Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'PC Gaming & Hardware' started by DennisK4, Feb 29, 2012.
I bet EA will sell DLC that increases plot size...
atleast not as the sole content in the dlc.
it would need to be an expansion because they would need to redo the engine/exe to support 64bit. so the game can access more than 2gb of ram. the way the simulation engine works they dont have enough memory to make the cities larger right now because they are limited by ram.
Beta 2 is starting on the 16th
you have until the 11th to sign up.
if you have the game preorderd on origin you will get a beta code.
if you registered for the first beta you dont need to register again but you also are not guaranteed a spot.
the beta is only a 24hr long beta to do server stress test.
same buildings that were locked before are still locked.
"Q: Is this the same experience as before?
A: We have implemented changes based on user feedback from our first Closed Beta. Players who participated in the first Closed Beta will notice improvements in the game when they use the zoning and road tools, alongside the hundreds of bug-fixes as well."
It looks like SC2013 has a store that will function much like the TF2 store. That pretty much means free modding is out the window...
How does it mean it's out the window?
I'm actually asking, not being sarcastic.
Didn't they state clearly that modding tools were going to be released? Of course, even if they do, how much people will be able to mod I'm sure is nowhere near previous iterations of the series.
Also, it says "both free and paid" content in the description, so would that not indicate there will possibly be user-made things downloadable for free?
As someone who has a professional interest in global markets, I have to say that the requirement of online connectivity may not be for the purposes of piracy.
I think what they're going for is to more accurately portray the relationships between randomness (the global markets) and order (how you build your city). In this way, connecting all instances of the game to one another is a really marvelous way of simulating what goes on every day.
With this global interdependence of game play, steel prices can move to supply and demand just as they do in real life. Building costs can fluctuate as they SHOULD - at the mercy of a global economy - rather than be static ($1,000 for a hospital) or simulated within the game itself ($1,100 for a hospital, but the $100 is just a dice roll within the game instance).
Sure, they could use the forced online component to do nasty stuff. But if the main reason they implemented it was to better mimic the international economy we live in today, then what could be more true to the "SIM" name than that?
the free part doesnt mean mods, some developers still release free content of their own.
but it would be nice if the store offered users to upload content similer to steam workshop.
The way everything is shaping up, the in-game store will be a requirement for any modders to get their content downloaded (Win 8, TF2, etc). Basically, I believe we are going to see The Sims all over again...abunch of pay-for-download websites filled with stuff. We won't see another SC4-style modding community from EA for a long time.
The Sim City's that Will Wright and Maxis brought us years over the past two decades is gone. Sim City Societies and the way EA is taking the game is the downfall of the Sim City series.
My guess is they'll run it much like The Sims 3...lots of expansions, Store content for money, and user-made stuff for free as well.
Is it just me or is this game basically sims 4
its just you.
not following your logic at all, maybe you just picked a terrible example, or do not understand how source mods work. since you have chosen a paid system that results in directly the opposite of what I think you're trying to say, offering a small subset of paid mods that does not affect the custom community at all, besides influencing certain modders to choose the storefront over their own outlets.
the advantage you may not be realising here is, community devs are motivated to release more content than you would have ever seen without the supporting infrastructure in place. those who have been with tf2 since the beginning would have noticed a huge surge in the amount of both free and paid mods due to its popularity. I lost interest in the game by then, but I sure don't remember a decline in free mods at this point, quite the opposite actually.
gamebanana.com anyone? still seems pretty lively to me at a glance.
now don't get me wrong, it's not like I have anything over zero faith that ea is going to give a single fuck about community devs but, offering a storefront really has nothing to do with anything, unless they actively prevent free content from being released. which I would not put beyond them either, this isn't valve we're talking about here.
I am not defending it as ok. Maybe my expectations are just lower and I accept it for what it is and know that there is nothing that I can do about it.
