Interesting, I'm trying that now, I cant see it happening myself, I'm at 230K so I'll soon find, or maybe not so soon, its getting a bit slow now to get through a day
RCI... does it even work?
- Thread starter Simcity5
- Start date
-
We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.
Interesting, I'm trying that now, I cant see it happening myself, I'm at 230K so I'll soon find, or maybe not so soon, its getting a bit slow now to get through a day
I have been out for the day and left the game running to see what would happen.
There is now a demand for residential and industrial (more offices), so it looks like it was just time that was missing, to get a demand again, as I never touched the game at all while I was out, obviously.
Here are the latest stats:
I think an interesting thing of note here, is the way the death and birth rate has divided, and I'm not getting the big death waves I was, before the office zoning experiment.
Population growth is slow, but it is slowly climbing again.
There is now a demand for residential and industrial (more offices), so it looks like it was just time that was missing, to get a demand again, as I never touched the game at all while I was out, obviously.
Here are the latest stats:
I think an interesting thing of note here, is the way the death and birth rate has divided, and I'm not getting the big death waves I was, before the office zoning experiment.
Population growth is slow, but it is slowly climbing again.
Last edited:
- 1
I was just about to say that, it gets pretty slow, especially when a lot of changes happen at once, I dont think many buildings can grow at once and it prioritizes, I guess your city was growing, it just didnt look like it was and there was no demand bars cos you were constantly satisfying it.
How many tiles you got, I think space is going to stop me getting to 300k. I'm nearly out of space and at 250k.
How many tiles you got, I think space is going to stop me getting to 300k. I'm nearly out of space and at 250k.
Still on one of the original maps, using the original 9 tiles, and not done any terraforming either, as that is how the game was originally supplied, tested and balanced by the devs.
Space will become an issue I'm sure but that is part of the challenge as well.
Even in real life the cities need to conform to pressure on expansion, because of national parks and environmentalists, as well as restrictions caused by terrain for example.
I will probably start to bulldoze some of the smaller buildings, to make better use of the larger ones, that hold more people per square.
I have also been working on the assumption that low density residential is important to keep up the birth rate, as families prefer them.
In light of what you have discovered so far, I wonder if even that has been simulated into the game properly?
Space will become an issue I'm sure but that is part of the challenge as well.
Even in real life the cities need to conform to pressure on expansion, because of national parks and environmentalists, as well as restrictions caused by terrain for example.
I will probably start to bulldoze some of the smaller buildings, to make better use of the larger ones, that hold more people per square.
I have also been working on the assumption that low density residential is important to keep up the birth rate, as families prefer them.
In light of what you have discovered so far, I wonder if even that has been simulated into the game properly?
Mines all high density, I dont know about the birth rate factor, if you build a house they will move in, so better build a bigger one imo.
I agree with the space, but really the space we have it should be possible to build bigger, I dont think cities would bother building skyscrapers if all they can accommodate is 70 or so people, with a 1 million limit it seems strange you run out of space well before that, maybe they were over cautious with skyscraper capacity, but saying that its pretty snail pace already,
I agree with the space, but really the space we have it should be possible to build bigger, I dont think cities would bother building skyscrapers if all they can accommodate is 70 or so people, with a 1 million limit it seems strange you run out of space well before that, maybe they were over cautious with skyscraper capacity, but saying that its pretty snail pace already,
- 2
Thats another thing about the RCI, its if they are giving away skyscrapers, a millimeter of green and a skyscraper will happily appear, even if theres nothing else in the city, once you unlock high density they seem no different to small houses. No extra special demand required. Zone it like a regular house, put one next to the other, watch them grow. Ive zoned high density on sc4 and its sat empty for years, cos not enough demand. Demand is easy come. It was also best to zone out first on sc4, before going up. SC4 they were more willing to move out, a skyscraper abandons and your population can drop 6k, It takes a lot to get them to move out in CS. Infact Ive not seen it happen on this save.
