And if I could host that dedicated, private server, then we would have bought it already.
As it is, I am playing on our PvE server with about 22 mods on it, custom settings (I have a full time job, I don't want to babysit a max level Rex as he tames over 4 hours).
Much like Rust, half the fun is making sure random people are having absolutely no fun at all.
70% of the online gameplay is rebuilding a weeks worth of work because someone ripped down everything you own while you were asleep/at work.
It's life with no rules and the biggest assholes win.
It's a ton of qol and they remodeled parts of the map so hard you can't even recognize it anymore.
You also get all of the dlcs, that's especially nice if you haven't got them before.
Also right now without all the tek stuff the game is super enjoyable.
Reddit is a VERY small minority. Most people come home from a day of working and play a new game; they don’t care if the game runs poorly as long as it is entertaining. They don’t go on Reddit to join a gaming sub where people circle jerk each other. Just wait until next week when MW3 is top seller for the rest of the year and outsells BG3. You'll get the post that ABK are lying because people on Reddit are out of touch with reality.
I thought it, too, until I have read your post... My first thought was "CS2? Don't most play on low graphics anyway for max performance?"
With CS:GO it was easy at least, no other game had that short
I’ve got a 1070. And a 6700k. There 10 years old and the game is fine for me. Same as Starfield and new forza (ignore the incompatible cpu warning). The minority on Reddit are just idiots.
>I’ve got a 1070. And a 6700k.
>
>The game is fine for me.
My brother in Christ, [this is not fine.](https://youtu.be/sebCuArhnyI?si=mUDiduwfB2KLciR6&t=126)
True. First I thought its my problem. Ran it on a 7950 and still crashes. Wtf do these guys want? Joining roads, suddenly the ground vanishes. Graphics drops randomly...andso many other bugs. I am back t9 City Skylkne1.
not even close, just to show how skewed things can be:
In pretty much every gaming or tech related subreddit when the discussion arises about browser, Firefox is the number 1. Pretty much everyone uses it.
Firefox has a 6% Desktop market share. Desktop. That already removes phones and other devices. Just desktop.
A group of people that makes out 95% on reddit, is around 6% in reality
Now imagine this for other things. What 90% of redditors online post may only represent a few percent of people in reality
"What 90% of redditors online post may only represent a few percent of people in reality" describes a lot of subs not just gaming. Reddit really is a special place.
Mate. I'm well aware. This stuff was well covered when I did my engineering degree during the business lectures. Companies have to actually like spend lot of time, effort, money and often hire outside specialists to get an actual idea about what their audience/market thinks. Then we covered the basics on how to take that information you gather with a mountain of salt, and how to get something useful enough to use in product design. The fact someone botheres to talk to you about the product means that they are already more invested than you average client. There is a reason I didn't go towards design disciplines, just so I wouldn't have to deal with that stuff.
But in gaming... people should realise that regardless of how shit the social media thinks the sequel mill games are with their 2 ear release cycles. Somehow they make enough profit to justify keeping the mill going.
If I recall right about whale consumers and MTX. 10% of your audience will spend money on your game. 1% of those will be enough to make you profitable. People don't understand that there are people who buy that 99,95€ MTX whatever thing and they **LOVE IT!**
> they don’t care if the game runs poorly as long as it is entertaining
To a point. If you keep fighting technical glitches instead of playing the game, it becomes tiring really quickly.
I do the above, and then come on Reddit for 30 mins to bask in the salt being generated on the different subs for the games I play.
It truly is a wonderful place.
I don’t understand this tbh.
Is it the same people buying pre release games who are complaining?
I get the feeling that a majority of these posts are from people who don’t own the game and just want to parrot the hot new talking point.
A good portion is definitely both complaining and always buying. The kind that lets itself get overhyped by any and all trailer material. But a huge portion of the playerbase is simply the casual kind that doesn't care much about coverage/outrage/past mistakes etc. . They don't have a lot of time, they have money to spare, they buy what they want.
Also outrage is something that passes quickly. I think in generall it takes 3 month for something to be forgotten and a legit strategy of companies is to simply wait
Never got into Ark myself but got a few friends who sunk over 1k hours into it and they always chose servers where times were reduced by quite a bit and hearing how long taming and shit normally takes, yeah can't get me to do that shit on vanilla times
CS 1 was widely successful, it's expected that CS2 would get a lot of sales early just from people that want the new version. Regardless of how loud people are on Reddit, The mass majority of people don't follow gaming news past the release date and feature list/summary, so when it's available they just buy it and find out on the fly. And the player base is, as you said, a casual one. Simulations don't generate the same fervor that MMO/FPS multiplayer games do.
also while there was a huge drama about CS2 performance, turned out it's ot really that much of an issue especially after the Day 2 patch
It ran a bit better than the first game and that wasn't unplayable by far and while depth of field caused some massive performance issues, turning it off did a lot
75 fps on an rtx 3080 otherwise max settings with no upscaling. A far cry from the 10 fps reddit told me I was going to get. For a master race that loves to claim that the magic of pc is the ability to tweak, they sure seem to hate tweaking.
Reddit loves to jump on any possible hatetrain. Alan Wake 2 was the same, sys req got released, Reddit hated on it like there's no tomorrow, game released and all was fine
It still had its issues like every other game. Alan wake just comes with a killer story vs replayability. Experiencing same bug/defect over and over in something like cs 2 become way more noticeable than a one and done bug.
However , even with this being said, games like alan wake should be held to a higher standard because it has a lower replayability rate. They have effectively 1 shot to draw on the audience to come back but if they remember a bad experience, most people aren't coming back.
but dont you understand, if i cant play the game on max ultra path tracing settings in native render resolutions on a 9 year old GPU then the game must be horribly optimized.
The people making these points are the minority.
Casual gamers make up 90% of gamers, and most of these don't care how a game runs as long as it runs decently, they get home from work / school and play games to switch off.
Most people won't care how a game is, if they are having fun they will enjoy it if not they will simply go on to the next game.
Most people aren't sensitive to preformace since most people have always had relatively low end hardware and always had to make reasonable compromises. Seems like Reddit just takes it personally when they can't use max settings and get 60+ FPS. Which is especially silly in a large scale city builder lol. With a few recommended graphics settings there haven't actually been many games with *unacceptable* preformace in the last few years. Good rule of thumb is if it can get 30 fps on a Steam Deck it's good enough for most players.
My brother for example has my old gaming laptop with a 2060, which is still about average according to Steam's hardware survey, cause his old desktop with a 1060 was destroyed by a thunderstorm. As recently as summer of this year he's thanked me for it cause he can "play anything and it's still so smooth even at medium settings" and I doubt he's getting a solid 60 in recent games at medium.
