Should SimCity get re-reviewed?

Gamer Bhoy 89

I got the 4 hour trial which Origin are giving away at the moment, and I've nearly used up my 4 hours. I've about an hour to go and it has been the most fun I've had in a long time. It's a SimCity game I can actually play.

I'm not saying SimCity 4, or any of the previous ones, are by any means worse, believe me, I've played SimCity 4 more times than I can imagine, I'm just not good at it, at all.

But I have been so sceptical about SimCity for ages now, since its release, from hearing about all the bad things about it... But I'm surprised. I'm honestly loving this game and I do plan on picking it up within another week or so.

I went to look at reviews for it and they're still pretty bad (save for Eurogamer who gave it an 8/10) and it got me thinking. Should this game not deserve a re-review? I heard IGN were going ahead with this idea but I don't know if they actually did. I mean, there is a single-player option now and by my experience, it appeared very stable.

Maybe it's just me, but I love the game.

degrassinoel

i see your point but i disagree, purely because when the game was officially released it was a shambles - they may have worked diligently to fix all the problems and make it awesome (is it really that good?) but the fact remains that it should have been in the condition it's in now upon release.

Gamer Bhoy 89

I understand it was a mess on release...but so was GTA Online (probably a bad comparison but I can't think of any other bomb of first-day release) and that got an updated review. Everyone said the same thing, saying that it should've been from the get go and it got looked at again once it was fixed.

And I haven't seen anything wrong with the game at all since I heard it was fixed. I was going into the game expecting it to be pretty horrid. But in a matter of surprise I've lost 3 hours without stopping already. I'm going to finish the rest of it either tonight or tomorrow. I might consider a purchase on Friday if I can find it cheap enough.

For the record, I'm easily impressed.

degrassinoel

I'm downloading that trial now. :P

I still dont think a fully released game should have a review revisited - if anything a buggy unfinished and seemingly untested product which goes on general release deserves the reviews it gets, good or bad. Thats not to say that reviewers don't have their own biased opinions on different games either.

If reviews were recalculated after a year of fixes and patches - the scores would be dramatically different and people would still be paying out for what they expected to be a working AAA game, when in fact it was anything but.. in that respect reviews are a good measure to keep developers and publishers in line with releasing a quality product. Hell, even if it's a crap game and scores low, at least it works right?

Either way, kudos to maxis for fixing the game and making it playable offline (finally).

Shiminay

There are some sites that make a point of re-reviewing games (I think Eurogamer is one of them), but unless they have completely re-written the code that controls this game, it's still a shambles. It didn't work. At all. AI routing was disgraceful. Running multiple cities in a region was always flaky and the out and out lies they told about every single aspect of the game means that they should life forever with a terrible score and a reasonable reminder that when you make all kinds of crazy announcements and proclamations about a new game, if better fking live up to the expectations you've built.

Gamer Bhoy 89

Shiminay wrote: »

There are some sites that make a point of re-reviewing games (I think Eurogamer is one of them), but unless they have completely re-written the code that controls this game, it's still a shambles. It didn't work. At all. AI routing was disgraceful. Running multiple cities in a region was always flaky and the out and out lies they told about every single aspect of the game means that they should life forever with a terrible score and a reasonable reminder that when you make all kinds of crazy announcements and proclamations about a new game, if better fking live up to the expectations you've built.

Well I never invested into the hype, I just knew it was coming. It came out and bombed, big time... So I ignored it for a year.

Then I heard of the removal of the always-online and the addition of single player, and I haven't heard any bad things since. I never would've bothered about the game if it wasn't for this trial.

And as I said, I'm easily impressed. If I had jumped on the massive hype bandwagon that everyone else was on prior to its release, I may have a completely different opinion altogether. But I give others the benefit of the doubt. So, upon playing the trial with no expectations whatsoever, I was happy. So I'm buying it.

Happy days

Overheal

a 4 hour trial? A joke; an apology is what they need to offer. No, seriously, they're souring the whole industry with the idea that you can lie to your customers and fcuk up horribly and still get away with millions. Others will inevitably follow in their shadow

Gamer Bhoy 89

I think making this thread was a bad idea

cherryghost

The game has a 4 hour lifespan so you're done. Don't buy it. It's very shallow after you get through the buildings.

degrassinoel

I dunno, the trial wasnt bad. I made an absolute bollocks of the first city so started a second one and it went pretty well.. apart from the massive oil refinery upwind of a residential area :P

I might actually buy it out of boredom whilst it's on special

Gamer Bhoy 89

cherryghost wrote: »

The game has a 4 hour lifespan so you're done. Don't buy it. It's very shallow after you get through the buildings.

