Only negative thing I have to say about it: once my city starts getting bigger, it gets a bit sluggish on my old crappy PC. It is one of the two games that is forcing my hand to buy a new gaming PC.
Only negative thing I have to say about it: once my city starts getting bigger, it gets a bit sluggish on my old crappy PC. It is one of the two games that is forcing my hand to buy a new gaming PC.
It's probably worth giving a new shot, I guess.
It's a fun game but I just didn't feel as involved as the SimCity series (prior to the latest, which was a disaster).
I feel like C:S seems shallow to people because the first and only real challenge in the game is traffic. Most of the elements that are challenging in Sim City actually do exist in C:S, but the game is tuned such that you have enough money to buy your way out of any problem.
Sim City games force you to make many difficult decisions because your funds are so limited. I hope that in the future the C:S developers make note of this, and they take the time to tune their games to replicate that challenge.
I wonder if the developers had set their mind on building a city builder game before SimCity's non-success or did they realize the market gap and go for it reactively.
They already had a pretty decent city and traffic simulation engine in their earlier Cities in Motion games (which I didn't like nearly as much, perhaps because I was really bad at it). So it's feasible (but still awe-inspiring) if they put Skylines together in that timeframe.
so far my preference goes to sim city 4 deluxe + rush hours. that has a very good traffic simulation and does a good job of simulating cities, has a lively modding community and it's quite cheap.
haven't tested yet skylines, waiting for a sale.
certain gameplay aspects graphics music user interface
SimCity (2013), despite some failings in gameplay, still gets a lot of things right.
Now why some people might not care about the things I enumerated above, I do. I've been playing SimCity since the original classic was first released. For me personally, the peak of SimCity was SimCity 2000 or possibly SimCity 4 Rush Hour in gameplay terms, but graphically, SimCity 2013 was the most desirable.
While Skylines certainly has that core gameplay feel to a certain extent that Simcity (2013) was missing, it's clearly not yet the best the developers are capable of. I think the next iteration they release will be the one that many have been waiting for.
Skylines came out only this year. 6 years is a long time in the gaming world. I wouldn't expect to play many games from this year on any computer from 2009.
That could potentially run on a Pentium 4 with integrated graphics, not exactly the best comparison. Great game, but not sure why you felt you needed to include it in that list.
Quite a few of those games are not overly demanding either and mostly forgiving of older graphics cards. If you can run things like Arma 3, Witcher 2 or 3, I'd be more curious.
Cities Skylines is a simulation, it's going to eat up a lot of CPU and a lesser extent, GPU.
If Bohemia Interactive wrote ARMA 3, I wouldn't take its requirements for a beefy machine as indication of anything other than the... interesting design choices those guys make when designing and implementing their games.
I run many, many, many recently released (and not-yet-released) big-name 3D games on 5 [0] and 6 [1] year old hardware.
Console-first development has done terrible things to video game design, but it has let cheap bastards like myself get enormous mileage out of our gaming rigs.
(BTW: Cities runs juuuuuuuuust fine on my "ancient" PC. :) )
[0] Radeon HD 6950
[1] AMD Phenom II X4 955