Let's ask the hard questions about FS19

[j_maybury]

1- How badly pixelated is the background going to be? the first shots look really bad!
2 - Is FS19 really only going to have one CPU core = two threads?.........REALLY!!!
3 - How is the Frame Rate going to hold up once all the new mod start pouring in with all the extra farm building and peripherals there is going to be mods for?
4 - Will, there ever be a time when we will see decent Traffic AI on the roads?
5 - The shading is looking very bad on moving vehicles, will this get fixed in time for the launch?
Is there any chance of getting a satisfying answer to any of these Questions?

Feel free to add any other questions you can think of that may show that Giants should not rest on their laurels.

[redglasses]

Remember that that was all work in progress footage, wait until the gamescom trailer to really judge the game.

[Earnest Pea]

Who says FS19 will only support 2 threads? On 17, on my current machine, the game starts up 6 threads. I find it hard to believe that they would decide to start limiting you to 2 threads for the next game.

[cmdrbyron]

I would offer that you need to better define the specific information you are requesting, and a willingness to accept a significant range to the answer, because of the range of users and equipment the game is being designed to play across (amongst many other factors). Right now, the answer to all of them is likely "it depends".

As for your last request of "getting a satisfying answer" to your questions, I already suspect the answer is "no", because of the way in which you asked your questions where you give me the impression that you already have what you consider to be "acceptable" answers in mind, and anything other will just be leveraged maliciously (intentionally or otherwise). Your closing statement "show that Giants should not rest on their laurels" re-affirms this (for me).

I believe that, unlike many other Game Developers, Giants is far more pro-active in developing the franchise (not "resting on their laurels", as you put it). Not saying they are perfect, but I believe them to be "better than most". Sometimes it can be difficult to discern the improvements that were made to the game, especially in the realms of graphics/performance. As an example, consider the implementation of dynamic fill-planes. Not something easily accomplished, and definitely not "required" as a part of the core gameplay experience - yet it was implemented. Consider as well, the expansion of crop types (with associated equipment).

They may not be making huge strides in any one aspect, but (to me) they continue to make noticeable progress across many aspects.

Personally? Had the questions been posed more objectively (without the negative connotation you have employed, and having actually done some legitimate research) and not used such inflammatory language, your questions may be better received.

[Old-an-Slow]

Can't count pixels in preview media. Not fair to anyone since graphics can change up to the last minute. I've put a crazy amount of hours into each of the last three versions of FS and trust Giants to deliver an improved sequel, just like all the others. How much improvement is subjective but I have confidence that improvements will be noticeable across the board.

My question would be what improvements have been made to the quality of online play in terms of how responsive controls are, updating ground state and ease of connectivity to others. Probably will have to wait for release for specifics like that.

[TacoFarmer]

Will character customization include an I Love Tacos hat?

[j_maybury]

Who says FS19 will only support 2 threads? On 17, on my current machine, the game starts up 6 threads. I find it hard to believe that they would decide to start limiting you to 2 threads for the next game.

Have a look at this video from Hubcap..... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S76OdWLAD2k

[Earnest Pea]

Have a look at this video from Hubcap..... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S76OdWLAD2k

You're taking "expert" opinion from a guy running a Condor seeder at 50 kph? He says that 19 will have no better performance than 17 and you won't be able to run at 1440 or better (I'll assume he's talking resolution and means 1440p). I run 17 at 2160p on high (I can actually run it at very high but noticed the occasional hiccup). My install is currently using more than one core (6 threads). I'll take what I know to be true over hearsay from someone I don't know.

[Smith Modding]

Then something is wrong with his PC because with my specs I get 60FPS on max settings, and it only drops when I'm looking at 5-10 vehicles in one spot, but even then it's to maybe 53FPS

[j_maybury]

As for your last request of "getting a satisfying answer" to your questions, I already suspect the answer is "no", because of the way in which you asked your questions where you give me the impression that you already have what you consider to be "acceptable" answers in mind, and anything other will just be leveraged maliciously (intentionally or otherwise). Your closing statement "show that Giants should not rest on their laurels" re-affirms this (for me).
Personally? Had the questions been posed more objectively (without the negative connotation you have employed, and having actually done some legitimate research) and not used such inflammatory language, your questions may be better received.

I don't believe that the questions I have asked are in any way too harsh, but they need to be asked, If this game is ever to go forwards, you know full well how bad these games perform in multiplayer mode and the fact that they are now adding building you're own farm, razes a massive red flag for me! I can envision the frame rates being even worse than those of FS15, this for me is an issue that needs to be addressed.

[Smith Modding]

When was the frame rate ever bad? In either game? Even on a PC that didn't meet minimum specifications, I got a decent 30FPS or so on a vanilla game in FS15, and FS17 runs really well on my new PC(s). I get a steady 60FPS which is good to me, are you expecting like 120FPS or something?

[Earnest Pea]

but they need to be asked, If this game is ever to go forwards, you know full well how bad these games perform in multiplayer mode and the fact that they are now adding building you're own farm, razes a massive red flag for me! I can envision the frame rates being even worse than those of FS15, this for me is an issue that needs to be addressed.

These questions don't need to be asked. I doubt that you asking these questions is going to radically affect the course of this game. The developers will (as always) put their best effort forward. They do this because they take pride in their creation not to mention a financial interest in seeing it succeed. They have stated numerous times that they don't talk about features until those features work to their satisfaction. Based on that, and experience with previous releases, I'm fairly certain 19 is something to look forward too. If you don't agree, you, as always, are free to take a pass on this one. I, on the other hand, have already preordered.

[j_maybury]

You're taking "expert" opinion from a guy running a Condor seeder at 50 kph? He says that 19 will have no better performance than 17 and you won't be able to run at 1440 or better (I'll assume he's talking resolution and means 1440p). I run 17 at 2160p on high (I can actually run it at very high but noticed the occasional hiccup). My install is currently using more than one core (6 threads). I'll take what I know to be true over hearsay from someone I don't know.

It is clearly showing in the bottom left corner that the CPU maxes out at 25% usage on a quad-core chip, what he is driving has no relevance to the outcome. If you can't handle facts don't bother to comment, can you even prove the game is running on 6 threads or is that what you have running in the background? Either way, I would like to know the true answer.

[j_maybury]

Then something is wrong with his PC because with my specs I get 60FPS on max settings, and it only drops when I'm looking at 5-10 vehicles in one spot, but even then it's to maybe 53FPS

Hi smith modding, On this particular topic we are talking about the number of cores the game is using not the number of frames per second.

[Earnest Pea]

It is clearly showing in the bottom left corner that the CPU maxes out at 25% usage on a quad-core chip, what he is driving has no relevance to the outcome. If you can't handle facts don't bother to comment, can you even prove the game is running on 6 threads or is that what you have running in the background? Either way, I would like to know the true answer.

Actually, what he's running is quite relevant as I believe he's doing his darnest to stress the system by have the program perform in ways that it wasn't intended too. I'm sure I could max out my machine as well if push it hard enough (what he appears to be doing).

As for threads, here's a short clip from my log.txt (the relevant part is in bold):

Device: Generic Software
Render System
Driver: Direct 3D 11
Card Vendor: AMD/ATI
Renderer: AMD Radeon (TM) RX 580
Version: 24.20.11021.1000 (7.6.2018)
Revision: 199
Feature level: DirectX 11 ON
Info: Effective window resolution 3840 x 2160
Started 6 threads for threadpool 'Render threadpool'
Hardware Profile
Level: High (forced)