If you're not going to give us any patches til the next one is done, at least give us previews

[Metropolitan]

W2W buildings are still in a design phase.

We were told a couple weeks ago that the big patch would come "in a month". So today you're saying that one of the biggest most time consuming parts has not even begun?

Nope, you read that wrong. They've always told, from the first announcement of the big patch, that tunnels were more advanced then wall-to-wall. This has been repeated multiple times so don't pretend it could be understood otherwise.

So not only did you say "We'll wait until we finish these cosmetic addons to do more bug fixes", but you made that decision without even having these features DESIGNED?!?!

Simify, for your own good, stop judging things as "cosmetic" when several people already disapproved the idea they were. You're not serving your opinion here, just isolating yourself.

Tunnels for once, can change everything in the way congestion spots could be solved. That in itself is far from being simply "cosmetic". As for wall-to-wall, the functional value of it would be determined by CO's own ambitions in the way to implement it. The whole idea of "wall-to-wall" in itself seems to not fit with the core zoning system in the game which is based on square cells. So maybe they are just designing buildings with brick walls on the side, maybe they are considering managing angle buildings, but that would really amaze me and I don't put my expectations so high. That's the kind of things I'm expecting more for a next version of the game coming in several years.

Two traffic sims under your belt and your next game has crappy traffic simulation. How is that even. How.) and they're taking a break from making it work to DESIGN NON-ESSENTIAL FEATURES AND IMPLEMENT THEM FROM SCRATCH.

Please Simify, be more specific. You're too vague here. Traffic simulation is something huge. I know there are bugs in them and it could work better but if you want this discussion to go anywhere you should explain in better details your worries. The way it is we only hear someone expressing the fact he's not happy without explaining why. This can't lead us anywhere.

Overall, I would still say this about traffic: yes, the way vehicle directions are calculated generates one lane traffic jams whereas other available lanes remain empty, which does feel buggy. However, I have no clue how to correct that from a programming perspective. This being said, it's also the job of the player to be smart in designing his road layout. I see some people building huge wide roads with 6 lanes everywhere as an "easy lazy" solution to solve traffic, then later complain it doesn't work. Sorry but this isn't even realistic regarding traffic flows. I would only advise to build smaller (standard roads and 2x2 avenues), as well as zoning differently. It's generally better to mix different zoning, build several industrial areas instead of a single big one, serve each of them with cargo train stations to avoid industrial trucks crossing the whole city, and so on and so forth. That's not about the game being buggy here, but about players to play wisely.

 

[TotalyMoo]

-This patch is supposed to be here within a month
Incorrect. The stated time in the April Update thread is "at least a month", which implies a month or longer.

-The design phase for the most complex and largest feature of the patch is not finished yet
Correct, although you phrased it as "has not begun" which is of course incorrect.

-You are adding a new building type entirely before solving variety problems with the existing types
Strawman. Things are being worked on side by side. And for the record we do not see the same issues with existing building types as you do.

-The choice to make these things and not release any bug fixes until they're done was made before the design phase started
Incorrect. The design of W2W buildings has been in the works for a long time. The update will come with a large amount of fixes together with the new content.

-Cities Skylines is missing Traffic algorithms and assets that are standard in the Cities in Motion series, and has traffic algorithm bugs that are not present in those titles
It works differently, yes. Cities: Skylines is not Cities in Motion 3. Still, we are looking for ways to improve traffic which has also been stated previously.

 

[kanid99]

"How can we have confidence in the game's livelihood and potential as a long-term investment if the devs don't patch it regularly, like they promised they would? Or if they don't fix basic bugs for 3+ months? Or if they release broken patches? Or if they have a beta test of a patch, and then ignore bugs people found during the beta?"

It depends on how you define regularly. It appears to me that they have decided that perhaps that is every month or every other month, in order to reduce any bugs the patch itself may present and also include new content. Depending on how this works when they roll it out, I support that.

