1 fear and 1 question.

[Mithkabob]

I think something that would make it significantly harder to build a working city would be a mod that increased the number of households in the high density buildings and the number of workers required at larger offices/commercial buildings to more realistic levels. That would definitely give you lots more to worry about.

 

[Person012345]

Challenge doesn't just have to come from financial matters. Other systems (traffic management, population management, etc.) can also make the game difficult. If the challenge was solely in balancing the budget I think it would become quite repetitive.

I find this a weak argument. The budget, maybe people's happiness, are really the only places you can have an explicit fail state. I'm still convinced "challenge in traffic" is just a shitty excuse for poor traffic logic. Most cities have bad traffic jams and they still function. And either way, it's entirely optional, you can't call a game "challenging" if the main "challenge" dissolves the moment the player decides that it's not really important to him. With money, even if you don't have a "game over" screen, the entire continuation of the city is based on it. If you had the ability to go infinitely negative in cash and still spend, then it wouldn't be challenging just because you COULD decide that going into negative money is bad.

And no-one is saying "remove easy mode" or "remove sandbox" that's absurd. If you just want to build pretty cities then you can do that. It's about adding some challenge because I don't just want to build pretty cities, I want to build pretty cities within certain constraints and work around the problems those constraints pose in order to build what I want. If you're just following the exact same strategy for SC4 over and over, then that's your prerogative, I don't see why you would do that though. I build lots of different things using different strategies which not only allows me to build exactly what I want, but it poses financial challenges for me to work around and have the resultant city emerge out of that, still to my liking. Rather than some rigid plan where every city goes through the exact same steps as every other city.

 

[levitus]

I find this a weak argument. The budget, maybe people's happiness, are really the only places you can have an explicit fail state. I'm still convinced "challenge in traffic" is just a shitty excuse for poor traffic logic. Most cities have bad traffic jams and they still function. And either way, it's entirely optional, you can't call a game "challenging" if the main "challenge" dissolves the moment the player decides that it's not really important to him. With money, even if you don't have a "game over" screen, the entire continuation of the city is based on it. If you had the ability to go infinitely negative in cash and still spend, then it wouldn't be challenging just because you COULD decide that going into negative money is bad.

And no-one is saying "remove easy mode" or "remove sandbox" that's absurd. If you just want to build pretty cities then you can do that. It's about adding some challenge because I don't just want to build pretty cities, I want to build pretty cities within certain constraints and work around the problems those constraints pose in order to build what I want. If you're just following the exact same strategy for SC4 over and over, then that's your prerogative, I don't see why you would do that though. I build lots of different things using different strategies which not only allows me to build exactly what I want, but it poses financial challenges for me to work around and have the resultant city emerge out of that, still to my liking. Rather than some rigid plan where every city goes through the exact same steps as every other city.

It's not only about building pretty cities, it's also about the challenge of juggling different priorities (economic growth, traffic pollution etc.). Personally, I prefer "making my own challenge" by trying to build a super high density city that still has ok traffic and good city services. As a counterpoint to your traffic example, cities in real life rarely ever go bankrupt. The big challenges tend to be traffic, crime as well as managing structural problems (over-reliance on a particular industry, attracting investment etc.).

 

[Simcity5]

Its hard to judge from vids game difficulty.

It could also be a gradual difficulty. Most are just doing the basics, and some are even struggling at that.

I'm also worried the game could be too casual and easy achievable.

 

[IIWW]

Its hard to judge from vids game difficulty.

It could also be a gradual difficulty. Most are just doing the basics, and some are even struggling at that.

I'm also worried the game could be too casual and easy achievable.

Yes, but, like I said, I have an impression that they struggle because of they own, big mistakes, and trying to show the features/dividing their attention between the game and the video. Oh, and not pausing.
But yeah, that's really something that seems to be the biggest possible disadvantage of the game.

