Talk:SimCity 4

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the SimCity 4 article.
Article policies
Archives: 1
Remember that article talk pages are provided to coordinate the article's improvement only, and are not for engaging in discussion of off-topic matters not related to the main article. User talk pages are more appropriate for non-article-related discussion topics. Please do not use this page as a discussion forum for off-topic matters. See talk page guidelines.
Maintained The following user(s) are actively involved with this article and may be able to help with questions about verification and sources:
Camaron (talk · contribs)
This in no way implies article ownership; all editors are encouraged to contribute.
Archive
Archives
1. March 2003 - February 2007


Contents

[edit] Misleading Caption

"A small town in SimCity 4, surrounded by farmland. New regional gameplay made towns such as this feasible for the first time in the SimCity series." - the caption below the farm town picture

Farming towns weren't feasible before because they invariably turned to manufacturing (in sim city 3000 unlimited). Sim city 4 made zoning for farmland an option. So the regional play doesn't really deserve credit for making farming towns possible.

  • I also feel that simtropolis.com is worthy of a link. It is a direct result of the game and tools created by maxis. It has added a lot of depth to the game and for that reason merits a link. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.61.190.218 (talk)
    • Yes, I think that Simtropolis is very important for many players. Simtropolis used to have its own article, so it would be acceptable to add it as an external link.Reguiieee (talk) 14:04, 31 May 2008 (UTC)
I don't know why you posted this here, but the reason it isn't linked to is because it is a fansite, which the guidelines/policies state we shouldn't link to. Instead, we have a link to a directory of fansites. Remember, wikipedia isn't a collection of links.-Localzuk(talk) 14:17, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] R.E screenshots

Have all of the screenshots been taken by you from your own game? A little more would not go amisss D. BULL 11:06, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

Too many violates WP:FU policy #3, and this article may already have too many. It's advantageous to focus on cramming as many features in lesser screenshots as possible. ╫ ２５ ◀RingADing▶ 13:11, 22 March 2007 (UTC) ╫

ok thanks for your speedy reply. D. BULL 15:50, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Building Designs

I think the building designs section should be slightly rewritten, to mention that buildings in the game were inspired by more than just San Francisco structures. There is probably no "verifiable source" to cite, but there was a discussion once on the old SimCity Central site about the origins of many of the games buildings, and members of that forum located dozens and dozens of real world buildings that are reproduced very accurately in the game. Buildings from New York, Chicago, Los Angeles, Hong Kong, Atlanta, and many others were identified in-game, usually with very slight alterations in design. Toroca 04:17, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

Provide a link on it. I'm interested to know myself. ╫ ２５ ◀RingADing▶ 13:59, 25 March 2007 (UTC) ╫

[edit] Rush Hour Section

I have noticed that the Rush Hour expansion pack now has its own article, though the section on Rush Hour in this article is not that much shorter than the Rush Hour article itself. Perhaps, we should reduce the Rush Hour section in this article to a summary, and put most of the information in the Rush Hour article, so to avoid repetitiveness. Camaron1 | Chris 18:31, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

I have now merged most of the information about Rush Hour into the main article, and just left a summary paragraph. I have tried to avoid losing some encyclopedic information in the process, however excessive repeating of information should now not exist. Camaron1 | Chris 15:50, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
The recent merge virtually cut off everything about the EP except the release date, which only reduces the informative value of the section when read from the SC4 article. A summary is still needed anyway even though it has its own article. ╫ ２５ ◀RingADing▶ 14:13, 30 March 2007 (UTC) ╫
I did leave a summary, I disagree that the merge was "sloppy". The summary that was left was sufficient and the relationship between this article and the Rush Hour one is better than it was. I do however agree the summary currently placed in this article "fits in" better now than it did. Camaron1 | Chris 16:05, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] SimCity 3000 trailer in SimCity 4

Hey, if anyone who has SimCity 4 and got a drive-in cinema (you can get one in commercial development), watch the movie that will be played on the screen. This movie is actually a short section of the SimCity 3000 trailer. The movie is about the UFO section of SimCity 3000 trailer. Should we add this to the trivia section? Aranho 11:14, 19 May 2007 (UTC)

Yes —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.153.204.116 (talk) 23:42, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Easter eggs