I am simply looking for a game to provide hours of entertainment. I just do not care about always having to be online. By the time they take the servers down, I will not be playing this game anyways. I will have 100's of other games to play by then and I won't care. The city size is not deal breaker either cause I simply don't care about making some mega city. I think having 16 different specialized cities in a region is much more interesting.
I could care less about the money dude. I am looking for good entertainment in the little amount of free time I have in between work, wife, 3 kids and responsibilities. I make alot of money and will continue to make more. 100$ for many hours of entertainment is money well spent in my opinion since I am likely to go out one weekend and spend a couple hundred in the bar and for alcohol at home.
Games have about a 6 month shelf life with me currently and I will not be playing this game in 5 years so your 5 year sub comment is silly.
I agree with your sentiments... need to live in the moment, enjoy shit while you have it/it's there and you can get something from it in life.
However, the only problem I have with that mentality is being given things that are sub-par and having to "settle" for something that could have been far better, instead of being a game that does offer longevity due to having depth, and generally higher quality production values all around.
So far, it seems the game is far too limiting and limited, and could have really been a huge offering with a lot more to it in the end, especially given the tech available these days. I would like to be able to still be playing five years from now, as with SimCity IV, which is still fun to play.
Devs need to focus on quality, instead of the almighty fucking dollar, which they'd actually bring in more of with a higher quality, more expansive game. I'd think devs would realize that by now.
We'll have to see just how limited the game really is when it's released. The smaller city size is the worst thing for me, even over the always-on, though that is unacceptable. However, I'd try to overlook both as long in those small areas I can end up with a landscape packed with skyscrapers and other huge, interesting buildings with some interesting designs and a large amount of Sims running around.
So you're saying you're ok with it.
No, he's not "OK" with it... which he makes clear in what he's saying. He's just willing to "settle", in other words, just to have at least somewhat of a good experience, and appreciate it for what ever it has to offer.
I don't believe we should have to "settle" for anything, there's just no excuse for it, but what can you do? It is what it is, and while they could have made a far better game from what it seems like thus far, if it has any redeeming qualities at all, and it's something someone is into, sometimes people are willing to make concessions.
He's making it clear he's not "OK" with it, that he's just lowering his expectations to "settle" for what's being offered. Sometimes in the world of gaming, that's just what you have to do. Though I don't believe in doing it too often or more extreme cases, given that it does send the wrong message to lazy and/or money-hungry devs.
Agreed. Small cities is a killer for me, and the regions aren't adequate compensation for it.
As an alternative, I have been playing a fair amount of Cities XL Platinum, and while it has its fair share of flaws, it has pulled me in with as much force as previous Simcity games. I guess it is somewhat iterative from previous versions of the series, but for relative newcomers to the series like me, there is a lot to like. Case in point, I built a 750k population city on about 25% of a city map using about 50% low density zones. Now that's scale!
Plus, it's on Steam .
Exactly. It [regions] doesn't "make up" for it, not for me personally, anyway.
I really do not want several smaller cities in the same region, nor do I care about other people's regions, because it's not a multiplayer game, nor will I play it as one.
But, we'll see just how "big" cities can get in the end. Just a stupid move on their part... you just cant have a that many Sim hookers working cities that small. It starts too many pimp wars.
Holy hell, that's a lot of people on only 25% of the map! lol
i loved sims 3 btw
So sims 4 then this is? lol
Indeed. It's the first time I can recall ever not feeling constrained by a city-builder's size limitations. Granted, I am only about 14 hours in, but I have been able to build a good-sized city and also have natural open and undeveloped space without having to feel like I am sacrificing something to do it.
yeah but the games dont really have anything in common other than the sims theme like llama burgers and the sim jibberish when your sims or council members talk.
i actually thought about getting sims 3 at one point then i took a look at all the expansions and i couldnt bring my self to even get just the base game feeling like i was missing out on alot of content.
i always liked the build your own house creativity behind the series but at this point if i were to get it i would want all the expansions for it in a bundle for like 60 bucks at the most.