I for one do not expect weekly or every other weekly updates - Im satisfied for now. But then, I find the game playable.

 

[Hyronymus]

I rather have 1 solid update that possibly breaks saved-city (is that a term?) compatibality than 10 small updates that break saved-city compatibality. Also, as justly pointed out by TotalyMoo, not all issues you and other people have with the game are necessairy bugs. New games take time to be adapted, even if they look or feel familiar to games you adapted to before.

In short: patience is a virtue and you can't please everyone.

 

[Mr Maison]

I don't think tunnels and W2W buildings are simply cosmetic. Tunnels have to be coded in I think to work with what currently works. I would hate to get a patch that breaks or takes away something that's already working. W2W building capabilities will change the way zones are on the roads as they are now. That doesn't sound like a simple cosmetic thing. All coding is relevant. You have to consider that they are working on things that have yet to be considered stable so why would they make patches before they know what works for what they're currently creating?

 

[Hyronymus]

I don't think tunnels and W2W buildings are simply cosmetic. Tunnels have to be coded in I think to work with what currently works. I would hate to get a patch that breaks or takes away something that's already working. W2W building capabilities will change the way zones are on the roads as they are now. That doesn't sound like a simple cosmetic thing. All coding is relevant. You have to consider that they are working on things that have yet to be considered stable so why would they make patches before they know what works for what they're currently creating?

True. From what I understand from how tunnels are coded in the good old Transport Tycoon tunnels are just black holes. Probably that is just one way of approaching it but figure out having to keep track of vehicle and citizen movement through a black hole. And not just 1 per gameday but a manifold per gameday. Good luck on writing persistent and stable code for that!

 

[Sinbuster]

TotalyMoo, you're too kind responding to these kind of threads.

 

[lordmichael95]

TotalyMoo, you're too kind responding to these kind of threads.

That is why he gets paid. Anyone can ignore or be unkind to these kind of people. Only special PDX people have the awesomeness to be helpful in such circumstances. Go Moo (and all other PDX people)!

 

[Simify]

I don't think you guys are grasping what "cosmetic" means.

It means that they're purely visual. Other things in the game already perform the same function. They are additions that merely look different, even if they do act differently.

YES, they require extra code. NO, they are not just model-swaps. But they're still cosmetic additions. There are no situations in the pre-made included maps in the game where a tunnel is a necessity. There are no situations in ANY map where wall to wall buildings are a necessity. They merely look different. Tunnels are more useful, but they're still at the time not a necessary addition.

Something requiring coding on top of modeling does not mean it is a feature that has a gameplay purpose/use.

 

[Lord Canterbury]

This is a view of my main town:

Spoiler

Note big mountain in the background. It would be very useful for me to have tunnels. That would add functionality and gameplay options. I would like tunnels. There are almost 10,000 maps on the workshop, so limiting observations to vanilla assets became irrelevant long ago.

 

[Miwi]

I don't think tunnels and W2W buildings are simply cosmetic. Tunnels have to be coded in I think to work with what currently works. I would hate to get a patch that breaks or takes away something that's already working.

And I am pretty sure tunnels will lead to a game function that is still covered by a mod - Terraform Tool. For making tunnels in game you need to modify the terrain. So it won't be just an cosmetic change. And btw a function we had in this old city simulator some 15 years ago
What makes it more complicate is the water simulation when terraforming - but I am confident devs will solve this problem.

 

[Metropolitan]

I don't think you guys are grasping what "cosmetic" means.

It means that they're purely visual. Other things in the game already perform the same function. They are additions that merely look different, even if they do act differently.

YES, they require extra code. NO, they are not just model-swaps. But they're still cosmetic additions. There are no situations in the pre-made included maps in the game where a tunnel is a necessity. There are no situations in ANY map where wall to wall buildings are a necessity. They merely look different. Tunnels are more useful, but they're still at the time not a necessary addition.

Something requiring coding on top of modeling does not mean it is a feature that has a gameplay purpose/use.