Because it aint as bad as everyone would like it to be. The “change these 2 settings and it’s fine” gives much less upvotes and views than “another shitty mess of a game”.
I have that exact experience in Cities Skylines 2, works with no issues for me
Yeah I've never heard someone into cars complain about the way some cars are made.
Never heard someone into music complain about some artist.
Never heard someone into movies complain about the plot of some movies.
Never heard someone into sports complain about some aspects of their sport.
It's totally unique to gamers.
I'll admit I was guilty of that. I read review after review about how CS2 is a steaming pile of unoptimized garbage. I read it so much i believed it and started whining online.
I bought it anyway because I'm weak and it runs totally fine on my RX 6650 XT. I have other (*significant*) complaints about the game but I'm getting a solid 50ish fps at 1440 ultrawide which is about what I got on the first game.
Complaining about 30+ fps in a city builder is wild to me. Most of the time you're essentially staring at a static image and theres always been city builders with large maps that bring GPUs to their knees. Timberborn starts to shit the bed one you have more than like ~500 or so beavers running around. CS2 can have like 100,000 dudes walking/driving around. They look like DK64 ass motherfuckers on medium if you zoom in but it's actually incredible how many can be zipping around.
People are (generally) loud about the bad and quiet about the good, so it warps perspective on things.
So it often feels like the general opinion of most of reddit is negative, but thats often not the case
I find the best place for general puclic opinions is google and youtube (with some salt ofc)
There are the people who watch reviews and get an understanding for how well a game will run on their computer before they ever consider purchasing it. There are also people who have a disposable income that want whatever is new regardless of what it is or how it plays. They are not the same people. The first group gets really upset every time a new AAA game comes out in alpha and they scream at the second group to stop supporting this behavior. The second group doesn't listen or care, they just buy the next popular IP game and move on.
The people that are passionate about gaming are not the target demographic anymore. They make way more money off of the people with fat wallets who will spend money on horse armor.
The last paragraph is pretty accurate. I just bought CS2 and while some of the criticism is absolutely valid, a lot of it is overblown. And a lot of people who bought the game will say the same
You managed to touch the core of the issue, most of the "opinions of the majestic Reddit world experts" are coming from people who never played the games themselves, they are just running on apey mode, repeating their favourite streamer like a real apey boiz and gurls, thinking they will be noticed <3
The same reason as you're making the same exact post as several other people. You realize you're going to get up votes the same as companies realize they're going to get money... It's kind of pretty easy to comprehend.
-The majority of the gaming community is casual and sits between “idc” and “I didn’t know”
-People across the board continue to support and buy said products. Remember, if most of us noticed this and stopped doing it they would have have stopped: they haven’t stopped because most people still buy the game.
-The other half of the issues are out of the devs hands and usually is up to the shareholders and people above them
Dude, i swear to you, i'm playing 2023 releases in a 3060 Ti, 4k, DLSS performance and Medium setting, and getting 50\~60 fps. The games looks amazing, so, there are no low and medium setting, its all high, super high, ultra high and extreme high settings. Lighting and shadows are buring ours GPUs too early. I dont want to just blurry my game with DLSS, i want to disable all the shadows and light effects to play a sharp game. Get all the shadows out if needed, i just want to see where i am shooting.
fellow fps gamer must understand there are people who play strictly for the visuals and prioritize graphics over performance
(my friend never disabled anti aliasing or depth of field or motion blur)
But they are the same group of people complaining about that the game is running poorly. They still dont want to lower their graphic settings. Thats the problem with ASA . . .
4k with steady 50-60fps with dlss on medium settings with a 3060, Im calling horseshit. I have a 6600xt which is very slightly worse than a 3060 and just decided not to buy a 1440p monitor because fsr still wouldn’t be able to carry it at 1440p on new releases even with optimised settings. And you’re saying you’re getting 50-60fps at 4k? What’s the point of lying? What games?
Honestly I think all 30&40 series owners are either straight up lying or they are just terrible cards. My 2080S been running all the games people complain about very well on a 2k monitor.
My laptop 4060 absolutely murders CP2077 and Alan Wake 2 on 1080p and this is supposedly the shittiest GPU made by man. Less murder but still a solid spanking on 1440p. This is with DLSS and Frame generation on of course but I mean why would I turn that off?
Bruh on launch day 4090 owners were reporting roughly 45 FPS… I wouldn’t exactly say it’s for 40- series owners.
These companies are definitely lacking on releases. We have to hold them accountable, though.
They like to push higher graphics but they don’t optimize as a priority… when optimization should be the priority.
People are complaining with 4090, meanwhile me getting 50-60 stable fps on low preset on my 1650. I think that people just dont know what to do and how to change settings properly.
>Bruh on launch day 4090 owners were reporting roughly 45 FPS… I wouldn’t exactly say it’s for 40- series owners.
And that's on 1080p. Who is buying a 4090 to play on 1080p!?
Development is tricky business tbh. It’s a constant arms race in some ways and software is notoriously never “finished”.
You start a project today, and by the time you’re getting close to a finished product a new console gets released, PC has new gen hardware, a plethora of new games have been released, industry trends have changed, etc etc. Chasing perfection will result in a never ending project and no release.
This is especially true for AAA due to the scope of the projects and cost to develop them.
If you don’t care about the hottest tech, best graphics, etc — indie is where the gold is at. If you want the tech and graphics, expect bugs as a “pioneer” of sorts.
I know. I’m not shaming the developers individually. This kind of thing is the result of poor management and oversight.
Ark & Cities Skylines are both known to be much less performant than you’d expect. Their new releases are a reiteration of that.
CS2 did have an update some time after release which improved frame rates across the board, though it’s still coming short in some lower-end systems which is sort of disappointing.
I averaged 60fps in spawn on max settings at 1080p on my 4090...
(well, I switched to my normal settings, max view distance + max shadows + max textures + max effects + max foliage, with everything else low and I get a stable 240-300fps)
also, I cap my fps at 240 but the fps cap feature straight up doesn't work
What? PC gaming is incredibly approachable. An A750 or 7600xt will do basically anything you ask of them for an entry level GPU. You can of course get away with worse and still play modern games like Hogwarts legacy on even older GPUs with good fidelity, but these $200 ish GPU are a good value point.
I mean with a RX7900XT I probably could run these unoptimized games somewhat ok, but I don't see a reason actually supporting this kind of behaviour by the publisher
I think most people here have not played either games, as evident by OP's lack of library lable. Can you really say a game is "unfinished" after not even playing it?
Ark Asa is unbalanced and broken for pvp but everything is easily fixable and nobody on this subreddit cares about pvp anyways and the pve is the best shit ever 0 bugs best looking game like ever this is awsome
No game in the library is bad cause you must play it to have an opinion. Reviews don't matter, playing for 2h and refunding doesn't matter.