Well I'm buying it so. I enjoyed it.

VinLieger

Still regret buying this overpriced broken piece of crap, no matter how "fixed" it is now it still doesn't get rid of the bad taste left after the horrific release it had, suffice to say no matter how many pathing issues the fix and patches they apply they will not adjust the one giant flaw in that the maps are ****ing tiny

degrassinoel

the maps are pretty small alright but it's not a bad game - i didnt play it at release deliberately because of the reviews and tbh i'm glad i didnt play until now

Drexel

no. its still a pile of restrictive crap. There is zero creativity in the game

cherryghost

Agreed. It's so limited. Play Sim City 4. It's 100 times better than this mediocre crap.

Wossack

4 hours is probably the honeymoon period alright. Niggles start to creep in after that

humanji

Yeah, the 4 hour period is the limit that enjoyment comes easily, now that it's sort of fixed. After that, there's very little to do except start a new city and mess around with sharing resources. But the resource sharing is still broken, so you end up just getting angrier and angrier at the game, and all the little problems with it become more and more apparent. The first part is great fun, although the first 4 hours of every city you build will be near identical. You really are better off not buying it as it's just not a great game in totality.

And then there's the moral reason to not get it, in that it's rewarding a company and a publisher who screwed over their customers and will continue to do so if they see they're making money on it.

Shiminay

Here's an idea...

How many of us have this game and how many of us would be interested in getting a multi-player region going? Get some Team Speak going, chat with one another and see if we can play the co-op in the way they dev's suggested? If you didn't have to worry about Sewage or Water and one person took on the responsibility to manage all of that for the region, another to make an entirely residential city, another to make an oil mining town, another a coal mining, etc

degrassinoel

i wouldn't wanna be stung with the sewerage region :P

but it's a good idea

Sephiroth_dude

No I really don't think it should,a very disappointing game for me,did they make the map sizes bigger?

degrassinoel

dont think so, no

Hercule

The success or failure of most games* (in review terms) should be dictated by it's quality or potential quality on day 1 -EA already have garnered a lot of customer apathy by regularly take the piss by launching half-games that are missing features or are not fully functional - they shouldn't get a 2nd chance because they "eventually got it fixed" or "12 months later we patched it to be better" - It's the equivalent of a filmmaker making a critically panned film and then re-launching it 6/12 months later as a "directors cut - how we really meant to do it".

In sim-city's case this game is notorious for being a major devolution in terms of what made the original games so fun - replacing scale and complexity with social/multiplayer features that detract from the originals "create your city, your way" vibe.

EA games are often akin to a full price early-access beta product until abut 5-6 months after launch when they really go gold.

*I think the only games that should get rolling reviews which are regularly re-evaluated are MMOs - because the score for an MMO is more based around a quality of service (over time) that is given on a continuous basis. ie. The quality of the product on day 1 is not indicative of the quality on day 60, 180 etc- (An MMO like Tera or Warhammer Online was reasonably well-reviewed at launch but disappeared into obscurity and was ultimately quickly abandoned by the developers 30 days after launch - a review of it now would and should be a lot more critical) -e.g Day 1 review scores for games like Wildstar or FF14:RR are a waste of everyone's time.

wyrn

I need to give it another go. I had awful hassle trying to get it installed. The patch update killed it each time and there was no way to prevent it from trying to update. I eventually found a way around but by that time I was severely peeved off. I went back to it the following day but I couldn't connect to the server, so I said screw this and went back to my old SimCity

Mc Love

I gave up on this when I bought it on release, but I'm getting a noice piece of machinery and wondering would it worth trying it out again as it doesnt look like there will be another simcity game for quite some time.

Anyone else still playing and think its worth giving a second shot?

Atlantic Dawn

The Cities:Skyline game is everything Sim City should have been, they got it so wrong it's unbelievable.

Eoin247

I have all the Simcitys going back to 3K. I have to say though that Cities Skylines is miles ahead of any of them.

