• We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.
Hello again! This time we will take a peek at how the game systems actually work. Some of the main goals for us at Colossal Order where to create fun systems which interact with each other, and to have simulated individual citizens.

At the heart of Cities: Skylines is how the individual citizens and goods move around the city. Citizens have a name, age, a home and a workplace, unless they are students at the university or too young to work. Citizens travel to work, go shopping and occasionally visit leisure locations like parks. Not all citizens own cars, so some walk and others drive. If public transportation is available, most of the people without cars will use it for longer trips. Even people with cars use public transportation if they notice driving with their own car might be slower because of the traffic.

xtIlDXH.png


Because simulating individual citizens takes some processing power, we opted to cut down the number of citizens. Some residential buildings have a quite low amount of people living in them compared to the size of the building. We felt choosing individual citizens over realistic numbers brought more to the game. So while your high-rise might have only 12 households, everyone has a name and a logical pattern of moving around the city.

Goods are produced in industrial areas and transported to commercial areas to be sold to citizens and tourists. This means that wherever there’s a commercial area, there will be trucks driving to and from it. To produce goods, industrial areas use raw materials. If the city produces raw materials by specialized industry, the industry will automatically get them shipped from the specialized production facilities. Industry prefers materials from inside the city, but if none are available, they will order raw materials from outside locations. Materials arriving from outside locations come by truck if no train or cargo ship connections are available, which will put a stress on the road system.

995IESV.png


To avoid traffic jams, vehicles choose their route so that they try to avoid busiest spots in the city. They also like to choose lanes early to avoid switching lanes and blocking off two lanes in the process if they are trying to push their way into a line of cars and have to wait. If the traffic does not flow well, there’s a traffic info view to show the spots where problems lie. Using roundabouts, elevated roads and building roads to get the vehicles straight to where they are going is are a big part of the game.

dVF1fP2.png


Everything is connected. If you build a Fire Station that sends out fire engines to put out fires, the service vehicles can only get to the fires if the roads are not crowded with other vehicles. But just having a Fire Station near by raises the happiness of residential houses. A raise in happiness means the residents are less likely to turn to crime, even if they are unemployed for some time.

Karoliina Korppoo, Colossal Order, lead designer on Cities: Skylines
 
Last edited by a moderator:
@Greygor69:

IMO you're wrong. I'm not suggesting changes, I'm asking. And if I'll see a problem I'll point with my finger on it.
Or is it better running around as sheeps and applauding without thinking about?

Why shouldn't the devs have the possibility to change things during development and listen to the community?

Or is it necessary, that they repeat failures already done by others?

On the other hand:

Why should I buy a game, if s.th. is going wrong or bugged? Shall we players spend money, so that the devs "maybe" patch a bug after release?
Over the last years I've spent too much money on games, that were not worth a dime (because of bugs etc.).

That's why I have a bad feeling and I will say that.

It's better this way, than the devs thinking they're doing everything right and at the end the game will be a flop.

It's my way to show respect for the work of the devs.
 
@Greygor69:

IMO you're wrong. I'm not suggesting changes, I'm asking. And if I'll see a problem I'll point with my finger on it.
Or is it better running around as sheeps and applauding without thinking about?

Why shouldn't the devs have the possibility to change things during development and listen to the community?

Or is it necessary, that they repeat failures already done by others?

On the other hand:

Why should I buy a game, if s.th. is going wrong or bugged? Shall we players spend money, so that the devs "maybe" patch a bug after release?
Over the last years I've spent too much money on games, that were not worth a dime (because of bugs etc.).

That's why I have a bad feeling and I will say that.

It's better this way, than the devs thinking they're doing everything right and at the end the game will be a flop.

It's my way to show respect for the work of the devs.

Which is of course why I said maybe and asked the question "can it be changed at this stage".
 
Forget about any kind of ratio combinations in putting certain amount of people into buildings. If its done naturally by a one to one ratio you can't go wrong with that. Putting people in their houses and apartment units that measure up to standards. Build what ever size of town or city you want with the space that is provide for you. If a maximum of a million people is offered in this game don't complain. At least a its realistic and there no cutting corners like the twelve family concept per apartment building. Or an under scaled airport or farmland.
The bottom line is that you kept to your words in promises. If the technology is there for expanding the population and map tiles in the future. I'm pretty sure CO will be right at it.
As Holmes on Homes reality TV show would say. Make It Right !!!
 
It's interesting to see all these comments and complaints. It's the exact opposite of the complaints for SimCity. People complained that the visual representation was too disconnected from the actual game logic. You can't have it both ways, either you get every citizen simulated with real work places and real homes. Or, you get massive numbers with no individual simulations, only droves of fake people moving house and switching jobs each day.