I have noticed that the trivia section of this article has become an easter eggs section. I do have to dispute this slightly as not all the content in that section is necessarily about an "easter egg". For example A few of the vehicles in the game are from the cancelled game SimsVille which Maxis also worked on. is more about links to other games, not easter eggs. I suggest we either clean that section to be about easter eggs in a perhaps less listed format, or we turn it back into a temporary trivia section. Camaron1 | Chris 10:58, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

I have now cleaned and moved this section - I think it looks better now. Camaron1 | Chris 13:55, 22 June 2007 (UTC)

The easter egg about Dr. Vu is incorrect - there was an Assistant Producer by the name of "Vu" on the project.74.71.66.14 15:02, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

I have removed this point completely - it does not pass WP:OR as Vu could mean a variety of things and no verification has been provided. Camaron1 | Chris 08:59, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

Don't you think that this section is still unecessary as it could classify under WP:TRIVIA? I think the facts need to be integrated into the article, or removed, probably putting the easter eggs under a paragraph rather than bullet points, which actually makes them look like trivia facts. ætərnal ðrAعon 10:04, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

Yes I think you are right, putting it into prose seems to be a good idea, and would allow it to fit into the article better. Camaron1 | Chris 16:54, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Agricultural Zones?

What are the farms useful for? Huge tracts of land have tiny farmhouses that employ 2 people, and they generate so much pollution. 59.183.184.210 19:34, 21 June 2007 (UTC)Vader1941

Welcome; you might want to visit a SimCity 4 fan-site like Simtropolis for a better answer. This talk page is only for discussion on how to improve the article. Camaron1 | Chris 20:09, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

An great point Camaron! While this is a good topic to discuss, this page is reserved for discussions of the article itself and not a board for arguing the values of certain zones. SimCity 4 fansites such as Simtropolis are great places to discuss such matters. Sorry for writing for the point of arguing your point, my point is (in a nutshell); ditto. Rbpolsen♦☺♦ Talk to me! 04:59, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] SimCity 4 (csc)

Does anybody know anything about it? If you do, tell me what it is and where I can get it.--MP123 05:31, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Confusing captions

The text under one of the images -I believe is it one within the section involving add-ons- reads "urban city." It should either read "urban area" or, simply, "city." All cities are urban, which makes the phrase "urban city" a rather redundant statement, as if someone had been trying to use BIG WORDS without first double-checking their meaning in a dictionary.

Sorry about the rant.

sorrythankyou —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 80.94.107.8 (talk)

No need to be sorry, I have re-phrased this caption for you. Camaron1 | Chris 09:01, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Drive to GA

I have began the slow process of getting this article to GA post peer review. I have done the following:

  • Re-named "Gameplay changes" to "Gameplay" - section should focus on SimCity 4 itself most of the time.
  • Cut building design section for now. Relevance to SimCity 4 was questioned in the peer review and had inappropriate citations. Something on this could be re-added for the Gameplay section though. I have merged the building design section into the gameplay section, this will need cleanup.
  • Re-organised general images and captions. More images I do not think would be appropriate - especially since most are uploaded under fair use. I am going to make sure they all have fair use rationales as needed.
  • Re-organised some text to make some sections clearer.

I plan to also:

  • Possibly merge "Future updates", "Add-On Modifications" and "Bugs" section into one section of continues prose.
  • Create a game development section.
  • Extend introduction.
  • Generally improve sources used.
  • Remove trivial information in Gameplay section and make it read less like an advert.
  • Extend Reception section - add review comments.

I will continue working on the article as necessary. Camaron1 | Chris 15:21, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

I am continuing to work on this article. I have now cleaned-up the Gameplay and Graphics and music sections as well as extend the introduction - though I might add a few more references to these sections if possible. I am next going to work on merging and cleaning up the Bugs and Add-ons and Modifications sections by converting it into prose and making it more concise, then I will extend the Reception section. Camaron1 | Chris 17:41, 14 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Reception

This section is really short, but not much can really be added here. The content of this section ought to be merged into the rest of the article, preferrably into the introduction (as it was previously tagged as being too short, which I deleted after expanding the intro).

