this post was submitted on 16 Jan 2024
137 points (91.0% liked)

Games

32007 readers
1510 users here now

Welcome to the largest gaming community on Lemmy! Discussion for all kinds of games. Video games, tabletop games, card games etc.

Weekly Threads:

What Are You Playing?

The Weekly Discussion Topic

Rules:

  1. Submissions have to be related to games

  2. No bigotry or harassment, be civil

  3. No excessive self-promotion

  4. Stay on-topic; no memes, funny videos, giveaways, reposts, or low-effort posts

  5. Mark Spoilers and NSFW

  6. No linking to piracy

More information about the community rules can be found here.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] circuitfarmer@lemmy.sdf.org 28 points 8 months ago (2 children)

I was so excited for Cities: Skylines II, and it is a shell of the former game. So many systems seem to fake the economy, and it also feels impossible to make your city fail.

Waiting until I see evidence of a good game post-release before I board any kind of hype train.

[–] echo64@lemmy.world 9 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Heh, that's what I felt about city skylines. Maybe that's just the game

[–] circuitfarmer@lemmy.sdf.org 6 points 8 months ago (4 children)

It was definitely possible to tank a city in Skylines 1. That said, it's also not the most challenging game.

But with Skylines II, I can't even tank one when I try. Hundreds of thousands in the red? The game throws free money at you in the form of "government subsidies" to compensate. And they cannot be disabled. Absolute shit show.

[–] arudesalad@sh.itjust.works 6 points 8 months ago (1 children)

The subsidies have never saved me from failing before, they only make me fail slower (if that makes sense). It might just be something I'm experiencing though.

[–] circuitfarmer@lemmy.sdf.org 1 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Yeah, I've heard of people having a different experience (the economy just never picking up enough to succeed) -- I think both are indicative of a borked simulation.

For me, I can even be completely in the black, with 100k+ income, and I'll still be getting hundreds of grand in subsidies. Ruins any challenge.

[–] Th3D3k0y@lemmy.world 2 points 8 months ago (1 children)

I have a pretty large city, but something is wrong with my tax calculations? I have one industry pumping out 150x the taxes of everything else combine. Just a blanket of $5m from lumber an in-game hour, next best is Metals at $45k a day.

[–] circuitfarmer@lemmy.sdf.org 1 points 8 months ago

Doesn't surprise me, if you read their forums there are a ton of folks reporting issues either being outright ignored or told that the game-breaking bug they found is "as designed".

[–] lolcatnip@reddthat.com 3 points 8 months ago (1 children)

What if you treat receiving subsidies as a failure condition?

[–] circuitfarmer@lemmy.sdf.org 1 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago)

I mean, usually they're already active as soon as the game starts, so I don't really think it could be considered that way. Ideally I'd just like to be able to turn them off, which I think would provide some challenge to the budget.

[–] EncryptKeeper@lemmy.world 2 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago)

In CS 1 I purposely poisoned the entire city and it took a remarkably long time for that to have any real repercussions and can be immediately and cheaply fixed. Like you can tank a city, but it takes a concerted effort. If you just keep building roads and painting RCI the game just kinda plays itself.

[–] echo64@lemmy.world 2 points 8 months ago

I feel like whenever i "tanked" a city in cities skylines, it was because of some awkwardness in the traffic system that comes about from chaos theory rather than anything city builderey, just not really about that.

[–] Rev3rze@feddit.nl 1 points 8 months ago (1 children)

I still haven't bought that, and looks like I won't be for a while at least, maybe never if it doesn't pan out. I was so excited for Victoria 3 but reading the reviews they indicate that it's also a shell of the former game. Waiting until the game is fully released before letting in any hype has served me well lately.

[–] ChairmanMeow@programming.dev 4 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Vic3 certainly isn't a shell of Vic2. It's a considerably more complex and interesting game.

There are however some frustrating and obtuse mechanics, particularly related to warfare. It's not even that bad once you get into it properly, but as a new player it's definitely a bit frustrating and it's definitely different from what players were used to from Vic2.

[–] Rev3rze@feddit.nl 2 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Ah, that's good to hear! I myself haven't played Victoria 2, I've played EU4, CK2 and CK3 a lot and was really excited about focusing on economy and population rather than map painting in Vic3. I saw the lackluster reviews on release and beyond and assumed it just missed the mark like so many sequels do. I'll check it out some more. Thanks for your input!

[–] ChairmanMeow@programming.dev 4 points 8 months ago (1 children)

I recommend watching some YouTubers playing the game (not reviewing them). One Proud Bavarian has some fun playthroughs, and Laith is one I quite like too. Those videos give good impressions of what the game is like I think.

[–] Rev3rze@feddit.nl 2 points 8 months ago (1 children)

I checked out one proud bavarian and some beginner's guide videos to see what the gameplay is actually about and ended up buying it. Thanks for taking the time to respond, I might've slept on this title otherwise.

[–] ChairmanMeow@programming.dev 2 points 8 months ago

Hope you have fun with it!