 

[Person012345]

It's not only about building pretty cities, it's also about the challenge of juggling different priorities (economic growth, traffic pollution etc.). Personally, I prefer "making my own challenge" by trying to build a super high density city that still has ok traffic and good city services. As a counterpoint to your traffic example, cities in real life rarely ever go bankrupt. The big challenges tend to be traffic, crime as well as managing structural problems (over-reliance on a particular industry, attracting investment etc.).

I don't see how that is a counterpoint. They can and do go bankrupt and from a game perspective it means you can't build or do anything, thus being pretty much universally considered a failure, even if you don't have a game over screen.

I'm not entirely sure what your point is though to be honest.

 

[Simcity5]

Yes, but, like I said, I have an impression that they struggle because of they own, big mistakes, and trying to show the features/dividing their attention between the game and the video. Oh, and not pausing.
But yeah, that's really something that seems to be the biggest possible disadvantage of the game.

Yeah, like I said in a thread the other week, the biggest crime this game can have is being too casual.

If it is it doesnt matter how big the maps are you will get bored pretty quickly.

 

[mslangen777]

And no-one is saying "remove easy mode" or "remove sandbox" that's absurd. If you just want to build pretty cities then you can do that. It's about adding some challenge because I don't just want to build pretty cities, I want to build pretty cities within certain constraints and work around the problems those constraints pose in order to build what I want.

I totally agree with you. Of course the game is about building nice cities. And when I end up with a nice city, that should be a reward which needed hours and hours of time to reach that goal. Not only time spend working out the best layout etc. but also the fact that a city starts small and goes a long way to be that city you want to end up with. And if you make any mistakes, thats fine, they can be solved, but its going to take longer to end up with the city you want to have. For those people who don't care about this sort of challenge, they can choose the sandbox mode, they can even choose the unlimited money option if they like.
From the videos I'v seen so far, it looks like easy to get enough cash. Maybe this is so because they are running the game like on the fastest speed. I hope that it will be more balanced if you run the game on the slowest or normal speed.
There is now a hard mod, but why don't they just make you choose easy, medium or hard when starting the game? Almost every simulation game of different genres which I came across have this basic feature.

And I know its said before and we should see it as abstracts or so, but its just strange that a city with fewer then 20.000 people in it can look like having high rise buildings all over. And how soon these buildings are being build seems not right to me. Also I saw Skye first dezone an area of low density and then zoning it with high density. It should be possible to just zone over and let the game decide if the time is right to upgrade to higher buildings at that time. This should be dependent on total population of the city, demand for workers etc. Not just like there is good health, educatation, parks etc. so lets just build the highest buildings we have.
Sure this looks like a good game and I'm exited about it. I hope they will tweak the game and will take notice of these factors as I mentioned here. If they don't well, I will still play the game, but will also continue playing SC4 after this game gets too easy or bored. Of course it looks like the simulation of people and traffic is just perfect. Why not combine this with realistic growth and realistic challenges? Of course SC4 is not perfect like sims who need to live literally near their workplace, but they did a very good job of balancing the growth and density of buildings. Thats just the major factor I still like that game very much. I do also enjoy the regio concept among other things, but I can do without them if this game is really going to be as nice as I hope it will be.

 

[IIWW]

I'm glad to see that it's not only mines concern, and hopefully CO would take it into account.It would be a real shame if a game with so many great features should prove to be in semi-sandbox mode only (unless You mod it)

 

[Mithkabob]

The game is balanced for the normal game play mode. They made a sandbox mod and the unlock everything mod for the people that want those options. I'm not sure about the hard mod... I see it more as an example of what can be tweaked through modding than as an actual mod (I could be wrong) and expect that the modding community will provide the 'super realistic simulation' mods that some people want.

I think CO has hit a good balance between game and simulation. The game has pretty wide appeal and is selling quite well already. This means they will have money to improve the game and a large player base for making mods and assets.

 

[cRAGGLE]

The cims are too easy to please. The little face icon is always green/happy.