[IMTDb]

There are plenty of “chill and peaceful” city and town builders that trade realism for prettier, more idealized places.

In more simulation-focused games, cycling and walking paths are often available, and you can use them, but they come with many of the same constraints they face in the real world. In practice, that means they are usually not efficient as the primary way to move large numbers of people across a large city.

Reading your comment, it sounds like you want a game that is realistic in most respects, but treats transportation differently, in a way that makes your preferred options the optimal strategy. That is going to be hard to find, since transportation is a core part of city-building sims, and developers tend to pick either realism or a more utopian/fantasy model rather than mixing both in a single game.

[chongli]

That's not what I want at all. I want a more realistic sim that deals with issues such as sprawl, food deserts, transportation elasticity of demand, mental health issues (and their impact on crime and productivity), and a network-flow theoretical model of transportation and commuting contributes to all this. Building a bunch of sprawling suburbs that feed into a dense downtown core should make your citizens' commute times shoot way up and lead to misery.

A well-built large city isn't just going to be 100% biking and walking paths, it's going to have streetcars, light rail transit, subways, and buses as well as roads with cars. The difference is that people shouldn't be forced to commute across the entire city to get to work because you decided to cram all of the commercial zoning into one downtown core.

[jmye]

> The difference is that people shouldn't be forced to commute across the entire city to get to work because you decided to cram all of the commercial zoning into one downtown core.

Isn't the point that they should be, if that's how I choose to build a city, and they don't have to be, if you choose to build it otherwise? The entire point of a sandbox city-builder is, I assume, that it's a sandbox, and not a dogmatic interpretation of a childish Reddit meme.

[chongli]

It was pointed out elsewhere in this thread that SimCity already distorts reality in an ideological way: it lets you have tons of traffic without worrying about parking. It just gives you magical free underground parking everywhere that you never have to think about, in order to avoid the usual suburban parking sprawl hellscape.

[jmye]

What, specifically, does this have to do with my comment? Aside from being another opportunity to abuse a tired, ill-conceived soapbox?

[chongli]

The point is to illustrate that SimCity isn't a blank-slate, value-free sandbox city-builder. It has rules and those rules have been made deliberately unrealistic in ways that favour North American style cities.

It's like a fluid dynamics sandbox that causes water to flow uphill rather than settling into the valleys.

[Qwertious]

Car-centric transportation is not efficient. Not remotely. They have absolutely terrible bandwidth, and they balloon the size of cities apart the more you try to increase the speed to bring them closer together.

If you think Simcity and Cities: Skylines are realistic depictions, then ask yourself why Simcity famously has no visible parking whatsoever (or don't: the devs are on record saying they excluded it because it made the cities look terrible, there's no need to speculate here), or ask yourself why Cities: Skyline added car pokeballs (where drivers get out of the car and put the car in their pocket) or straight-up delete cars when traffic gets too heavy.

[matsemann]

> Reading your comment, it sounds like you want a game that is realistic in most respects, but treats transportation differently,

It's the opposite, no? Most city builders cheat to be able to be fun. Like, with the amount of roads one build in Sim City, half the map would have had to been parking lots to account for that amount of traffic. But that's boring gameplay, so they remove that constraint to make a fun game. Aka you never have to deal with the consequences of making your city car dependent.

Edit: See another comment from CalRobert about exactly this.

[bombcar]

The original SimCity was perfection - you could build no roads and nothing but rail! ;)

Cities Skylines with all the DLC and the right transportation mods gets pretty “realistic” in that you can build a transit paradise but the car still exists.

[prmoustache]

You have a weird definition of "realism".

[Tarrosion]

[citation needed] that some combination of "New Urbanism, traditional neighbourhood design, streetcar suburbs, one-way streets, bike paths, walking paths, mixed-zone walkable villages (light commercial with residential), smaller single-family houses and duplexes, triplexes, houses behind houses." is not in fact optimal! (For certain objective functions)