Good Game, bad performance!

[Tammy25]

Something that people didn't seem to discuss in this thread is that there are a lot of small maps.

Both the default desert and taiga maps are small, and some of the campaign maps are tiny. You can play on these ones.

Smaller? i think not so. I can't find a difference from they size. A planet Zoo Sandbox Map is roughly (in metric system) 1 km² big (1000 x 990 m). The Heightmap is required to be a 1024 x 1024 pixels tif file. So all maps have no different size. Quote: https://steamah.com/planet-zoo-heightmap-guide
That include all maps, the campaign maps too (They only looks smaller, they have hills and mountains and lakes). And i have not all campaign maps unlock, than i play only franchise and sandbox for creativity.
By choosing a map size, you can set a limit for yourself and your hardware, and you would not be frustrated. Anyone could choose.

 

[ElectricMonk]

They only looks smaller, they have hills and mountains and lakes

But why do you care then? This doesn’t substantially affect performance since the piece count for the trees etc. isn’t high.

whatever the size of the map, if you have bad pathing, high piece counts, lots of effects, lots of guests, your performance will suffer. In fact, in many cases a smaller map would make it worse since crowds are denser assuming equal number of guests. The only way to avoid this is to limit the number of guests but apparently you don’t want to do that.

 

[Tammy25]

Why do you have to talk badly? Are we not allowed to say what does not suit us? Just because it works for you?
I stick with it, I want options for map sizes. It can go a long way because you can't know that. What you don't know either, how we will then build on smaller maps. Why such an anti-mood from you?

I don't know why my last post was deleted either, but I'm sticking with it. This is called freedom of expression when the post has been deleted. I didn't offend anyone! And now I just ignore people like you.

 

[ElectricMonk]

Why do you have to talk badly? Are we not allowed to say what does not suit us? Just because it works for you?
I stick with it, I want options for map sizes. It can go a long way because you can't know that. What you don't know either, how we will then build on smaller maps. Why such an anti-mood from you?

I don't know why my last post was deleted either, but I'm sticking with it. This is called freedom of expression when the post has been deleted. I didn't offend anyone! And now I just ignore people like you.

Assuming this is directed at my comment - I’m not sure what I’ve said that is offensive but, whatever it was, I apologise. I have no issues with the option of smaller maps but, in your OP, you said:

I like building a lot at Planet Zoo. Also very detailed.

Very detailed = more strain on your system - that is an inevitable law of physics, no matter how optimised the game is, this fact will remain.

Why are we given such large maps, so many options and no-limit animals when you can't use them?

The clear implication of this question / statement is that we should not be given such large maps - its now clear that you want smaller maps as well (which I’m totally ok with) but your initial implication was that you wanted smaller maps instead of the current size.

And the support says that you shouldn't build a lot and bring in fewer animals and visitors, that is the way it is intended (I am happy to provide support responses).

The game provides the opportunity to build zoos as complex as your machine can handle - are you really saying that it should run just as well on a less powerful machine as on a more powerful one irrespective of the way it’s played?

It's not fair on the developers to give us a game like this, but expect the bugs to be ours. And also not to give a fair game that you shouldn't push to the limit (according to support).

It’s not about bugs, it’s about providing the maximum possible flexibility to players. Inevitably this is constrained by their equipment to some extent. Pushing the game to its limit is fine - but that limit is imposed by your system, not by the game.

 

[Tammy25]

Nowhere did I write that I only wanted a small card, but a choice of several options. Please do not interpret anything into it!
And a smaller map does not mean that I build in such detail, also a wrong interpretation on your part! You can build in detail, yes, but you can also do that with minimal effort and objects. I just meant that I don't just slap stones of the same kind into it.
But I didn't care, I can't play the game like that and I gave it up. Discussion ended on my part. The game is not intended for creative people on a tight budget / PC!

 

[ElectricMonk]

Nowhere did I write that I only wanted a small card, but a choice of several options. Please do not interpret anything into it!

I didn’t say you said it, I said you implied it:

“Why are we given such large maps, so many options and no-limit animals when you can't use them?”

implies “they should not give us such large maps (or as many options, or no limit on animals)” It later became clearer you wanted smaller maps in addition to current sized maps, as I acknowledged in my previous post.

And a smaller map does not mean that I build in such detail, also a wrong interpretation on your part! You can build in detail, yes, but you can also do that with minimal effort and objects. I just meant that I don't just slap stones of the same kind into it.

I like building a lot at Planet Zoo. Also very detailed.

How else am I to interpret this, other than to mean you like detailed builds?