"SPARKY1922;c-17910879" wrote:
"ironknight35;c-17908773" wrote:
"ncisGibbs02;c-17908621" wrote:
"ironknight35;c-17908611" wrote:
Was hoping it would be bigger. They probably made it small for the people that play on toasters. People really need to get a new PC or upgrade them if they want to play PC games. I used to play on a very low-end PC, but I recently bought a high-end one to be able to play without lagging.
Sometimes it’s the cost of computers and it takes time to save. I’m saving up for a new computer.
More power = more Sims! ????
I hope you get it soon! It really is a huge difference playing on a good PC. My comment was probably a bit too harsh, but I just feel like they could do more if they didn't keep low-end PCs in mind. It just feels like it's holding the game back.
I completely agree with this as why should I suffer because I am prepared to pay out for a performance PC? Do other game companies downgrade the game just because players can't or won't upgrade their PC's? I only ask because I don't understand how game companies work in general around this area?
I play both Sims 4 and the Truck Simulator games, both long runners (Sims 4 came out in 2014; Euro Truck Simulator 2 came out in 2012 and American Truck Simulator in 2016.)
On the Sims 4 forums, people complain that EA is doing too much to keep system requirements low and not enough to take advantage of new hardware to make their gameworld bigger or update graphics or fix bugs or whatever.
On the Truck Sim forums, people whinge that SCS Software isn't doing enough to keep system requirements low and that "I shouldn't have to buy a new computer to play a game I bought 9 years ago", because SCS has added everything from full DirectX 11 support (that's how old the game is—at launch it supported DX9!) to SSAO and HDR lighting effects to a massive amount of map DLC (ETS2 was basically Germany and the UK when it launched and is just about all of Europe now, while ATS started with just California and now has 9 western states with two more coming as confirmed/announced DLC.)
The moral of the story is that you're guaranteed to anger
someone whenever you have to deal with a super long-running game that's active many years after you launch it (heck, look at
World of Warcraft, which came out in 2004 and which Blizzard has to keep current so it doesn't feel and look like a relic today compared to other MMO games). Keep it accessible and people complain about the technical restraints. Keep up with developments in tech and game design and older players feel left behind or like they have to buy a new computer. You're pretty much boned either way.
