Welcome to Simtropolis
|
Topic Title: Comparing Simcity and Cities XL Topic Summary: Keep the 'discussion' here thanks people... respectful and intelligent discussion welcomed. Created On: Oct-10-2009 01:37 AM Status: Post and Reply |
||
 Search Topic |
Topic Tools
|
#1635417
Oct-26-2009 12:05 AM
The real problem here is that EA for some reason does not want to publish a true sequel to SC4. They have all the elements in that game to build upon and bring Sim City to the modern 3D realm. Even if they don't change the core gameplay and just modernize it to 3D, people would LOVE it. So it's not like they have to start from scratch. But other developers like MC pretty much have to start from scratch and they are not a big enough company to have the resources necessary to get this game to the level it needs to be at on launch. I have to agree with mrdazza, I don't think the problem was that they couldn't have made a decent sequel, I think they got sidetracked with the MMO option halfway through and then found they had bitten off more than they could chew. Of course, that's just what it looks like to me from out here, I haven't been in the MC boardroom lately so I can't say that for certain  |
Tired of waiting for game companies to finally make a successor to Sim City 4?
|
#1636279
Oct-27-2009 07:20 PM
| You know, honestly, there isn;t anything that wrong with Sim city 4 that hasn't been patched up a bit by mods.... has anyone ever considered starting a group to make one massive overhaul of sim city 4 Deluxe from the ground up? I mean... all the tools are there but i find myself getting lost in the STEX trying to figure out what to add to my game... there's just so much awesome content. I think the devs of the larger series of plugins like the NAM team and Pegasus, etc, should get together and add in all of the functionality they have worked at in the game, lots, plops, networks, parks, etc, into one big expansion for Sim City 4 Deluxe and we'll just pretend it's Sim City 5... |
| "If you build it, they will come..." |
#1636859
Oct-28-2009 10:47 PM
| Please remember to stay on topic, if you simply want to discuss SC4 on its own there are decicated forums for that. |
Moderating the CXL forum is not an exact science.  However we can have fun experimenting.  |
#1639311
Nov-02-2009 05:05 PM
| In one sentence :
Cities XL is to Simcity 4 what Dofus is to World of Warcraft. On one side, you've got an American game with a sizeable starting budget, and polished game in the end, that welcomed one or more addon, though On the other side, you've got a little French company that struggles for their first games, who are somewhat lacking in depth. (disclaimer : I've passed way too much time on all four games ) |
#1639911
Nov-03-2009 04:02 PM
| SimCity 4 delux is great because of it's dynamic community. SC4 with no custom content is barely playable. Sims driving in circles between 4 cities is really bad. Things like NAM make SC4 truly great. However, custom content also allows money trees, garbage shutes, quadruplers, speciel civic buildings, etc that ruin the integrity of the game IMO. The fact that you can change the rules as you see fit makes it more like a paint program than a game IMO. Cities XL is a MMO. So by definition it's a dynamic changing game. Right now it's still in the barely playable phase, but players who jon in a few months may miss that phase and only see the more shining complete version. Everyone has the same rules restricting them making this a better 'game' IMO. We'll see how the simulation and additional content provided leads to a great game? |
#1640636
Nov-04-2009 06:46 PM
I use all those things you mention... well it is a power tree, but same difference. People are free to play which ever way they like, and do what works for them. If we were all still stuck playing the original vanilla game then we would have all packed up and gone home years ago about of sheer bordem. Custom content keeps a game alive... including mods that 'change the rules'. Of course the big difference with SC is that everyone plays SC as a single player... so what I choose to put in my plugin folder is my business... I accept however that in an online game the playing field needs to be level... that is the trade off you have to make. BTW... there aint no way I am handing back my garbage chute... not for all the landfills in Maxisland. |
Moderating the CXL forum is not an exact science. However we can have fun experimenting. |
#1640791
Nov-04-2009 10:44 PM
