SimCity V (2013) - screens/artwork and information

Sorry folks, I must be missing something here.
Watching that tutorial to build up a casino city, I thought it was generally looking good.

What is the gripe exactly with the game because I seem to be completely oblivious to it and would appreciate your insights!
 
People are getting a little stroppy because the game they want to play isnt the game EA have decided to make.
It'd be like DICE making BF3 and instead of sticking with the more open maps of BF2, they've crammed everything into the middle and made the outside space bigger so really its a smaller map with a bigger flying space, and the people who loved BF2 arent happy, but EA & DICE care more about broadening their appeal and stealing market share from the COD community than simply continuing to do what people loved about BF2.

Similar story here, they're abandoning the SC4 core, and building a new game which will hopefully see new customers become adopters, and i guess thats from The Sims, because thats pretty much what it appears to be - (The) Sims City.

While i liked SC4, it left a lot to be desired, and from what ive seen of SC5 it looks better but then im not ignorant enough to believe that therefor it is better, or it means everyone will agree.
What i like about it is that it seems they've taken something that was a perceivable as being a little nerdy, stat based and boring, and turned it into something alive, where you can see the stats in a living city rather than only on a bar chart.

Whether or not it also leads to a dumbed down game, a game for fans of the Sims first, and Sim City second, is debatable, but i dont think theres any doubt they're trying to bridge that gap and turn Sims fans into Sim City fans, and given all the DLC they spew out for that, if they can do the same with Sim City they'll be quids in especially if a chuck of that audience is Sims audience who've grown to accept paid DLC microtransactions for silly objects in their games.

I have to say, theres only 2 things ive been disappointed with, 1st being the price (thankfully i got the £65 one for £17, thanks EA!) as its a god damn joke, and the 2nd the fact that its been about 3 months since the Beta signup and they've still not announced when it'll be with the game 3 months away. Why the signup if its so far away?
 
Thanks for the feedback Paul.
I can see where you are coming from, but surely its too early for any of us to be able to judge that this is a "dumbed down" version?
I suppose one aspect is the piping for the water system, this has now been removed and linked to the road system (similar to electricity) so in one respect you could call that dumbed down....
 
NP. Given a choice between dumbing it down *a little* and geeking it up *a little*, i think i'd rather it was simplified, but hopefully it wont be dumbed down too far purely for casual gamers, which is a concern if they plan on hammering out DLC offerings they need as many people playing the game to maximise possible sales.

Im quite upbeat about it so far tbh, im liking what im seeing and i think one of the main gripes people have had is the city map size being smaller, about the size of the smallest SC4 zones, but i can live with that. I always used to work on 1 large map, now i'll just have to consider all the cities as multiple zones in 1 city and properly allocate particular industries/services they'll focus on. Thats not good enough for some, which is a fair enough complaint i guess, but i dont think it'll bother me so much.

The beta will be the most telling though, whether we get in or not at least it'll be in the hands of independently thinking people, rather than everything being spun as great news, facebook & twitter integration - yey :rolleyes: and we'll be able to understand whether things which are sceptical work well or are a step backwards/dumbed down for casuals.
 
The developers have been on reddit and said some other interesting things also.

From what I understood, you will need an always online internet connection to be able to even save your city. Lose your connection and your play time will be done 'within a few minutes'..

Surely that can't end well?
 
ozzaman said:
The developers have been on reddit and said some other interesting things also.

From what I understood, you will need an always online internet connection to be able to even save your city. Lose your connection and your play time will be done 'within a few minutes'..

Surely that can't end well?
Click to expand...

:eek Man that would suck if you put a couple of hours into a city and then the internet borks :p
 
PaulC2K said:
People are getting a little stroppy because the game they want to play isnt the game EA have decided to make.
Click to expand...
It's a step backwards in lots of important areas. That's why people are a little stroppy (rightfully so)

PaulC2K said:
Similar story here, they're abandoning the SC4 core, and building a new game which will hopefully see new customers become adopters, and i guess thats from The Sims, because thats pretty much what it appears to be - (The) Sims City.
Click to expand...
We've had this already. It's called Sim City Societies. It is bad. Very bad.
They need to stop trying to make Sim City into something that nobody wants or has asked for. Literally nobody in the entire world has gone "Hey, Sim City 4 is awesome, but I wish it was easier with less depth" - except EA.

PaulC2K said:
While i liked SC4, it left a lot to be desired, and from what ive seen of SC5 it looks better but then im not ignorant enough to believe that therefor it is better, or it means everyone will agree.
Click to expand...
Absolutely SC4 could be better. I played the socks off that game but it needs an update - modern hardware + online connectivity advances could easily make it immensely compelling. I don't see where your SC5 = Better angle is coming from. The graphics are nicer but that's about it.

