3 ms·

What a weird tone for that article! Acts like the game developers were out to cheat people out of understanding reality.

CalRobert 7y ago
Well, I wouldn't say it's evil or anything (it's just a game) but it is a bit frustrating in a game calling itself a simulation. Also, it's humantransit, which specifically promotes walking, cycling, etc. so they're going to be understandably annoyed when the cited inspiration for plenty of city planners understates the negative impact of car dependence.
- Nasrudith 7y ago
  Personally I wouldn't call it understating car dependence so much as underestimating the alternatives. Which reminds me of Cities Skylines and how they did the opposite for what was probably an amusing oversight. Foot paths are very good for traffic without congestion which makes perfect sense. What doesn't make sense is the complete lack of time or distance limit meaning the population will happily walk a massive pedestrian walkway the length of an entire sector. A somewhat more realistic way is to use subways to link your high density residences with no highway access to places like work and retail while leaving the roads for mostly delivery trucks and emergency services. Apparently Japanese developments were practically planned this way - adding to where a new subway loop and putting housing on top for synergy.
  - nicoburns 7y ago
    > What doesn't make sense is the complete lack of time or distance limit meaning the population will happily walk a massive pedestrian walkway the length of an entire sector. How far is sector? What would you consider reasonable walking distances? Something like 30mins regularly, 60-90mins occasionally?
    - DoreenMichele 7y ago
      Real world transit-oriented design in the US routinely uses either 1/4 mile or 1/2 mile for the radius from transit that most people can/will walk. I believe they estimate that it takes 15 minutes to walk a quarter mile and 30 minutes to walk half a mile. Single data point: I'm a pedestrian. I haven't owned a car in over a decade. I'm willing to walk up to 30 minutes regularly and farther occasionally. I also use public transit sometimes.
      - asark 7y ago
        30 minutes for a half-mile? Is that the round-trip time or something?
        silversconfused 7y ago
        Potentially that amount of time would allow carrying some groceries with a screaming toddler in tow.
        DoreenMichele 7y ago
        No, that's little old ladies in street clothes hobbling as fast as they can. People walking as a mode of transit aren't competing with joggers for who gets there first. These times are for planning purposes. Of course, it's okay if you walk faster than that. But planning departments need to look at "Who will actually walk this?" And the answer is "Ordinary people will walk it if it isn't over 30 minutes, but 15 minutes is better. And that works at these distances." You see the most traffic from establishments within a quarter mile, and some additional traffic within the half mile radius but outside the quarter mile. It drops off steeply outside of the half mile radius.
        asark 7y ago
        Ah, makes sense. 30 minutes is a very slowly walked city mile for me (25min at a casual, unhurried pace, shaving a couple minutes off that for a 22-23min time with a bit more bounce in the step but still not jogging or even speed-walking) so I figured it was either round-trip or the slowest speed anyone capable of walking anywhere at all would attain—seems it's the latter.
forgottenpass 7y ago
Game design decisions made in the name of doing something fun instead of perfect makes it easy to churn out clickbait that paints the designer as monsters. There are entire publications kept afloat by rewriting that article all day every day.

CalRobert 7y ago

Well, I wouldn't say it's evil or anything (it's just a game) but it is a bit frustrating in a game calling itself a simulation. Also, it's humantransit, which specifically promotes walking, cycling, etc. so they're going to be understandably annoyed when the cited inspiration for plenty of city planners understates the negative impact of car dependence.

Nasrudith 7y ago
Personally I wouldn't call it understating car dependence so much as underestimating the alternatives. Which reminds me of Cities Skylines and how they did the opposite for what was probably an amusing oversight. Foot paths are very good for traffic without congestion which makes perfect sense. What doesn't make sense is the complete lack of time or distance limit meaning the population will happily walk a massive pedestrian walkway the length of an entire sector. A somewhat more realistic way is to use subways to link your high density residences with no highway access to places like work and retail while leaving the roads for mostly delivery trucks and emergency services. Apparently Japanese developments were practically planned this way - adding to where a new subway loop and putting housing on top for synergy.
- nicoburns 7y ago
  > What doesn't make sense is the complete lack of time or distance limit meaning the population will happily walk a massive pedestrian walkway the length of an entire sector. How far is sector? What would you consider reasonable walking distances? Something like 30mins regularly, 60-90mins occasionally?
  - DoreenMichele 7y ago
    Real world transit-oriented design in the US routinely uses either 1/4 mile or 1/2 mile for the radius from transit that most people can/will walk. I believe they estimate that it takes 15 minutes to walk a quarter mile and 30 minutes to walk half a mile. Single data point: I'm a pedestrian. I haven't owned a car in over a decade. I'm willing to walk up to 30 minutes regularly and farther occasionally. I also use public transit sometimes.
    - asark 7y ago
      30 minutes for a half-mile? Is that the round-trip time or something?
      - silversconfused 7y ago
        Potentially that amount of time would allow carrying some groceries with a screaming toddler in tow.
      - DoreenMichele 7y ago
        No, that's little old ladies in street clothes hobbling as fast as they can. People walking as a mode of transit aren't competing with joggers for who gets there first. These times are for planning purposes. Of course, it's okay if you walk faster than that. But planning departments need to look at "Who will actually walk this?" And the answer is "Ordinary people will walk it if it isn't over 30 minutes, but 15 minutes is better. And that works at these distances." You see the most traffic from establishments within a quarter mile, and some additional traffic within the half mile radius but outside the quarter mile. It drops off steeply outside of the half mile radius.
        asark 7y ago
        Ah, makes sense. 30 minutes is a very slowly walked city mile for me (25min at a casual, unhurried pace, shaving a couple minutes off that for a 22-23min time with a bit more bounce in the step but still not jogging or even speed-walking) so I figured it was either round-trip or the slowest speed anyone capable of walking anywhere at all would attain—seems it's the latter.

forgottenpass 7y ago

Game design decisions made in the name of doing something fun instead of perfect makes it easy to churn out clickbait that paints the designer as monsters. There are entire publications kept afloat by rewriting that article all day every day.