| I don't understand why so many people are so surprised that CXL is being compared to SC4... Am I the only one who realizes that CXL is the first real competition to come along for SC4 in seven frakking years? They're both city-builders. Comparisons are inevitable. Get over it or go find something else to read. I don't count Societies as real competition, by the way, because the SimCity fanbase watched the prerelease coverage and knew in advance that it wasn't the game they wanted. That's why it sold so miserably. We were hoping for something different with CXL because of how much Monte Cristo engaged the fanbase. EA and Tilted Mill essentially made a game and expected us to like it because it was a new SimCity, regardless of the fact that it didn't have anything we wanted or asked for in SC4's supposed replacement. I have said this elsewhere, but it bears repeating, because it is evidence of just how GOOD SC4 actually is: In Societies' debut month, November of 2007, it was OUTSOLD by SC4 Deluxe. What was then almost a five-year-old game outsold its own successor when it was brand new. What's more, SC4 Deluxe was the tenth highest selling game of November, 2007. THAT'S staying power. And it wasn't a fluke, either; SC4 Deluxe has appeared in the top ten best selling PC game charts sporadically ever since it was released, and SC4 Vanilla DOMINATED the sales charts when it was new. Neither SCS nor CXL can make the same claim. SimCity 4 may not have sold as well as The Sims (but then again, no game in history ever has, so that's not really saying anything) but it IS a best-selling game that has surely made a huge profit for EA. The fact that it can still be found new on the shelf (and not even the bargain bins) in practically every game store is further evidence; how many other PC games that are seven years old still have such a prominent place on store shelves? Now, because of the fact that SC4 remains the market leader in city building games, comparisons with CXL were inevitable and to be expected, especially since Monte Cristo made it a point early on to engage the SimCity fanbase, ostensibly to find out what we wanted in the "next big thing" in our genre. And that's why there is so much dissappointment over CXL. It is NOT the game we were hoping MC was going to make. Much of our input was seemingly ignored. And the release version seems half-finished, even compared with the original non-Rush Hour release of SC4 back in January of 2003. Two of the primary ommisions are also two of the most ludicrous: lack of terraforming tools and lack of mass transit. There hasn't been a major city-building game without both of those features since the original SimCity, and that was 20 years ago! What were they thinking? Are they actually surprised by the fan backlash over these two omissions? They shouldn't be; it was present during the beta. CXL is a major step forward in city builders in some areas. The graphics are beautiful, of course. The road construction system wins hands down over any prior city builder. The way they did farms is great. But in every other way I could think of during the beta, CXL is a step backward from SC4, which, be honest, is the game it has to beat to be successful. The zoning is a step backward, and a big one; the last time the SimCity series had a comparable zoning feature was the original version (I'm referring to the set sizes and lack of flexibility in building sizes). The only place the zoning comes out ahead is the fact that it can align to the newly-curvable roads. That's a plus, but not a big enough one to overcome the lack of flexibility. Another step backward is in the area of information presentation. Many of the complaints I've seen (and made) about CXL is that you're not given any real information. There's a lack of water? Okay, so how many water structures do I need to build to take care of it? No idea, because we're not given any data on output or consumption. Where are the charts and graphs we've become accustomed to? There are some there, but they all seem to lack some critical information. The simulation is not very deep, as others have mentioned. It mostly boils down to "build what satisfies them." In SC4 a whole myriad of factors could affect your city and what happened in various parts of it. In CXL... not so much. CXL seems more sterile than SC4, less alive. It also seems more like a model set than a sandbox. In SC4, one of the joys for me was never knowing what new building might appear, or when an area might upgrade itself to higher wealth, or whatever. In CXL, you pretty much know what to expect from the moment you place a zone. It's only one step away from a system in which you manually place every single building. I always avoided custom RCI buildings that were only ploppable in SC4 for the precise reason that I don't WANT to plop every single thing. I'd rather have them grow naturally when conditions are right for them. Nothing like that happens in CXL. And while SC4's development engine could sometimes be overzealous in building and rebuilding an area, I prefer that to the static, unchanging neighborhoods in