origin did a 50% off sale for the whole sims 3 series a few days ago and it was still like $150+ or something dont remember exactly how much it was but it was pretty crazy.
i tried to play cities XL and get into it but the engine its on is severely flawed and lags to hell once your city gets too big so even tho you only have 25% of the map covered its going to start to crawl soon if it hasnt already. i just couldnt take playing it at 10-15fps felt brutal
It was probably just over $200 for everything. Steam had a similar deal where the base game was 66% off with most other stuff at 50% off except the latest expansions, and the grand total of everything was still just over $200. Full price for everything was $400. Ridiculous, especially since like you said, the base game is so stripped down, especially if you're used to already having a lot of the expansions from the last Sims game. It makes me want to resort to...well, you know. Not buying it.
Though with that being said, I would only be most interested in a few of the expansions, and wouldn't even bother touching most of the item packs simply because most of them seem so....I don't know the word...stupid maybe?
Very well said and thank you for understanding
To "settle" and to buy is to say you're "OK" with it.
Actions speak louder than words. In this case, buying the product.
SimCity is better off dying than becoming a Sims-esque nickel+dime microtransaction/expansion factory.
EA is the extreme of the industry, and should be treated as such. I have no doubt that the devs themselves are talented, the direction of the series (and efforts) are put into the framework of the store, rather than the game.
For every "feature" lost, there is equal effort put into something else that no one wants.
I've been ranting and raving for years about DLC, microtransactions, etc. What comes next now that this stuff is the norm? A paid subscription just to play. EXPECT IT. It's coming. Kotick already wants it with the CoD series, same with BF, these "premium" packs and whatnot are just the test grounds for something continuous.
SimCity Online - just $4.99/mo for "Standard" and $9.99/mo for "Designer", featuring all new DLC for free!
To be frank, and I'm not sure I could have seen myself saying this five or ten or fifteen years ago, for a game like this I'm not sure I would be against that idea. If I'm paying five or ten dollars a month to play a game like this, provided it is not merely a single player game and one that would grow with content over time, I think the sub model could be quite attractive.
Contrast that with paying $60 for a SP only game that you might spend 10-15 hours playing and call it quits. With this kind of sub model, you would only pay and play for the time you're still interested in continuing (which also incentivizes continued development to ensure that these games are good for the long term). If, for example, the planned DLC looks to be garbage (i.e. cosmetics) then I think you'll see people move on quite quickly from the game.
The F2P model is perhaps tougher to get right (avoiding 'pay to win' while still developing new/interesting content), but I do think some games like Planetside 2 have done so.
Although part of me feels painful in having written that, I'm getting more and more convinced of it as a viable future path for some types of gaming (not all, mind you).
EDIT: Just for transparency's sake, I have preordered the game. I can't live without a good successor to Sim City!
idk if ima get this right away... my buddy gave me his coupon from his amd card so i have bioshock infinite and tomb raider fo free; plus heart the swarm.. ill be too busy for SC
ill snag it when it goes on sale
No problem, my pleasure.
His assumptions were completely outside the scope of the reality of the point you were getting across, and I also happen to agree with you said.
Actually, no it's not. You need to be broader-minded and understand there are multiple interpretations, all of which depends on where someone is coming from.
Be willing to accept something for what it has to offer, even if it's sub-par, can by done by those who simply want to get as much experience from something as possible in life, but that doesn't meant that they're "OK" with the situation as a whole, or that they support it.
It's matter of, "Do I want to at least experience something I might enjoy to some extent?", and that's really the only question/point here.
Where as some people are actually just "OK" with accepting shit and eat it up, but that's not where he's coming from.
There's a difference between being willing to accept something in order to get what ever experience from it that you can, even if you don't like some aspect of it, because that's why we're on this damn planet, compared to those who just accept garbage because they don't give a damn and have no principals or standards.