275k, a bit bored now. I think I'm going to stop. Its taking 8 seconds a day, not that I think that effects the simulation, I think thats just how fast you make money, I dont know why it slows down, traffic and everything else still seems to run at a normal speed.
I think 300k would be possible, maybe 350k, not much more, not on my map anyway, some is taken up by water.
I think 300k would be possible, maybe 350k, not much more, not on my map anyway, some is taken up by water.
- 2
Got to 300k leaving it running.
If you put the low density res tax to 29% it also stops demand for high res.
- 2
- 1
Taxing low and high density separate is another questionable decision...
they should have made taxing the single levels separate instead of the different densitys, so you can tax the single levels different and still have demand - so taxing lvl5 residential with 29% will not stop you having demand for the lower levels. I ask myself if you tax them that high, will they start to leave your city or still be happy with it and stay?
they should have made taxing the single levels separate instead of the different densitys, so you can tax the single levels different and still have demand - so taxing lvl5 residential with 29% will not stop you having demand for the lower levels. I ask myself if you tax them that high, will they start to leave your city or still be happy with it and stay?
So I'm going to try and put down my ideas on why certain things happen in Skylines regarding RCI. I will try and compare it to Tropico 5, Sim City 4, and Sim City 2013, specifically because I think all of these games fall into two neat categories, with Skylines straddling both sides.
Sim City 4 (SC4) has been critiqued as being a "spreadsheet" simulator. This is because SC4 didn't have any actual sims moving around anywere. There weren't any agents. Put another way, every car that you saw moving around in SC4 streets was nothing more than a visual that was put up to represent the traffic that was nothing more than a value in a spreadsheet cell. If a tile had a lot of traffic (400 cars, say) and that road only had a capacity of 600, then SC4 would draw a lot of cars on that tile of road, to make it look like there was a lot of traffic. By contrast, Tropico 5 (T5) and Sim City 2013 (SC13) are an Agent Based simulation. That is, if you see a car on a road, that is an "agent" that needs to go from somewhere to somewhere and is therefore actually causing a jam. In T5, a person leaving their home to go get food at the market is actually causing a jam because they "exist"; likewise, a sim in SC13 going to a park to fulfill their happiness needs does the same thing. Therefore, in T5 whenever someone returns from the market, their "food' meter is filled up. In SC13, when they return from a park, the building's "happiness" is brought up. In SC13, if a building has 1 "shopper" sim, as long as by the end of the day, that building gets a "shopper" sim with happiness fulfilled, it's happiness goes up and makes it closer to eligibility for raising of the density.
Cities Skylines (C:S) has a hybrid approach to this. It is agent based in the sense that each and everyone of the sims in your city is an agent. Every car that you see is an agent trying to fulfill needs. When going to the shop/park, it represents a sim trying to get "happiness" points; when going to work, money; when going to school; education. This is actually very similar to SC13. When an educated sim goes to work in C:S, that job is counted as having 1 more educated sim. When a sim from a level 5 home goes to a commercial site, it adds a level 5 "shopper" to it's happiness rating. These help increase the density rating of those respective buildings. The main difference between C:S and others, however, is that it is ALSO spreadsheet based (I'm not talking about the teleporting worker issue yet, btw).
How is it spreadsheet based? Well in SC4 let's assume you had a 1000 sim city. You place an elementary school such that it only covers 600 sims. The elementary school, over time, increases the Education Quotient (EQ) of those households by 20 points over time. At the end of that period, the homes in that section have a 20 EQ higher than the others. This brings up your average EQ by a number higher than 0, but lower than 20. This higher EQ raises the demand cap (more on that later) on certain buildings, as well as increase land value, and decrease crime. in C:S schools work like they do in Tropico 5 and SC13. Child sims go to elementary school and gain an education point, teens go to high school, and young adults go to university, each gaining and education point (this is different from SC4 which didn't really have a difference in ages [sort of]). SC13 has the "student" sim which all they do is go to school and bring back education points to a building. Where C:S differs, however, is that Education Points don't directly affect the home's density leveling. Each school has a radius in which they provide a bonus to leveling (hence, why you can have your whole city educated but only a school in a small section of the map). This is why when you place a school, you see happy faces everywhere. This is also why the education map view has an "efficiency" heat map. The higher the education "efficiency" the more it provides that level up bonus to homes.