CXL. I had high hopes for CXL. I really did. Monte Cristo's early involvement with the community made me hope that they would get it right where EA screwed it up. I was dearly hoping that CXL would be the city builder that would finally dethrone SC4 as the reigning king of city builders. In part, I had these hopes because I'm petty and I wanted to see a smaller developer bloody the nose of giant EA in a genre they have a virtual monopoly in, especially after they released the crap that was Societies and dared to stick the venerable SimCity name on it. But I don't think it's going to happen. CXL has some definite positives, but in most of the areas people are looking for, SC4 still reigns supreme. Gameplay can keep ancient games alive; I know of several active gaming communities surrounding games that are now over a decade old (one I'm thinking of was originally released on DOS for frak's sake), and it's because the games they center on were so well made that even though they look very dated now, they're still great fun to play. SC4 is pretty much in that category; it's showing its age, but it's still so fun to play that thousands of us continue to play it. The proof is in the size of the still-active fan community. I wish Monte Cristo had paid more attention to the fan community in the end. I think CXL would have a better chance at longevity if they had. They did a better job than EA did with Societies, no doubt whatsoever about that. But for me, at least, and many other gamers I've discussed this with, they have not managed to replace SC4. Not yet. Maybe they will eventually when more of the content is released, but as others have said, I'm not willing to pay for a half-finished game. Give me a final product that has what I want in a city builder and you'll have a fan for life. Until then, I'll stick with SC4. No "crying" here, just a simple statement of fact. |
#1640811
Nov-04-2009 11:19 PM
| Excellent post Toroca. I agree with the last paragraph in every sense of the words. |
#1641075
Nov-05-2009 09:48 AM
| Couldn't have said it better myself, Toroca. You have summed up the whole issue in just one post. Way to go! |
Viewing this signature is only available to Profile Offer subscribers.
...but g314's favorite SC4 CJs are still here. Low prices ($0). Fun for the whole family!
Stories: 3126 EARTH | Crystal City | Schulmania II | The Diesmaran Empire | Worst CJ Realistic: Atlantis | Bevelle | Condor Bay | Copper Basin, AZ | Edelstein | iCANDY | Jargeah | Paradise Falls 2 | Puerto Joya Recreations: HK1 | HK2 | NYC | Sauerland | World Cities |
#1641302
Nov-05-2009 05:46 PM
| An outstanding example of a thoughtful, constuctive, balanced and respectful post.
Well done Toroca. |
Moderating the CXL forum is not an exact science. However we can have fun experimenting. |
#1641310
Nov-05-2009 06:14 PM
| I think some Valid Points have been made by torca, plus I don't really feel Confortable Paying for Stuff I can get for Free within Simcity and the Delux version. Like extra Roads(Allthough I don't have rush hour) and with BATS, paying for there Custom Content when we can get stuff around the place for this Game for free is allways good. |
#1641343
Nov-05-2009 07:22 PM
| The Simcity Community has been very well catered for, for many years by all the many quality custom content makers that give of their time and creations for free.
To those talented people we are greatful. We do however need to realise, that whenever new technology is released, it is expensive... because someone had to develop it... Does anyone remember paying $5000.00 for a VCR ...(yes video... not DVD... ) and I distinctly remember seeing blank video cassesttes for sale in the supermarket... 30 years ago that cost $49.95... yet people were prepared to pay... and the ones that weren't simply had to wait for the price to come down... as it eventually did... and buy their VCRs a few years later. Microwave ovens... cellphones... and even playstation... they were all incredibly expensive when they first came out... and the technology at 'release' was no where near what we expect of those same items today, for a fraction of the price. |
Moderating the CXL forum is not an exact science. However we can have fun experimenting. |
#1641913
Nov-06-2009 08:52 AM