If you have any desire to play a city builder, then you should get skylines. Firstly it's dirt cheap for a relatively new game and it's regularly on sale for cheaper. It's also regularly updated with free additions and there are thousands of free buildings and mods on the steam workshop.

Eoin247

Atlantic Dawn wrote: »

The Cities:Skyline game is everything Sim City should have been, they got it so wrong it's unbelievable.

What amazes me the most about it is how Skylines only had a fraction of the developers and funding that Simcity had.

Mc Love

might give that one a go

quokula

I had friends who worked for EA at the time Sim City was made, in a completely different studio on the other side of the world, but they heard enough about what was going on. They'd invested really heavily into new simulation technology, but it just didn't quite work properly. In the previous sim city games they just faked everything, but it was a convincing fake, while this one had many orders of magnitude more "real" simulation going on beneath the surface, except it got so complicated that they couldn't tune it and get it behaving exactly how they wanted. They also found that the more conditions and rules they needed to add to it to get it behaving more as intended, the more resource intensive it became and the smaller they had to make the cities.

In summary, there were some huge technical mistakes made, primarily with the game engine itself and also with the scalability of the servers, but I can guarantee you those devs poured thousands of hours of their lives making the best of what they had for that launch, with nothing but the best of intentions. And they continued to do so after the launch, working hard to get the game to a much better place.

That's why I find it a little sad when I see the comments in this thread which seem to imply the job of reviewers is to basically punish developers for the mistakes they've made. The purpose of a review should actually be to allow the reader to make an informed choice about what to buy. If, as is the case with Sim City, there have been many patches and improvements, then the review ought to reflect that in order to give the reader a fair glimpse into what they would potentially be buying. To purposely mark the game down based not on how it is now, but how it was a two years ago, in a state the reader of the review would never see, is simply misleading and not useful as a review. In fact you could argue that in mis-using the review to try and punish developers, all it does is discourage them from supporting and improving any other games they make post release.

With all that said, logistically you can't expect reviewers to keep coming back to every game they've reviewed to check in on it, so the game will have to live with its existing reviews for the most part. Plus, even with the fixes, Cities Skylines is still a better game. SimCity isn't anything like the disaster some people would have you believe though, and it can be very enjoyable to play.

Dave_The_Sheep

I think people would rather punish the publishers for the mistakes they've made. How practical that is at this stage though is another argument.

Mc Love

When I did play in the first round it was enjoyable until, until the city/town was well established and you needed more space to grow, which is tough because you have to start a new city. I think I'll have to give it another go though because it has the potential to be a good game. I read the updated review on eurogamer and the review of Cities Skylines and I'd probably come to same conclusion, that it wouldnt be sim city.

Shiminay

Nobody with a lick of sense blames the men and women at the coalface for producing a sub-standard game. The hours spent in crunch of any software project are all consuming and the work put in is above and beyond - and it must be crushing to know you're in crunch time of a product that the world is going to hate because the publishers and more specifically, their marketing people, started hyping your project before you were even sure if you could deliver on the ideas. For other well documented examples, see anything Peter Molyneaux says, anything Ubisoft released in 2013 and 2014 and most things EA release.

Korvanica

They should give up on it. The damage is done now. A Sim City game wont sell as well again because of the mess they released. No matter how much they've fixed the game.

Although chances are i'm wrong because gamers in general are total ****ing idiots.

Kirby

Korvanica wrote: »

They should give up on it. The damage is done now. A Sim City game wont sell as well again because of the mess they released. No matter how much they've fixed the game.

Although chances are i'm wrong because gamers in general are total ****ing idiots.

It will. It has brand association. EA frequently put out sub par games and people still buy the next version.

People tend not to buy unknown IP's. Sure, Cities skyline is popular with streamers and niche markets like this forum.....but the public have no idea what it is. My sister and her friends all bought Sim City at launch because they knew what the game was and they all liked the Sims. None of them have a clue what Cities is.

There is a reason Cities Skyline is so cheap. Its because it has to be in order to sell. EA can charge three times as much as and still sell more. Franchise power.

CruelCoin

Gamer Bhoy 89 wrote: »

I understand it was a mess on release...but so was GTA Online (probably a bad comparison but I can't think of any other bomb of first-day release)

X-Rebirth




"Shudder"

ScumLord

degrassinoel wrote: »

i see your point but i disagree, purely because when the game was officially released it was a shambles - they may have worked diligently to fix all the problems and make it awesome (is it really that good?) but the fact remains that it should have been in the condition it's in now upon release.

