Install Steam
login
|
language
简体中文 (Simplified Chinese)
繁體中文 (Traditional Chinese)
日本語 (Japanese)
한국어 (Korean)
ไทย (Thai)
Български (Bulgarian)
Čeština (Czech)
Dansk (Danish)
Deutsch (German)
Español - España (Spanish - Spain)
Español - Latinoamérica (Spanish - Latin America)
Ελληνικά (Greek)
Français (French)
Italiano (Italian)
Bahasa Indonesia (Indonesian)
Magyar (Hungarian)
Nederlands (Dutch)
Norsk (Norwegian)
Polski (Polish)
Português (Portuguese - Portugal)
Português - Brasil (Portuguese - Brazil)
Română (Romanian)
Русский (Russian)
Suomi (Finnish)
Svenska (Swedish)
Türkçe (Turkish)
Tiếng Việt (Vietnamese)
Українська (Ukrainian)
Report a translation problem
Are you really saying that Frontier is a small company? They are not and this page gives a good run down on things as a whole, then you can also read the end of year report document.
https://craft.co/frontier-developments
https://www.frontier.co.uk/annual-report
Incorrect
Probably would have made sense actually...
Thousands of people are unhappy with the games performance, many refunded - many couldn't because the performance issues aren't apparent early in the game.
Many people including myself will be apprehensive about buying their next game because of this.
Some people will make a point of not buying it for this reason ^^
It doesn't make sense now no, its too late.
But it would have made sense either early into release or pre-release.
They aren't that small of a company at all, and the game has made more than enough money to justify the discussion about something like DX12 :)
Not that they'd do it now...
But the optimisation is dog ♥♥♥♥♥
Vocal minorities are exactly that - they do not represent the whole population of happy or unhappy people.
If 2000 people were vocal about being unhappy , you can safely say MUCH more people were unhappy and weren't vocal , as this is the case with anything of this nature.
Yes , that would also mean the vocal happy people are a minority - compared to the happy silent people.
And 99.9% of players would not be happy , that their parks break when they exceed a certain amount of guests regardless of hardware and graphical settings used.
Unless they are masochists...
And, it is not "so tiny" it's quite literally thousands of people - which amounts to thousands of sales, not tiny at all XD
A thousand unhappy customers can cost you ten thousand sales ( as a figure of speech )
There are lots of cases of just 1 unhappy customer costing companies millions through bad publicity , has happened quite often in the food industry - but the logic applies.
I've personally cost them at least 2 sales, excluding my own. :)
I agree , at this point it's not worth the devs time or investment.
But the game clearly wasn't tested enough - or they tested and thought
" meh, the game gradually becomes unplayable ... oh well, they won't notice until its too late to refund "
It's a game where you can create and grow your own park ... until eventually you create and grow the park too much and it breaks.
DX12 aside , they should have optimised the game for DX11 during the development , keeping a check on the hardware usage, not let it run rampant and saying sod it to limitation.
Nothing over exaggerated about the game / singular park - being unplayable after reaching a certain number of guests.
Nothing over exaggerated about it being poorly optimised / not at all optimised as it can and does reach the point of breaking through normal gameplay in a fairly short time.
Nothing I've said is over exaggerated actually.
Happy doesn't need fixing , disappointment does , and real businesses do in fact abide quite regularly to customer dissatisfaction.