Talk:City-building game

IBM CITYONE

I don't think the IBM CityOne is significant a game enough to be featured in this article. It might even be advertising. The game is about advertising IBM networking products and it's hardly a city building- or a game at all. Therefore I think the inclusion of it in this article is advertising too. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.248.103.33 (talk) 14:09, 3 June 2011 (UTC)

QUESTION

Do Dark Cloud and Dark Cloud 2 belong on the role playing games page rather than here on the city building games page? -- Sitearm | Talk 04:23, 2005 August 13 (UTC)

City Building games are pretty much a subset of strategy games. If the game in question (which I'm not familiar with) has more elements in common with RPGs, then the place shouldn't be along SimCity, at best in a different section about "games with city building elements". ^wS;✉ 06:36, 13 August 2005 (UTC)

Modern vs. Historical?

I know the terms "modern city-building game" & "historical city-building game" are used unofficially on various forums, such as Simtropolis, for city-building games. It is usually used to indicate whether or not the city-building game is themed in a historical setting (i.e. Caesar IV) or a modern setting (i.e. SimCity 4). Usually the difference can mean a lot in terms of buildings to select from, gameplay (historical games, for example, sometimes add a military component to them), among others.

Anyway, I do know the phrases are used, but I don't think they're official (i.e. used by game developers, game reviewers/magazines, etc...). I would like to be able to add the two phrases into the article and mention their differences, etc... but I was wondering if anyone had any sources that indicate the existence of these labels. Poetic^X_contribs 18:10, 26 June 2007 (UTC)

Removal of SimCity Societies

This turned out longer than expected, please bare with me! I've categorized the response for easy viewing.

Birth-right popularity and statistics

I have reverted the removal of SimCity Societies, because I feel it must be discussed before proceeding. It must be noted that SimCity Societies is part of the SimCity series, arguably the most popular city-building series. I disagree with the premise that a game cannot be popular if it hasn't yet been released. It could be argued that the games unique position as a sequel to the SimCity series and its' relation to EA, Tilted Mill, and the SimCity community allows it to be popular dispite it not being released.

I have reworded the original entry which had SimCity Societies as a completely separate entity, because 1) SimCity Societies has been worded many times as being the next installation of the SimCity series, 2) SimCity Societies is by the same, very popular, publisher of SimCity, SimCity 2000, SimCity 3000, and SimCity 4, and 3) the SimCity Societies article lists the game as a part of the series itself.

Since the game is a sequel to a popular series, is from a popular publisher that has published previous well-known SimCity games, and is also from a designer that already has two games on this list (of which it has only designed two), I would say that is good argument for the game's inclusion.

Besides the games birth-right popularity (which it does have, like many sequels of popular series), it can also be said to be popular based on it's inclusion in multiple forms of media, as well as the fact that it is listed 118 of 8,915 for PC games, and 381 of 42,401 for total games on Gamespot. Lastly, the fan anticipation of SimCity fans, rather negative or positive, is a good argument for popularity ranking.

List is too subjective, reform may be needed.

Unfortunately, Wikipedia has no defined (that I know of) standards for inclusion of a list within an article. There have been articles in the past that have included popular songs, movies, etc... which had been deemed as too subjective and removed. The only guidance we have in this matter is the fact that SimCity Societies was added to Wikipedia as an article (which normally is an indication of notability), and that it could, therefore, be argued that if the game was meant to be mentioned in the encyclopedia, then it is noteworthy enough to be mentioned in it's own game genre's article.

I would recommend renaming the list from popular games, which is subjective and prone to problems, to simply a list of all games within the genre. The list already includes almost every city-building game made, with an exception of maybe one or two, as the game genre isn't as large as FPS or RTS. Also, there are other infringements on the list's namesake, such as with MetropolisMania, which is a game I think most can agree isn't a well-known game. Poetic^X_contribs 10:16, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

Question: I don't see much order in the way the games are currently listed. Wouldn't it be better to put them in alphabetical order? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 220.173.4.180 (talk) 11:29, 26 December 2008 (UTC)

Removing it is probably okay, as well as adding it. Lists like these aren't really meant to be complete. There isn't really a firm guideline about how to handle it. Randomran (talk) 17:53, 26 December 2008 (UTC)

I'll move the list to its own article like there are for other genres. Just remind me if I forget. SharkD (talk) 04:39, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

Online game

I just came across this article: StarPeace (video game). The game is basically an MMO version of SimCity. I can't believe I never heard of it (but that could be due to the low review scores). SharkD (talk) 04:39, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

Video only?

There are a number of city-building board games. I guess they should be mentioned here, too. Or the article should be renamed to explicitly exclude board games. --Palnatoke (talk) 22:35, 31 March 2018 (UTC)

@Palnatoke: I concur. BGG lists city-building as one of the board-game thematic categories: [1]. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 04:23, 16 February 2021 (UTC)