Optimization question to the devs (poor performance during gamescom)

Hello! After watching almost every gamescom streaming I noticed that all of them had lag issues. I mentioned that last week and some people said that it could be because of the temperature of the room, but even the first streaming was laggy. And even the oficial gameplay 15min video was too. I get that that was an alpha, but you used very powerful computers that cost more than 2k euros. My question is: Is that a known issue or that is something we have to deal with once the game is released? That was the first campaign zoo and I am afraid that other bigger zoos (like the african one from e3) will be even worse.

If a dev can give us an answer about that it would be amazing. Bye!
 
Agreed I hope that the devs will be optimising the game quite a bit more as the animals a.i could be quite demanding. The planet zoo page on game debate has a poor optimisation rating too.
 
Agreed I hope that the devs will be optimising the game quite a bit more as the animals a.i could be quite demanding. The planet zoo page on game debate has a poor optimisation rating too.

How is that even possible?

How can people rate a unreleased product 2 months before launch on its performance, based on a ALPHA build.
 
This is my system features:
Msi Rx 580 Armor o.c 8gb
Amd Ryzen5 1600
Corsair DDR4 8GB 3000MHz Ram
In which graphic settings can I play this game?
 
I remember people even saying that they were disappointed the game looked different from the trailers and the pictures.. when it looks the same, its just the first few streams took place in the afternoon, and the pictures were taken in the morning or night.
 
Usually just by maxing out the graphics, even beyond what the game would be able to do on our PCs. In many cases camera movement and animations are also controlled. But graphics-wise it is all in-game. But that has been that way since game engines can render quite realistically. Still prefer it that way than having ultra-realistic CGI "cinematic trailers" that are created by a completely separate company with none of the actual in-game graphics/assets.
 
No matter how good of a computer you have, if a game is not optimized (which is true for an ALPHA build) it's not going to run top notch. The last bit of a game's development is optimizations. After everything is added in and fleshed out, the game is then optimized. In an ALPHA build, the game is currently being worked on and things are being added in. Optimization is not a big thought.
 
for the people who played at gamescom, could you tell if it was running off DirectX11 or 12 (did anyone go into Task Manager?).
Our 8 core CPU's dont want to have some of those threads lonely.
 
It is also something to bear in mind that it was very hot at gamescom, to my understanding, especially in the rooms the streamers were in. There were a lot of factors coming together to cause the alpha to lag when the streamers were playing.
 
Several people who played the game at Gamescon said the game played just fine. It was the stream that was lagging.


Why are we still having this discussion?
 
for the people who played at gamescom, could you tell if it was running off DirectX11 or 12 (did anyone go into Task Manager?).
Our 8 core CPU's dont want to have some of those threads lonely.
No core/thread is every lonely. But only one core can be used to send draw calls to the GPU. The game obviously still uses all other cores for everything else. And yes, the game runs on DX11, not 12, the devs decided that. You can't easily tell whether the game runs on one or the other anyway, especially considering none who streamed are very savvy with computers to be able to notice the subtle differences.
 
How is that even possible?

How can people rate a unreleased product 2 months before launch on its performance, based on a ALPHA build.
Maybe because Planet Coaster has these issues and is running on the same, although older, engine?
 
Top Bottom