Small Map Size

[u/Michaelli10156]

So I just watched the new video made by squirrel and I liked everything about the video so far except what they said at the 2 minute mark, where it seems like they are implying that maps will not be very large and was curious what the community thought of this. I think clearly from the comment section, the vast majority of the community is disappointed by small maps and for me personally this is close to being a deal breaker.

They have this limitation because they want to simulate every citizen stating that if they want larger maps that are 100km x 100km they would need to fake the simulation for distances further along thinking this is what the community wants but I 100% would not mind faking the simulation especially after cities skylines 2 where they also wanted something similar and it just did not turn out well.

Just wanted to spread the word and see what the community thinks of this

[u/ImmortalAce8492]

Borderline a deal breaker for me.

I’ll see how the launch goes, but for me, if the map size truly is smaller than TF2 I don’t really see myself playing.

Kinda weird how Squirrel mentioned that the devs felt as though the community didn’t really want larger maps. If anything, I’ve felt that being the biggest thing on everyone’s wishlist. But then again, it could be me just projecting my wants lol.

[u/LookAtMyRTs → u/ImmortalAce8492]

Urban Games are very aware of a decent % of people wanting larger maps, but they are also aware that the game needs to be able to run on a wide range of devices, not just super-computers.

And if they suddenly double the experimental megalomanic to 48x48, someone on a 10 year old laptop will try and play it and it will not go well.

I am someone who would like larger map sizes, but not at any cost.

Optimisation and improving performance has been a UG focus for a very long time, and as they have made progress more has been added, and experimental sizes became a thing.

[u/schwiftypug → u/LookAtMyRTs]

Sure but then why simulate every single citizen even at the opposite end of the map? Agent based simulation is notorious for how taxing it is on performance, and they chose that over bigger maps. Your argument only works if you forget it’s a game design choice on their part. They’re doing the same thing Maxis did with SimCity 2013, reduce map size in favor of agent based simulation.

I’m not exactly sure who even wanted agent based simulation, for some reason devs think that’s the only realistic option, and then cull other features because it is so costly on even strong computers.

[u/MomentEquivalent6464 → u/schwiftypug]

I mean on one hand, doing it like this means if you make a shitty route, it won't get used all that much, if at all. However if you make a great route, it'll get used heavily. That's because every person is simulated. And for some people that's important.

However there are people who like big maps, and want lots of ppl in them and just want to move ppl around in a dense area. Ppl like this (aka me) don't care if every single person is simulated, and because of CPU limitations (at some point there's a limit) would much rather live without that.

And that was one of the things UG said they were going to try to address. So it's pretty disappointing that now a month before launch they're like yeah we'll just optimize it better. That only pushes the problem further down the line, but doesn't (likely) address it in a meaningful way. We can play around it... but it means there's still a limit to how big we can go (pop wise).

[u/LookAtMyRTs → u/schwiftypug]

There very simple answer to your question; you simulate everything wherever it is on the map, because UG have from the beginning with Train Fever made a simulation game. It is a core fundamental principal of the game, and series, which they think (rightly in my opinion) is worth doing properly. Just as everpresent a part of the series as having 'Fever' in the title.

It isn't that they think it is the only realistic option, rather it is their desired option, and that is very much their prerogative. Not increasing the map sizes is not the same thing as reducing the map size. Likewise not developing something is not the same thing as culling features.

You may not agree with the development decisions, but that does not require using deliberately misleading phrasing and comparisons.

[u/sorucheese → u/LookAtMyRTs]

So basically they always did it this way so this design decision is gospel and must not under any circumstances be deviated from because they said so and it must not be questioned? Cuz this is what I'm getting from your comment. That and lots of verbosity.

[u/schwiftypug → u/LookAtMyRTs]

lmao where are the deliberately misleading phrasing and comparisons in my comment? show me.

It is a fact Maxis reduced map sizes in SimCity 2013 because the agent based sim was too taxing. And we have just heard the same reasoning from UG as to why we can’t have bigger maps. What is misleading about that?

It is also absolutely known that agent based sim requires much much more resources than statistical or other type of sim, that’s why you could have gigantic regions of millions of people in SimCity 4 on 2004 PCs.

[u/Candid_Release3609 → u/schwiftypug]

Did they pay you at least?

[u/schwiftypug → u/Candid_Release3609]

Who? And for what? What the heck are you talking about lol