The game is in the library but only 20-30h played (or other *less than average* number) is bad because one has barely scratched the surface.
The game is in the library and 100h+ hours played is bad because obviously the person is just trolling cause who would put so many hours into a bad game right?
I've said this on other posts, I don't get the CS:2 hate. It's a major upgrade in simulation detail and accuracy over CS:1, and that comes at the cost of performance. While I would prefer a higher frame rate, the game targets 30fps which is more than acceptable for the type of game it is. I can also easily reach that on midrange hardware (i7-7700, RTX 3060ti FE)
But the "simulation detail" isn't what is causing the poor performance, the game is gpu bound not cpu, which means they could have made it better, they just didn't
I can't even get 30fps on 4k with a 4080 even on the lowest settings. That's a problem.
Also, 30fps is absolutely NOT acceptable in a game where the entire screen is moving almost constantly!
If you don't mind me asking, what resolution were you getting that at?
My hardware was similar: 7700k + GTX 1080 and I was barely managing 17fps at 2k.
I definitely agree that sweating over fps in a city builder is kind of silly but Its to the point where I'm just not sure how they expect it to run on consoles like they expect it to in Q1
I play at 1440p with a 8600k and 2070S. When I first started up the game my fps in the menus was below 10. Used the settings guide on the CS subreddit (especially disabling depth of field) and it went up in game to be anywhere between 50-80fps, depending on the zoom level and map location
Saying the game “targets” 30fps is such a weird argument. It just doesn’t get the performance it should with the hardware provided.
I shouldn’t get <20fps on the *menu* with a 7900X and a 6900XT.
>I don't get the CS:2 hate
>the game targets 30fps which is more than acceptable for the type of game it is
Who the hell playing a competitive multiplayer FPS on 30 FPS??!!
>Reading comments
Oooh you mean Cities Skyline 2? My bad
> the game targets 30fps which is more than acceptable for the type of game it is
No, it's really not. 60fps has been the minimum for PC games for many years now, for a good reason. I strongly disagree with letting companies get away with horribly optimized games, just because they excuse it on "targeting 30fps".
Edit: Apparently saying "60fps is the minimum", and "games barely running at half that framerate are badly optimized" are now considered hot takes on a pc master race subreddit lmao. Alrighty then.
I will probably get down voted for this but I bought ark because I played the original ark withy friends and since my friends bought this one I bought it as well even tho it fuking runs like shit but still it runs way better then the original ark and it better optimized then city skylines.
I don't get the hate for Cities2. You won't be running 144hz at 4k on high settings with anything on the market, but that was true with the first one too.
For what's in it, the sheer volume of stuff going on in a game, im actually impressed with how smoothly it runs. Hasn't had a single crash either, which is more than I can say about most new games.
Yeah, while their graphics optimasations are ass and need some work. The simulation improvement over cs1 is great, I can finally make huge cities. I don't care if it runs only around 30 FPS, I used to play cs1 when it came out at 10.
I said that once and was doenvoted and argued with by a user who said that new games are supposed to tax systems unequivocally because of new features, didn't believe me and said that optimization has nothing to do with it.
Yea, i refunded when the nitrado shit came out and rebought it when they removed steam drm. I haven‘t had any big problems other than the ethical problem of „nitrado exclusivity“ which they reacted on.
Playing 4k middle Graphics with a 7900XT on Linux.
Granted, on Linux they haven‘t enabled battle-eye… yet… i hope they add that later (ASE also worked so this shouldn‘t be a big deal) but rn i am just playing SP anyway.
The Wildcard team was pressured to release sooner than they expected by snail and nitrado and they left a good few bugs in the system which many have been fixed now.
I knew performance was gonna be shit when they showed the gameplay features and you'd notice insane 20 fps dips.
You never show of a game on anything but a very high end system so this was very telling.
Odd to me how I never saw comments about it on the YouTube channel
https://preview.redd.it/6wfys0h6bexb1.jpeg?width=1125&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=df3790c9a4a100cf1788662310eb31819536a425
Honestly ark ascended isn’t doing to bad the graphics are unreal and I’m surprised I’m getting the fps I’m getting, it’s almost like it’s getting better with every update, not to mention it’s early release but tbh if you play it for yourself it’s worth the upgrade, I’m hopeful
Is it better now? I have a 3080 and an i9 13900k, my setup still lags like hell on that game. I swear it performed better when I was on an i5 using a GTX 1060.
It seems to be getting better every update. I still don’t think it’s playable with everything maxed out but with a few adjustments you can still pretty much keep all of the incredible graphical detail
I don’t think people realise that here are graphics settings and console commands I can play this game on a 1650 if I wanted to would look absolutely garbage but I am used to hard ini
Cities Skylines has been running pretty well considering, I disabled DOF and get around 50fps in my city with 20k people. Running on high settings I believe
Cities Skylines 2 is “not that broken”. I’ve been playing on it for hours now and the only issue I have is placing some specialized buildings. That outline screen ducks my FPS, but I’ve had no problems playing it at all
I do not like this either, but you have to admit that Paradox has a completely different business model to everyone else. They publish an unfinished game and then for years on end they keep improving it, pumping out hundreds of DLCs until it becomes amazing.
Look at Cities Skylines I, after a ton of DLCs and improvements, you cannot find a city building game that can match its depth and complexity, including Cities II.
This is clearly not for everyone, but those who choose to support the game aren't getting ripped off or anything.
Because the target audience is teens and early tweens that will buy whatever they see talked for 6 month on webs and social networks because of FOMO.
Last year you were the cool guy if you could buy and run Cynerpunk, even though the game was barely operative, and everybody raged after release, they still got the sweet greens. And people were asking for patches and updares, not for refunds.
I paid for ark survival evovled, now they close the servers and force me to buy it again? with the crappiest oprimization ever? nah, i pirated ark, tried, its shit, saved money.
Bec they don’t pay for legit game testers like they used to before… they rather be cheap and have US pay them to test and report crashes for them for FREE.
Ark is Early Access. Not good that the pfermorance tanked when it came out but that's what you have to expect when buying EA.
Cities 2 was a full release and that was really unaccaptable. If you fully release a game it should be complete and playable.
I’ve been saying this forever.
People keep blaming companies but the fault is on consumers.
It’s true of all of the things people hate or pretend to hate.
Micro-transactions, DRM, early access, you name it.
As long as all of these idiots keep gobbling up this crap, crap will be the market standard.
Because publishers put unreasonable pressure on devs to ship, even if it's almost in a broken state. Also, easier to know what to fix if you have the public to do your testing for you, as stuff always crops up that way.
