Will they ever optimize the damn game?

[BlackViper]

its not fun when you build on haf youre "map" and it dips from 120 fps to 30-40...
RTX 3080Ti 12GB and a I9 9900k .. like iknow its the game comon. i want to buy the other DLCS cause i own almost all of them but seriously when you cant even play the game fully before it turns to ♥♥♥♥ its not worth my money.

[TeaPanda]

I think any game would have a lower fps if it had as many objects rendered at once as we tend to have in our zoos (especially when you decorate a lot with plants and rocks). I don't think they have done a bad job as I can play on my really old laptop almost as well as my desktop. Also 30-40 fps is still perfectly playable in my opinion considering the human eye can only see between 30-60 fps anyway.

[rajirrah]

Planet Zoo doesn't actually depend on the GPU as much as it does the CPU. And also the memory required to keep the game running well. The listed minimum and recommended requirements for memory really needs to be updated on the game specs as I just needed to upgrade my memory to 32gb to keep my game from crashing.

If you want to see where your whole computer is clocking when you are running the game a simple analysis is shown using the task manager under the performance tab. It will tell you how much demand there is on your CPU, your GPU and your memory. You can see where your system is bogging down by pulling up that window while the game is running.

As far as your question they aren't likely to optimize the game as they would need to begin again from scratch. The high end computer hardware is, as always, outrunning the software foundations for the games we play. A complete remake of this game would be like rebuilding the foundation of a house without moving the house.

[TeaPanda]

Originally posted by rajirrah:

Planet Zoo doesn't actually depend on the GPU as much as it does the CPU. And also the memory required to keep the game running well. The listed minimum and recommended requirements for memory really needs to be updated on the game specs as I just needed to upgrade my memory to 32gb to keep my game from crashing.

Hmm that just sounds like a problem with your PC. I'm running the game on high quality settings in a large zoo on a laptop that is 6 years old and it is running just fine and only using 10GB of RAM (out of 16GB available).

[Wylie28]

You can't negate physics. The more guests and things that need rendered, the more work needs done PER FRAME.

The more work done PER FRAME. The less frames get rendered PER SECOND.

Its physics bud. You can't just ignore it. In a game that doesn't have limitations you will always be able to exceed what your hardware is capable of.

And 9900k is old anyway. Get with the times.

[Wylie28]

Originally posted by MoonRae:

I think any game would have a lower fps if it had as many objects rendered at once as we tend to have in our zoos (especially when you decorate a lot with plants and rocks). I don't think they have done a bad job as I can play on my really old laptop almost as well as my desktop. Also 30-40 fps is still perfectly playable in my opinion considering the human eye can only see between 30-60 fps anyway.

Eyes don't see in FPS. And human eyes can see rates well above that. There are games I cannot player under 130fps. Such an example is Doom Eternal, or another is Redout. I need more information for my brain to be able to differentiate everything moving on screen so quickly from each other. (autism/adhd really impacts such things)

[Jay]

I got it to work smoothly by setting it as "high priority" in task manager, I also set my max ping on steam to 1500, and turned off the stupid xbox game bar thing windows has. Absolutely ridiculously sped up the game, no lag whatsoever now, whereas before I definitely had a lot. Now if only it would stop crashing, lol.

[BlackViper]

Originally posted by Wylie28:

You can't negate physics. The more guests and things that need rendered, the more work needs done PER FRAME.

The more work done PER FRAME. The less frames get rendered PER SECOND.

Its physics bud. You can't just ignore it. In a game that doesn't have limitations you will always be able to exceed what your hardware is capable of.

And 9900k is old anyway. Get with the times.

oh yea sure and yet games that demand Way more and show waaaay more on the screen works perfectly fine. but i get it, you are one of those muppets who thinks you are smart.

i have dealth with PCs since i was 6. iknow how they work.
still comes down to the game beeing poorly built since i can play waaay to hell of more demanding games then this one.

Yes you are right fill the MAP with 500000 people and 40 animals sure..
but i can not have more then like 15 animals and bearly even fill 3/10ths of the map before it starts lagging. even some scenarios lag after i build 3-4 extra animals.. have bearly touched anything else then the main missions...

[Khasa]

Originally posted by Wylie28:

You can't negate physics. The more guests and things that need rendered, the more work needs done PER FRAME.
.

Well, for me game startted to lag even in empty map after the last patch. There were no problems before with same settings.

[BlackViper]

Originally posted by Khasa:

Originally posted by Wylie28:

You can't negate physics. The more guests and things that need rendered, the more work needs done PER FRAME.
.

