nanoUFOCities: Skylines 2 devs warn players of performance problems: 'we have not achieved the benchmark we targeted'
DojanSo don’t release it.
AppoxoNot like the gaming whales with their 4090 tis and top spec CPU would care.
They sure can release it. You don’t need to buy every game that barely got your attention and interest.
Oh, I barely buy games nowadays. I aim for games that are finished.
It’s just that a lot of problems with the gaming industry at large could be fixed if release dates weren’t announced until the game is actually release ready. It bugs me that even CS stumbles on this.
ShigglesThe game is going straight on Xbox gamepass right? It might be too late for them to delay the release date, I’m not sure how that works.
That’s what I was thinking. I know releases have been delayed on GamePass before, but I’m also not sure how easily that is done. The couple content creators I saw seemed to have what would be “normal” FPS for C:S1, so maybe CO is willing to release like that as the player base is already used to it, then optimise later. Could be completely wrong, but I hope not.
🇰 🌀 🇱 🇦 🇳 🇦 🇰 🇮 🏆Not like the gaming whales with their 4090 tis and top spec CPU would care.
You mean the same people that whine when they are only getting 299 fps and not a solid 300?
More or less.
They may whine but will continue to pre-order games
They may whine but will continue to pre-order games
AlexisFRIt’s unity. It will run poorly even on top end hardware.
woelkchenIt’s unity. It will run poorly even on top end hardware.
That makes it even weirder that people act surprised that this game will require a very beefy PC.
Most people who are interested in this game don’t know what engine it’s made on, let alone the performance issues inherent to that engine.
Most people aren’t here ob Lemmy. Lemmy users are tech savvy and know such things.
So don’t release it.
Why? “Requires high-end hardware” is not the same as “unstable trash”. If they publish realistic hardware requirements, I see no deceiving of the customer base. They made an announcement ahead of release. They could have just quietly updated the system requirements or even lie but they didn’t.
If the games runs solid otherwise, so no major instabilities, I see no problem with that.
To me it reads like they’re not happy with where the game is right now, that they’d prefer to tweak it more. I don’t expect that it’ll be as disastrous as say Cyberpunk, but I’m dead tired of developers releasing games they don’t view as finished because the publishers went live with a release date prematurely.
I work in software dev; if we don’t finish the software on time, we don’t go live with it. We might take a hit on our revenue, or we might need to ask our customer for more funding, but we don’t go live with broken software.
To me it reads like they’re not happy with where the game is right now, that they’d prefer to tweak it more.
But they made the choice to go with Unity early. I’m not a developer myself but I’ve seen many statements of people who are who say that there is a certain ceiling with Unity that’s not there in AAA game engines like UE.
I work in software dev; if we don’t finish the software on time, we don’t go live with it. We might take a hit on our revenue, or we might need to ask our customer for more funding, but we don’t go live with broken software.
But then you should know that there is a difference between benchmark scores and general bugginess.
If the game is otherwise done and stable, why not just be open to the customer base and tell them about higher system requirements and ship the game? Cities Skylines 2 is no Kickstarter game. They can’t ask their customers for more money beforehand. They get the money from selling a product.
If the game turns out that it’s an unstable mess, I’ll fully agree with you. But for now it’s only about raised system requirements that are being openly communicated ahead of release.
Why? I want to play it.
However, they could release it as early access and align the full release with the console version
I’m more concerned with the fact that they’re not supporting the steam workshop and using their own mod platform
Why is that concerning? I found the reasoning for having their own platform convincing.
So its essentially modders are only uploading their mods to the steam workshop and the versions of the game without workshop support are up shit creek without a paddle.
I admit I'm kind of guilty of this with the mods that I create and publish for stellaris. I pretty much only publish them to steam although Im given the option to upload to the paradox launcher. Personally I'd prefer to only publish through the workshop since Im used to the system, and its an easy way to get feedback on my creatons, however I can see the benefits to the ecosystem as a whole by allowing anyone who has the game to get the same mods in a bespoke mod store.
Not OP but I have 0 faith in companies to not pull the plug when they decide something isn’t making them enough money. Just look at all the old games online games that have been rendered near useless thanks to the company that made it deciding that it’s not profitable to support anymore. Sure, the same could happen to steam workshop too, but I have more faith that the steam workshop will be around in a decade than whatever proprietary knockoff paradox is using for CS II
As long as they don’t bork sideloading mods, I don’t see a major problem, even if they kill the service. They will be able to offer model on console via their Paradox Mod launcher. It would cost them more to support Steam Workshop & console mods via a separate method.
Consider it against games with no official mod support - if they break your mods, you don’t have a right to be angry.
While I think open and easy modding is an easy avenue to building a better fanbase and boosting sales, I also understand some devs don’t invest in that.
Well, rocket league is a good example. They had workshop implemented by popular(well PC is <25% player base) demand, then when Epic bought them and become F2P, the Epic version does not support workshop maps and later requires modder to side load the maps in. Now with layoff etc it’s even harder to ask them to re-implement workshop or modding support to the client.(they also announced removing player to player trade so it’s a big mess there. ) So a game that supports it’s own mod loading is a good thing, if the mod distribution platform is closing down, it’s a lot easier to redirect the calls somewhere to load mod compare to steam integration. Say, if you buy on GoG or other platforms then you are fucked right?
Steam Workshop is several years broken for Cities in Motion 2 without any changes in Cities in Motion 2
As far as I know, the Steam workshop is just a convenience layer for mods, it isn’t a modding platform nor does it do anything to enable mods. All it does it give you a central place to apply your mods, and puts the files in the correct spot. Any game that primarily uses the Steam workshop can still be modded by manually placing mods obtained through a site like moddb. Many games with no Steam workshop support have third party mod downloaders/loaders which will do the job just fine.
I actually disliked the Steam workshop as a platform for CS1 mods because of the way modders can make their mods like building sets rely on 100 other mods like individual pieces. That practically destroyed growable modding for CS1, because the owners of the dependency mods either wouldn’t update them, or would outright remove them, so most of the dependent mods would be missing crucial assets and wouldn’t work.
I FUCKING CALLED IT
Good thing I upgraded my setup not too long ago. But I’m gonna hold off on the purchase, for a few months anyway. Wait out the first few patches and mods that will truly push the game to the next level. I like the things I’ve seen and trust in their long term commitment to the game but experience tells me it’s not going to be all it could be straight away.