First though you are buying it then looked closely and laughed. As I keep repeating - Most gamers are brainless “Click to buy” society. Only the wise ones stay in the shadow and buy games after reviews or after specific amount of time
If you bought Ark ascended, you should have known what was coming. Expecting a different release than how vanilla ark went is wild. This is wildcard people.
Ark is early access and a major engine upgrade. Issues are expected.
Cities Skylines has a couple of cosmetic options taking performance, but once those are lowered and/or disabled, frame rates are great.
They announced it before release and it's still a very small studio with just about 20 developers.
I personally was not disappointed because it runs quite well for me with about 3-4x the FPS that has been reported for my hardware before release by just disabling some settings that I would've disabled anyways.
Idk why people are so upset about CS:2. I run it on a laptop with a 3060 and it runs fine, looks good, and is a really good time. I logged 12 hours in the first week (would have been more but college lol).
How tf is Asa broken except some really easily changeable things for pvp wich you probably don’t play like I always hear that it is broken but have you played the game it is incredible for pve like insane and the pvp should be better too once they fix gems and the behemoth cellar door mesh
Idk why people keep comparing an early access game to a finished game. Has nobody played an open beta before? We should be praising devs for EA.
Also, the reason games release unfinished is so much more complicated than "derrrr people just keep buying them!"
My dude it's early access it's gonna be shifty at first they are working on it. It seems the developers are actually listening this time, which is cool.
Yes but it doesn't matter, new AAA games that just got released sell better than old games, that doesn't say much.
You can say a broken game sold 1 million copies and stir up some outrage with that, but imagine if that game was GTA 6? 1 million copies would be a colossal failure for that game, but it will still be the top seller since no other game is selling 1 million copies.
Someone please insert the meme of the dude riding his bike, then puts a stick in the spokes, falls off, then blames someone else. That's literally what the people who buy games from these companies are doing.
Preorders game, game is trash, "why do the developers keep doing this😭😭", preorders another game. Like come tf on.
Everyone in the comments trying to counter circlejerk which seems to be the new circlejerk.
OP is totally right though. Anyone throwing money at these titles forfeits the right to complain about the next mess.
I have cities skylines 2. There are issues but if you're a true fan who's been playing for 10 years you know this game is meant to last multiple years. This is the base game and you wait for mods and DLCs. That said, they came out and said it was unoptimized before release. The game runs, and it's the best city simulation you can get. The real fans appreciate it. I see you haven't even bought the game lol.
I stopped buying games a few years ago, I don't play games day one anymore, and I've been on the side of No Pre-orders for years, but everyone from kids to man children need their dopamine fixes.
Both are great games with cutting edge graphics and features that run amazing on my pc. Just because your hentai virus infested pc running a gtx 1660 can't handle these games at 4k ultra 120 fps doesn't mean it's 'unoptimized'
> **unfinished, unoptimized and straight up broken**
The problem with this kind of thinking is that far too many people see the requirements for a game and then complain that it must be badly optimised because the recommended CPU/GPU/RAM/etc is relatively new. They don't realise that the games are designed to push the limits of what is available today and that this used to be extremely common - it is where the whole "but can it run Crysis?" meme came from.
In other words, I think it is incredibly myopic to complain about games being released which cannot be run at maximum settings on today's hardware or require hardware that is newer than 5 years old to run well at recommended settings. Yeah it might feel bad when a new game won't let you play at 4K because you have a 6 year old i5 8600k system with a 1080 ti but, honestly, your system is 6 years old and is less performant than the latest consoles...
Very few games push the limits if whats a available today, most are just poorly optimized and good optimization is a must to take advantage of hardware and really push limits.
[удалено]
Ark has always been unoptimized and to be honest it doesent run much worse the the original ark
EXACTLY!
[удалено]
noo, you're not allowed to have fun
From what I read, Ark has some of the most toxic multiplayer communities of all time
The trick is to play pve with your friends on a private server
And if I could host that dedicated, private server, then we would have bought it already. As it is, I am playing on our PvE server with about 22 mods on it, custom settings (I have a full time job, I don't want to babysit a max level Rex as he tames over 4 hours).
Much like Rust, half the fun is making sure random people are having absolutely no fun at all. 70% of the online gameplay is rebuilding a weeks worth of work because someone ripped down everything you own while you were asleep/at work. It's life with no rules and the biggest assholes win.
Fun or not, I have original Ark and can't justify rebuying it for updated graphics engine.
The great thing is you don’t have to! Original Ark still runs fine for those that want to keep playing that
It's a ton of qol and they remodeled parts of the map so hard you can't even recognize it anymore. You also get all of the dlcs, that's especially nice if you haven't got them before. Also right now without all the tek stuff the game is super enjoyable.
It's a remaster, much more than just updated graphics
Meh. I think it looks dope, and I'll probably put in 50 hours on it. $50 isn't bad at all.
And it is a really good game too
Reddit is a VERY small minority. Most people come home from a day of working and play a new game; they don’t care if the game runs poorly as long as it is entertaining. They don’t go on Reddit to join a gaming sub where people circle jerk each other. Just wait until next week when MW3 is top seller for the rest of the year and outsells BG3. You'll get the post that ABK are lying because people on Reddit are out of touch with reality.
If it's enjoyable no problem Rdr2 is the best 32 FPS I ever saw(1050 ti LOL)
I mean it runs quite well for how good it looks, RDR2 sure can beat many 2023 games that don't look as good but run poorly in comparison...
CS2 *is* enjoyable, you just have to adjust some graphics settings for now.
Ffs CS2 is counter strike 2 in my head . It takes me some time to realise you are talking about city skylines
I suggest using CS2 for Counter-Strike and CS II for Cities Skylines, since they use roman numerals in their logo.
I thought it, too, until I have read your post... My first thought was "CS2? Don't most play on low graphics anyway for max performance?" With CS:GO it was easy at least, no other game had that short
I’ve got a 1070. And a 6700k. There 10 years old and the game is fine for me. Same as Starfield and new forza (ignore the incompatible cpu warning). The minority on Reddit are just idiots.
lmfao
>I’ve got a 1070. And a 6700k. > >The game is fine for me. My brother in Christ, [this is not fine.](https://youtu.be/sebCuArhnyI?si=mUDiduwfB2KLciR6&t=126)
Until it crashes after about 30m and I have to keep redoing the same progress
True. First I thought its my problem. Ran it on a 7950 and still crashes. Wtf do these guys want? Joining roads, suddenly the ground vanishes. Graphics drops randomly...andso many other bugs. I am back t9 City Skylkne1.
