4 ms·

While this would be more realistic the majority of players would stop playing the game. I would argue this is just like you not having to build each street in a

While this would be more realistic the majority of players would stop playing the game. I would argue this is just like you not having to build each street in a 3d game by yourself you also don't need to fill out every form, etc. by yourself. I just image you have a lot of employees doing that for you.

bombcar 3y ago
What you do is make the normal game play like CS or SimCity, but you have options to turn on "difficulties" that would basically enable different aspects/gameplay. For example, you could add "federal/state requirements" where a new freeway/rail line/whatever would appear on the edge of the map and you have to get it to the other side, making connections as appropriate.
kcb 3y ago
Big disagree, I think that sounds super fun. Remember there's a significant enough number of people that play long haul truck simulators.
- philistine 3y ago
  Yeah. I think people saying more realistic interactions would not be fun or popular are lacking in imagination. The real problem with those games is the divorce from reality of bulldozing. Imagine bulldozing is as expensive, complicated, and despised as in real life. Then imagine having to fight against infrastructure cost overruns. You play a city building game, and you don't have access to roads (cars haven't been invented) so you want to put rails everywhere. You do that, but then you realise later how expensive and complicated it is to remove some rails to put down roads. Imagine the game stopping, and telling you that the cost of roads will double when you unpause the game. You'd have to manage putting down more road than you need and the consequences of overreach. It could be super fun.
  - bombcar 3y ago
    I saw someone playing that way, they could ONLY bulldoze "city services" like roads (so they could replace a road with one with more lanes that fit in the same space, or one with bike/tram lanes) but they could NOT bulldoze zoned properties, and tried their best not to remove even things like police stations, etc. I think they had a rule saying they could rezone or bulldoze a building that was abandoned; but that of course led to accusations of intentionally forcing buildings to be abandoned (which is a real thing that happens).

bombcar 3y ago

What you do is make the normal game play like CS or SimCity, but you have options to turn on "difficulties" that would basically enable different aspects/gameplay. For example, you could add "federal/state requirements" where a new freeway/rail line/whatever would appear on the edge of the map and you have to get it to the other side, making connections as appropriate.

kcb 3y ago

Big disagree, I think that sounds super fun. Remember there's a significant enough number of people that play long haul truck simulators.

philistine 3y ago
Yeah. I think people saying more realistic interactions would not be fun or popular are lacking in imagination. The real problem with those games is the divorce from reality of bulldozing. Imagine bulldozing is as expensive, complicated, and despised as in real life. Then imagine having to fight against infrastructure cost overruns. You play a city building game, and you don't have access to roads (cars haven't been invented) so you want to put rails everywhere. You do that, but then you realise later how expensive and complicated it is to remove some rails to put down roads. Imagine the game stopping, and telling you that the cost of roads will double when you unpause the game. You'd have to manage putting down more road than you need and the consequences of overreach. It could be super fun.
- bombcar 3y ago
  I saw someone playing that way, they could ONLY bulldoze "city services" like roads (so they could replace a road with one with more lanes that fit in the same space, or one with bike/tram lanes) but they could NOT bulldoze zoned properties, and tried their best not to remove even things like police stations, etc. I think they had a rule saying they could rezone or bulldoze a building that was abandoned; but that of course led to accusations of intentionally forcing buildings to be abandoned (which is a real thing that happens).