Please Fix Zoning

[J B Dryden]

I've jumped in and out of the game since it released (just generally annoyed with it too often), but hands down the thing that annoys me the most is zoning. After the years of "Cities: Skylines," there's a lot to love about the game, and there should have been a lot learned about the game. Why, though, do we still have to deal with a square grid for zoning?

I don't typically like to compare games, but if "Manor Lords" can do it, then I'd think that a game like "Cities: Skylines II" would be able to create zones that aren't rigid. It ends up creating some awful bare spots in the cities and really just isn't realistic when designing cities. It's the one thing I really they'd consider adjusting.

[Stealthy]

Use surface tool to adjust the area. Buildings will be square but at least the lot will be shaped to meet the next one.

[J B Dryden]

Originally posted by Stealthy:

Use surface tool to adjust the area. Buildings will be square but at least the lot will be shaped to meet the next one.

That's a solution to a bad game design. There is ZERO chance of creating unique buildings like the Iron Horse Building or other oddly-shaped ones because you can't create oddly-shaped zones. For a game so "revolutionary" in their design with the first iteration, I would have thought they'd do something a bit more unique than just putting pipes under the streets.

[guyerg]

I know bad game design but when assets come out there will be those types of building just like in CS one and you will be able to use anarchy and move it to place them where you need them to fit. I have stoped playing because of the lack of assets.

[J B Dryden]

Originally posted by guyerg:

I know bad game design but when assets come out there will be those types of building just like in CS one and you will be able to use anarchy and move it to place them where you need them to fit. I have stoped playing because of the lack of assets.

You shouldn't have to mod your game to make it more enjoyable. Again, bad design.

[guyerg]

Well I would disagree that you should not have to mod a game to make it more enjoyable thus it is bad if you have to. Not everyone would agree on what is or is not enjoyable and developers have to balance that so while I will agree that they may have missed the mark on some things not everything we see in a mod should be in the base game. City painters don’t want to have to deal with some aspects of the game they need mods to accomplish that and to them a mod makes the game enjoyable for them. Simultaneously those that want deep simulations would disagree with having those aspects of the game removed. So no mods are not the deciding factor of bad game design

[sternenstaub70]

Originally posted by J B Dryden:

You shouldn't have to mod your game to make it more enjoyable. Again, bad design.

Then I wonder, why have mods in the first place ?

Everyone has a different definion of enjoyable or good design.
Obviously CS2 does not meet your minimum criteria. But in this case also CS1 fails this criteria and the whole Simcity franchise anyway. And Anno... because all of those games are lacking what you would like to have in CS2 without mods.

[Stealthy]

Originally posted by J B Dryden:

That's a solution to a bad game design. There is ZERO chance of creating unique buildings like the Iron Horse Building or other oddly-shaped ones because you can't create oddly-shaped zones. For a game so "revolutionary" in their design with the first iteration, I would have thought they'd do something a bit more unique than just putting pipes under the streets.

Of course there is. You just need to stop limiting yourself with 90 degree angles. Even the vanilla game has already circle buildings.

All you need is one small point connecting to the road, rest can be any shape. Zoning grid doesn't dictate that.

[J B Dryden]

Originally posted by guyerg:

Well I would disagree that you should not have to mod a game to make it more enjoyable thus it is bad if you have to. Not everyone would agree on what is or is not enjoyable and developers have to balance that so while I will agree that they may have missed the mark on some things not everything we see in a mod should be in the base game. City painters don’t want to have to deal with some aspects of the game they need mods to accomplish that and to them a mod makes the game enjoyable for them. Simultaneously those that want deep simulations would disagree with having those aspects of the game removed. So no mods are not the deciding factor of bad game design

If you have to mod a game to make it enjoyable, then that's not a very good game. Mods should be there to enhance the experience. If they're being created to make up for flaws in the game, then the game should fix those flaws.

[J B Dryden]

Originally posted by sternenstaub70:

Originally posted by J B Dryden:

You shouldn't have to mod your game to make it more enjoyable. Again, bad design.

Then I wonder, why have mods in the first place ?

Everyone has a different definion of enjoyable or good design.
Obviously CS2 does not meet your minimum criteria. But in this case also CS1 fails this criteria and the whole Simcity franchise anyway. And Anno... because all of those games are lacking what you would like to have in CS2 without mods.

This doesn't make any sense. I was critiquing a single game, not an entire genre. I know what I'm getting out of games like Anno or the old SimCity games. This critique is about a game that isn't moving forward. It's stagnant design.

[ViraCorp]

Originally posted by J B Dryden:

Originally posted by guyerg:

Well I would disagree that you should not have to mod a game to make it more enjoyable thus it is bad if you have to. Not everyone would agree on what is or is not enjoyable and developers have to balance that so while I will agree that they may have missed the mark on some things not everything we see in a mod should be in the base game. City painters don’t want to have to deal with some aspects of the game they need mods to accomplish that and to them a mod makes the game enjoyable for them. Simultaneously those that want deep simulations would disagree with having those aspects of the game removed. So no mods are not the deciding factor of bad game design

If you have to mod a game to make it enjoyable, then that's not a very good game. Mods should be there to enhance the experience. If they're being created to make up for flaws in the game, then the game should fix those flaws.

Agreed, the mods should be the icing on the cake. Mods should not be needed to make the cake itself.

[ruen]

you guys are pretending mods are fixing this problem, the only way for mods to fix this problem is with a massive asset pack with unique building angles, which will never happen. I personally think the game is unplayable, years of my life waiting for the next city builder to come out just for it to be repackaged and completely uninspired.

[leftbehind]

I'm surprised that they didn't include some sort of procedural building that could curve along roads. Terraced housing (row housing) often follows the road shape, which in older cities worldwide is often not straight lines.

[martinolund]

Originally posted by J B Dryden:

I've jumped in and out of the game since it released (just generally annoyed with it too often), but hands down the thing that annoys me the most is zoning. After the years of "Cities: Skylines," there's a lot to love about the game, and there should have been a lot learned about the game. Why, though, do we still have to deal with a square grid for zoning?

I don't typically like to compare games, but if "Manor Lords" can do it, then I'd think that a game like "Cities: Skylines II" would be able to create zones that aren't rigid. It ends up creating some awful bare spots in the cities and really just isn't realistic when designing cities. It's the one thing I really they'd consider adjusting.

I hear you. The Manor Lord is quite nice in this regard. CS2 was built on the concept we have in the game right now, all assets are created around this concept. I highly doubt they would re-do one of the core functions of the game (and all other systems are built on top of it) and then change tens of thousands of assets to make it work. We can always hope though. I'd welcome the change. Good luck and I hope you get what you wish for.

[J B Dryden]

Originally posted by martinolund:

I hear you. The Manor Lord is quite nice in this regard. CS2 was built on the concept we have in the game right now, all assets are created around this concept. I highly doubt they would re-do one of the core functions of the game (and all other systems are built on top of it) and then change tens of thousands of assets to make it work. We can always hope though. I'd welcome the change. Good luck and I hope you get what you wish for.

I'm not naive enough to think that they'd change it at this point. Paradox just stymied what could have been a much better game and really just pulled a Firaxis in making a cookie cutter replica of "Cities: Skylines" with some new icing. It's just a woefully underwhelming game at this point.