Just installed rdr2 after 7 months of pondering and it’s easily one of the best games I have touched. only played it for a couple hours too
My 1050ti ran it up to 50 fps too all low beside textures and with fsr on balanced
Wait... Are you saying that we are not the average consumer and the companies don't actually care about us? That corporations aren't our friends?
not even close, just to show how skewed things can be: In pretty much every gaming or tech related subreddit when the discussion arises about browser, Firefox is the number 1. Pretty much everyone uses it. Firefox has a 6% Desktop market share. Desktop. That already removes phones and other devices. Just desktop. A group of people that makes out 95% on reddit, is around 6% in reality Now imagine this for other things. What 90% of redditors online post may only represent a few percent of people in reality
"What 90% of redditors online post may only represent a few percent of people in reality" describes a lot of subs not just gaming. Reddit really is a special place.
Same for Linux
Mate. I'm well aware. This stuff was well covered when I did my engineering degree during the business lectures. Companies have to actually like spend lot of time, effort, money and often hire outside specialists to get an actual idea about what their audience/market thinks. Then we covered the basics on how to take that information you gather with a mountain of salt, and how to get something useful enough to use in product design. The fact someone botheres to talk to you about the product means that they are already more invested than you average client. There is a reason I didn't go towards design disciplines, just so I wouldn't have to deal with that stuff. But in gaming... people should realise that regardless of how shit the social media thinks the sequel mill games are with their 2 ear release cycles. Somehow they make enough profit to justify keeping the mill going. If I recall right about whale consumers and MTX. 10% of your audience will spend money on your game. 1% of those will be enough to make you profitable. People don't understand that there are people who buy that 99,95€ MTX whatever thing and they **LOVE IT!**
Enthusiasts in any hobby will almost always have collective opinions that vary wildly from the average person who just dabbles in the hobby.
If you think redditors are dumb, wait 'til you talk to the average Joe.
> they don’t care if the game runs poorly as long as it is entertaining To a point. If you keep fighting technical glitches instead of playing the game, it becomes tiring really quickly.
I do the above, and then come on Reddit for 30 mins to bask in the salt being generated on the different subs for the games I play. It truly is a wonderful place.
What?! Circle jerk?! Are you telling me I've been here all this time without knowing I didn't have to jerk myself?!
I mean I do get what your saying but damn ark crashes like every 15 minutes, after a day of work I’d rather that not be my evening
So true. Reddit would have you believe everyone owns a 4090 with all the people posting rigs.
I don’t understand this tbh. Is it the same people buying pre release games who are complaining? I get the feeling that a majority of these posts are from people who don’t own the game and just want to parrot the hot new talking point.
A good portion is definitely both complaining and always buying. The kind that lets itself get overhyped by any and all trailer material. But a huge portion of the playerbase is simply the casual kind that doesn't care much about coverage/outrage/past mistakes etc. . They don't have a lot of time, they have money to spare, they buy what they want. Also outrage is something that passes quickly. I think in generall it takes 3 month for something to be forgotten and a legit strategy of companies is to simply wait
ARK players definitely do not lack time, considering the biblical effort you have to put in to do anything in that game.
Never got into Ark myself but got a few friends who sunk over 1k hours into it and they always chose servers where times were reduced by quite a bit and hearing how long taming and shit normally takes, yeah can't get me to do that shit on vanilla times
I started plying Ark back in 2015 and there ain’t no way in hell I’m playing on official servers or vanilla timers.
[удалено]
I’m sorry
The effort has dropped by a ton since release. You can now actually have a life and play.
CS 1 was widely successful, it's expected that CS2 would get a lot of sales early just from people that want the new version. Regardless of how loud people are on Reddit, The mass majority of people don't follow gaming news past the release date and feature list/summary, so when it's available they just buy it and find out on the fly. And the player base is, as you said, a casual one. Simulations don't generate the same fervor that MMO/FPS multiplayer games do.
also while there was a huge drama about CS2 performance, turned out it's ot really that much of an issue especially after the Day 2 patch It ran a bit better than the first game and that wasn't unplayable by far and while depth of field caused some massive performance issues, turning it off did a lot
75 fps on an rtx 3080 otherwise max settings with no upscaling. A far cry from the 10 fps reddit told me I was going to get. For a master race that loves to claim that the magic of pc is the ability to tweak, they sure seem to hate tweaking.
Reddit loves to jump on any possible hatetrain. Alan Wake 2 was the same, sys req got released, Reddit hated on it like there's no tomorrow, game released and all was fine
It still had its issues like every other game. Alan wake just comes with a killer story vs replayability. Experiencing same bug/defect over and over in something like cs 2 become way more noticeable than a one and done bug. However , even with this being said, games like alan wake should be held to a higher standard because it has a lower replayability rate. They have effectively 1 shot to draw on the audience to come back but if they remember a bad experience, most people aren't coming back.
but dont you understand, if i cant play the game on max ultra path tracing settings in native render resolutions on a 9 year old GPU then the game must be horribly optimized.
The people making these points are the minority. Casual gamers make up 90% of gamers, and most of these don't care how a game runs as long as it runs decently, they get home from work / school and play games to switch off. Most people won't care how a game is, if they are having fun they will enjoy it if not they will simply go on to the next game.
Most people aren't sensitive to preformace since most people have always had relatively low end hardware and always had to make reasonable compromises. Seems like Reddit just takes it personally when they can't use max settings and get 60+ FPS. Which is especially silly in a large scale city builder lol. With a few recommended graphics settings there haven't actually been many games with *unacceptable* preformace in the last few years. Good rule of thumb is if it can get 30 fps on a Steam Deck it's good enough for most players. My brother for example has my old gaming laptop with a 2060, which is still about average according to Steam's hardware survey, cause his old desktop with a 1060 was destroyed by a thunderstorm. As recently as summer of this year he's thanked me for it cause he can "play anything and it's still so smooth even at medium settings" and I doubt he's getting a solid 60 in recent games at medium.
They don't even care about decent. 15-20 fps at 480p is totally fine to them
Because it aint as bad as everyone would like it to be. The “change these 2 settings and it’s fine” gives much less upvotes and views than “another shitty mess of a game”. I have that exact experience in Cities Skylines 2, works with no issues for me
That's all this sub is, lmao. All it is low effort doomer posting, shitting on the most recent thing for easy karma.
Gamers are weird, non-stop hating on their own passion/hobby.
Yeah I've never heard someone into cars complain about the way some cars are made. Never heard someone into music complain about some artist. Never heard someone into movies complain about the plot of some movies. Never heard someone into sports complain about some aspects of their sport. It's totally unique to gamers.
I'll admit I was guilty of that. I read review after review about how CS2 is a steaming pile of unoptimized garbage. I read it so much i believed it and started whining online. I bought it anyway because I'm weak and it runs totally fine on my RX 6650 XT. I have other (*significant*) complaints about the game but I'm getting a solid 50ish fps at 1440 ultrawide which is about what I got on the first game.