| Since to most people it looks inevitable to review CXL comparing it to SC4 I'll try to do this now in a logical way. I'll also try to explain what exactly is bothering me about this comparison. First of all, I won't talk at all about SP/PO, what should be in one or the other and all that. I'll just compare the full games. 1. Funcionality: SC4 is hailed as 'the city-building simulator' because of its complexity, not necesserily its realistic behavior. The division of S, SS and SSS, office and service commerce and all that, the ability to adjust taxes separately on each, and all the other micro-adjustments that are possible (including ordinances). The different types of R, C and I grow all on the smae zones, though. For example, you zone commercial, and you have no control over what will grow there, it depends on the overall conditions. Is this realistic? Not really.... A viable industry would never give place to another, unless something interferes. Also, it's difficult to really keep the kind of industry you want, or the kind of commerce you want (you never know what exactly will grow when you zone). On the other hand you have great control via ordinances and tax adjustment. I agree, that it's fun, and it gives you something to do at all times. Overall, it's one of the greatest pluses of SC4, and to most people, its chief advantage over CXL. CXL, on the other hand, goes for different funtionality. It has different divisions than SC4 (in all categories), and those divisions can never get mixed once the zones are drawn. For example, you can't have a dirty industry grow into a manufacturing, and then into a high-tech one. You have to re-zone to achieve that. Is this realistic? Yes (mostly)! Is it fun? Why not? It's simply a different mechanic, and if you get used to it, you'll enjoy it! - Services: area effect vs access. SC4 had the cool 'zones' that each school/hospital affects. You could also adjust the radius of the zone affected and the max number of people served. CXL replaced this with access restrictions: if there's easy transport to it, there's access. Is this realistic? Definetily yes! But here you have less controll over what you're doing; people dislike this. It's not necesserily a fault, though. Again, it takes getting used to it. And it makes you think trice where exactly you're gonna place your next school. - Resources. One of the big innovations of CXL; the only think SC4 has close to it is the water/electricity/waste management. Nowhere near to CXL, where the resources are not only diversified, but also made funcional in a big time. Again, it takes some getting used to it, and after that it becomes a real challenge! Not to mention realistic. Now, the trading issue I won't mention, because it's linked to the PO/SP issue, and I said I'm not talking about that. However, it again gives the player more options. 2. Transportation. Here's the big issue: CXL has crippled transportation, hands down. Is this true? - First of all, let's keep in mind that they haven't released any mass transport options, yet. (Yeah, I know, the game is incomplete without it, blablabla). But they'll come, eventually! - Second: What was SC4's transportation before Rush hour and the BAT? Let's remember.... oh yeah, there were roads, highways, busses, trains and metro. What does CXL have right now? A hell of a road and highway system, no busses trains and metro. Will there be? Yes (and probably much more)! You can argue here with me until dawn, but I deem that CXL's advanced transportation system, even without the mass transit, beats SC4. Curved roads, bridges and tunnels, lane management! And there's room for improvement! Can you immagine what it's gonna look like with the mass transit? I'm sorry guys, but you have to admit that SC4 has reached its full potential in this area, and it has some flaws; while CXL hasn't reached even 20% of its potential, and parts of it are already better than SC4! 3 Looks, sounds. SC4 has a huge diversity of buldings, yes. But how many of them are actually made by the community? Like, 70%? After 5 - 6 years of work? Also, let's keep in mind that there are no realistic styles, everything will grow out of order. So, it's reeeeeeeealy difficult to make, say, a medieval England town center. CXL can do this already, a month after release! Sounds: difficult to say. Some say they're missing, some say they're not... Again, it's something fixable. To sum it up: Can we compare the two games? Yes, if you wanna compare a 60-year old, experienced man that has done a lot in its life with a 15-year old boy that just starts it. And another thing: they're of different cultures. The boy lacks polish, it lacks features and abilities that the old man has, but it's full of energy and potential, it's agile and can learn fast. The boy's life is ahead of him, while the man's life is behind him. They are different , because they have a different background, and because the man has experience that the boy is yet to aquire. CXL has problems, issues, nobody denies that. But oh boy! it has sooooo much potential! If we only allow it to develop, I think we'll be swept away in an year! Mass transit, GEM's not to mention additional maps and all other content that MC thinks of adding.... I'm talking not only superficial changes here, folks, not only new buildings models, not only some more sounds...... Since they made the game, they could vastly improve it in funcionality, if they want. Where EA abandoned the community to take care of itself after Rush Hour, MC is ready to stick to it and give and give more and more! Well, they demand payment in return. So what? We live in a freakin' capitalistic world.... And after all, there's also the SP where you can have less for free (compared to PO, of course). Again, who knows what MC will decide and do in a year? |
