Water Dynamics?

[citysimplayer]

This could just be me but does anyone think this is completely unnecessary? It appears the only reason this was included is so you could see the waste stream float down the river and provide some challenge that you dont put your intake valve down stream from your dumping pipe. Not to mention what about getting water from ground water?

IMO this is unnecessary as modern cities have waste treatment plants (plus not really a challenge to avoid putting your input take upstream). Not sure what industrialized non-third world city dumps raw sewage into the river. It would be a shame if this dynamic sucks up your computer's processing power.

The only useful thing I could imagine would be if you could terraform and redirect a river flow to your needs. However there is no terraforming in the game so.... what am I missing?

 

[RustyCool]

I think it is a cool feature. They also talked about implementing weather dynamics further on.

 

[citysimplayer]

I think it is a cool feature. They also talked about implementing weather dynamics further on.

I give you that, it is cool. As long as it doesn't limit other things then no harm no foul. I assume there are trade offs that have to be made to ensure the game can run. My question to the developers is how much processing power does this use up (eg - could you increase the limit of citizens if you removed the water dynamic?)

 

[Eurofighter1200]

This is the first citybilder where you can have Waterstreams and water on diffrent highs you can create waterfalls (also ingame with the used water) can build dams i like this very much maybee they add later some flood or tide later.

 

[JsonGold]

I also don't get the point of having this water feature. During one of the Dev diary videos it was stated that there was a person working on the water full time. Seems like a lot of work for what will have only a small effect on gameplay. Plus as was stated this water simulation looks like it would consume cpu that could otherwise compute traffic and other more important things.

 

[Amiths]

If you want realistic games why are you complaining about "realistic" water? =P Makes no sense to me. I bet you would complain if they just done something like in SC4 where the water was just a paint on the ground. lol

 

[jpq21]

I think the coolest part about it is with the dams, and being able to have waterfalls. I don't think there's any other game that has this capability, so I think it was worth it. There's supposed to be a map editor (before you make a city), so I'm sure there will be lots of really good uses of this dynamic.

I'd like to seem them go all out with the weather thing, with rain flows, streams, artificial river-ways, outlets, flooding, drought, certain trees that are specific to certain climates, etc. This stuff could also have a big influence on farming and forestry.

 

[citysimplayer]

If you want realistic games why are you complaining about "realistic" water? =P Makes no sense to me. I bet you would complain if they just done something like in SC4 where the water was just a paint on the ground. lol

No one is complaining about "realistic water" (I mentioned above that it was cool). The point is about the use of a computers processing power and the trade offs that developers have to make. There are obviously more realistic things they would love to put into the game that they cant due to processing power (or manpower as JsonGold mentions). If you had to make a choice between realistic water (which doesn't make the game more realistic by the way) and more complex simulation of RCI, traffic or some other element - which would you choose? I realize my question may be false as I don't know if there are any trade offs to be made but if there are I'm not sure realistic water would be at the top of the list.

 

[JsonGold]

If you want realistic games why are you complaining about "realistic" water? =P Makes no sense to me. I bet you would complain if they just done something like in SC4 where the water was just a paint on the ground. lol

Not sure if your comment was directed at me specifically or the OP. I'm all for realistic water and I in no way want to complain about it. It's more that I am having trouble seeing how it improves a city sim game. So hearing what others think the water mechanic makes possible is what I am looking to hear so that I can get excited about it too So far I am envisioning that it would have the greatest impact if used as a disaster ie flood. Of course waterfalls and such are eye candy but again i don't know what kind of gameplay options or effects it would have.

 

[BuckyDee]

No doubt in my mind that the 'high fidelity model water dynamics' feature receives so much disproportionate attention on their development team only because they just happen to have a coder who is really good at it. If he wasn't on the team, this wouldn't be such a hyped-up feature.

I just wish that whoever decided it was a good idea to name individual people, pigs, and birds would have thought about also letting us name our streets, and seeing them on street signs when we go to street level.

 

[ali.usman]

Its a good addition but water pumping from the ground should be added.

 

[KyleJ]

Its a good addition but water pumping from the ground should be added.

You're obsessed...

If this were added, i'd personally have it at monumentally lower levels then fresh water pumping stations, else it completely takes away the planning need for water pumping/treatment facilities.

 

[Person012345]

You're obsessed...

If this were added, i'd personally have it at monumentally lower levels then fresh water pumping stations, else it completely takes away the planning need for water pumping/treatment facilities.

I would have underground water as a limited resource, albeit one that could regenerate over time if the pumps are turned off.

 

[ali.usman]

You're obsessed...

If this were added, i'd personally have it at monumentally lower levels then fresh water pumping stations, else it completely takes away the planning need for water pumping/treatment facilities.

In real world not all cities have water rivers

I would have underground water as a limited resource, albeit one that could regenerate over time if the pumps are turned off.

+1 to this

 

[citysimplayer]

You're obsessed...

If this were added, i'd personally have it at monumentally lower levels then fresh water pumping stations, else it completely takes away the planning need for water pumping/treatment facilities.

Are there treatment facilities in the game? I haven't seen any as of yet - anyone else see them?

My whole point to starting this thread was to discuss if people felt it was worth the sacrifice to include this feature in the game. I'm assuming simulating water flow takes some processing power. Processing power that could be used elsewhere. I do think its a neat feature when creating your own maps, but its not something I think is necessary (mind you naming individual pigs isn't necessary either but assume it takes less processing power to add that feature). If someone told me it doesn't take any processing power to simulate the water then I would definitely say its worth it.

 

[Hannodb]

completely unnecessary???

If I have to think all the reasons why I would not buy CXXL, this one pops up first. Why would anyone want to question the necessity of the water feature? It is a great leap forward. Not only do you now have realistic pollution patterns, the ability to make really cool hydro dams, and have water on different elevations, but it opens the door to realistic flooding disasters!

The fact is, Cities can and do affect the water they're build next to, and adding flowing water to the simulation greatly improves realism. You might as well ask if it is really necesary to have trees in the unbuilt area.

 

[citysimplayer]

realistic pollution patterns,

Can be done without water simulation

the ability to make really cool hydro dams

Can be done without water simulation

have water on different elevations,

Can be done without water simulation

but it opens the door to realistic flooding disasters!

Give you that one but that is currently not in the game nor is it being promised. Plus I don't think you need water simulation in the game in order to do a flood disaster

You might as well ask if it is really necesary to have trees in the unbuilt area

Doesn't take up much processing power to paint a tree


If you said because they are going to add terraforming and you could redirect the water (build canals, move rivers, etc) then I would agree. Perhaps that is where they will go with it.

 

[medopu]

Are there treatment facilities in the game? I haven't seen any as of yet - anyone else see them?

My whole point to starting this thread was to discuss if people felt it was worth the sacrifice to include this feature in the game. I'm assuming simulating water flow takes some processing power. Processing power that could be used elsewhere. I do think its a neat feature when creating your own maps, but its not something I think is necessary (mind you naming individual pigs isn't necessary either but assume it takes less processing power to add that feature). If someone told me it doesn't take any processing power to simulate the water then I would definitely say its worth it.

So far, nothing but whinging.
Please, enlighten us, what type simulation is missing that is hands down more important than water simulation?

 

[KR153]

So far, nothing but whinging.
Please, enlighten us, what type simulation is missing that is hands down more important than water simulation?

To me, personally, a day/ night shift and/or weather.

 

[KyleJ]

I find it funny how you're complaining about something that is pretty much finished... what do you want them to do, remove it? turn back time and never add it? It's done, and I'm sure it will be a great feature among the many other features in the game.