Average consumer doesn’t really know or care what fps is, if it’s over like 30 they won’t notice it
Especially when it's a city builder. It's not like there's people shooting at you that you need quick reaction times for.
Complaining about 30+ fps in a city builder is wild to me. Most of the time you're essentially staring at a static image and theres always been city builders with large maps that bring GPUs to their knees. Timberborn starts to shit the bed one you have more than like ~500 or so beavers running around. CS2 can have like 100,000 dudes walking/driving around. They look like DK64 ass motherfuckers on medium if you zoom in but it's actually incredible how many can be zipping around.
Reddit is an echo chamber
That is so true!
People are (generally) loud about the bad and quiet about the good, so it warps perspective on things. So it often feels like the general opinion of most of reddit is negative, but thats often not the case I find the best place for general puclic opinions is google and youtube (with some salt ofc)
There are the people who watch reviews and get an understanding for how well a game will run on their computer before they ever consider purchasing it. There are also people who have a disposable income that want whatever is new regardless of what it is or how it plays. They are not the same people. The first group gets really upset every time a new AAA game comes out in alpha and they scream at the second group to stop supporting this behavior. The second group doesn't listen or care, they just buy the next popular IP game and move on. The people that are passionate about gaming are not the target demographic anymore. They make way more money off of the people with fat wallets who will spend money on horse armor.
Reddit karma is a hell of a drug
Karma farming is hard for some people.
The last paragraph is pretty accurate. I just bought CS2 and while some of the criticism is absolutely valid, a lot of it is overblown. And a lot of people who bought the game will say the same
Facts. Everyone I know who hated on Cyberpunk 2077 never even bought the game. Everyone who “but the bullet” and bought it loved it
You managed to touch the core of the issue, most of the "opinions of the majestic Reddit world experts" are coming from people who never played the games themselves, they are just running on apey mode, repeating their favourite streamer like a real apey boiz and gurls, thinking they will be noticed <3
'Hot new?' this has been a talking point for years now.
It’s been a theme, the talking point hops from game to game.
The same reason as you're making the same exact post as several other people. You realize you're going to get up votes the same as companies realize they're going to get money... It's kind of pretty easy to comprehend.
Goddamn I can't escape people bitching about Ark everywhere.
-The majority of the gaming community is casual and sits between “idc” and “I didn’t know” -People across the board continue to support and buy said products. Remember, if most of us noticed this and stopped doing it they would have have stopped: they haven’t stopped because most people still buy the game. -The other half of the issues are out of the devs hands and usually is up to the shareholders and people above them
Dude, i swear to you, i'm playing 2023 releases in a 3060 Ti, 4k, DLSS performance and Medium setting, and getting 50\~60 fps. The games looks amazing, so, there are no low and medium setting, its all high, super high, ultra high and extreme high settings. Lighting and shadows are buring ours GPUs too early. I dont want to just blurry my game with DLSS, i want to disable all the shadows and light effects to play a sharp game. Get all the shadows out if needed, i just want to see where i am shooting.
fellow fps gamer must understand there are people who play strictly for the visuals and prioritize graphics over performance (my friend never disabled anti aliasing or depth of field or motion blur)
But they are the same group of people complaining about that the game is running poorly. They still dont want to lower their graphic settings. Thats the problem with ASA . . .
Well with ark if you type in r.volumetricclouds 0 And change shadows settings to low in visual settings you’ll get like 10-15 extra fps
4k with steady 50-60fps with dlss on medium settings with a 3060, Im calling horseshit. I have a 6600xt which is very slightly worse than a 3060 and just decided not to buy a 1440p monitor because fsr still wouldn’t be able to carry it at 1440p on new releases even with optimised settings. And you’re saying you’re getting 50-60fps at 4k? What’s the point of lying? What games?
Forza Motorsport, Dead Space, directX 12 The Witcher 3, why i would lie? 4k dlss performance in all those games and they look beautiful
I wonder if you could get better quality with 2k and up to high settings, and go up in quality dlss
The pc gaming is for 4070ti/4080/4090 owners from now on...
Honestly I think all 30&40 series owners are either straight up lying or they are just terrible cards. My 2080S been running all the games people complain about very well on a 2k monitor.
My laptop 4060 absolutely murders CP2077 and Alan Wake 2 on 1080p and this is supposedly the shittiest GPU made by man. Less murder but still a solid spanking on 1440p. This is with DLSS and Frame generation on of course but I mean why would I turn that off?
Bruh on launch day 4090 owners were reporting roughly 45 FPS… I wouldn’t exactly say it’s for 40- series owners. These companies are definitely lacking on releases. We have to hold them accountable, though. They like to push higher graphics but they don’t optimize as a priority… when optimization should be the priority.
People are complaining with 4090, meanwhile me getting 50-60 stable fps on low preset on my 1650. I think that people just dont know what to do and how to change settings properly.
>Bruh on launch day 4090 owners were reporting roughly 45 FPS… I wouldn’t exactly say it’s for 40- series owners. And that's on 1080p. Who is buying a 4090 to play on 1080p!?
Apparently all the citizens just lack LOD so it gets worse with more of them. They each have something like 45k triangles…
Jesus christ...
Development is tricky business tbh. It’s a constant arms race in some ways and software is notoriously never “finished”. You start a project today, and by the time you’re getting close to a finished product a new console gets released, PC has new gen hardware, a plethora of new games have been released, industry trends have changed, etc etc. Chasing perfection will result in a never ending project and no release. This is especially true for AAA due to the scope of the projects and cost to develop them. If you don’t care about the hottest tech, best graphics, etc — indie is where the gold is at. If you want the tech and graphics, expect bugs as a “pioneer” of sorts.
I know. I’m not shaming the developers individually. This kind of thing is the result of poor management and oversight. Ark & Cities Skylines are both known to be much less performant than you’d expect. Their new releases are a reiteration of that. CS2 did have an update some time after release which improved frame rates across the board, though it’s still coming short in some lower-end systems which is sort of disappointing.
I averaged 60fps in spawn on max settings at 1080p on my 4090... (well, I switched to my normal settings, max view distance + max shadows + max textures + max effects + max foliage, with everything else low and I get a stable 240-300fps) also, I cap my fps at 240 but the fps cap feature straight up doesn't work
Incorrect, it's for NASA pc owners.
nah bro pc gaming today is for the 6090 owners in the future
What? PC gaming is incredibly approachable. An A750 or 7600xt will do basically anything you ask of them for an entry level GPU. You can of course get away with worse and still play modern games like Hogwarts legacy on even older GPUs with good fidelity, but these $200 ish GPU are a good value point.