#1641976
Nov-06-2009 01:31 PM
| Do you play mostly SP or online mode, Soltangris? |
Viewing this signature is only available to Profile Offer subscribers
|
Edited: 11/07/2009 at 01:06 AM by RegisteringSucks
#1642403
Nov-07-2009 06:06 AM
| You may all laugh at me at this point but:
as a matter of fact, neither. I still didn't get the game.... I base my comments on the demo I played quite extensively, and the info and comments here and on the official MC site. But, after I finally get it, I intend to play PO for a while. Maybe at least until they release the mass transit. If after that thinks haven't imporved in the way that I hope, I'll be probably the first to condemn MC. |
#1643244
Nov-08-2009 04:02 PM
| good points made by all,
CXL will never replace SC4 with the zoning the way it is, fix that and I think it will |
WesternBulldogs.com.au |
#1644627
Nov-10-2009 07:03 PM
| for those of you holding out for a new sim city from maxis.... http://news.bigdownload.com/2009/11/10/rumor-most-of-command-and-conquer-team-to-be-laid-off-after-candc/
|
Cities XL Wiki http://citiesxl.wikia.com/ |
#1645221
Nov-12-2009 07:45 AM
| I know how challenging it is to run a boutique tech. That's why I can't wait to add to MC 's cashflow by volunteering to pay for the content packs and trains which could be played offline. EA is a big clunky bureaucratic whale, and The Sims3 - despite their witholding of custom tools and apparently overpriced official shops - have sold enough to last a few expansion packs. So don't worry for EA. TS and TS2 have millions and millions are existing fan base with demands inflated by free downloads. Even if their game and biz strategy sucks, MaxisEA will survive and continue to rule. In contrast, what MC, a boutique size game company has for their CXL, is a boutique/niche audience - the long established and very solid SC4 community base. Popular Mods and BATs on Simtropolis easily surpass 6 figures PER download. That's the magic of USER CUSTOMIZATION. There's a ready market of at least 100,000 (or 200000 or more) extra SC4 diehard citybuilding fanatics that can be tapped for INSTANT SALES of CXL. But apparently, every time the SC4 crowd voice out their unmet expectations for CXL, they get told to shut up or go back to SC4. Not very constructive kinda community expanding spirit is it? A few screenshots filled with exciting elevated rail bridges are very effective advertising tool. And if people know that their cities are theirs to own and keep as they wish, CXL sales will explode. Boutique setups should perhaps keep their business strategy and vision in boutique size too. Simplanet MMO is a great idea, but even Rome wasn't built in a day. Perhaps the base community need to be built and expanded on the Offline ground first before venturing into hyperspace? One thing at a time. Think about it. Boutique setup also has the benefit of sensitivity to ground level feedback (or less excuse and to not get it). Respect the simcitybuilding convention, MC wins. We all get what we want! |
I AM PRO-SP & PRO-PO - YES THAT'S POSSIBLE
 ...As an Elite in Real Life I Can Afford $$$ for My Fav Game...However GEMS or Trains or Discounts will NOT get Me to go PO simply because... ...I Want My Cities to Sit on MY Computer, and NOT on Someone Else's Computer... !!! I Want To Play My Cities Whenever I Want !!! |
Edited: 11/12/2009 at 08:21 AM by SoftcoreGamer
#1642484
Nov-12-2009 10:16 AM
thread read. --Liv |
Edited: 11/12/2009 at 11:42 AM by Simtropolis Moderator
#1645617
Nov-13-2009 06:57 AM
IMHO so far |
#1646017
Nov-14-2009 05:43 AM
| I'm really puzzled what are those "great graphics" people are talking about... Have you seen them upclose? |
| my threads:
Asian buildings | Non-Asian buildings | Forces of Light and the geometry of Shadows (general info on modeling, lighting etc) 
my BATs on STEX |
#1646038
Nov-14-2009 06:43 AM
| Many great points have been made and it is a shame that MC went to the extent to have an outlet to communicate with its fanbase, then didnt listen to us in the end. How do they expect us to buy the game if they produced something we didnt like? Seriously, did they not try and check any of this first? Releasing a half finished game, I wont buy it...not having transit options, I wont buy it....not having a number of things that are essential to a city builder, I wont buy it.
