(Unofficial) SimCity Offline mode available


Recommended Posts

NeoGaf member zomgbbqftw posted a very simple how-to on the board detailing how you remove the timer to play offline. Here is the code:

kNoRepeatNetworkAlertSeconds : 15,

kNetDownForceQuitAfterMinutes : 20,

Remove the line and you can play offline. That's it.

Details and step-by-step instructions can be found @ link(s). Local saving currently not available.

Source

LOL great news!

And all these ways go against how the game was designed - which you knew when you bought it (or should have).

So tell me again - in what way did Maxis or EA lie, if you are having to mod/hack to get something you CLAIM is supported by the game from the jump?

And all these ways go against how the game was designed - which you knew when you bought it (or should have).

So tell me again - in what way did Maxis or EA lie, if you are having to mod/hack to get something you CLAIM is supported by the game from the jump?

There are people that buy games and play them with cracks, trainers, mods and hacks for various reasons. As long as those things don't affect others, it shouldn't be an issue. Why is this an issue to you?

when the offline patch is perfected, then i would buy the SimCity 'online'.

All I am saying is that as much as both EA and Maxis have been saying that the game was going to require an online connection, that should have set off the alarms - if you bought the game ANYWAY, that's not the fault of either EA or Maxis - it means that you didn't do your due-dilligence; anything else is basically blaming the developer/publisher for telling the truth.

There are people that buy games and play them with cracks, trainers, mods and hacks for various reasons. As long as those things don't affect others, it shouldn't be an issue. Why is this an issue to you?

It's not an issue to him he's just saying EA didn't ile about the game requiring to be online

The game needs to be online in order to play full stop

You can't say they are lying as you had to modify something in the game in order to allow this change

On the other hand they did lie as they said the game needed to be online for functionality reasons as the server does various calculations for the game - this was a lie it seems to only be used for saving and tracking

All I am saying is that as much as both EA and Maxis have been saying that the game was going to require an online connection, that should have set off the alarms - if you bought the game ANYWAY, that's not the fault of either EA or Maxis - it means that you didn't do your due-dilligence; anything else is basically blaming the developer/publisher for telling the truth.

I don't think people here purchased the game without knowing this tidbit they wanted to play the game but the online drm was annoying so this is great news for them as it will allow them to take their game offline

Sure people can pirate the game but others wish to still pay the devs for the work they put in just because their is drm doesn't mean they haven't put any effort into the game its self drm is only a small part that ruins the experience

It's not an issue to him he's just saying EA didn't ile about the game requiring to be online

I was talking about this part:

And all these ways go against how the game was designed - which you knew when you bought it (or should have).

I didn't want to get into an argument about what constitutes a lie with him. I've learned how stubborn he is while talking about GPUs. He kept insisting his position was the right one even though I repeatedly gave him evidence to the contrary.

I've already bought the game but yeah offline is the ****. **** this cloud bull****. I need everything on a hard disk at all times.

Yo and I don't know if anybody else feels this way but I bought Battlefield w/ my free game token from EA and the DRM links me to a ****in website! :wacko: That is super sad.

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • According to Microsoft, Cause: One of the drivers controlling the device notified the operating system that the device failed in some manner.   https://support.microsoft.com/en-us/topic/error-codes-in-device-manager-in-windows-524e9e89-4dee-8883-0afa-6bca0456324e
    • This looks awesome, I will request access via Steam later this afternoon!
    • Personally, I’ve found that it’s usually worth investing in the infrastructure you don’t want to replace later, especially cabling. Running Cat6A (or better, depending on your needs) during an upgrade is relatively inexpensive compared to having to re-cable a few years down the road. For switches I try to balance current specs with realistic growth. If my budget allows it Ill choose switches with higher uplink speeds which leaves room for expanding later on, but I don’t necessarily overspend on access ports if the endpoints won’t benefit from them anytime soon. One lesson I’ve learned is that planning for scalability pays off. It’s much easier to add devices, VLANs, or higher-bandwidth workloads when your network infrastructure already supports it than to replace hardware later.  What is your budget like?
    • I hate the term, "future-proof." We saw it back in the 90's / 2000's, if not before. You cannot future-proof anything, since there is no definition of how far into the future you plan on prepping for. Best idea is to tell us what you currently have and what its use is at the moment, and we can then offer ideas about some areas that might need an upgrade and other areas that can be left alone.
    • I can agree that it is being used in a small capacity. I worked for a company where their engineers still used XP, and when asked why it was because their sensor software wasn't compatible with newer operating systems and the software was discontinued so they couldn't upgrade the software. Given that the sensors were still in use by companies, they had to continue using XP to support the sensor, otherwise the price to the company would have gone into the millions or billions. Our response was simple: Ok, you can keep the XP machine. But we're removing it from the network. "But then it can't access the Internet or folder shares!" Yup, kinda the point. If someone wants to continue using an unsecure OS they can do, I have no problem with that. But it should be isolated. Simple. I had a fight with a guy in the engineering department for weeks before he finally relented. But we digress.   What do I plan on doing to commemorate the anniversary? Nothing. I have fond memories of the OS, but at the end of the day it's just an OS. If I had some time I might see if I could install it on my Raspberry Pi for a laugh. But my reflex memory with today's OS ideas would probably get me frustrated and I'd uninstall it after 5 mins.
  • Recent Achievements

    • Reacting Well
      NovaEdgeX earned a badge
      Reacting Well
    • Week One Done
      NovaEdgeX earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • One Year In
      BA the Curmudgeon earned a badge
      One Year In
    • Conversation Starter
      rosiecharles earned a badge
      Conversation Starter
    • First Post
      KMilenkoski1202 earned a badge
      First Post
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      539
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      269
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      154
    4. 4
      Steven P.
      99
    5. 5
      macoman
      66
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!