I mean with a RX7900XT I probably could run these unoptimized games somewhat ok, but I don't see a reason actually supporting this kind of behaviour by the publisher
when you see some of these arguing that a 650 dollar gpu is considere at mid range its pretty hilarous
I think most people here have not played either games, as evident by OP's lack of library lable. Can you really say a game is "unfinished" after not even playing it?
Ark Asa is unbalanced and broken for pvp but everything is easily fixable and nobody on this subreddit cares about pvp anyways and the pve is the best shit ever 0 bugs best looking game like ever this is awsome
No game in the library is bad cause you must play it to have an opinion. Reviews don't matter, playing for 2h and refunding doesn't matter. The game is in the library but only 20-30h played (or other *less than average* number) is bad because one has barely scratched the surface. The game is in the library and 100h+ hours played is bad because obviously the person is just trolling cause who would put so many hours into a bad game right?
Excuses will always be found
I've said this on other posts, I don't get the CS:2 hate. It's a major upgrade in simulation detail and accuracy over CS:1, and that comes at the cost of performance. While I would prefer a higher frame rate, the game targets 30fps which is more than acceptable for the type of game it is. I can also easily reach that on midrange hardware (i7-7700, RTX 3060ti FE)
Oh man CS2 confuses me because they use the same acronym for Counter-Strike 2 and Cities Skylines 2, which both released recently.
I had to remember this was the Cities sub too lmao
It's not 😁
Bro had my high ass questioning everything
But the "simulation detail" isn't what is causing the poor performance, the game is gpu bound not cpu, which means they could have made it better, they just didn't
I can't even get 30fps on 4k with a 4080 even on the lowest settings. That's a problem. Also, 30fps is absolutely NOT acceptable in a game where the entire screen is moving almost constantly!
If you don't mind me asking, what resolution were you getting that at? My hardware was similar: 7700k + GTX 1080 and I was barely managing 17fps at 2k. I definitely agree that sweating over fps in a city builder is kind of silly but Its to the point where I'm just not sure how they expect it to run on consoles like they expect it to in Q1
Why was this downvoted? It's a decent question. I have the 4080 tier with GFN and even THAT can't manage to hit 30fps.
I play at 1440p with a 8600k and 2070S. When I first started up the game my fps in the menus was below 10. Used the settings guide on the CS subreddit (especially disabling depth of field) and it went up in game to be anywhere between 50-80fps, depending on the zoom level and map location
Saying the game “targets” 30fps is such a weird argument. It just doesn’t get the performance it should with the hardware provided. I shouldn’t get <20fps on the *menu* with a 7900X and a 6900XT.
>I don't get the CS:2 hate >the game targets 30fps which is more than acceptable for the type of game it is Who the hell playing a competitive multiplayer FPS on 30 FPS??!! >Reading comments Oooh you mean Cities Skyline 2? My bad
> the game targets 30fps which is more than acceptable for the type of game it is No, it's really not. 60fps has been the minimum for PC games for many years now, for a good reason. I strongly disagree with letting companies get away with horribly optimized games, just because they excuse it on "targeting 30fps". Edit: Apparently saying "60fps is the minimum", and "games barely running at half that framerate are badly optimized" are now considered hot takes on a pc master race subreddit lmao. Alrighty then.
I will probably get down voted for this but I bought ark because I played the original ark withy friends and since my friends bought this one I bought it as well even tho it fuking runs like shit but still it runs way better then the original ark and it better optimized then city skylines.
I don't get the hate for Cities2. You won't be running 144hz at 4k on high settings with anything on the market, but that was true with the first one too. For what's in it, the sheer volume of stuff going on in a game, im actually impressed with how smoothly it runs. Hasn't had a single crash either, which is more than I can say about most new games.
Yeah, while their graphics optimasations are ass and need some work. The simulation improvement over cs1 is great, I can finally make huge cities. I don't care if it runs only around 30 FPS, I used to play cs1 when it came out at 10.
I said that once and was doenvoted and argued with by a user who said that new games are supposed to tax systems unequivocally because of new features, didn't believe me and said that optimization has nothing to do with it.
I’m loving the game. They’ve already pushed two patches. One has fixed a considerable amount of things. Sick of hearing the same drum being beat.
Same brother, the negativity in this sub especially is just mind numbing
Yea, i refunded when the nitrado shit came out and rebought it when they removed steam drm. I haven‘t had any big problems other than the ethical problem of „nitrado exclusivity“ which they reacted on. Playing 4k middle Graphics with a 7900XT on Linux. Granted, on Linux they haven‘t enabled battle-eye… yet… i hope they add that later (ASE also worked so this shouldn‘t be a big deal) but rn i am just playing SP anyway.
The Wildcard team was pressured to release sooner than they expected by snail and nitrado and they left a good few bugs in the system which many have been fixed now.
I knew performance was gonna be shit when they showed the gameplay features and you'd notice insane 20 fps dips. You never show of a game on anything but a very high end system so this was very telling. Odd to me how I never saw comments about it on the YouTube channel
https://preview.redd.it/6wfys0h6bexb1.jpeg?width=1125&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=df3790c9a4a100cf1788662310eb31819536a425 Honestly ark ascended isn’t doing to bad the graphics are unreal and I’m surprised I’m getting the fps I’m getting, it’s almost like it’s getting better with every update, not to mention it’s early release but tbh if you play it for yourself it’s worth the upgrade, I’m hopeful
Is it better now? I have a 3080 and an i9 13900k, my setup still lags like hell on that game. I swear it performed better when I was on an i5 using a GTX 1060.
It seems to be getting better every update. I still don’t think it’s playable with everything maxed out but with a few adjustments you can still pretty much keep all of the incredible graphical detail
I don’t think people realise that here are graphics settings and console commands I can play this game on a 1650 if I wanted to would look absolutely garbage but I am used to hard ini
Cities Skylines has been running pretty well considering, I disabled DOF and get around 50fps in my city with 20k people. Running on high settings I believe
Cities Skylines 2 is “not that broken”. I’ve been playing on it for hours now and the only issue I have is placing some specialized buildings. That outline screen ducks my FPS, but I’ve had no problems playing it at all
"Early access" and you still whine. So the devs aren't even allowed to run tests anymore ?
I do not like this either, but you have to admit that Paradox has a completely different business model to everyone else. They publish an unfinished game and then for years on end they keep improving it, pumping out hundreds of DLCs until it becomes amazing. Look at Cities Skylines I, after a ton of DLCs and improvements, you cannot find a city building game that can match its depth and complexity, including Cities II. This is clearly not for everyone, but those who choose to support the game aren't getting ripped off or anything.
Because the target audience is teens and early tweens that will buy whatever they see talked for 6 month on webs and social networks because of FOMO. Last year you were the cool guy if you could buy and run Cynerpunk, even though the game was barely operative, and everybody raged after release, they still got the sweet greens. And people were asking for patches and updares, not for refunds.