PaulC2K said:
What i like about it is that it seems they've taken something that was a perceivable as being a little nerdy, stat based and boring, and turned it into something alive, where you can see the stats in a living city rather than only on a bar chart.
Click to expand...
You did play Sim City 4 didn't you? You could turn a small farming community into a bustling metropolis and back again! Going from muddy lean-to shacks to 100-storey skyscrapers with an international airport is not a small change.

PaulC2K said:
Whether or not it also leads to a dumbed down game, a game for fans of the Sims first, and Sim City second, is debatable
Click to expand...
I wouldn't say 'dumbed down', but certainly less deep - fewer hard choices. There seems to be more opportunity for specialisation (Addons for buildings are a nice feature, as well as expanding your 'core' city draw - Casinos have been shown off extensively) but you are limited in the bredth of services you can offer across a single city. Relying on your neighbouring cities to stitch together a patchwork of services.

PaulC2K said:
But I dont think theres any doubt they're trying to bridge that gap and turn Sims fans into Sim City fans, and given all the DLC they spew out for that, if they can do the same with Sim City they'll be quids in especially if a chuck of that audience is Sims audience who've grown to accept paid DLC microtransactions for silly objects in their games.
Click to expand...
Sounds good. Why not do what they did with Sim Copter and Sim City 2000 where you could import the region files to play in them? That would be awesome! Buying an apartment in a city you've already created in another game, and playing with your Sims there! How about MMO-ise the whole Sims experience and have thousands of people playing in a single region, doing jobs and whatnot online?
Oh wait, this is EA. Let's charge £5.99 for a different textured firestation instead.

Let's be clear, I'm not ragging on EA for doing something different, I'm ragging on EA for doing something which nobody asked for and is empirically worse than the previous iteration.
 
Last edited:
Online only?

Presumably so one day they can just turn the servers off? I still play games I bought 10+ years ago, presumably not possible with this.

£65 for a game they can switch off when they want you to buy a new one. Awesome.
 
[TW]Fox;23492491 said:
Online only?

Presumably so one day they can just turn the servers off? I still play games I bought 10+ years ago, presumably not possible with this.

£65 for a game they can switch off when they want you to buy a new one. Awesome.
Click to expand...

That's something i never thought of, but it'll be a few years at least whilst they milk DLC surely :)
 
[TW]Fox;23492491 said:
Presumably so one day they can just turn the servers off? I still play games I bought 10+ years ago, presumably not possible with this.

£65 for a game they can switch off when they want you to buy a new one. Awesome.
Click to expand...
Taking all your online-only DLC with it. Thanks EA! :D

Edit: I'm being unfair at this point, but EA have absolutely no pedigree in providing a continued service in any circumstance. To say it's expensive / awkward to maintain legacy systems is nonsense in the age of VMs.
 
[TW]Fox;23492491 said:
Online only?

Presumably so one day they can just turn the servers off? I still play games I bought 10+ years ago, presumably not possible with this.

£65 for a game they can switch off when they want you to buy a new one. Awesome.
Click to expand...

£65 for a game full stop is just a huge red flag. EA, get real... £65 is asburb and even though I did enjoy Sim city 4, I highly doubt the next in the series is worth that type of money..

and online only has proven time and time again to not work and just peeve the ones who do buy the game off. Silent Hunter 5 anyone?

EA have actually lost the plot on this one, such a shame. I can only foresee this game tanking badly which is shame for the fans of the series..
 
iv-tecman said:
£65 for a game full stop is just a huge red flag. EA, get real... £65 is asburb and even though I did enjoy Sim city 4, I highly doubt the next in the series is worth that type of money..

and online only has proven time and time again to not work and just peeve the ones who do buy the game off. Silent Hunter 5 anyone?

EA have actually lost the plot on this one, such a shame. I can only foresee this game tanking badly which is shame for the fans of the series..
Click to expand...

+1 To all this :(
 
I really dont get why people are being so pathetic over this £65 price, for starters, isnt it a little bit hypocritical to be disgusted with a £65 pricetag for a game which they're selling for £45?? They've NEVER asked you to pay £65 for the game, unless you want the Deluxe version which is the same game but with 3 country themed sets of buildings (and im sure i read somewhere they're not what most ppl would expect).

Secondly, its pretty much £35 EVERYWHERE except Origin, who have to charge RRP, just like Steam do, everyones favourite, cant do no wrong, also charging considerably more than your brick stores, digital distributor.