This is the key difference between C:S and others, methinks. All services in Skylines have both of those effects; there is the actual, agent based effect, and then the home level up bonus effect. SC13 and Tropico 5 are PURELY agent based in that scenario. Homes only get crime protection if a police car physically passes in front of a home in SC13, in C:S a police car lowers the crime rating if it passes by a home, but if the police station is too far, it doesn't provide a bonus to leveling up (the "not enough services" tooltip)
Agent simulations have one key problem; the same one shared between T5, SC13, and C:S, calculations. Each agent has certain attributes about it that needs to be fulfilled periodically and the sims needs to go out to fill those attributes on a regular basis. This means a sim has to calculate the degredation of those stats; Hunger in T5, happiness in SC13, money in C:S, as well as calculate pathfinding to get those things fulfilled... all in a dynamic environment where the player is constantly changing things. T5 addressed this issue by just having less agents. In T5, we run a WHOLE COUNTRY with less than 1000 people in it. SC13 did it by severely limiting the size of the map, thereby limiting the number of agents doing calculations at any one time (they played tricksies by inflating the number; something C:S did but in a different way) and by having everything happen on a cycle (the day night cycle). C:S tried to have it's cake and eat it too. Large maps with a bunch of sims, but calculations eventually end up limiting you. After a certain period of time, the game would become unplayable because it's trying to calculate all 100k sims trying to fulfill their needs. The solution? Limit the number of sims you could have on the map at any given time. Hence why after a certain size, you actually start seeing a DECREASING number of cars per street tile. This is where the teleporting commuter thing comes in. If the game knows there is a job somewhere that has a vacancy, and a sim that is looking for a job, it will eventually just "teleport" the sim there. I.e. it will just assume that eventually it makes it and the needs of both parties are fulfilled.
Side note: Earlier I mentioned demand caps. In SC4, demand for certain zones were "capped" (demand couldn't get higher) until certain conditions were met. High tech industry was capped at low levels of demand until average EQ got higher. Commercial Offices (CO) were also capped until a certain level of Commercial Services, EQ, and Industrial level existed. Furthermore, there were city wide demand caps and region wide demand caps. If you had neighboring cities, the demand cap busters (buildings that would raise the cap) would transfer from connected city to connected city. Hence, if you had a high industrial city on one tile, it would raise the demand cap for your CO in the neighboring city. Furthermore, airports, like the International Airport, for example, would increase REGION WIDE demand caps. This means that after a certain point, there was no need for more industry.
T5 has this "tier based" play by having an actual primary, secondary, and tertiary sector. As you play the game, get technologies, and educate your populace, your mines will run out of resources, forcing you to start importing resources, decreasing the primary sector and increasing your secondary sector. Educating your sims doesn't improve demand for higher industries... you NEED higher educated sims to man them (quite literally, most manufacturies REQUIRE high school sims). Likewise, after you're importing everything, and manufacturing everything else, you'll want to use the profits to provide tertiary services... banking, telemarketing, newspapers, etc.
SC13 simulated this via the specializations and tax incentives. Each higher wealth building, in all three categories, was harder to keep happy, but provided an exponential amount of tax revenue per tile. Since space was so limited in SC13, the incentive was to get everything as high wealth and high density as possible. The counter balance to this, was the dramatically higher demands for services, as well that each building required all three wealth levels of employment, so not everything would be a utopia.
C:S, unfortunately, doesn't deal with this well. Because primary and secondary resources aren't directly nescessary for a comercial sites (unlike T5 where markets could only sell food if you imported it and/or grew it) or don't provide a hefty happiness malus like in SC13, and happiness doesn't matter to the growth of homes (homes depend on services covered and land value to grow) then there is a poor incentive for Commercial AND Industrial sites. The only incentive is increased tax revenues, but the game is already forgiving enough in that sense that one doesn't really feel it. Furthermore, homes and offices have the exact same services required to level them up... they are both effected by noise, both effected by transport, education, hospitals, etc. so there are no tradeoffs to be made. Furthermore, Offices only require one agent to visit them (workers) rather than two or three like in commercial and industrial sites. The "goods" provided by typical industry don't outweigh the negatives associated with them.
