no, i see that. i also see the latest news on there is the E3 teaser. dated June 11th,2014
looking at the the twitter feed, i see they did a press release, though i only see that because it got retweeted. so they told the press, but not us.
fact is, they did not bother to post anything about this here in the OFFICIAL FORUMS, which is one place where it should definitely be found. i know when i want to see if anything new has happened in Project Zomboid i go directly to the TIS official forum to find out what is going on. same with ETS 2, visit the SCS forum. i mean, what the hell is the point of having an official forum if you don't use it to let the customers know about upcoming things?
Married to "Farmer Bob" aka Ian
mother, wife, sister, daughter, bank manager, farm manager, cleaner, chef, Councillor, PC technician and all round dogs-body!
Rickenbacker wrote:So now we've seen some actual gameplay. Am I the only one who thinks it looks like FS2013 with some new particle effects?
No, no you are not. If giants new physics engine has the same level of improvement as their new graphics engine, then god help us.
Now THAT would explain why so many people are using so many crappy, ugly looking mods.
Seriously, the detail level has improved a lot. If you don't see that, you're probably comparing FS with some AAA titles with a way higher budget and way more developers and way more resources. But that doesn't work, since other games don't have the foliage that FS has. And also FS has another budget, new version every other year, not a really big developer team, not to mention the completely different target audience...
bassaddict wrote:
Seriously, the detail level has improved a lot. If you don't see that, you're probably comparing FS with some AAA titles with a way higher budget and way more developers and way more resources. But that doesn't work, since other games don't have the foliage that FS has. And also FS has another budget, new version every other year, not a really big developer team, not to mention the completely different target audience...
I'm sorry to disagree with you Bassaddict but I can't accept your comment as a serious arguments in favour of Giants.
If Giants want to sell this next edition of the game based around the fact that they have "greatly improved" both the graphics and physics of the game then surely these changes should, at the very least, be noticeable to "Mr. Average" (you know the average person who likes playing games but isn't a hard core gamer).
I tend to agree with the previous two comments that there is very little to see that is different to FS13. This plus the fact that Giants have once again given us a "Release Trailer" that doesn't actually show very much of anything doesn't help.
Just my two cents worth.
Carol. x
Married to "Farmer Bob" aka Ian
mother, wife, sister, daughter, bank manager, farm manager, cleaner, chef, Councillor, PC technician and all round dogs-body!
I don't think a fair judgment is possible until we get our hands on it.
My main concern is the physics improvements. I just disabled my mods folder (with More Realistic) to do a test. With FS 13 vanilla game physics the 18 hp Kramer can pull 20+ metric tons of trailer and grain up a steep hill. Really? And let's not even get into bale behavior.
I doubt that MR style physics will be fully implemented, and I even understand that. Giants has to appeal to the widest possible audience to maintain economic viability. That said, the game is called Farming Simulator. That "simulator" part demands at least some approximation of reality.
I don't want to sound overly critical. The FS franchise has given me many hours of enjoyment and I am grateful to Giants for that. I don't regret a single penny spent on FS games and DLCs. FS 15 will definitely be on my computer, but it may be sitting idle until Dural releases More Realistic for the new game. That is a big assumption on my part, I know. Ideally, it would not even be necessary.
Now, about graphics. No matter how much improvement there is, some people will complain. That is just a given. How many of those complainers would be happy if they had to spend a load of cash to build or purchase a new gaming rig? As Bass said, there is a different target audience for FS, and Giants is not a large studio with unlimited funds. For simple economic reasons, their games have to be playable on a wide range of hardware.
A massive, immediately noticeable “improvement” of graphics would probably require a new game engine. That would be an expensive and risky move for a small studio that sells their base game for 30 bucks or less as opposed to 50 or 60 bucks. Not to mention that existing mods would probably not be easily converted to the new game. It's a pretty safe assumption that price point and customer loyalty are important parts of the business model for a studio that serves a niche market.
Touting graphics improvements might have been a questionable move. Only time will tell. It is bound to raise expectations, many of which will probably be disappointed. If by that they mean more detailed equipment that gets dirty with use, that is what they should have said and left it at that. Improvement is a rather ambiguous and subjective phrase anyway. I'd much rather see optimization of certain aspects rather than overall "improvement". As an example, I would love to be able to kick up the view distance on crop foliage to 250 or more meters. A small bubble of rendered foliage around the player really breaks immersion. I've got foliage view distance bumped up to 120 meters on my FS 13 mod maps, but that is still far from ideal.
Photo-realistic eye candy is nice for about ten minutes. After that, physics, game mechanics, user friendly UI, etc. become the primary factors for enjoyment. I have purchased several games that look amazing, but lost any interest after a week or two. A game/simulator with good enough graphics and excellent gameplay is far more appealing, and a much better investment. Those that demand ultra-realistic visuals would be better served by saving their money and simply walking outside. Just my opinion.
I agree with a lot of what you just said, but when giants say "A new graphics and physics engine" that's what people, including myself, expect. And when they show a trailer (physics aside, that's a wait and see) that shows a nigh on identical game, then people get a bit pi**. If they hadn't of said that, I wouldn't of been that bothered by the trailer, 09-11 minor changes, 11-13 minor changes, that's what I was expecting this time until they said these things. Now I'm fixin to open up a can of whoop ass.
Absolutely. I will find it hard to blame anyone who is disappointed, or even angry. That's the danger of open-ended statements about new physics, graphics, and gameplay mechanics.
The obvious goal of any marketing strategy is to create excitement for the new, shiny product. On the other hand, it's a good idea to give some specific examples and manage expectations. Being cryptic and only giving snippets of information is setting yourself up for well deserved criticism later on. You can only disappoint people so many times before they tune you out.
I've always appreciated game/simulation creators that are more open with the development process. Regular updates with specific examples of improvements, new features, etc. are nice to have. As is welcoming feedback from the future customers before the product is finalized. Developers explaining the decision process about adding, changing, deleting this or that is a good idea as well. When people have a good idea about what the end product will be, far fewer will be disappointed.
Granted, this gives away info to competitors, but I think it does far more good than harm. Humans, in general, are social, herd creatures. Making people feel like a part of the creation process always pays off. I mean really, how many competitors does Giants have in the farming simulation genre? The Ag Sim series and Pro Farmer have some features I like, but they are vastly inferior (in my opinion). ***'s reputation for marketing unfinished, buggy games and then abandoning them is well deserved. If anything, the competition only makes Giants products look even better.
I suppose I'm only trying to manage my own expectations, and possibly others as well. Here's hoping we are all pleasantly surprised.
ok, obviously Giants has failed, again, to provide any real news about Gamescom. i know, how surprising, right?
so, i suggest you go to FS-UK and check out the news they have been posting, the interview translations, the videos.....all the **** Giants should have been doing if they understood PR.
Well, I'm going to be a miserable git again. Just seen some gameplay, and really, shouldn't this be dlc? All they seem to have done is add a couple of mods to fs 2013, build a couple of new maps, which still don't have proper fields. (no fences, hedges or dykes) It still has the same awful lod with all the detail (including crops) appearing half way down the screen. Even the new wheel tracks only seem to apply to certain surfaces. I also seen the ps4 version running, and I pray it's a work in progress because the frame rate was awful and even new things they did add, like working mirrors, were absent from this version. Damn it!
I'd rather say you've seen nothing. If you want to know what they've done, you should talk to the developers, or start reading about the new features. The difference between FS13 and FS15 will most probably be the biggest difference between two FS versions ever.
I've seen nothing? Are you mental, are you telling me the gamescon footage I've just seen of the game is just a figment of my imagination? Or was it a game masquerading as fs 15 in an attempt to make it look bad. Or is it (like you said on another topic) just giants using old assets to let people see something in action, and the "real" game will be revealed soon.
Don't tell me what I have and haven't seen again, you don't have that type of power over me.
About 90% (my estimation) of all the information about FS15 is revealed by interviews with the developers. And that information is all passed in audio (which requires understanding German) and in text form (also translated in English).
That's why I said you've seen nothing. Well, actualy in retrospect maybe I should've said "not much" instead of "nothing", but that doesn't change much about the fact that most information is not passed by pictures.