Tunnels allow you to build above a road. How is that something that can be done currently?

Here are some screenshots about a city I've created in CIM2 to give you just an idea about how powerful is that functionnality.
Important warning: tunnels will probably not look this way in CSL. From what has been suggested, they may be in a shadow style like the metro or something else, but functionally speaking that's not what matters here.

So here you see an island with buildings typical from CIM2 mixing both commercial and residential. There are also parks and pedestrian walkways for leisure.

But if you look at it underground, you realize that island is actually served with a motorway, with ramps to all directions. If that was built above ground, it would take half of land space, and would generate noise that would ruin the other half of the island. Basically, in the current version of CSL, we just can't serve such an island with a motorway.

Now you may answer we don't need to build on islands. So let's go for a downtown, which is functionnally speaking something important in a city.

Well, that area is actually served by a motorway, built fully underground, with two exits having 4 ramps each. Without tunnels, to put such a motorway right in the middle of a downtown, you need to destroy the downtown in itself.

If you have difficulties with traffic congestion, you should be glad to have such a new opportunity being offered to you. I don't know if the tunnels as implemented by CO will allow to build on multiple levels below ground, but if that would be the case, we could build interchanges below ground.

But even without multiple level tunnels, they would still be of a great help to design interchanges with crossing ramps on multiple levels. Here's a 6-direction super interchange I designed for fun in CIM2. I couldn't do it without tunnel, or it would have taken a lot more land area.

 

[Sotrax]

Damn it. When I see this screenshots I really miss the easy street building and the incredibly high amount of streets in every variety and the possibility to merge streets in a very acute angle - all things that are lacking C:SL ...
But I am looking forward. Once streets are moddable (by CO) or someone had a brainstorm on how to do it without a simplification from CO this will increase a lot.

 

[zephyr7913]

Tunnels allow you to build above a road. How is that something that can be done currently?

Here are some screenshots about a city I've created in CIM2 to give you just an idea about how powerful is that functionnality.
Important warning: tunnels will probably not look this way in CSL. From what has been suggested, they may be in a shadow style like the metro or something else, but functionally speaking that's not what matters here...

Splendid post! You've made me excited to build underground interchanges or even completely underground highway networks, that would be SO awesome!!

 

[kanid99]

I don't think you guys are grasping what "cosmetic" means.

By that definition then most any type of transportation system added to the game is purely cosmetic since it essentially is a derivative of the existing road system albeit with extra code'. It therefore seems to me that your rather ambiguous use of 'cosmetic' as a term to describe game updates is really intended to be a dramatic minimization of changes that don't appeal to you rather than a subjective criticism.

Keep in mind also that the features they are adding (Tunnels and wall to wall buildings) were items promised long ago that some other people besides yourself consider a vital feature. That CO is working on those as well as bug fixes and not rushing either is encouraging to me. If three more months down the road we do not have any patches of significance or these features added but have had a DLC announcement and "oh hey" those features were promised for free will come with the DLC, then I will concede your point that this experience was poorly handled and worthy of derision.

What are the big game stopping bugs that you are experiencing ? Ive played the game quite a bit and have not encountered any bugs that make the game unenjoyable, nevermind unplayable. There are certainly refinements but nothing that makes me angry or want to stop playing.

 

[potorium]

I'm verging on the side of would like more info/updates etc BUT then i remember that constant patches might mean mods need constant patches of their own. This could drive modders away while constant CO mini patches occur.

The game drives me nuts with bugs and its quirks but I'd still have to say its a game with great playability as it is, with massive potential going forward.

If I had my way, I'd have them stop working on skylines and start working on skylines 2. I'm sure they have learnt so much from developing this game that a version 2 would be an even better rock to build off. But then I'm sure they are eager to take what they have learnt onto a new main challenge as they have said elsewhere

 

[Mr Maison]

Metropolitan- Wicked Post!! I wonder why they didn't use that water shader for C:S?