Well, for me game startted to lag even in empty map after the last patch. There were no problems before with same settings.

exactly. since the beginning of release it was utter trash.. back then i had a failing 2080. now i have a 3080ti and i can play quite well tbh. 120 fps.. more then i need. i just need 60.
but even in scenarios where it wants me to rebuild stuff... i dont even put down trees and make pathways.. i have absolutely no imagination. i dont do these big ass parks you see on youtube.. anyays, even in scenarios i just add like 5 animals to the "panda" place.. nothing else, then 5 smal habitats and 2 animals in each and bam... 40 fps.. constantly.. goes with every single mission kind off.. and playing the sandbox is even worse.. even if i set population of visitors to 0.

[rajirrah]

Originally posted by MoonRae:

Hmm that just sounds like a problem with your PC. I'm running the game on high quality settings in a large zoo on a laptop that is 6 years old and it is running just fine and only using 10GB of RAM (out of 16GB available).

Nothing wrong with my PC. I just work it to heck and back. Especially in Planet Zoo. I admittedly make some buildings with way too many parts to them and that doesn't help. I'm not saying everyone will need more than 16gb memory either, but I was actually not expecting my game to be clocking that much memory usage and believe Frontier might want to revisit the Minimum and Recommended memory for this game. I don't believe they have changed those numbers since launch, many many DLC's ago.

I've got a zoo now that is nearly filling the entire map and no limits on visitors. Not sure how many animals at this time. but I wasn't able to do that before I got more ram.

[BlackViper]

Originally posted by rajirrah:

Originally posted by MoonRae:

Hmm that just sounds like a problem with your PC. I'm running the game on high quality settings in a large zoo on a laptop that is 6 years old and it is running just fine and only using 10GB of RAM (out of 16GB available).

Nothing wrong with my PC. I just work it to heck and back. Especially in Planet Zoo. I admittedly make some buildings with way too many parts to them and that doesn't help. I'm not saying everyone will need more than 16gb memory either, but I was actually not expecting my game to be clocking that much memory usage and believe Frontier might want to revisit the Minimum and Recommended memory for this game. I don't believe they have changed those numbers since launch, many many DLC's ago.

I've got a zoo now that is nearly filling the entire map and no limits on visitors. Not sure how many animals at this time. but I wasn't able to do that before I got more ram.

RAM has absolutely nothing to do with it lol.
Motherboard - Rog Strix Z390-H Gaming
Processor - Intel i9 9900K
GPU - ASUS GeForce RTX 3080 Ti 12GB STRIX GAMING OC
PC Case - Corsair Obsidian 500D RGB SE
RAM - 32GB Corsair Vengeance RGB PRO 3600Ghz
CPU Cooling - Corsair Hydro H100i RGB Platinum
Fans x6 - Corsair LL Series LL120 RGB

way more ram then you.
runs like garbage.

[rajirrah]

Originally posted by BlackViper:

RAM has absolutely nothing to do with it lol.
Motherboard - Rog Strix Z390-H Gaming
Processor - Intel i9 9900K
GPU - ASUS GeForce RTX 3080 Ti 12GB STRIX GAMING OC
PC Case - Corsair Obsidian 500D RGB SE
RAM - 32GB Corsair Vengeance RGB PRO 3600Ghz
CPU Cooling - Corsair Hydro H100i RGB Platinum
Fans x6 - Corsair LL Series LL120 RGB

way more ram then you.
runs like garbage.

I have exactly the same ram as you have. Your CPU is bottle-necking your nice system. Any system is only as good as it's worst component.

[BlackViper]

Originally posted by rajirrah:

Originally posted by BlackViper:

RAM has absolutely nothing to do with it lol.
Motherboard - Rog Strix Z390-H Gaming
Processor - Intel i9 9900K
GPU - ASUS GeForce RTX 3080 Ti 12GB STRIX GAMING OC
PC Case - Corsair Obsidian 500D RGB SE
RAM - 32GB Corsair Vengeance RGB PRO 3600Ghz
CPU Cooling - Corsair Hydro H100i RGB Platinum
Fans x6 - Corsair LL Series LL120 RGB

way more ram then you.
runs like garbage.

I have exactly the same ram as you have. Your CPU is bottle-necking your nice system. Any system is only as good as it's worst component.

nah its not my cpu/pc. i run every single damn game of over the 300 i got on steam just fine. there is only 2 games that ♥♥♥♥♥ up, this game and cities skylines.

[rajirrah]

You'll figure it out some day........

[Kal]

Its what happen when you try to use the same game engine made for Planet Coaster and try to shove another game on top of it. So disappointed I bought this game. NOTHING WORKS!!!!