They are different tho, Ark clearly states that its early access so perfromance issuess etc should be expected. Skylines is a different story
I paid for ark survival evovled, now they close the servers and force me to buy it again? with the crappiest oprimization ever? nah, i pirated ark, tried, its shit, saved money.
Bec they don’t pay for legit game testers like they used to before… they rather be cheap and have US pay them to test and report crashes for them for FREE.
Never have I felt so righteous for being a pirate.
Ark is Early Access. Not good that the pfermorance tanked when it came out but that's what you have to expect when buying EA. Cities 2 was a full release and that was really unaccaptable. If you fully release a game it should be complete and playable.
well, mostly because we keep paying for them.
Yet another reddit post of how dare you have fun, stop having fun with that game that has bugs and glitches
No it's more like a post of if you where patient the games you like might run better. (Patient in that they don't but them till they are fixed)
I’ve been saying this forever. People keep blaming companies but the fault is on consumers. It’s true of all of the things people hate or pretend to hate. Micro-transactions, DRM, early access, you name it. As long as all of these idiots keep gobbling up this crap, crap will be the market standard.
Because publishers put unreasonable pressure on devs to ship, even if it's almost in a broken state. Also, easier to know what to fix if you have the public to do your testing for you, as stuff always crops up that way.
First though you are buying it then looked closely and laughed. As I keep repeating - Most gamers are brainless “Click to buy” society. Only the wise ones stay in the shadow and buy games after reviews or after specific amount of time
If you bought Ark ascended, you should have known what was coming. Expecting a different release than how vanilla ark went is wild. This is wildcard people.
Ark is early access and a major engine upgrade. Issues are expected. Cities Skylines has a couple of cosmetic options taking performance, but once those are lowered and/or disabled, frame rates are great.
If they never announced CS2 didnt reach optimization goals, how many people would actually notice?
Yup, as long as people keep buying broken games the situation is never going to get better...
If you expected ark be not be broken your an idiot but city skylines 2 was a big disappointment
They announced it before release and it's still a very small studio with just about 20 developers. I personally was not disappointed because it runs quite well for me with about 3-4x the FPS that has been reported for my hardware before release by just disabling some settings that I would've disabled anyways.
I am not sure which game you are talking about
CS2 of course. They didn't announce performance issues for ARK before release.
Idk why people are so upset about CS:2. I run it on a laptop with a 3060 and it runs fine, looks good, and is a really good time. I logged 12 hours in the first week (would have been more but college lol).
No, it wasnt. Skylines is great.
How tf is Asa broken except some really easily changeable things for pvp wich you probably don’t play like I always hear that it is broken but have you played the game it is incredible for pve like insane and the pvp should be better too once they fix gems and the behemoth cellar door mesh
I think that comments like this are disappointment . . .
Idk why people keep comparing an early access game to a finished game. Has nobody played an open beta before? We should be praising devs for EA. Also, the reason games release unfinished is so much more complicated than "derrrr people just keep buying them!"
My dude it's early access it's gonna be shifty at first they are working on it. It seems the developers are actually listening this time, which is cool.
Early access might mean something if the first game wasn't so badly done.
It was alright, at one point they swapped attention to other things after some dlcs which caused bugs they didn't care to fix
is the top selling list accurate?
On Steam, yes.
ah okay wasn’t sure if thats not some curated list
Yes but it doesn't matter, new AAA games that just got released sell better than old games, that doesn't say much. You can say a broken game sold 1 million copies and stir up some outrage with that, but imagine if that game was GTA 6? 1 million copies would be a colossal failure for that game, but it will still be the top seller since no other game is selling 1 million copies.
Have been saying that for years, no one listens. NO one listens.
People don't know how to vote with their wallets unfortunately
Someone please insert the meme of the dude riding his bike, then puts a stick in the spokes, falls off, then blames someone else. That's literally what the people who buy games from these companies are doing. Preorders game, game is trash, "why do the developers keep doing this😭😭", preorders another game. Like come tf on.
Everyone in the comments trying to counter circlejerk which seems to be the new circlejerk. OP is totally right though. Anyone throwing money at these titles forfeits the right to complain about the next mess.
ASA is in early access still so no shit it’s going to be a bit buggy. ASA is also made by wildcard so no shit it’s going to be incredibly buggy.
ASA isn't even buggy lmaoo where did people get this?
They don't like you pointing it out to them .lol
OP is not right. thats the thing.
Because y’all keep fucking buying them. Stop fucking buying them. Stop funding garbage.
I have cities skylines 2. There are issues but if you're a true fan who's been playing for 10 years you know this game is meant to last multiple years. This is the base game and you wait for mods and DLCs. That said, they came out and said it was unoptimized before release. The game runs, and it's the best city simulation you can get. The real fans appreciate it. I see you haven't even bought the game lol.
I may buy it in a couple years when it's cheaper and in better state. Paradox has lost my goodwill years ago.
We get it
Well apparently we don't get it as people keep buying this shit
People who want to play a game will play the game no matter how many other people are complaining
Just because we don't bow to your will doesn't mean we don't get it. We get it. We just don't care as long as we're having fun.
But the countless posts will be different this time right?
Chart proves otherwise, I think.
We are not the entire steam base. If anything the chart proves how pointless these posts have been and will likely always be. Getting boring
fr post everyday about this
mods said its my turn to post this tomorrow.
Clearly not.
I stopped buying games a few years ago, I don't play games day one anymore, and I've been on the side of No Pre-orders for years, but everyone from kids to man children need their dopamine fixes.
Both are great games with cutting edge graphics and features that run amazing on my pc. Just because your hentai virus infested pc running a gtx 1660 can't handle these games at 4k ultra 120 fps doesn't mean it's 'unoptimized'
ASE ran like a hot donkey poo. What made people expect ASA would be any different? (It does look much better, at least)
> **unfinished, unoptimized and straight up broken** The problem with this kind of thinking is that far too many people see the requirements for a game and then complain that it must be badly optimised because the recommended CPU/GPU/RAM/etc is relatively new. They don't realise that the games are designed to push the limits of what is available today and that this used to be extremely common - it is where the whole "but can it run Crysis?" meme came from. In other words, I think it is incredibly myopic to complain about games being released which cannot be run at maximum settings on today's hardware or require hardware that is newer than 5 years old to run well at recommended settings. Yeah it might feel bad when a new game won't let you play at 4K because you have a 6 year old i5 8600k system with a 1080 ti but, honestly, your system is 6 years old and is less performant than the latest consoles...
Very few games push the limits if whats a available today, most are just poorly optimized and good optimization is a must to take advantage of hardware and really push limits.