds" are overwhelming (yes you can control the level) but overall, not a good soundtrack to the game. Speaking of bulldozing- Trees re-appear, and green grass after roads are destroyed? Even Transport Tycoon showed disturbed ground after roads and rail were bulldozed.. 2016 and we can't do this, and have the world's most annoying bulldoze sound? Could they make the bulldozer sound any worse? For a sound effect that is used all the time, please! 9. Too many services needed - In vanilla game - Too many police stations, garbage dumps, mortuaries, schools, hospitals, fire stations etc. needed- Do CO have a clue what real life is like? 10. Mass Die-offs - indicate poor city simulation.. Everyone who moves into a house is born at the same time, causing die-offs.. really CO? Guess this is one of the sad side-effects of overly ambitious simulating of every agent? 11. Vanilla Graphics and color scheme awful - Light Blues, pinks, yellows and futuristic looking buildings result in a total failure of CO to make a realistic looking city in vanilla. Generally bad look to the graphics, especially when zoomed out.. Very bad transition between zoomed in/zoomed out graphics. Yes, I know, it's all about gameplay, right? Well, no actually a city builder is a lot about graphics as well. SC2013 did building graphics right.. and did a lot of other things totally wrong obviously. 12. Missed opportunity for multi-player on much larger maps - Had CO used a more easily expandable square map size, such as 5x5KM .. Larger global maps could have been easy to simulate, and distances between distant city areas for trade, travel etc.. easily calculable "reply when ready" trade deals with other mayors in a multiplayer mode would have made multi-player an option, even when mayors weren't playing at the same time. Want to set up a long-distance airline route with another player? Trade 13. Generally poorly designed simulation - Sometimes less is more - regarding simulating every single person, do we really need this, or is this just slowing down the game? To me, traffic trends could have been simulated like in SC4.. Water simulation- I don't need it to be honest and it appears to slow down the city sim. There doesn't appear to be much of a city simulation and the entire point of these types of games is the city simulation. Cities Skylines, ironically doesn't have a skyline simulation attached to it, so is perhaps the worst possible name for this game? You don't have to work to get large skyscrapers really.. Cities that are relatively small have a number of highrises.. just doesn't look right. CO doesn't understand how cities actually develop it appears. Yes, it is more of a city painter.. with 4 deep zones all over the map.. no it is not a "city skyline simulator"... This game really has no skyline simulation at all, which is why the name is so ironic. Don't get me wrong, I love city building games, just don't like this game, and yes, I have played it plenty.