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.
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.
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.
CO is Finnish, and I think they don’t crunch their employees, but lots of gaming companies do, and they use ridiculous release targets as an excuse. Crunch doesn’t even work. So in the end you burn the workers and you give a worse product to the customers.
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.
So don’t release it.
Not 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.
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
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.
The 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.
It’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.
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.
CO is Finnish, and I think they don’t crunch their employees, but lots of gaming companies do, and they use ridiculous release targets as an excuse. Crunch doesn’t even work. So in the end you burn the workers and you give a worse product to the customers.
It’s stupid.
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.
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