Tommo

Nah, they aren't there. It's the worst problem to me, as i don't think they could be added with some expansion.

I noticed also that the game is really slow after some play, for a very stupid reason: if you zoom street level, the game loads detailed meshes for the buildings. When you zoom out, it will keep the detailed model instead to put the simpler ones it was using for that same level! So after you zoom in many different places of a city, the game becomes quickly crawling... and you have to reset to planet mode. Instead if you don't zoom _ever_ it remains fast and fluid even at high resolutions.

I agree with likeseattle, it's exactly my feeling...maybe the new SC4 is indeed there under tons of marketing and wrong gameplay choices... @numpty dumpy these are exactly the excessive rants i was mentioning - letting aside the money part (which is just awful) the rest of the things are irrelevant features in the broader scope of a game; many are design choices that only look bad for you, maybe... for example i like the less info part, green to red is definitely better of random number that appeared often in SC4 for example. And you aren't representative of the fanbase, to make money they have (unfortunately) to also address casual gamers! I think that in the current market, where the most hardcore thing is Halo, and the wii has groundbreaking success with games shallow as a pond, investing everything in a citybuilder is indeed a courageous decision... and you can't (again, unfortunately) expect a game with more options than SC4. Anyway if this is the price of asking for ideas, don't worry, they won't repeat the same mistake

I'm saying that you can't blame MC for ignoring many of the ideas, because most software houses would just ignore them all and do as they want. How many games do you know that had a mod as an inspiration? As i said, it's not fair that you ask them to "Ask NAM team for inside info" or "directly do what user told"...they were already generous in doing what they did. And in fact is because of these good premises one can be disappointed on how the game (and the community relations) turned out; in fact i am.. they cut off from the fan base in the moment they needed it more... when it had to give them money. They say they want to make fast cash; i think that selling a stripped down single player version will have exactly the opposite effect turning off player from the game even in the long period. But some rants around here are just excessive, that's all.

Originally posted by: RegisteringSucks They did have direct access to tons of people who bought and still play SC4 via the forums at CU and CXL. These people did more than answer a survey. They were willing, in some cases incredibly eager, to directly tell MC what they wanted in a new city building game. They spent hours posting, explaining, fleshng out ideas...Telling MC what they wanted, what would make them buy the game and play it for years, and why. quote> Well, I think that this is not really fair towards MC: how many software house do you know that actually open a forum for suggestions, talk with the user base, investigate "underground" things like NAM? In fact there are absolutely no SHs that do this, because honestly fan suggestions are often just a mess. I don't absolutely mean that each single opinion is crap; no, it's that the "average" desires of a fanbase are, in the end, a big and unoriginal more of the same, that often would not even be funny if built. The massified FPSes that everyone blames, for example, are often tailored to appeal to the most generic user base... while instead many good games were initially blamed by long-time fans because of their difference from what they like most. So you can't expect that an auto-financed SH just sits there and listen what YOU want to play. It's already a good thing that they changed so much after City Life to please the fan base...

Originally posted by: Cleaner475 Maybe we are all being to harsh on Monte Cristo now but I expected more. With all the feedback and and a very good skilled development team I would've thought they'd at least match the brilliance of SC4 when it was laucnhy for the first time. Its the ludicrous online fees and lack of transport that keep me from buying. I'll probably buy it eventually once there is a lot more content. Richardquote> Yeah it's exaclty what i think... online fees for a single player static game only to get content that just doesn't belong to online play is crap. Mass transit aside, playing it a bit more i noticed that what makes it look dull and dumb is the rock-bottom difficulty setting: nothing influences nothing, services are useless, streets just works, it is really impossibile to lose, and after 10.000 you can amass thousand of citizens with an imperceptible fraction of your money... Anyway i tried playing creating myself the constraints; like building all the services anyway, zoning under a mountain, avoiding heavy industry and unqualified workers... It actually works better and provides a good challenge... i think that the gameplay could become WAY better just multiplying all the game factors. Like, school accounts for 10x satisfaction but traffic is 10x stronger, citizens travel 100x less (they actually go from one side to the another of a big map...) and it should be overall more difficult to get citizens in your town. But then, you would need mass transit to run the city... i hope that we can edit those values in some ini file.

Are you sure that this isn't already in place? Zooming to ground level i saw many omnicorp ltd banners (clearly fake ads) but there was also a .com site that i can't remember, that looked real.

