Would this annoy the shit out of you or would you not care? I know that there are some games where they make it a pain in the ass to delete buildings, so maybe that would also be an option. But throughout history, they were more likely to let old buildings rot than to tear them down.
>>1745527Or maybe some option to repurpose an old building that has become obsolete. That could also work.
If we wanna go historical you will also not be allowed to place any building outside of public administration, that is, we go the CS route without the bulldozer
>>1745562Ehh, I think a player would still want to place houses and churches, which wouldn't normally be under the purview of government. That's where some liberties have to be made, otherwise there won't be a game. I also had an idea where the computer will turn standing buildings into whorehouses and the player can't bulldoze, but they can crack down on it, or they can choose to ignore (as the British government did during the time)
>>1745562>>1745570isn't how simcity\city skylines works, you don't build private building, you just assign the lots
>>1745527As long as it let me purchase properties that mysteriously spontaneously combusted.
>>1745527If you could blend them together or renovate or got some kind of bonus for them, okay sure. Spaghetti can be charming sometimes.
>>1745637Yeah like the computer would repurpose the buildings or the player would repurpose the buildings and that would either lead to bonus or extra crime.
>>1745627If a building burned to the ground then I guess you would be able to rebuild.
>>1745527Why would you need any other historical city builder when you have MANOR LORDS??
>>1745527>What if generic game, but bad for the sake of ill-conceived autism?
>>1745527Sounds stupid and unrealistic. People destroyed unused buildings all the time, usually because they were a good and cheap source of building materials.
>>1745527What movie?
>>1748809A TV series. One that should have ended 5 seasons ago
