Ten Ton Hammer: "Moving away from the fact that the Internet is required for single-player mode, this game is outright delightful. The gameplay is addictive, fun, easy to learn, and takes the series back to its roots--that honest innocent fun of placing. Even if you’re not a fan of the series, SimCity offers enough to draw you in by shedding the complicated simulation aspects of its predecessors and focusing on pure city building fun."
Some games force online-only measures onto people. It sucks! Especially when some titles, like these seven, 100% didn't need it.
The following is an excerpt from Chapter 5 of The Secret History of Mac Gaming, “Simulated.”
EA has something of a reputation when it comes to awkwardly handling much-loved franchises. Here are 7 that Screen Critics feel they ruined.
Need for Speed as well. Here's to hope that the new one will be a return to form for the franchise.
The cities are TINY. When I mean TINY, I mean TINY. Problems with traffic even if you have the biggest avenues, lots of mass transportation and thus all your hella expensive fire and police can't do squat. You watch criminals run amok and your buildings burn down.
I mean garbage collection sucked when you had a big map because you know it was just going to go to waste, but on a tiny map like this the garbage zones take up a huge amount of space on a small, tiny map.
This is a dumbed down version of Sim City. Is it quite the dumbing down like Sim City Societies? No. But there are major design problems in this game.
Even beyond the DESIGN decisions of the DRM and lack of being able to save your game.
93/100 my butt, even if you ignore all the technical problems.
It's like saying your last place football team would be the best if it had an all pro QB, RB, LB, WR, DT and about 15 other guys.
Meanwhile they don't.
Besides that they decide to play with only 7 people on the field because they want the extra room and less confusion for the newer players.
Oh and there is no 'year' in Sim City so things don't advance as you go into the future. One minute my Nuclear power plant was fine, but somehow later I didn't have the 'educational level' somehow and my Nuke plant was 'close to meltdown'.
You can't even throw disasters at your city and then reload the game. Because gasp, you don't control your game, and you never know when the cloud goes down and loses all your progress, nor if it does save, will it let you continue playing it when you come back, that is of course, if you can get on.
Suspicious score is suspicious. I love how some game "journalists" think a broken game deserve a "near perfect" score. The only series of conclusions I can draw from this is (a) either the reviewer is on crack or... (b) Website is a shill front... or (c) reviewer is being paid by PR firm for EA or... (d) Review is written by PR firm ...
"Moving away from the fact that the Internet is required for single-player mode..."
NOPE. We do not move away from that fact until it's gone.
I don't really get the bracketing of a "multiplayer" score in this review. The game *is* multiplayer. The cities are smaller because of it. The game is designed to constantly be a multiplayer game.
I'm still fumed. I hardly ever pay full price for a game, and I was going to for SimCity. It looks so good, I love the amount of stats you can get from it, the way it visualizes how your city is doing, that stuff is GREAT. They just screwed it up by making it always-multiplayer and assuming the best out of the Interbutts... which was most likely a creative caving-in to EA DRM demands.