I am curious with the increase in technology over the years and the amount of effort that has been put in to the developing of mods, why has there not been a open source city builder game yet? It is clear there is enough talent out there to create an amazing customizable game. I know there are a number of programs out there that are great open source programs, I just dont know how well that translates to the game idea. But if it did have a strong engine and was easy to mold, it would have a really strong fanbase making it even better....hell, just thinking of this makes me curious of what could be done. |
#1646407
Nov-14-2009 07:25 PM
| You know what I have seen recently? I have seen fans kill their own games. It's like an overprotective parent completely ruining childhood for a kid. World of Warcraft has gone berserk with a bizarre list of changes over the past few years to the point where the game is basically one geek's giant modified dreamland. Another MMO, recently came out called the Chronicles of Spellborn. It had some merits, it had some flaws. The fans who had been craving the game for years basically destroyed it withing 2 months of release by crying about how it wasn't exactly what they wanted, which, apparently, was World of Warcraft.
Monte Cristo *did* listen to player inputs. But, it can't put all of them into the game for launch. It. Can. Not. Do. That. Do you get that? They are not some ginormous corportation that can kick a game around in development forever without releasing it and making some sort of money off of it. Yes, you might think planet offer sucks, and it might really actually suck, but, this is not your game. It is their game. It is not Sim City 5, and it's not going to be. One thing that I think speaks volumes for Ciities XL is the fact that they are going to give you content every month. Yes, it costs money, but if you add up the costs of an expansion pack per year, it is nearly the same cost. Assuming Cities XL keeps their promise of conent every month and fixes for bugs, you have nothing to complain about except OmniCorp killing your solo games (which is a seperate gripe, and one worth making). Do I think certain features should have been added at launch. Yes. Mass transit being the main one. I hope you guys can be a little more realistic on what to expect from a developer that is not EA or Blizzard or some other huge company. The fact that they released the game as a digital download rather than in box format should tell you about their monetary situation. That is a big cost cutter, right there. They know that right now hard core Sim City fans are going to destroy them for the next 6 months. That's why they shut down the forums. Forums kill games. You should have seen the forums on The Crhonicles of Spellborn. After reading all the *****ing and whining there, *I* wouldn't have bought the game if I didn't already have it. I'm not saying it was "Democratic" or right they they shut down the forums, but they did what they had to do to keep people from pissing all over their product. Get a clue, my fellow sim lovers. The game is not perfect, not polished, doesn't have some stuff you think is necessary, but it is a start. In this economy, do you think Monte Cristo could afford to do anything more than get a foothold? You wanted a game that out of the box was going to demolish your need for Sim City. You didn't get that. You might not ever get that, but I think, and hope, that one day, we will get that. So, what I'm saying is, if you want something better than Sim City, you're going to have to support the people who are trying to give it to you, even if what you have at the start is not what you want at the end. That is the point. What you get at the start is not the same thing that you will have in the end. Please just remember that and try to do something constructive. |
#1646538
Nov-15-2009 02:56 AM
Since to most people it looks inevitable to review CXL comparing it to SC4 I'll try to do this now in a logical way. I'll also try to explain what exactly is bothering me about this comparison. First of all, I won't talk at all about SP/PO, what should be in one or the other and all that. I'll just compare the full games. 