Hi, i tried the demo these days, and i was enough satisfied... then i read there that most of users only wait the release to unleash destructive reviews on this game. Personally, i'm a gamer that looks to the "feeling" the game gives (being somewhat a casual xD), more than the sheer number of features... and i must admit that CXL gave me the "simcity" feeling for the first time after SC4. I'm just entertained building cities that bend over the terrain, trying to make beautiful landscapes, even wasting space!!! Anyway i do see the point behind the frustration: while i like to do such things, the game barely reacts to achievements. It's brain dead easy as you need at most to place roads, and to balance job demand and offer... on top of that there's a bunch of pointless design choices: *why there's nothing that can scare my citizens? Any malus like traffic/smog/waste/commute is just irrelevant to the people! I made a test city up to 22.000 with no services AT ALL, thriving with an income of 27.000$ in the end. *Why all the blocks are squared and identical? It just ruins the feeling! *why i can't build square zones over a really small slope? *why the camera can't tilt? (or have a free fly mode) *why there isn't pause/speedup? *Why there isn't a way to replace a zone with another? destroying a whole zone (with all its streets) only to upgrade to medium is plain stupid. *heck, you can't reduce the funding of things! if you can't afford the hospital (wich, in the end, is useless) you have to destroy it completely. *it lacks too many transportation options. Anyway, after this horrific list of disadvantages, i'm still convinced that this game could be a great game; the gameplay basics are just there, they only didn't notice (quoting from another topic, MC is no Maxis). Because except the last one, everything is a matter of a small fix, or just a need to adjust some values. Just adding 10x to the services dissatisfaction would make up for a challenge, for example. And because it's a 2009 game, and it has that fresh feeling that simcity can no more give me... i mean, it's even slower than CXL on my GT8800! I hope that the guys at MC don't ruin this one for the marketing... while i'm not sure i'm buying the first version, i think that a "rush hour" could easily solve much of the problems. What do you think about this? This game can't be better than this and we should ignore it, or it is a matter of time?

Hi, i bought that pc, with a E6600, 2gb ddrII 800mhz, and an ATI Radeon X1950 Pro 512.... but i kept Windows XP.... And it's SLOWER than before! After updating the drivers, and pasting the Gb of plugins and cities i get 4 fps on a 400k city.... Oblivion maxed out runs at 50+ fps.... Fortunately in Software mode Sim City 4 is really fast also on maximum settings, in the same city the fps are 20-30, nearly without lags. So it think that there isn't a way to get a good (decent) perfomace on an ATI card newer than 9200?

Well, i come from a Pentium4HT 3,0 Ghz so i should see a big advance with a E6700, that should be one of the best processors around... My doubt were about the VGA card... my old one, because of a bug, was really slow. A screen filled with buildings could drop the framerate at 5-4 fps... So your advice is to buy an NVIDIA? AN 8600 GTS could be a good choice? Considering quality/price is much better the X1950... it's an hard choice... @coolotter88 it can't be, because i never used vista... it was slow on XP, and software render was FASTER that hw render... while the VGA worked great with any other game.

Hi, i'm about to buy a new PC, and the main "gaming" components are: Intel core2duo E6700/6600 DDRII 2x1Gb ATI X1950 Pro Vista Premium 32 bit I want to use on it also SimCity4 Deluxe. At a first look it should work just fine, but i have some doubts, because my current Ati X800 Pro was really slow with it... when using simcity it ran slower than the Software render... X1950 pro hasn't the same compatibility bugs with SC4 or i have to buy an Nvidia? And i'm afraid that Vista could have some compatibility problems with a 2003 game... Thanks for any reply, Tommo

Done... i removed all and now the default trees are shown... but i still can't create new trees...

I installed PEG Pines for God mode... and i haven't installed any fog mod. Could be a problem that i installed also cycledogg's tree mod? This shouldn't have effects on God mode...

I think that the mod works, because i had this problem also with the just-installed game... I know that the game is designed to create different trees at different altitudes, but i get only pines on higher mountains... why i can't create oaks and other trees??? here's a screenshot: I am creating trees but they spawn only over a certain altitude.

Thanks, but i think that i had not explained well my problem... I CAN plant trees in God Mode, with and without mods, but ONLY on high mountain, where the terrain is brown (without using mods)... Under a certain level, no tree are created. Insistead, in major mode i can plant any tree at any level, but they won't grow up...