Published on 8th April 2013 by
Originally Posted by Tomrh99I think this game deserves the 40% it got. Aside from the awful DRM which cripples the game as a whole, the poor AI makes road managing and building managing really poor (they will always take the shortest road route, even if it is full of traffic). The online play is not really needed and is less fun in a lot of ways than if you had just one big city. It also apparently is not fun after about 10 hours for many people, which limits the playtime a lot compared to previous editions.
Originally Posted by steveo_mcgHate to break it to you but that is RL, thats why we have traffic jams...
Originally Posted by DbDlol 40% - attention seeking score that one.
I got it for my kids who love minecraft and general building games a few days after release. They had almost no connection problems and have spent many hours happily building cities. In addition due to the connection problems they never really suffered they got NFS:MW free.
While I don't like EA and their attempt to extract money from everything, and I agree with the faults (cities too small, no save) it's still a fun game and it works fine if you have the internet (i.e most of us). It's still a more fun game then many of the 80% bit tech scored games.
Originally Posted by ShirtyIt's good to see people debating about this, and most of them without being overly emotive. Quite why anyone thinks the new games editor is jumping on a bandwagon remains to be seen, since from what I've read he just didn't rate it overall. He is far from alone.
I'm not big on city builders, although the last one I played was SC4 and I've not touched the Anno series, the Cities series, the Tropico series, or indeed any other god games for some time.
So far I have yet to be swayed by the lovers, this sounds like a game I'd play furiously for a couple of days then get frustrated and put it down permanently.
Originally Posted by PiefaceMost people who rated it very poorly was a protest over the always online connection, or to do with the start up bugs. This appears to be neither a protest, and was planned after the bugs, so just seems more bandwagon than review. Reading through the review he says he enjoys it, and the only major issues appear to be smaller maps and always online, which hardly justifies a 40% really.
Originally Posted by XXAOSICXX
"fun, but i won't play be playing it for long" deserves a below average score.
Originally Posted by ZurechialSeriously? People defending this travesty of a game? No wonder EA thinks they can ride their customers when people are willing to defend an atrocity of a game like this just because they fear being associated with a bandwagon.
40% is generous.
Originally Posted by mars-bar-manM'eh. I really like it.
Guess I'm retarded.
Originally Posted by GeorgeStormHaha no, from gameplay videos/watching people play it IRL I would love to buy it, it's purely a cost thing that's stopped me, even with it's bugs it looks like lots of fun etc (which is what games are about I think?)
You are not logged in, please login with your forum account below. If you don't already have an account please register to start contributing.
9th February 2016
8th February 2016
4th February 2016
© Copyright bit-tech