1. Funcionality: SC4 is hailed as 'the city-building simulator' because of its complexity, not necesserily its realistic behavior. For example, you zone commercial, and you have no control over what will grow there, it depends on the overall conditions. Is this realistic? Not really.... A viable industry would never give place to another, unless something interferes. Actually that's fairly realistic, in fact it happens all the time. As cities mature the industries that often built up that city are pushed aside. Sometimes the buildings are put to other uses IE: lofts, factories( producing a different product) , sometimes the old is torn down and replaced with new. It's especially prevalent in downtowns where the old is torn down for a taller and often greener structure. The most viable and long staying industrial buildings are often not even located in city centers. They're located on the outskirts and the materials are bought into the cities. Steel mills, Oil refineries, paper mills etc... all located outside of the city center. So far neither game has really offered anything in that department, although SC4's modifications and lots have helped. - Services: area effect vs access. SC4 had the cool 'zones' that each school/hospital affects. You could also adjust the radius of the zone affected and the max number of people served. CXL replaced this with access restrictions: if there's easy transport to it, there's access. Is this realistic? Definetily yes! Hardly realistic, unless of course you live in the boondocks where the closest school, healthcare facility, police station is 3+ hours away. Most services in cities and suburbs actually overlap and are distance based IE: school districts are generally neighborhood services( granted students outside the neighborhood can attend), same for fire departments. Policing on the other hand is usually county/parish wide, and perhaps in that regards SC4 could've done a little better, although it's fairly close. - Resources. One of the big innovations of CXL; the only think SC4 has close to it is the water/electricity/waste management. Nowhere near to CXL, where the resources are not only diversified, but also made funcional in a big time. If by diversified you mean trading workers and industrial services, then it hardly hits the mark. You really can't trade industrial services, that's a fixed things, and labor shortages should be handled by the simulation not the user. Perhaps if there were actual natural resources being traded it might hold some water, but right now it doesn't. 2. Transportation. Here's the big issue: CXL has crippled transportation, hands down. Is this true? - First of all, let's keep in mind that they haven't released any mass transport options, yet. (Yeah, I know, the game is incomplete without it, blablabla). But they'll come, eventually! The apocalypse might come eventually too( I mean they made a movie about it ), who's to say whether they'll add mass transit in a timely matter, if at all. As for road management that appears heavily watered down, especially without that much promised multiple lane tool(never mind the lack of stacked/double decker networks). The road system could definitly have been done better. Surely SC4 has it's limitations in this department, but they've been overcome and people continue to vastly improve on then. 3 Looks, sounds. SC4 has a huge diversity of buldings, yes. But how many of them are actually made by the community? Like, 70%? After 5 - 6 years of work? If you're looking for a realistic European town center it's fairly easy to accomplish, and most of the buildings provided can be both grown and plopped. Never mind the fact that with mods you can also have cobblestone roads, and a tram running through the center. As for how much content is made by the community, I'd say a good 90%. A real testament to a strong modding and batting community. Sounds: difficult to say. Some say they're missing, some say they're not... Again, it's something fixable. Didn't notice any sounds in the Beta, seemed a bit too quiet actually. To sum it up: CXL has problems, issues, nobody denies that. But oh boy! it has sooooo much potential! If we only allow it to develop, I think we'll be swept away in an year! Mass transit, GEM's not to mention additional maps and all other content that MC thinks of adding.... I'm talking not only superficial changes here, folks, not only new buildings models, not only some more sounds...... Since they made the game, they could vastly improve it in funcionality, if they want. Barring any changes to core gameplay, there is a limited amount of functionality that can be tweaked. Unless of course they're willing to throw the PO off balance, which would make for some interesting reading. About the only thing to improve gameplay would be Mass transit, and Gems if they don't interfere with the MMO aspect. In PC gaming the community is the biggest aid in gameplay improvements, where providing a quality product with decent support is all that's really needed. The community can often answer and provide better content than the publisher, because the community can work together on what is "really" needed. |
#1646650
Nov-15-2009 08:30 AM
| Cities XL and SimCity 4 both have their weak points and strong points. THE GOOD SimCity 4:
SimCity 4:
SimCity 4: 8,5 / 10 Cities XL: 7 / 10 Best, Maarten |
Maarten's Sign BAT Room - Realistic HD Signage |
#1647143
Nov-16-2009 03:23 AM
Cities XL and SimCity 4 both have their weak points and strong points. THE GOOD SimCity 4:
