Planet Coaster needs a Better Optimization in game
- Thread starter FamouZ
- Start date
This has to be a limitation of the Cobra engine itself? Other games in similar genres don't have this much of an issue with optimizations and FPS drops. We also had similar issues with RCT3 using the same engine.
Thanks for answering the question though!
This is what I'm wondering, are all the devs' dedicated optimization efforts futile because Cobra itself is the problem and Frontier's committed to Cobra? [cry]
Probably doesn't help with PlanCo, but might with PlanCo2 if they face it in time.
So, are there other games in which you can build almost whatever you want using dozens/hundreds of different pieces, on different grids, and with hundreds of guests being (semi-)simulated, plus (semi-)physics simulation for a dozen coasters? Including real-time reflections, global illumination and day-night cycle? RCT3 had the same problem because it's closer to PC than any other game in terms of those features.
If you say Minecraft or Space Engineers, those games use voxel cubes to build things, which are then merged. They also don't have a lot of AI (or any) and limited physics. Otherwise, SE has the same issues with lag as PC.
If you say Cities Skylines, all assets are optimised and the simulation is not even close to PC. Yet, with a high enough population and large enough city, the FPS also decreases rapidly.
Even if it's a limitation of the engine, how would you solve it? There is no other game engine out there that can do this better. If Frontier decides to develop a new engine specifically for PC2, it can probably take another ten years before the game is finished to make it exactly as everyone expects now (it's rare that all expectations are met when it takes that long).
What other games with the graphical quality of PC and allows you to place as many objects in a single map that doesnt have this much issues with optimizations and FPS drops are you speaking of?
Cities Skyline, Minecraft, Sim City, Parkitect, The Sims, etc, etc
Minecraft - does not have 10,000 guests walking around deciding what to eat
Parkitect - only has isometric view and low polygon objects
Cities Skyline - no first person view, only isometric
Sim City - no first person view, only isometric
The Sims - only has the ability to show a few dozen people on screen at once
As I suspected you would say. Those games are not even close in comparison. And except Parkitect, none of those games are the same genre. And Parkitect does not have the same graphical fidelity or simulation quality as PC, not even close.
From experience, even Cities Skylines suffers large FPS drops if you use high poly content and have a lot of content and buildings present.
Shane
Shane
You cant be serious.... Cities skylines lags alot, especially when you place every little individual detail yourself. Parkitect lags a lot as well when you have a heavily populated map (which still has a lot less of objects than PC and the graphical style is also a lot less demanding. Sim city and the sims dont allow you to place 100k objects on a map without crashing the game. Minecraft? You cant even compare a voxel based building game to Planet Coaster. It makes no sense.
I would love to agree with all this. But you say it yourself "Cities Skylines, all assets are optimised and the simulation is not even close to PC". My question is, what is this "advanced" simulation in PC for? It has many flaws and yet, there is no even gameplay (just be honest about it, it´s portion of the game that is lacking).
Some people say this is not meant to be management game. Then what do we need this HW expensive simulations for in mere building sandbox game? I would probably be much more tolerant if the simulation had real impact on gameplay, but this is not the case.
Second thing is that you say "CS has all assets optimized". Not sure what do you mean, but I think it is correct to have assets optimized. Something PC doesn´t have
.I would be careful here. I would say Parkitect has great simulation and it even surpasses PC in some things. On the top of that, the game is not done and they are still adding things. Parkitect wins on this matter, especially considering how big both teams are. Parkitect is made by few people with very low budget.
Last edited:
I'd be interested to see someone do an accurate comparison between CS and Planet Coaster as they will soon find that quite a bit of what's on the Workshop isn't optimised and is quite high poly. Take it from someone who plays CS alongside Planet Coaster.
I've a feeling that Parkitect's simulation is more limited when it comes to guest simulation as they don't do as much.
As for the HW expensive parts a lot of that is guest related - the game needs to be able to track group thoughts and actions as well as staff thoughts/actions.