I can totally get your point but for consumers that weren't originally caught up in the fiasco it could be useful to have a review of the current software. If any game was a mess on release but got turned into a very good game in the meantime, wouldn't you want to know what the software is actually like now?

I think if they had been up front and said "look guys, this hasn't worked out as we intended, it's going to need a lot more work, but we know you're waiting for this game, if you want to buy in now as early access for a discount we can make this game great".

I have no problem with early access, when it's done right it's a great way to develop a game.

dreamers75

Gamer Bhoy 89 wrote: »

I understand it was a mess on release...but so was GTA Online (probably a bad comparison but I can't think of any other bomb of first-day release)

http://www.pcgamer.com/the-worst-pc-game-launches/

TheDoc

I got plenty of fun out of it on release. I wasn't hit with all the massive issues the majority seemed to get, and me and the lads playing it got away with murder. The server issues were the main gripe if I remember. Although as our cities advanced there was definitly AI issues.

I didn't pay much for the game since the lads I was playing with all worked in EA, so I didn't get as upset as I'm sure someone paying full whack did.

We all went back to it recently for a go and it was good fun again, but I guess with the other games we are playing we can't really fit it in anywhere. I play a bit of Cities Skylines also which I cant even dedicate proper time to that. And that game definitly capitalised on the mess of Sim City.

It's a pity, there was a clearly good idea in there, just executed horribly.

Mc Love

The city size really hampers the game, and the fact that residents in the region dont come to the other cities for work, so you cant have an industrial city or at least I havent been able to make one yet.

EoinHef

I dont think review scores should change but if it was tagged as something like a 'Revisit' rather than a review i dont see any problem with that.

Would mean people could get an idea of current performance but also being reminded that the game had/has issues. That way any dev that puts in the work after the fact can reap the rewards of a more positive view on the game. And players could be reminded to check out a game that they may have passed on because of certain issues that have now been fixed.

Mc Love

Does anyone know if the unlimited water cheat doesnt work anymore, I have the water plant backed up to a sewage plant and I'm running out of water..

Eoin247

Kirby wrote: »

It will. It has brand association. EA frequently put out sub par games and people still buy the next version.

People tend not to buy unknown IP's. Sure, Cities skyline is popular with streamers and niche markets like this forum.....but the public have no idea what it is. My sister and her friends all bought Sim City at launch because they knew what the game was and they all liked the Sims. None of them have a clue what Cities is.

There is a reason Cities Skyline is so cheap. Its because it has to be in order to sell. EA can charge three times as much as and still sell more. Franchise power.

While it's true that regular people would still recognise simcity more, the brand has been badly tarnished and its unlikely that a new pc game will come out for another 10 years.

Cities skylines was/is an incredibly huge success. Its total sales are approaching the total sales of simcity 2013. Anybody who games on the PC has heard a load about it this year and posts about the game have hit the frontpage of reddit loads of times this year.

The current simcity has no loyal following and the potential for DLC is now zero. Skylines on the otherhand has a large and loyal following who are gonna eat up DLC for years to come

SeantheMan

No. EA shouldn't get 2nd chances.
The game should be remember for the crock of **** it was upon release.

chrislad

I'd be saying no also, but with the advent of social media, and social reviews, any positive changes to the game will be reflected in those. Steams review system is one example of how reviews can change over time.

Mc Love

The limited space is the only thing that is still killing in and plus the fact that every city has to have RCI in it and you cant have a residential & industrial city.

Raging_Ninja

If they were happy to release the game in the state it was, they should be happy with the reviews they got.

BonkeyDonker

re-installed this after reading through this thread. Played it for two or three hours and uninstalled it again. As somebody who has played all these games from Sim City 2000, through Sim City 4, Cities XL and Cities: Skylines it is a fundamentally flawed game.

Mc Love

Wow I've been playing it for the last week but yes it is definitely flawed. The traffic network is a pain in the whole but I've see stuff where you can segregate the city and people will use public transport. Cant wait to try out Cities: Skylines though

VinLieger

They made their god awful game and now have to live with it, no re-reviews, especially when there are far superior products that represent what the players actually wanted ie Cities Skylines