Personally I want the detailed simulation where I can follow the citizens around when they visit work, home, entertainment etc. Tropico employs this approach and I find it vastly superior to the SC one.

Without having any actual insight into the specific programming. I'm under the impression it's a lot easier to sync up the underlying simulation and the visual representation if you downsize. This in turn lets you as a player take better decisions, since what you're seeing on the screen is actually relevant to the simulation in the background. Leading to better and more enjoyable game play.

In short, this is exactly the design I expected and hoped for.

Edit: The biggest problem in my mind when it comes to citybuilders and simulators is the time frame. I've never seen a simulation game or city builder where the timescale is reasonable. As in people going to work and going home in the same day. The norm is having people go to work and then home days later, having a few day/night cycles per month. I would love to see realistic time frames, but I think it's a long way off.
 
About having 12 families to a high rise, it's better than having 12 people to a little bungalow. This worked in SC4 because people weren't individuals, but yet another downside of simulating every individual citizen is that having the wrong number of people living in a house overall makes the city look silly when it comes to the amount of traffic and people going about their daily lives. Which only grows more apparent the more houses you have. I actually think the streets look kind of empty in the screenshots in the OP, but honestly it's better than one of the streams I saw where a tiny town had way too many people driving around in it.
 
I don't really mind an alien time concept, as long as it makes sense within itself. For example, a year being 7 days long. So the game can simulate a working week, complete with more leisure-oriented weekend, then move on to the next year. It would still kind of play right. And if there were seasons, each season could last a year. Then we'd have had a chance to play one whole week's cycle per season. Really human cycle is a day, then a week. The longer cycles are more to do with evolution and development. In terms of a human scale play experience, we need recognisable days and recognisable weeks. Outside of that the game can speed up the passage of years as much as it likes without breaking immersion.
 
To people saying that skyscrapers having 12 households is not a problem, look at this picture. HUGE city, isn't it? How much population does it have? 1mln? 2mln? Yup, that's right, just 116 000. And it's not even the whole city, there is a lot of skyscrapers on the left as well but we can't see it in this shot.
7_STRp0_B.jpg
 
To people saying that skyscrapers having 12 households is not a problem, look at this picture. HUGE city, isn't it? How much population does it have? 1mln? 2mln? Yup, that's right, just 116 000. And it's not even the whole city, there is a lot of skyscrapers on the left as well but we can't see it in this shot.
7_STRp0_B.jpg
With out playing the game it's hard to say if CO have got it wrong. They have played it, no doubt with several types of population ratios. They feel they have the balance right. We just have to trust them. Personally I'd rather have a realistic population displayed on the UI, rather than an agent count. 116,000 for that many hi rises is a bit silly. My only concern with the 12 families to a hi rise is the traffic may be artificially light. And the screenshot seems to indicate this too. Those streets should be jammed. Also, raising the land value seems easy. I'm surprised the simulation allows such a high ratio of skyscrapers to low density buildings. If there is more low density to the right, then that population figure seems even sillier.
 
Im fine with that numbers that town in the picture isnt a 1 mio city in real life town in my near have only 70 residents but is much larger than that city on the picture on scale.
The city in the picture would be better compared to Manhattan, as it's made up of hi rises. It looks like about a quarter of Manhattan. That's about 2 million people. I'd say Kanimir's estimations are spot on.
 
To people saying that skyscrapers having 12 households is not a problem, look at this picture. HUGE city, isn't it? How much population does it have? 1mln? 2mln? Yup, that's right, just 116 000. And it's not even the whole city, there is a lot of skyscrapers on the left as well but we can't see it in this shot.
7_STRp0_B.jpg

That's all there is 116,000 !! For people that study maps of cities of the buildings that inhabit the place. The calculations are definitely way off ! What's the point of putting buildings up went they can't show their energy of inhabitants.
Well I guess we have to fake it again. So let's pretend 116,000 really means 1,160,000 people. By adding another zero the hero at the end of it !!!
 
The picture has approximately 1,5 map tiles, and as you can see, there's lots of room between the high rise centers and plenty of water taking up space. For a full map of eight tiles, 1 million inhabitants is maximum. We have found this to be a very good number for the gameplay, getting the city to work well is a challenge but not too hard and there's lots of options on how to play. I do hope most of you will be pleased with the finished game once it's out, but naturally there will be some who find the numbers to be not of their liking.
 
Im sure I'll love the game, but I hope this will at least be modable so people can make a mod with more realistic population. I know it's just numbers, but I love numbers :ninja:
 
Why are people obsessed with maximizing the population of their city in a realistic way. Clearly sims like this cannot achieve that. Just add on a few noughts in your mind if it makes you happy. And I know soemoen will bleat 'buts its a simulator'. my reply is 'yeah, buts it's still just a game.'