ætərnal ðrAعon → 12:24, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

I still think the introduction is still to short - it needs to be at least two paragraphs for an article this size to get GA. Some reception information is a good idea - though it should keep to an overview of the entire article. Some more details on game-play would be a good extension too.
I think a few sections should merged, though I think reception could potentially deserve its own section. A lot can be written on third party reviews and comments on the game - as suggested by the peer review. Camaron1 | Chris 16:11, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] P.S: Fansites

I noticed that Simptropolis has been but up for AfD. Certain fansites, like Simtropolis and sc4ever are really relevant to the topic that we might want to merge it into the rest of the article as well.

ætərnal ðrAعon → 12:26, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

True, Simtropolis is now deleted. It has proved controversial on if fan-site information should be included in a game article (see archived discussion of this page). At most it should be a summary of one or two of the more notable fan-sites. Camaron1 | Chris 16:16, 17 August 2007 (UTC)
Problem is, you start getting into the whole 'why is that site more notable than X site?' arguments and stuff like that and the section will slowly but surely get bigger as more and more are included.-Localzuk(talk) 17:07, 17 August 2007 (UTC)
The same problem occurred with external links for fan sites in this article (see archives), one was added for Simtropolis and then a lot more appeared. Any such fan site section would have to be implemented carefully. Camaron1 | Chris 18:35, 17 August 2007 (UTC)
well most people know how big simtropolis is, and with all that content they would benifit with a link, so for example someone comes to wiki to learn more about sc4, while there they learn about simtropolis, and while there find tons of custom content, i think we should mention simtropolis since this would allow people to find custom content easily, and maybe some other sites could be added later, but just simtropolis for now, we shouldnt just not mention about custom content and where to get it, or people will think whats in the game is all there is.--Superchad 22:24, 28 August 2007 (UTC)superchad
I don't know how big simtropolis is, and stating it is big is not a valid argument. If we have valid, reliable, external sources stating that it is the biggest and most notable site then it should exist as its own article, but not included here. Also, considering it now covers 'Sim City: Societies', it would not be appropriate here. I think it is fine as it is to have a link to dmoz where these sort of sites are listed in abundance, until such a time when a reliable source or sources (preferably) can be provided for its own article.-Localzuk(talk) 22:35, 28 August 2007 (UTC)
all we need is a link to simtropolis and one or two other sites, no information, just a link to it that might say, "has great custom content and has a great community" or something like that, the ea fansite listing is a bunch of bs of lots of crappy fansites, which if you look through them, then you would find out that few are any good, simtropolis is one of the few good ones, also why would st not be appropriate here if it also covers sim city societies?--Superchad 03:34, 1 September 2007 (UTC)superchad
My main concern here is observing Wikipedia' s WP:NPOV policy, Simtropolis been the best and largest community is ultimately down to opinion. I agree that maybe the external links section of this article needs reviewing - perhaps to be cut down a little. Though I am still going to be cautious before adding Simtropolis to the external link list or even more creating a section on it in this article. If there is going to be content on Simtropolis I would rather it had its own article. Camaron1 | Chris 09:14, 1 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] External links

I have cleaned and cut down the external links section. I have re-formatted the official site section so there are no longer re-directs to the SimCity Societies website while maintaining links to useful resources such as the "Inside scoop" and "fan-site directory" - most fan sites can be found this way, meaning direct links to fan sites in this article are generally unnecessary.

I have cut down the additional resources section to one link per website - I have added the Simtropolis Omnibus as it contains some useful SimCity 4 information for readers beyond the scope of this article, with no registration been required. I have removed the "Mods/Downloads" section completely; only fan-site home page links and such sections of websites require registration to use and should be avoided per WP:EL. Camaron1 | Chris 11:51, 13 October 2007 (UTC)

I am bringing up the external link issue yet again as Superchad (talk · contribs) has re-added a direct link to Simtropolis for this article. This is has been discussed many times in the past and the general result is that there is no consensus that link should be there, if anything consensus is against it. I am considering removing it again, my reasoning is as follows: With a direct link to Simtropolis, it becomes very disputable on why Simtropolis should have a "exclusive link" while other SimCity 4 fansites don't. The most common reason given is that Simtropolis is the largest/most important/most active/most useful SimCity 4 fansite; that is a opinion and debatable with the growth of competing fansites such as SC4 Devotion. It has been shown in the past history of the article that once one fansite is directly linked, a lot more appear quickly.

This link also seems to be against the WP:EL guideline, including falling under the criteria of "Links normally to be avoided" in been: Links mainly intended to promote a website, for many sections of Simtropolis: Links to sites that require payment or registration to view the relevant content, Links to social networking sites (such as MySpace), discussion forums/groups (such as Yahoo! Groups) or USENET, and with Simtropolis no longer been just a SimCity 4 site and looking at the current state of the homepage: Sites that are only indirectly related to the article's subject: the link should be directly related to the subject of the article. A general site that has information about a variety of subjects should usually not be linked to from an article on a more specific subject. Similarly, a website on a specific subject should usually not be linked from an article about a general subject. I left a link to the Simtropolis SimCity 4 Omnibus as I considered that a additional resource which was generally directly relevant to the article and contained only content that could be viewed by unregistered users. The WP:EL guideline also states If a section of a general website is devoted to the subject of the article, and meets the other criteria for linking, then that part of the site could be deep-linked. If necessary, the SimCity 4 Omnibus link can be further deepened to information strictly only on SimCity 4.

Finally, the SimCity 4 directory is already linked - this lists most SimCity 4 fansites and more can be submitted. This is a better place to go and view SimCity 4 fansite lists, and its linkage makes direct links to fansites redundant. Camaron1 | Chris 19:22, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Gameplay section and Rush Hour

The gameplay section of this article is only for the original SimCity 4 game, this does not include Rush Hour, that has its own article at SimCity 4: Rush Hour. To verify, the original SimCity 4 game had two police station sizes, two fire station sizes, and two hospital sizes (with the smaller been called a clinic). Rush Hour added two further sizes of police station, and a fire department landing strip. Camaron1 | Chris 16:49, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] SimCity 4 reviews

As part of the expansion of the review section, I am creating a list of SimCity 4 reviews and similar that can be used below for reference to help:

Overall, the views are positive, with most saying SimCity 4 is a very good game, though a few are quite negative and should be used to resolve issues brought up at the peer review saying that this article is to promotional. Camaron1 | Chris 19:45, 18 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Vista

Does this game work with Vista? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.153.204.116 (talk) 23:45, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

Yes it does - though it is not listed in the system requirements as the game was released before Vista came out, Windows Vista vs. SimCity 4 could be mentioned in the article if there is a good reliable source available. Camaron | Chris (talk) 21:49, 29 February 2008 (UTC)
A set of suggested system requirements for a PC running Vista are on the article. This also states that SC4 only uses one core on dual-core machines. This is not unique to SC4 - most programs written before multi-core processors became popular will by default only run on one core. However, AMD have released a program called a "dual-core optimiser" which apparently automatically load-balances tasks designed for single cores across both cores - provided your processor is an AMD one (surprisingly enough). Mittfh (talk) 19:26, 5 March 2008 (UTC)
That section has been added since I made that comment, and I am bit concerned over its appropriateness for an encyclopaedic entry. This section seems to be based on the recommendations of one or more users, and given how many times its content has been changed recentley, its factual accuracy is very debatable. If a section on Windows Vista beyond the system specs given by the game developers is going to be in the article it should be reliably sourced, otherwise I am going take out this section, as it compromises the rest of the article. Camaron | Chris (talk) 16:29, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Image accomp. 'Third party add-ons' section

I noticed that the image is reversed, but have no idea how to go about replacing an image. Not only would flipping it horizontally allow the railway sign to be read, but would give a thumbs up to the seeming theme for every shot on the page (sloping downward from left to right). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.224.122.23 (talk) 03:42, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Simtropolis 1000

I just created my account today and please forgive me if I put this in the wrong section. A group of Simtropolis members are working on an open source version of SimCity 4. They are building it from scratch despite desires to work with the SC4 source code. Should it be mentioned in this article? Should there be an article on Simtropolis 1000 (the name of their project/game)? Should said article wait to be made until ST1000 is finished Azemocram (talk) 05:02, 2 June 2008 (UTC) Azemocram 10:00pm

The thing to look at is if it is notable. Are any of the people famous, has it got backing of famous people, is it in the mainstream media etc... I am guessing that it isn't yet notable and as such wouldn't be suitable for inclusion.-Localzuk(talk) 16:18, 2 June 2008 (UTC)