This is the kind of thing that Frontier should shed some light on. Speculation can definitely lead to disappointment.
Bigger maps confirmed? In this beta video?
- Thread starter Ramm
- Start date
Im assuming that if the map is any bigger than it is now it would suffer greater performance issues. Even if you had the same number of rides the processing would increase drastically because of the amount of calculations each guest would need to do to work out where to go and how to get there. As a result i suspect its not possible to increase the map size.
Just to refresh everyones memory, here is the Alpha map w/ a black line marking were the actual edge is located vs where the park edge is, namely where my rides end at currently...
Last edited:
Love the game to bits, but if that's the case it'll be pretty disappointing.
Hate to burst your bubble, but the park size is not bigger
I hollowed out all my buildings along my shopping street, they had roofs acting as floors so away the "floors" went & I painted the ground under them grey, why, because I'd rather put rides in there instead of running out of room, some of the rides will end up going underground ala POTC or Haunted Mansion at Disney, it's far better to plan ahead then to worry about it tomorrow.
I agree, we havent even heard from anyone on the Dev team about the poor performance on high end hardware when filling up the park so it seems unlikely they open up more space to build on, but I hope they do.
Well what needs to be considered is how long do they realistically imagine this game to be played for. Assuming Moore's law continues then in just 2 years the high end CPUs will have double the number of transistors and so would be able to run planet coaster far better than the current high end PCs can. If they are after long term to have a game that pushes the current generation to the absolute limit would be the way to make sure the game survives the test of time.
But if they did that prematurely, it possibly would put a lot of people off the game due to required processing. They might increase it later once the hardware had a chance to improve.
Just FYI, but Moore's law doesn't work anymore, hence why Intel are not using the Tick-Tock system for release. I can say for instance that the high end CPU's that we have today in our office are only about 25% faster than those from 4 years ago so it really isn't that clean cut. Intel are assuming with the next release on new chips & architecture they are only looking at a 25-30% increase I'm performance.
In regards to the actual comment on performance. I am sorry but we have no idea how it is running now. Optimisation is always behind the scenes and continuous throughout the build. Someone noted above about the pathing system and the guest brain logic, that apparently has almost zero overhead for performance so the park could be 10x the size without that being an issue. Check out the dev diary about it.
Voxel terrain is more likely to be the killer and just pure piece count in the PbP building. If we had just generic shops and rides that we plopped down the map could be 10x the size no issue because each element to have been optimised to a much greater degree than placing lots of little items together. It is actually why the Sims builder works so well. By the builder making the wall object continuous and just applying the texture to the visible portions it actually gives some very impressive optimisation.
Have wondered why PC never went the route of being able to drag room shapes out.
Vampiro
Volunteer Moderator
Believe me, Moore's law is still working.
(i hate to brag, but i work at the company that's 90% responsible for moore's law, and it's very much alive... hence the new EUV technology)
Last edited:
https://www.technologyreview.com/s/601102/intel-puts-the-brakes-on-moores-law/
Moore's law may exist with transistors generally in that yes every two years they could be doubled with in certain fields but I am specifically talking about Intel and their CPU's (AMD & IBM also have same issues).
This goes back to 2014 where they missed targets then for them to fall under Moores Law too. Yes it can be done but it isn't so it isn't working anymore at least currently in the CPU side of things we are talking about.
Edit: Yes we could theoretically get them down 5nm but the cost is so high an alternative solution is being introduced (at least attempting to be anyways). Again looking at it specifically with costs for Intel, AMD, IBM and their CPU's for the desktop PC market here.
Last edited:
Vampiro
Volunteer Moderator
Ofcourse there is always more sides to a story, and there is no denying that each time it gets more difficult. And there have been a few setbacks at chipfactory's. But when it's just about what you said, transistor size, moore's law is still existing.
https://www.technologyreview.com/s/601206/moores-laws-ultraviolet-savior-is-finally-ready/
It just depends on what you're reading. And i fully agree, there are more ways to look at it then one. But one thing is for sure, technically/financially moore's law is still applicable when it comes to production of chips.
(damn proud to work at ASML [big grin])
Hmm, we might have taken this thread oftopic a bit [mouth shut]
Last edited:
Haha yeah I get all that and all but we was specifically talking about desktop CPU's for gaming here and that is where I was saying that it doesn't work (certainly at this time) it may return upon later tech such as what you have posted but I can only go off real world products at moment and for the last 4 years almost we already haven't had Moores law otherwise we would be on 10nm or maybe even 7nm chips today.
If that makes sense [happy]
And yes....shhh don't tell anyone while we geek out a little over these things [big grin]
Ok so I just got the beta and noticed it is the same size as Alpha
What the h#ll guys
this was like the most important thing for the game
PLEASE TELL ME I CAN UNLOCK IT WITH A CHEAT
We need the devs to jump on this thread and give us a straight answer to map sizes and future plans for sizes.