Sim City 4 (SC4) has been critiqued as being a "spreadsheet" simulator. This is because SC4 didn't have any actual sims moving around anywere. There weren't any agents. Put another way, every car that you saw moving around in SC4 streets was nothing more than a visual that was put up to represent the traffic that was nothing more than a value in a spreadsheet cell. If a tile had a lot of traffic (400 cars, say) and that road only had a capacity of 600, then SC4 would draw a lot of cars on that tile of road, to make it look like there was a lot of traffic. By contrast, Tropico 5 (T5) and Sim City 2013 (SC13) are an Agent Based simulation. That is, if you see a car on a road, that is an "agent" that needs to go from somewhere to somewhere and is therefore actually causing a jam. In T5, a person leaving their home to go get food at the market is actually causing a jam because they "exist"; likewise, a sim in SC13 going to a park to fulfill their happiness needs does the same thing. Therefore, in T5 whenever someone returns from the market, their "food' meter is filled up. In SC13, when they return from a park, the building's "happiness" is brought up. In SC13, if a building has 1 "shopper" sim, as long as by the end of the day, that building gets a "shopper" sim with happiness fulfilled, it's happiness goes up and makes it closer to eligibility for raising of the density.
Cities Skylines (C:S) has a hybrid approach to this. It is agent based in the sense that each and everyone of the sims in your city is an agent. Every car that you see is an agent trying to fulfill needs. When going to the shop/park, it represents a sim trying to get "happiness" points; when going to work, money; when going to school; education. This is actually very similar to SC13. When an educated sim goes to work in C:S, that job is counted as having 1 more educated sim. When a sim from a level 5 home goes to a commercial site, it adds a level 5 "shopper" to it's happiness rating. These help increase the density rating of those respective buildings. The main difference between C:S and others, however, is that it is ALSO spreadsheet based (I'm not talking about the teleporting worker issue yet, btw).
How is it spreadsheet based? Well in SC4 let's assume you had a 1000 sim city. You place an elementary school such that it only covers 600 sims. The elementary school, over time, increases the Education Quotient (EQ) of those households by 20 points over time. At the end of that period, the homes in that section have a 20 EQ higher than the others. This brings up your average EQ by a number higher than 0, but lower than 20. This higher EQ raises the demand cap (more on that later) on certain buildings, as well as increase land value, and decrease crime. in C:S schools work like they do in Tropico 5 and SC13. Child sims go to elementary school and gain an education point, teens go to high school, and young adults go to university, each gaining and education point (this is different from SC4 which didn't really have a difference in ages [sort of]). SC13 has the "student" sim which all they do is go to school and bring back education points to a building. Where C:S differs, however, is that Education Points don't directly affect the home's density leveling. Each school has a radius in which they provide a bonus to leveling (hence, why you can have your whole city educated but only a school in a small section of the map). This is why when you place a school, you see happy faces everywhere. This is also why the education map view has an "efficiency" heat map. The higher the education "efficiency" the more it provides that level up bonus to homes.
This is the key difference between C:S and others, methinks. All services in Skylines have both of those effects; there is the actual, agent based effect, and then the home level up bonus effect. SC13 and Tropico 5 are PURELY agent based in that scenario. Homes only get crime protection if a police car physically passes in front of a home in SC13, in C:S a police car lowers the crime rating if it passes by a home, but if the police station is too far, it doesn't provide a bonus to leveling up (the "not enough services" tooltip)
Agent simulations have one key problem; the same one shared between T5, SC13, and C:S, calculations. Each agent has certain attributes about it that needs to be fulfilled periodically and the sims needs to go out to fill those attributes on a regular basis. This means a sim has to calculate the degredation of those stats; Hunger in T5, happiness in SC13, money in C:S, as well as calculate pathfinding to get those things fulfilled... all in a dynamic environment where the player is constantly changing things. T5 addressed this issue by just having less agents. In T5, we run a WHOLE COUNTRY with less than 1000 people in it. SC13 did it by severely limiting the size of the map, thereby limiting the number of agents doing calculations at any one time (they played tricksies by inflating the number; something C:S did but in a different way) and by having everything happen on a cycle (the day night cycle). C:S tried to have it's cake and eat it too. Large maps with a bunch of sims, but calculations eventually end up limiting you. After a certain period of time, the game would become unplayable because it's trying to calculate all 100k sims trying to fulfill their needs. The solution? Limit the number of sims you could have on the map at any given time. Hence why after a certain size, you actually start seeing a DECREASING number of cars per street tile. This is where the teleporting commuter thing comes in. If the game knows there is a job somewhere that has a vacancy, and a sim that is looking for a job, it will eventually just "teleport" the sim there. I.e. it will just assume that eventually it makes it and the needs of both parties are fulfilled.
Side note: Earlier I mentioned demand caps. In SC4, demand for certain zones were "capped" (demand couldn't get higher) until certain conditions were met. High tech industry was capped at low levels of demand until average EQ got higher. Commercial Offices (CO) were also capped until a certain level of Commercial Services, EQ, and Industrial level existed. Furthermore, there were city wide demand caps and region wide demand caps. If you had neighboring cities, the demand cap busters (buildings that would raise the cap) would transfer from connected city to connected city. Hence, if you had a high industrial city on one tile, it would raise the demand cap for your CO in the neighboring city. Furthermore, airports, like the International Airport, for example, would increase REGION WIDE demand caps. This means that after a certain point, there was no need for more industry.
T5 has this "tier based" play by having an actual primary, secondary, and tertiary sector. As you play the game, get technologies, and educate your populace, your mines will run out of resources, forcing you to start importing resources, decreasing the primary sector and increasing your secondary sector. Educating your sims doesn't improve demand for higher industries... you NEED higher educated sims to man them (quite literally, most manufacturies REQUIRE high school sims). Likewise, after you're importing everything, and manufacturing everything else, you'll want to use the profits to provide tertiary services... banking, telemarketing, newspapers, etc.
SC13 simulated this via the specializations and tax incentives. Each higher wealth building, in all three categories, was harder to keep happy, but provided an exponential amount of tax revenue per tile. Since space was so limited in SC13, the incentive was to get everything as high wealth and high density as possible. The counter balance to this, was the dramatically higher demands for services, as well that each building required all three wealth levels of employment, so not everything would be a utopia.
C:S, unfortunately, doesn't deal with this well. Because primary and secondary resources aren't directly nescessary for a comercial sites (unlike T5 where markets could only sell food if you imported it and/or grew it) or don't provide a hefty happiness malus like in SC13, and happiness doesn't matter to the growth of homes (homes depend on services covered and land value to grow) then there is a poor incentive for Commercial AND Industrial sites. The only incentive is increased tax revenues, but the game is already forgiving enough in that sense that one doesn't really feel it. Furthermore, homes and offices have the exact same services required to level them up... they are both effected by noise, both effected by transport, education, hospitals, etc. so there are no tradeoffs to be made. Furthermore, Offices only require one agent to visit them (workers) rather than two or three like in commercial and industrial sites. The "goods" provided by typical industry don't outweigh the negatives associated with them.
- 6
- 5
I was thinking the exact same thing myself, very easy to test that.
What was a bit puzzling was when I stopped zoning my population dropped quite heavily, even though birth rates were higher than deaths, but if I zoned it grew fast. Its as if new people only move into new houses, or more like;y too, than existing houses. I dont know about that, it just seemed a bit strange. After leaving it a while it did grow a lot. So who knows what was going on.
I did test whether, putting industry tax rate at 29% stops office growth too, I expected it too cos of how this rci seems to work, but it didnt.
- 1
Yeah, they all move out
My population dropped from 300k to 150k, it takes a little while though to anger them enough, you can make a fortune if you do it long enough so they dont move out. my income was 750K per week or what ever it is doing that.
Even though they were angry, my happiness went down to 50%, I still had happy green faces everywhere. Also losing 150k population in a few days my offices seemed totally uneffected. No complaints about lack of staff or anything. Edit: One or two have started complain about lack of staff now.
It doesnt recover that well when you put it back to normal either. Maybe it does eventually.
My population dropped from 300k to 150k, it takes a little while though to anger them enough, you can make a fortune if you do it long enough so they dont move out. my income was 750K per week or what ever it is doing that.
Even though they were angry, my happiness went down to 50%, I still had happy green faces everywhere. Also losing 150k population in a few days my offices seemed totally uneffected. No complaints about lack of staff or anything. Edit: One or two have started complain about lack of staff now.
It doesnt recover that well when you put it back to normal either. Maybe it does eventually.
Last edited:
- 1
Actually the game is still too simple. Too easy to achieve without thinking... Almost no brain
First thing it shouldn't be able to make a city without commercial... every 50k pop cities have stores. It's not realistic at all and very disappointing. RCI should be reworked to be usefull. Commercial zone should be a must have (at least for food in smal cities, and much more in big cities. There should be a demand for tourism and entertainment at a certain point increasing with city size (tourism reputation ?). Revamping industry is a pretty good idea too if the management is already reworked.
Achievement buildings are a bit killing the game, so they should be reworked to work with the game, not killing it. It would be much more fun. Give you new opportunity of development, but not killing things.
Green recyclage should be thought too.
I'm a huge fan of paradox games which are amazing (EU4... !!!) and i'm very disappointed since release with CS which feels so empty. It's a bit like a Cities in Motion where you could create the city. But the city management side is so poor and so bad that it leaves a bad taste. I bought After Dark and played 1 hour... I didn't even give a try to snowfall.
This game could be so great i had to write here too my thoughts. I hope many new features will come into future and i'll be glad to buy them. But since beginning is almost just a nice cosmetic game with a bit of fun with road magement (which could be improved too, drivers are so brain dead queuing on a lane when 2 other lanes are empty...).
Still in hope and wait about this game. Coming here regularly to see if something will happen (even if i get sarcasm from other players about my expectation "it will never happen forget this game !")
Regards.
- 2
@Simcity5 can you change the topic too something more general. I think it's not only about RCI anymore, it's about general gameplay imrovments.
Theres quite a few general gameplay improvement threads already. The way the RCI works is probably the reason why the game feels a little shallow, to me anyway. Theres a lot of other things that could help too, though.
RCI to me is one of the most important things in a city builder.
There is a chance the game could see big gameplay changes with the release of the xbox version, but then again as is is probably more suited to a console. I thought there would be no point, cos most people already own the game anyway, but the xbox gives them reason to keep improving.
My biggest gripe with the game, without a shadow of a doubt, and a huge deterrent to my enjoyment. It's nigh impossible to get immersed in something that you know it's a facade, very especially in the simulation genre.
I think Simcity5 has said it all and given enough proof on the matter, among the great contributions of other posters: RCI is irrelevant, just a curtain of smoke pretending to hide a big nothingness.
So, as a consequence of the no-RCI, the economic model being a joke, other systems such as health, crime, education being irreal and severely lacking, we cannot create or reproduce social realities, resulting in a shallow and pointless experience.
The last straw is to argue that they couldn't implement a real RCI system ala SC4 because "it's too difficult for the players". Sorry sir, that's bananas. SC4 system wasn't difficult, it just had the proper functionality to make a believable RCI system work. Oh, and you had different difficulty modes in case you wanted things easy-peasy.
My conclusion is that CO, like many other companies in the videogaming sector, is of the philosophy that "more functionality = more difficulty", which is an insult to the player's intelligence. The result is that we have a game that, not matter what you do, your city will always grow.
Once again, the recurring motto in the videogame industry: "Offer casual and sell stupid". Naive me, thinking that paradox was a guarantee against this...
