Posted May 18, 2012
I got Simcity 2000 from the promo now, couse i remember playing it a few years back. The thing is, i found it utterly boring after an hour. Especially when compared to the game i really like: Ceasar.
Reason? a) not easy to learn - as opposed to ceasar, the relation between things doesn't seem to be all that clear to me and at the same time game throws at you everything at once, whereas in ceasar complexity builds up slowly with each scenario. In ceasar you immediately know (and can immediately check with overlays) the effects of proximity of certain kinds of buildings, the needs of the population, the demands for products. The response to the changes you make in a city is almost instant. Things are clear (without losing depth). Here it's a mess.
b) no goal - sandbox idea doesn't seem to appeal to me. And scenarios - well I complain about complexity, so you can guess - i fired off scenario, looked at the big city clueless to where is what and what should i do now, sighed, and turned it off.
It seems nothing drives me to go on with this game. I don't feel purpose. Actually i don't even now what i should do in this game and am attacked with the feeling of pointlessness and being lost.
I guess when I was young i just had fun clicking with no idea what to do. Now I just got bored. But maybe my approach is wrong? Maybe some of you can say something that will make it easier for me to get started with this game? I really like Ceasar so i thought the legendary grandfather of all city builders will do it for me. And it didn't. I'm dissappointed.
I'm also really interested to know what people like about this game (as i am interested in game theory) and why do they play, what is the most rewarding about it. Maybe you can give me an answer?
Reason? a) not easy to learn - as opposed to ceasar, the relation between things doesn't seem to be all that clear to me and at the same time game throws at you everything at once, whereas in ceasar complexity builds up slowly with each scenario. In ceasar you immediately know (and can immediately check with overlays) the effects of proximity of certain kinds of buildings, the needs of the population, the demands for products. The response to the changes you make in a city is almost instant. Things are clear (without losing depth). Here it's a mess.
b) no goal - sandbox idea doesn't seem to appeal to me. And scenarios - well I complain about complexity, so you can guess - i fired off scenario, looked at the big city clueless to where is what and what should i do now, sighed, and turned it off.
It seems nothing drives me to go on with this game. I don't feel purpose. Actually i don't even now what i should do in this game and am attacked with the feeling of pointlessness and being lost.
I guess when I was young i just had fun clicking with no idea what to do. Now I just got bored. But maybe my approach is wrong? Maybe some of you can say something that will make it easier for me to get started with this game? I really like Ceasar so i thought the legendary grandfather of all city builders will do it for me. And it didn't. I'm dissappointed.
I'm also really interested to know what people like about this game (as i am interested in game theory) and why do they play, what is the most rewarding about it. Maybe you can give me an answer?
Post edited May 18, 2012 by CaveSoundMaster