SimCity 4:
SimCity 4: 8,5 / 10 Cities XL: 7 / 10 Best, Maarten And the list of bad are the reasons why I do not wish to spend money on an incomplete game that they are slowly trying to complete month by month. Until MC addresses these issues and can offer a complete game, then I will think about buying the game...personally I could care less if they make it as a company or not...it isnt my company, but if they wish for people to buy their product, then they should understand what the core system that is needed to make that game. They did a great job putting together a game core that is very impressive visually...they just need to follow it up with the things that make real cities run...I suggest MC should take a field trip to Paris and take in that city...when they can build a city in their game that functions just like Paris, then they know that have a complete game...this isnt rocket science. |
#1647224
Nov-16-2009 09:59 AM
| Good attempt at summing it up, mrtnrln, but I still think you're pointing out as 'bad' in CXL too many things that are questionable. Let me try commenting on each one: - The PO. You may not like it, but others might. It's a question of choice. People with MMO experience and culture think CXL is actually pretty cheap, for starters. - No mass transit - no use commenting here, it's done over and over again everywhere in the forum. - Parks, Landmarks, Rewards - you are plain worng here, there are parks, landmarks (the superstructures). OK, there are no rewards in the SC4 sence (you develop your city to a certain level, and you unlock a building), but I've heard you could actually unlock more effective recource buildings.... Anyway, all of the above are yet to come with content packs. - Lack of support for Solo - there is some support, and the trend is for this support to become more extensive in the future. The first content pack contained some new buildings for SM also, and if we are to believe MC's plans, there's gonna be more. There are even rumours they're gonna release byable content from the PO. - Lack of statistics - true, you have a good point here. - Non-realistic models. That's the style of the game, MC is doing this intentionally. Well, if you don't like it, you have the right to bring it up, of course. - Street lights - can't comment on that. Might be an issue they'll fix, though. - Expensive buildings - yeah, they tend to drag your economy down. But there has to be a challenge now, right? Still, again something that bears twicking. - OmniCorp trading - well, that's also done intentionally. But I agree they could ease a bit the pressure here. - Trading between cities in Solo - in solo mode there are no planets, nor regions, so your cities cannot be connected in any way. That's why OmniCorp is the only alternative, and that's why the PO is such an attractive alternative to Solo Mode. Don't expect changes here, and again - it's a question of wether you like that, or not. To sum it up - I think that one single from the Good points list sums it up here: - Support from the developer (Monte Cristo) available While SC4 is essentially a dead game, being kept alive on life support systems (read: the community content additions), CXL is a game that is very much alive, and with a future. If you care , read my previous comparison. |
#1647244
Nov-16-2009 11:37 AM
| You have a point there, soltangris.
Oh, I was missing one thing in "The Bad" of Cities XL: No Ambient Sound. The streets are dead silent. |
Maarten's Sign BAT Room - Realistic HD Signage |
#1648378
Nov-19-2009 11:11 AM
You have a point there, soltangris. Oh, I was missing one thing in "The Bad" of Cities XL: No Ambient Sound. The streets are dead silent. From what I understand, you can take the ambiance folder (in a file named "all_wav.pak") and put it in your data/ sounds folder to get the ambient sounds in the game, traffic - birds - people. Anyway that was what was said in another thread, and the members posting said it worked. I haven't actually tried it. I need to upgrade my graphics card, and will then most likely buy the game. |
#1648398
Nov-19-2009 12:32 PM
| Should of would of...it's ok to compare but let's face it 1 game is an apple and the other is a banana. They both have strong and weak points but neither are perfect. SC4 could continue for many years but in order to really make great changes to the game requires the source code. My only gripe with SC4 is the maps being too small 4x4 km and no curved roads. With CitiesXL there is no mass transit and the lots are gigantic. I don't play either game but if Citiesxl adds these 2 I would purchase it in a heartbeat. |
2002 - 2009 Simtropolis.com
Many Cities, One Community
www.sc3000.com
SimCity 2000
SC Urban Renewal Kit
Cities XL
SimCity 4 Deluxe
SimCity Societies
Live Chat (11 users)
ITC member and NAM associate