I think Simcity5 has said it all and given enough proof on the matter, among the great contributions of other posters: RCI is irrelevant, just a curtain of smoke pretending to hide a big nothingness.
So, as a consequence of the no-RCI, the economic model being a joke, other systems such as health, crime, education being irreal and severely lacking, we cannot create or reproduce social realities, resulting in a shallow and pointless experience.
The last straw is to argue that they couldn't implement a real RCI system ala SC4 because "it's too difficult for the players". Sorry sir, that's bananas. SC4 system wasn't difficult, it just had the proper functionality to make a believable RCI system work. Oh, and you had different difficulty modes in case you wanted things easy-peasy.
My conclusion is that CO, like many other companies in the videogaming sector, is of the philosophy that "more functionality = more difficulty", which is an insult to the player's intelligence. The result is that we have a game that, not matter what you do, your city will always grow.
Once again, the recurring motto in the videogame industry: "Offer casual and sell stupid". Naive me, thinking that paradox was a guarantee against this...
- 9
- 3
Couldn't say it better. Thanks Akerbeltz ! Though i'm still in hope of changes and improvment i think that you're totally right about video games industry. And i thought the Paradox label behind could save me too against this in CS...
- 4
- 2
That philosphy is so recurrent because it's true, and that's why the market is flooded with mediocre products, while the market itself is evergrowing.
PS: I'm not talking about CSL, I personally like the game very much.
- 1
Thanks for reading xagash!
I'd like to add that I feel personal sympathy towards CO, they look like very nice chaps and gals. So, I don't pretend to bitch just for the sake of it but I feel that they really dropped the ball in the aforementioned aspects.
On a positive note, I've seen on the simtropolis forums that some guys are working on a total enhancement mod to improve RCI, among other other things. Hope they succeed where others have failed!
- 1
Its not singling out. I often hope when EA and the likes make games that sacrifice gameplay for ease of access, instant win, with the more people that can play it the more people that will buy it philosophy, and it backfires and its low depth is big cause why its not a success, someone somewhere might turn around and say, maybe we dont give the players enough credit..
...but it doesnt, I thought lessons would have been learnt from SC13, and many before it and many after it, but it hasnt. Its just the way the games market is right now, theres a few games that arent trying to cater to every single person who owns a PC gamer or not and they are often the biggest sellers so it makes you wonder...
Look at KSP for example, thats not an easy win, pick up and play game. It didnt sacrifice gameplay to make it more non gamer friendly and is a huge success, I could see in the future EA buying this game cos its a big seller, making a sequel so getting to the mun takes 5 mins and a few button presses, paying 30 million to get eminem to sing on the advert, scratching their head cos it flops, blame the customers for being too entitled, then sacking the staff who made it, Then repeat this to another game. Cos thats the key to success...
It is a hard balance I guess, but I dont think games 10 year ago cared as much about this as they are obsessed with now, it was a focus on making the game the more interesting, not the most winnable, and if it wasnt for graphics, it would be a lot easier to tell how much worse they are now
...but it doesnt, I thought lessons would have been learnt from SC13, and many before it and many after it, but it hasnt. Its just the way the games market is right now, theres a few games that arent trying to cater to every single person who owns a PC gamer or not and they are often the biggest sellers so it makes you wonder...
Look at KSP for example, thats not an easy win, pick up and play game. It didnt sacrifice gameplay to make it more non gamer friendly and is a huge success, I could see in the future EA buying this game cos its a big seller, making a sequel so getting to the mun takes 5 mins and a few button presses, paying 30 million to get eminem to sing on the advert, scratching their head cos it flops, blame the customers for being too entitled, then sacking the staff who made it, Then repeat this to another game. Cos thats the key to success...
It is a hard balance I guess, but I dont think games 10 year ago cared as much about this as they are obsessed with now, it was a focus on making the game the more interesting, not the most winnable, and if it wasnt for graphics, it would be a lot easier to tell how much worse they are now
Last edited:
- 2