I don't understand the negativity around FS19

[Illinois Farmer]

Oh gotcha yeah makes sense. I could see why this is too based on the majority of console games are 60 dollars.

[Vfarms]

I guess we console gamers got used to that price lol

[Illinois Farmer]

Lol yeah I guess so. I remember when the xbox one came out and the price of my first game was 60, instead of 50 like xbox 360 was, I was shocked.

[Nilt]

Yeah, console game prices are mostly inflated due to the platform's requirements. People talk about how Steam's 30% cut is too much but they seem to ignore that on console it's not just the cut of sales but also the costs imposed on developers just to deal with getting on the platform to begin with. Those costs apply to virtually every update a developer wants to do, also. Unfortunately for gamers, this is the price of convenience since those costs necessarily get passed on to the end user in some manner.

[j_maybury]

Wow! Paying over the odds for a dumbed-down game, whatever next?

[CowsGoMoo]

The high game prices for ps4 eapecially are why I don't have many games. Train Sim World 30 dollars plus west rail or whatever dlc 15 (on sale) minecraft 20 dollars, hunter call of the wild 30, gt sport 30, subnautica 30, Truck Driver, thats all about a 150 dollars in games i don't spent and never play because i didnt like them or not what i thought they would be. I still play fs19 almost every day, but it very much falls under this category too.

There are a few other games i dont play much but i didn't include because i still like the game and would recommend them, i just choose to play a different game instead.

[livesea72]

A longer development cycle would benefit both giants and its player base. A 3 year cycle would give giants longer development and testing time meaning fewer bugs at launch. They could offset the longer cycle by offering a season 2 pass or just more paid dlcs to offset the cost.I wish they would offer a demo so we could help identity problems early and help make for a more polished experience at launch.

[VMD100]

To me FS17 only really had about a year of play time at its maximum potential (release of seasons and some good UK maps.... Especially Ballincraig.. Please come to FS19) and if FS21 is set to release late 2020 the same could be said for FS19

If the dev cycle was increased perhaps seasons could come with the game, or atleast be ready at launch - increasing the games sense of value and extending its time at maximum potential. Because realistically as soon as the next title comes out all modding for the previous stops and the game stagnates.

[punchi]

Have you guys ever considered what a longer dev circle means? Giants would have to deliever more content and stuff, which could potentially have more bugs So the more time more test time thing wouldnt really matter.

[BreadedVirus]

All in all i am very happy with FS19. It is a huge improvement over 17 in many ways, with the addition of JD, CLAAS and the graphics improvement is a tremendous bonus to name a few things.

Thank you GIANTS and modders for giving my endless hours of fun.

[livesea72]

Have you guys ever considered what a longer dev circle means? Giants would have to deliever more content and stuff, which could potentially have more bugs So the more time more test time thing wouldnt really matter.

Not if they had a roadmap before development started. They could implement and test new features or polish existing ones, not cram everything into 3-6 months leaving just a few months to bug test and polish. Most game developers bug test for months even years before polishing the last few months.

[Skunkworks]

I think first and foremost that if you are a PC player, it is easier to forgive some of the glaring issues with the game due to the amazing mod community.

For console players it is a different story. There are glaring issues that is still prevailant fter having reported them since 2013. Now with the new lighting they have in Fs19, the game is much too dark on console and there not even a brightness option, which is standard almost all other games I have on console.

Don't get me wrong, I love the game and play it more than most other titles I own.

I whish however that Giants would listen a bit more to the customer playing it to address and improve on aspects that constantly get overlooked... It is not all about just adding more stuff.. Although I do lobe the choices of equipment added. It is frustrating.. And the amount of bugs Fs19 had when shipped was crazy. Why don't they have a beta program for us to help them....?

[this_is_gav]

For console players it is a different story. There are glaring issues that is still prevailant fter having reported them since 2013. Now with the new lighting they have in Fs19, the game is much too dark on console and there not even a brightness option, which is standard almost all other games I have on console.

I'd argue the other way, that the game is much too bright in places, and I have a calibrated monitor which is, generally, a bit less bright than most TVs and monitors.

I think a lot of that comes down to the (in my opinion annoying) switching of light, where depending on which direction you look in compared to the sun, the game either horribly over blows the light (to the point most detail is lost) or understates it (to the point where blacks are crushed). This is why I describe FS19's style as looking somewhat "post-apocalyptic", more suited to Fallout than a simulator.

I understand why it's there, it just doesn't look very good in my opinion. It gives the impression every day is like a sunny winter morning, when the sun is so low you you can barely see anything due to the extreme light or everything is in too much shadow.

Granted PC users do have a brightness option to tone it down a little (though everything then becomes too dark) but the underlying issue isn't brightness vs darkness - it's both. It should be much, much more subtle. This is why FS17, while looking worse in places technically, generally looks far more natural.

[BulletBill]

I'd argue the other way, that the game is much too bright in places, and I have a calibrated monitor which is, generally, a bit less bright than most TVs and monitors.

I think a lot of that comes down to the (in my opinion annoying) switching of light, where depending on which direction you look in compared to the sun, the game either horribly over blows the light (to the point most detail is lost) or understates it (to the point where blacks are crushed). This is why I describe FS19's style as looking somewhat "post-apocalyptic", more suited to Fallout than a simulator.

I understand why it's there, it just doesn't look very good in my opinion. It gives the impression every day is like a sunny winter morning, when the sun is so low you you can barely see anything due to the extreme light or everything is in too much shadow.

Granted PC users do have a brightness option to tone it down a little (though everything then becomes too dark) but the underlying issue isn't brightness vs darkness - it's both. It should be much, much more subtle. This is why FS17, while looking worse in places technically, generally looks far more natural.

Couldn't agree more...

Something I always liked about previous Farm Sim versions was the overall lighting while not technically advanced, maintained a nice balance throughout. It made it feel appealing, somewhere you enjoyed being.

[Stevo0114]

It would be nice if Giants could work with a select few modders going forward i.e realusmus modding,BSM,Bulletbill to name but a few i think we could get a more rounded complete game at launch then move forward during life cycle!!