Cosmetic is simply aesthetic features mostly having to do with texture graffics and props and things that have no marriage with the code. How can anyone say tunnels and W2W features is in that category? In a way Simify, No one disputes some things need fixing. I think I can safely say no one disagrees with you on that. Especially the in-game icons thing for custom content. Just be patient and imagine they are working on these things as we speak.

You want to know what bad interaction is like? Ask anyone who was a part of the Cities Unlimited/Cities XL community years back when we got a wink smiley every few months from the PR person and then got something totally different from what we discussed for 2 years in a forum that disappeared before launch as the backlash started.

 

[KeanoManu]

Of course it would be nice with as much information as possible about the development, but this thread are a very good evidence for why it may not be a good idea for CO to do that.

What are the chances that TotallyMoo will ever again say ANYTHING about a possible estimated time of release for something? Zero?

 

[Hyronymus]

Of course it would be nice with as much information as possible about the development, but this thread are a very good evidence for why it may not be a good idea for CO to do that.

What are the chances that TotallyMoo will ever again say ANYTHING about a possible estimated time of release for something? Zero?

There is a balance between not sharing any information, sharing enough information and sharing too much information to your customers. There isn't one proper solution amongst those three, it all depends on who your customers are, how important they are to your business, how vocal your customers are and how happy your customers are with you. Because of that I'm convinced TotallyMoo will ever share such information again.

 

[jcitron]

I rather have 1 solid update that possibly breaks saved-city (is that a term?) compatibality than 10 small updates that break saved-city compatibality. Also, as justly pointed out by TotalyMoo, not all issues you and other people have with the game are necessairy bugs. New games take time to be adapted, even if they look or feel familiar to games you adapted to before.

In short: patience is a virtue and you can't please everyone.

By that definition then most any type of transportation system added to the game is purely cosmetic since it essentially is a derivative of the existing road system albeit with extra code'. It therefore seems to me that your rather ambiguous use of 'cosmetic' as a term to describe game updates is really intended to be a dramatic minimization of changes that don't appeal to you rather than a subjective criticism.

Keep in mind also that the features they are adding (Tunnels and wall to wall buildings) were items promised long ago that some other people besides yourself consider a vital feature. That CO is working on those as well as bug fixes and not rushing either is encouraging to me. If three more months down the road we do not have any patches of significance or these features added but have had a DLC announcement and "oh hey" those features were promised for free will come with the DLC, then I will concede your point that this experience was poorly handled and worthy of derision.

What are the big game stopping bugs that you are experiencing ? Ive played the game quite a bit and have not encountered any bugs that make the game unenjoyable, nevermind unplayable. There are certainly refinements but nothing that makes me angry or want to stop playing.

I agree with both here...

1) Let the developers get things right before releasing updates. There truly is nothing worse than having a half-baked, rushed out patch. I've experienced this with both casual and professional programs. It's worse in games, though, because all you want is fun. The program came out and needed a big service pack to include stuff that was missing on first release. No problem, the community said, but with some grumbling...

The SP1 came out, followed immediately by SP2, because things weren't quite right in SP1. SP2 broke the performance to a point the game was impossible to play. SP3 came out to fix the fix that broke the game, but broke something else. SP4 finally came out and that made it the best version after, but not after multitudes of arguments in the user forums about the needed fixes. If the developer had taken the time to truly, really, really, test the program before release then there wouldn't have bene this mess. So CO devs, take your time.

2) What exactly is broken?

There are bugs, like any program has, but they don't crash the program for the majority of us to the desktop. There are some annoyances, if you want to call them that, but these things are livable until they can get fixed. There are some logic issues, I think that need some refining, like AI pathing for example, but in due time these things will be worked on. They are not show stoppers, and for the most of us, we've figured out how to get around some of the issues with community add-ons and mods.

As has been said, we need patience and let the programs get worked out. I look at it this way. When we don't hear anything, it means their noses are to their monitors and fingers are stuck on their keyboards while writing, testing, and fixing.