Free your mind, Neo. lol
So for all of your ranting and raving over years, has it changed anything at all? Have you bought any games that have DLC and microtransactions? Have you purchased any of that extra material over these excruciating years of change? You probably have. You dont agree with it but you settled for something you wanted. That is the point I am trying to make. I don't like it but I accept the fact that I do not have a choice as a consumer on the direction of the industry. I realize that these guys do want to make good games but they have bills to pay also, I get that. I have comes to terms with all of it including DRM. No amount of bitching, whining, pissing and moaning is going to change it. If you don't like it that much then don't support these companies by buying their products. Their business will continue with or without your purchase. Accept it and get over.
QFT. Well said.
Thank you sir, you also!!
Well i don't know what else to say.
When you get fucked by EA, Don't post about it, because I tried to warn you, and you told me to shut up. I thought that voicing my distaste for this direction of the industry might, in some small way, might change things. Of course it hasn't. Because tools that have more money than sense just say "meh".
I guess I'm done in this thread. I'll leave you with this:
I'll be laughing when you guys start "grudgingly accepting" a company that sues you for cheating in a single player.
You most certainly do. The consumer has ALL the power. Vote with your wallet. That is how change happens. If enough people feel that way they too will vote with their wallets and change will happen.
Sure they have bills to pay. But perhaps there are better models the majority are willing to accept? If people continue to support the current model they are unsatisfied with then nothing will change.
You are correct that no amount of bitching and moaning will change anything. It's all about money. But you are wrong about their business continuing without a purchase. If enough people agree and stop buying a companies products then that company cannot function.
To me it sounds like you've become apathetic. Because you feel that you by yourself not buying a game makes no difference to the company you will instead just suck it up and buy it. And that does indeed do nothing. And you have no chance of creating change with that attitude. Enough people need to make a stand.
If there's something I don't agree with then it doesn't get my money. I don't care what anyone else thinks or will do, that's outside of my control. I only control my own actions. Maybe enough people agree with me and change happens. Maybe not. But I still don't give in.
that wont happen unless you actually reverse engineer the game's engine code in some sort of illegal way to distribute the code for others to use said cheat.
I agree with most of this.
I would also say that most of us on this forum actually have more than just a single vote because we are likely alpha consumers. I know that if I really like a game, I can usually assure 2-3 additional sales for the game through my friends and family. Similarly, if I don't like a game, it won't get any time with people I know because they probably won't even know the game exists if I don't tell them.
I may be naive, but the thing that makes me the most optimistic about the future of games is that more and more people are making games, the tools to make them are getting cheaper and easier to use, and things like digital distribution are eliminating the need for money-hoarding middlemen like EA.
With more and more good games on the market and the same amount of hours in a day, my view is that there will come a time when companies that erect barriers to entry for their products like EA will be forced to evolve or die out.
Well publishers do more than just put games in a shiny box, they also advertise and promote them. Most independent studios don't have those resources or contacts to do it on their own, at least not as well.
And chances are they'd still need to use a 3rd party distribution system to reach as many people as possible such as Origin, Steam, gamefly, Windows Store, etc. so there would still be a middleman.
Are there any truly independent studios out there that also self published and distributed their own games successfully yet?
I don't get it, the article talks about exploiting a game bug to get items that respawn (and the update said that EAs response was that it's not even a bug and won't be fixed) but then the article goes off on a tangent talking about how cheat codes and the like have been around for decades like it's somehow relevant.
This might be "wishful thinking", but...
Each region is supposed to hold 16 cities. However, there seem to be different numbers that signify what seems like "main areas" of the region.
I don't suppose that would mean (I'm already laughing in my head) that the regions that have less than 16 city areas offer larger areas to build in?
For example, the ones that one list two or three "main areas" (I'm probably interpreting it wrong), would be larger areas to build in?
Wishful thinking, as I said, but it would only make sense to do in my head, though I've no idea how that's really working.
no all the cities are 2kmx2km
cape trinity is the zone that was in the beta, 3 cities that are 2kmx2km and 1 great works area. Clear water was the beta zone you could actually build in.