Complaining that £65 is a joke is like complaining MW2 was £130, GT5 was £150, and half a dozen other games who've done pointless Special Edition sets which comes with extras nobody needs, as if thats the price they've got to pay, despite the basic game being £30-40 or whatever.

If you're all ignorant enough to think you have to pay £65 for a game they're selling for £45, and is available for £35 in tons of places, then thats your issue, its not EA's or Origins. Stupid people blaming others for their own stupidity.


Gecko - The beta emails go out on Friday, and its only a long-weekend beta anyway (Fri-Mon) which is rather weak IMO, so chances are if you dont get an invite its going to be hard finding one because theres so little time before any spare invites are useless.
 
Blimey Paul, calm down a little. I was merely pointing out that any publisher that feels they can charge upwards of 50% more on top of even the best day one release price you can pick an AAA title up for elsewhere should expect some backlash.

This does raise alarm bells, but what is even more alarming about this title is the always on internet connection, which ok concede that a vast number of those interested in purchasing this game would have a stable and decent internet connection, but to cut you out of a game if you lose the connection (not fully confirmed) will not end well and was met with some unfavourable criticism when UBI soft attempted this with Silent Hunter 5.

So coupled with the rather absurd pricetag for the complete edition, the always on internet requirement it has to be said, this isn’t a game that I’d willing throw £35 at, yet alone £65. EA are clearly not making any friends with this, UBI soft felt the backlash with such stunts in the past.

Which is a shame, but from what I’m hearing many might not even buy it even if these issues were resolved, however that’s another story.

I fully appreciate that the title can be purchased elsewhere for less, but my point is that attempting to fleece the un-suspecting Sim City buyer with a product costing best part of £70 is simply not on, even if you can find it elsewhere for £35. Many of the special edition packages are not worth it either, and those packages and editions are guilty of the same as what this so call complete Sim City Package is meant to be..

You yourself mentioned that the £65 price tag was a bit of a joke..
 
But what has a £65 pricetag got to do with anything, when the game ISNT £65?
Its £45, they're asking for £45, they'll charge you £45, and £45 will come out of your bank account. :confused:. Dont want to pay £65, then the simple solution is dont buy the £65 version, no??

The only difference in the £45 & £65 is 3 building sets, pre-set buildings from what i understand, so its not like you selecting High Residental - French, and up pop some Parisian themed buildings. You're plopping them down is my understanding, a bit like the skyscrapers and similar landmark buildings.

If you've got a problem with the game and its £45 pricetag, then fine, everyones entitled to their opinion. But you dont have to pay £65 for it, theres nothing worth more than £5 value max in the Deluxe version, its just them being chancers because there are people stupid enough to pay the full price, they're the same people who'll pay £45 from Steam/Origin for games they can pick up elsewhere for £30-35 at the same time.

But lets not go around with outrage of the game costing £65 when it doesnt, just like you wouldnt claim other games have been £100+ just cos they've had a more-money-than-sense Edition with night vision goggles, RC cars, plastic models or whatever. Its stupid, they're not that price because thats what the game costs. The game is £45 RRP, £35 in most stores. People who agree to pay these RRP prices with Origin & Steam are what will drive people like Origin/EA to put silly RRP prices on them, because theres people stupid enough to pay full RRP when they can save themselves 25% by buying it elsewhere.

Just think of what buying from Origin or a brick store means:
Shops = £35, they'll pocket say £10, £3 on P&P if its free shipping, the regional distributer will get a cut and EA get the rest. You get the game, and install it into Origin.
Origin = £45, EA pocket £45.

One method EA gets about £15-20 per sale (or whatever), the other they get the lot, so people are encouraging these actions, and EA are just seeing how stupid people really are.
Its absolutely idiotic to encourage companies like EA, and the rest, by proving to them there are people stupid enough to pay full RRP for something they could get cheaper elsewhere. So why the hell wouldnt EA think why not screw some more idiots over for a stupid price, they keep coming back for more.

Someone remind me who's really responsible for starting this digital distribution full RRP pricing malarkey, where people dont bat an eyelid at paying £10 over the odds, and then they complain when another digital distributor, following their lead, does the same.
If anyone's responsible for a company thinking £45 is an acceptable RRP for a game, look no further than Steam. EA is just seeing Steam as a platform where people are happily paying RRP prices, and im pretty sure the competition is fierce for a share of the idiot market.

£45 is a joke price, but if i was to buy it i'd either buy it elsewhere for £35 or i'd be waiting till the price dropped. As it is, EA India helped me pick up the £65 version for £17 (£45=£14 iirc) but theres not a cat in hells chance i'd give them £45, or anyone full RRP unless there was a damn good reason.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom