CS2 hits Mostly Negative on recent Steam Reviews

[lukassooo]

Anyone asking for increased patch cadence, should aske themselves, how it would actually help?

That is a serious question. Game has many issues and requires many, many fixes and updates.
Here we have seriously consider what kind of time scope we are looking at. It is not weeks or even months, it is much more.
Having increased patch cadence will just slow down this process, less fixe, less updates overall for a very small short-term benefits. Do we really want that?

The small, regular patches might sound great, but how much are they actually worth if they do not address major issues and actually slow down work on those?

Let's ask ourselves, do we want the game to be reasonably patched or updated in 1 year time or 2 years time? Yest, that's the time scale we are working here with.
Myself I would prefer lower patch cadence, but overall better game in 1 year, than weekly small updates and waiting another year or 2 for actual, measurable improvements.

so basically you are saying that glass of water in spoons of water is less than glass ?^^

 

[BabylonDK]

I wonder if CO has given up ?
I see they're hiring lots of Senior positions now so I have a few questions for them.

1. Does that mean they have admitted internally they can't fix the game with the current team (surely hasn't been fixed in the 4 months its been out yet).
2. Will we ever get rid of the many bug reports and performance issues. Every "weekly word" seems to be downplaying the impact and issues with the game, if the fans even remotely says its broken, the defense is to mention CS1 and that it is similar to that. Like "We don't understand what the problem is, it was working almost like that in CS1".
3. Do CO plan to stop pushing meaningless weekly words out, and address the elephant in the room and start owning up to the issues and mistakes?. I mean EA did that with Battlefield, and may have saved the entire franchise in the future. CO managed to kill a very praised and successful franchise without any competition, at least EA had COD to worry about. Someone surely should get a award internally in CO for this achievement.
4. Do CO and Paradox plan to issues a FORMAL apologi to the fans, and come with a plan to compensate the fans and early adapter of the game from the time they can't play the game - We paid a premium price for a broken game that hasn't even been able to deliver close to what it was said to do.
5. What about a OPEN ROADMAP to allow fans to have a look into the machineroom and be able to see that CO is in fact working on the game. Right now there is NO sign of this, besides the forced and meaningless weekly messages that provide NO INSIGHT OR VALUE.

This will be my last pre-order and PDX & CO game even remotely close to the launch. NEVER AGAIN.

I was fooled by EA, but this hurt me. Paradox and CO.. Shame on you !

 

[Reid777]

so basically you are saying that glass of water in spoons of water is less than glass ?^^

Emm, no.

 

[TWiCS]

We'll keep working on the game as planned. Eventually we'll see what comes out of it. We still won't tolerate toxicity. Constructive criticism and feedback is always welcome. I'll write something about the feedback process in the next word of the week, thanks for the suggestion!

Please do,
from Steams Major Kudos

 

[unoace1006]

@co_martsu, thank you for the response and you're welcome.

I do think you're making a mistake here, carrying on regardless - it's not working Mariina, you're failing your paying customers by refusing to countenance an increased patching cadence. I understand you're a small team trying to get to grips with some very large problems, and all the negativity surrounding the game must have come as an unpleasant surprise after the positivity CS1 engendered, but surely you have to change course at some point and implement a new plan to get out of this mess?

Honestly, I admire the way you're sticking to your guns in the face of such an onslaught, but it can't carry on like this.

I hear what you’re saying. I also think the community has asked for substantial fixed snd improvements. I myself suggested monthly or bimonthly patches.

The CO team charted a path to improve the game. We can agree or disagree with that approach; and at some point we have to accept the course they’ve charted.

I remain very upset overall but I acknowledge that CO did their level best to explain that a faster patch cadence comes at the expense of substantive game updates.

In other words, many small patches might be slower than fewer larger patches. Again, we will see if this theory proves itself true.

 

[ClemiMD]

so basically you are saying that glass of water in spoons of water is less than glass ?^^

He is saying that it's better to let the patient heal his broken arm than to just change the bandage and give a painkiller every week.

 

[Mazisky]

I think we will know if the new patching process (less but bigger) is worth it by judging the next patch notes.

If the patch is big and fix a lot of issues, than it is worth it to wait a bit more between patches.

If it is just few bugfixes like last patches + modding support I will start to lose hope.

 

[TripleAgent]

The CO team charted a path to improve the game. We can agree or disagree with that approach; and at some point we have to accept the course they’ve charted.

They haven't charted anything though, there's no roadmap and CO/PDX refuses to release one, it's been 5 months since release and the game has only progressed from "very broken" to "fairly broken," and we have no idea what they're working on. The new WoWs don't touch on any of that, they just describe how the game is intended to work (and how it's not working).

 

[Co_SeaofThieves]

We'll keep working on the game as planned. Eventually we'll see what comes out of it. We still won't tolerate toxicity. Constructive criticism and feedback is always welcome. I'll write something about the feedback process in the next word of the week, thanks for the suggestion!

Working on the game as planned, is clearly not working for you. Look at your reviews and influencers. How about changing your plan to fix the game, then work on it as planned (which I'm sure means DLC), once its fixed. Look at all the reports in the bug forums of crashing after a few minutes for a lot of people. We cannot play the game and have to wait months between possible patches. I'll be banned soon, I'm sure, but this is not toxic, its a legitimate concern.

 

[unoace1006]

They haven't charted anything though, there's no roadmap and CO/PDX refuses to release one, it's been 5 months since release and the game has only progressed from "very broken" to "fairly broken," and we have no idea what they're working on. The new WoWs don't touch on any of that, they just describe how the game is intended to work (and how it's not working).

I understand your frustration friend and I also appreciate the fact that you want to know more about what's going to happen moving forward. Unfortunately, they've said as much as they're comfortable saying.

The roadmap, in my opinion, is laid out in WoTW#9.

1. Public Beta version of code modding and Paradox Mods will be available in the live build by the end of March
2. Public Beta version of Map editing available in the live build together with code modding or soon after
3. Public Beta version of Asset editing to be announced, only after the technical issues are sorted can we roll out the tool
4. Continue to work on the modding support and get out of the Beta stage during the Finnish fall
5. CCPs/Expansion along with patches.
   1. bug fixes and performance improvements
6. [Continue to work on] console versions

That's it. This is both the roadmap and what they're working on everyday. That's the best they can give us right now. We can certainly voice our disapproval, but I also think it's time we accept this as the official roadmap. If they could confidently commit to more, they would. I think even this vision could be an over-promise and under-deliver trap. I hope it isn't.

hopefully an awesome patch lands on March 28th or so.

 

[Daedalos_MS]

I understand your frustration friend and I also appreciate the fact that you want to know more about what's going to happen moving forward. Unfortunately, they've said as much as they're comfortable saying.

The roadmap, in my opinion, is laid out in WoTW#9.

1. Public Beta version of code modding and Paradox Mods will be available in the live build by the end of March
2. Public Beta version of Map editing available in the live build together with code modding or soon after
3. Public Beta version of Asset editing to be announced, only after the technical issues are sorted can we roll out the tool
4. Continue to work on the modding support and get out of the Beta stage during the Finnish fall
5. CCPs/Expansion along with patches.
   1. bug fixes and performance improvements
6. [Continue to work on] console versions

That's it. This is both the roadmap and what they're working on everyday. That's the best they can give us right now. We can certainly voice our disapproval, but I also think it's time we accept this as the official roadmap. If they could confidently commit to more, they would. I think even this vision could be an over-promise and under-deliver trap. I hope it isn't.

hopefully an awesome patch lands on March 28th or so.

Thanks for reminding the road map from the WoW9. When I looked at the dates one question popped in my head > If CO started to build CS2 with mod support in their mind, what went wrong that the mods would be fully supported almost a year after release?

I am not trying to be hatefull or toxic, I am just curious. Yes, I can understand and write simple code, but I never worked on project of this magnitude, so I cannot imagine the problems they have to face. And as we already have working mod platform in Thunderstore, which is working fine for me, I would like to know more on what CO is working on. For example if they are trying to build a tools where everyone, like me who can code a little, could tweak the game to their liking. If yes, it would be awesome.

But, again if Thunderstore and their app is doing fine job, why something similar is not deployed by CO. I mean something like: here you have a platform you can tinker with and we will add robust tool and support later.

 

[Co_SeaofThieves]

If the patch is big and fix a lot of issues, than it is worth it to wait a bit more between patches.

There's a crashing issues affecting quite a few people, preventing us even playing the game
This occurred since the last patch for me, so now I have to just wait an undetermined amount of time, yeah, not a good plan, imo.

 

[CensoredLOL]

We still won't tolerate toxicity.

Sigh.

Disclaimer:
Mentions of "you" below refer to CO, not you as an individual.

@co_martsu Mariina, Thank you a lot for engaging with the community outside of a WoTW. It's becoming increasingly rare to see it.

But "toxicity" is not an excuse or a catch-all word CO can use anytime CO wants to avoid criticism. Sure, threats, violence, hate speech, etc. are all toxic, and should be dealt with as harshly as you deem fit... but criticism, sarcasm, apathy, and anger are not toxic, especially when the root cause of all of those IS THE GAME. We have a saying here in the US - "You made your bed, now sleep in it".

It's hard getting paid to get yelled at by random netizens, I get it - but that is what a leader does when the **** hits the fan. If things go south, they take the front line and handle it. To us, it doesn't feel like this is being handled. We don't have a warm and fuzzy feeling that CO is doing everything they can to assuage doubts, generate goodwill, and interact with the community with the hopes of finding a resolution. We don't have a roadmap, we don't know what you are working on, we don't know the cadence of bugfix releases that are CRITICAL to maintaining engagement by some of your most committed players from CS1. People are quitting this game because of lack of communication from CO. They might stay quit because of how communication has been handled thus far.

You have a community manager that hasn't posted since January 25th. Where's Avanya? Why don't you have multiple people interacting on ALL the threads on the main forum? Even some information (even if it isn't concrete) gives people a sense that you care about the community, and WANT to interact with us (as you have stated many, many times). The best way to come back from that lack of communication is actually to communicate - not post stripped down basics of how the simulation should work (but doesn't).

I'm challenging you to respond to this - hopes are not high - but you gotta do something to win back the community's (read: your clientele's) trust. I'm doing this out of care, nostalgia, and the enjoyment I got out of CS1. You made a great game, once, and I think you can get there again. But you need to do more before the people who you intend to buy all of your DLCs decide not to because of this disaster of a launch.

 

[unoace1006]

Thanks for reminding the road map from the WoW9. When I looked at the dates one question popped in my head > If CO started to build CS2 with mod support in their mind, what went wrong that the mods would be fully supported almost a year after release?

I am not trying to be hatefull or toxic, I am just curious. Yes, I can understand and write simple code, but I never worked on project of this magnitude, so I cannot imagine the problems they have to face. And as we already have working mod platform in Thunderstore, which is working fine for me, I would like to know more on what CO is working on. For example if they are trying to build a tools where everyone, like me who can code a little, could tweak the game to their liking. If yes, it would be awesome.

But, again if Thunderstore and their app is doing fine job, why something similar is not deployed by CO. I mean something like: here you have a platform you can tinker with and we will add robust tool and support later.

Not a problem I don't think you're being toxic at all. All fair questions/thoughts, IMO.

I think that's a great question and only CO can answer definitively, but many have voiced theories about the difficulties of working with an incomplete technology stack (i.e; Unity 2022.3) and as a result, having to make custom solutions for certain things. You have that happen enough times and all of a sudden it's October 2023 and the Editor isn't complete or worse, you realize you need yet another custom solution, etc.

If you haven't read this blog, it corroborates some of the custom solutions pieces I've mentioned.

Why Cities: Skylines 2 performs poorly

 

[Daedalos_MS]

Not a problem I don't think you're being toxic at all. All fair questions/thoughts, IMO.

I think that's a great question and only CO can answer definitively, but many have voiced theories about the difficulties of working with an incomplete technology stack (i.e; Unity 2022.3) and as a result, having to make custom solutions for certain things. You have that happen enough times and all of a sudden it's October 2023 and the Editor isn't complete or worse, you realize you need yet another custom solution, etc.

If you haven't read this blog, it corroborates some of the custom solutions pieces I've mentioned.

Why Cities: Skylines 2 performs poorly

Thanks for the link to article, I finished roughly the first third and I will take the rest of the article to bed.

When I try to piece everything said together to make sense of it: incomplete technology, complex simulation game, state of the game once released, releasing fixes which are not solving the problem, silence regarding terms when something would be done, it all make sense.

Now I imagine CS2 as a huge house of cards, where before the release card near the bottom of the structure had issue and need it to be replaced. As they were trying to fix the problem, the whole house of cards fall apart. And now it is hard for CO pin point the problems and fix them. Where it seems that that try one thing and another is broken. Where as the times goes the solution is still hidden for them. And fixes could be right around the corner, or they can find them in a week, a month, or even a year or more from now.

With this on the table I can understand the silence we are receiving, the CO simply do not know and if they would told us that it is possible the game would be fixed in more than a year, a lot of gamers would ask for refund.

Apology to CO for next part, but if they are focusing on mod support, it could be because they believe the community will fix a lot of problems game has. Like it happen with CS1. And even now for example land value mods are addressing the issue better then the developers are capable to do so. Plus the mod support will add variety game really need.

And with the focus CO has on consoles, yes the optimization would be beneficial also for us, but IMHO the crucial point is monetization of the game and I cannot blame the CO. After all, it is their job and they are responsible to the publisher and that is responsible to investors. We, gamers, may not like it, but it is business in the end and we are at the proverbial end of the food chain (eventhough we are the ones who brings the money on the table).

And with this I am putting aside the CS2, this and Steam forum for a very long time. You can find me playing and on forum for Workers & Resources: Soviet Republic, as that is my next gaming stop for a near future.

 

[mauporte]

We'll keep working on the game as planned. Eventually we'll see what comes out of it. We still won't tolerate toxicity. Constructive criticism and feedback is always welcome. I'll write something about the feedback process in the next word of the week, thanks for the suggestion!

PSA: it's useless to try to make them understand our position as customers since it's part of their culture in general:
to act like they know better for everyone's sake (paternalism), to act as if they are superior (supremacism), and to be eurocentric.

They also earn a lot of money and have a lot of benefits that some of us commenting here will never have even though we work harder jobs, so they are also spoiled rich people with no empathy, completely disconnected from reality. That is why complaints are too much for them to handle...

 

[Ashreon]

Sigh.

Disclaimer:
Mentions of "you" below refer to CO, not you as an individual.

@co_martsu Mariina, Thank you a lot for engaging with the community outside of a WoTW. It's becoming increasingly rare to see it.

But "toxicity" is not an excuse or a catch-all word CO can use anytime CO wants to avoid criticism. Sure, threats, violence, hate speech, etc. are all toxic, and should be dealt with as harshly as you deem fit... but criticism, sarcasm, apathy, and anger are not toxic, especially when the root cause of all of those IS THE GAME. We have a saying here in the US - "You made your bed, now sleep in it".

It's hard getting paid to get yelled at by random netizens, I get it - but that is what a leader does when the **** hits the fan. If things go south, they take the front line and handle it. To us, it doesn't feel like this is being handled. We don't have a warm and fuzzy feeling that CO is doing everything they can to assuage doubts, generate goodwill, and interact with the community with the hopes of finding a resolution. We don't have a roadmap, we don't know what you are working on, we don't know the cadence of bugfix releases that are CRITICAL to maintaining engagement by some of your most committed players from CS1. People are quitting this game because of lack of communication from CO. They might stay quit because of how communication has been handled thus far.

You have a community manager that hasn't posted since January 25th. Where's Avanya? Why don't you have multiple people interacting on ALL the threads on the main forum? Even some information (even if it isn't concrete) gives people a sense that you care about the community, and WANT to interact with us (as you have stated many, many times). The best way to come back from that lack of communication is actually to communicate - not post stripped down basics of how the simulation should work (but doesn't).

I'm challenging you to respond to this - hopes are not high - but you gotta do something to win back the community's (read: your clientele's) trust. I'm doing this out of care, nostalgia, and the enjoyment I got out of CS1. You made a great game, once, and I think you can get there again. But you need to do more before the people who you intend to buy all of your DLCs decide not to because of this disaster of a launch.

You made such an eloquent reply and it's just.. Sadly such a waste of time as this is, in their mind, the fault of the community (even said that). So, this is somewhat of a stalemate now. The community keeps getting more frustrated, CO interacts less and less. The community gives more negative ratings. It is going to hurt sales and that's what I don't get.

Sure, an apology is going to draw headlines; "ERHMEHGERD CEO OF COLOSSAL ORDER APOLOGIZED FOR DISASTROUS LAUNCH AND GAMEPLAY" for a week and that's it. Done. Healing can begin. Community will still be frustrated and on edge for a bit, but actions do speak louder than words (a roadmap would seriously be nice) and successfully addressing the complains would show people that CO do take it seriously. It might even turn the negative review spiral around.

Right now, most people probably feel scammed and I don't think you can really blame them for that. This is not going away. You're not going to turn the current situation around by simply putting things right in the game, because you have made it so very personal by blaming and antagonising the community at every step of the way.
People will continue to give your DLC negative review ratings as it stands, even if the game is fixed, even if the the simulation is matters.. Do not poke the bear on this. Creative Assembly tried something similar... It did not end well..

Anywho. Good luck with the attempt to get through.

 

[brother_korahael]

If you haven't read this blog, it corroborates some of the custom solutions pieces I've mentioned.

Why Cities: Skylines 2 performs poorly

The article I haven't read before, thank you for sharing! It stresses the point concerning the bizarrely heavyweight demands that the game places on hardware, and this is the key thing I, personally, wish to see addressed, and I hope will be part of the future set of updates expected in March.

For me, performance above all is my concern, because if I can't play a game now when pops reach above 100k, and the simulation slows to an absolute crawl, then there's no point in loading my computer with more assets. Assets which will solve the issue of scarce asset variety, and thus replayability!

The other issue for me is that the opaqueness of the simulation is a persistent problem, so I'm personally glad to see @co_martsu answering questions about it. Some might feel that the FAQ style answers aren't necessary, but they offer an insight into the developer's simulation logic and we can then begin to understand if what we're experiencing is a bug or not.

As an example, take education. If all children are enrolled in primary school (elementary school) then these will always have lots of students, but if teens have a shorter time in high school and a chance of dropping out, they will always look much barer compared to elementary schools. If there's space for it, it might be worthwhile adding an infant stage to the life cycle, and adding childcare or preschool as a service.

Anyway, since we do have something of a rough guide as to when we should expect a release for a patch, I'm keen to see what happens in March and how it works out.

 

[gpaolo79]

If you haven't read this blog, it corroborates some of the custom solutions pieces I've mentioned.
Why Cities: Skylines 2 performs poorly

It's a very interesting article, but I'm not sure it's completely applicable to the latest version of the game. Surprisingly, it´s running smooth on both my 2070 and 3070, yesterday I checked and my 3070 wasn't running at more than 70%, so that is fairly good. The real bottleneck for me is the CPU, with the path queries piling up and slowing down the simulation.

 

[lukassooo]

It's a very interesting article, but I'm not sure it's completely applicable to the latest version of the game. Surprisingly, it´s running smooth on both my 2070 and 3070, yesterday I checked and my 3070 wasn't running at more than 70%, so that is fairly good. The real bottleneck for me is the CPU, with the path queries piling up and slowing down the simulation.

Sir 25 fps in 1920 resolution on low is not what we call "smooth" this is what we call BARELY.