Shane
I've a feeling that Parkitect's simulation is more limited when it comes to guest simulation as they don't do as much.
As for the HW expensive parts a lot of that is guest related - the game needs to be able to track group thoughts and actions as well as staff thoughts/actions.
Shane
I compare both games with "vanilla experience", so not much with the workshop stuff.
Agree about guest in Parkitect, but my question still remains. What is "better" (it is questionable, because PC has quite a few flaws with AI anyway) AI for in PC if it has no real gameplay/management and this simulation doesn´t affect much? For instance, I would prefer to have AI more similar to Parkitect in PC if it made game running better.
Technically the simulation does include quite a bit of decision making (buying/not buying items for example, going to ATMs etc) although I'm not sure how detailed that goes in Parkitect.
Lesser simulation detail may help the game run better but there is a flipside to it and that is from those who want the guest brain to be more advanced (which in turn requires more resources). It's kind of like a catch 22 situation.
Shane
Lesser simulation detail may help the game run better but there is a flipside to it and that is from those who want the guest brain to be more advanced (which in turn requires more resources). It's kind of like a catch 22 situation.
Shane
You still don´t get my point. For what reason should it be more advanced? I´m saying there is no real reason to have AI more advanced if there is no purpose for it....
From what I can see it's what some seem to want although I'm waiting until the next update as it will be becoming more advanced then if you class the new staff resting/training as advanced.
Shane
Shane
I have my doubts about it, as I think this will end up just like security guards. extra feature that brought nothing in the end.
Must be boring to live a life with constant negative views on everything...
When we talk about simulation, we also must not forget simulation of the guests themselves. In PlanCo all guests react to the environment, rides, scenery etc. You can zoom in and see different facial expressions and different animations for different feelings, emotions etc. All those things makes the park feel alive and interactive and not sterile and cold. Lots og humor built in as well. Compare this to previous RCT games or Parkitect. RCTW has taken the "walking dead" approach and the peeps there are horrifying. This is also part of the simulation bucket which often gets forgotten. Not all parts of the simulation category has to do with finance and management.
For everyone that compares with Cities: Skyline (a favorite game of mine); that game lags severely given big enough city. This is without mods or extra assets. Bring in those and the situation is even worse when it comes to fps. This very same discussion is happening over at Paradox's forum as well. People are crying because they can't get more than 20fts or less. Whenever you get "unlimited creativity" which both Cities: Skylines and PlanCo has, everyone will hit a point where you just have too much stuff on the map. You and your machine will always be the limiting factor when it comes to how much you can place and do. It is self regulating that way. The alternative is to limit how many items one can place or how many guests you can have (you already can limit it yourself if you like) but my guess is that if Frontier did that this forum would erupt in anger. In the end, if you want to build your dream part (or city or whatever) you have to make sure you have hardware powerful enough to handle it. For the average player (those that does not hang around on this forum) the game is playable and enjoyable on average hardware (recommended specs). What else could Frontier do?
For everyone that compares with Cities: Skyline (a favorite game of mine); that game lags severely given big enough city. This is without mods or extra assets. Bring in those and the situation is even worse when it comes to fps. This very same discussion is happening over at Paradox's forum as well. People are crying because they can't get more than 20fts or less. Whenever you get "unlimited creativity" which both Cities: Skylines and PlanCo has, everyone will hit a point where you just have too much stuff on the map. You and your machine will always be the limiting factor when it comes to how much you can place and do. It is self regulating that way. The alternative is to limit how many items one can place or how many guests you can have (you already can limit it yourself if you like) but my guess is that if Frontier did that this forum would erupt in anger. In the end, if you want to build your dream part (or city or whatever) you have to make sure you have hardware powerful enough to handle it. For the average player (those that does not hang around on this forum) the game is playable and enjoyable on average hardware (recommended specs). What else could Frontier do?
Last edited: