Cities Skylines 2 is Official!
- Thread starter willhub
- Start date
what what whaaaat! Wouldn't pay that for a CS1 DLC.
Man of Honour
Embargo is over, first reviews are out - bit of a mixed bag
www.gamesradar.com
www.rockpapershotgun.com
www.ign.com
Cities: Skylines 2 review: "Its promise is completely overshadowed by its technical problems"
Cities: Skylines 2 offers the foundation of a world-class city-building game, with a wide array of features, smart quality-of-life improvements, and a genuinely impressive simulation to help bring you
www.gamesradar.com
Cities: Skylines 2 review: A standard-bearer that ought to have higher standards
Cities: Skylines 2 is an engaging city builder that balances simulation with ease of play, but offers little new or imp…
www.rockpapershotgun.com
Cities: Skylines 2 Review - IGN
Cities: Skylines 2 is an ambitious sequel that might have bitten off more than it can chew – be prepared to do a lot of terraforming if you don't want your metropolis to look like a nightmare.
Had a look at the Games Radar review and they're not painting a particularly good sounding picture for performance.
System used is a i9 9900k and an RTX 3080.
Theres a ton of videos uploaded and live streams going on right now, so gonna watch a couple of reviews, thoughts, and some then gameplay. Feels like this could go down the Cyberpunk path, very problematic at launch, but i have faith that if it is the case then they'll get things back on track eventually. It feels a lot like the all too familiar act of launching something thats simply not ready, because thats the date that was given. Can you imagine how bad it must be on consoles if an i9 9900k & 3080 are struggling...
System used is a i9 9900k and an RTX 3080.
Theres a ton of videos uploaded and live streams going on right now, so gonna watch a couple of reviews, thoughts, and some then gameplay. Feels like this could go down the Cyberpunk path, very problematic at launch, but i have faith that if it is the case then they'll get things back on track eventually. It feels a lot like the all too familiar act of launching something thats simply not ready, because thats the date that was given. Can you imagine how bad it must be on consoles if an i9 9900k & 3080 are struggling...
Man of Honour
I think I'm going to hang odd ordering and see what its like on Game Pass, that runs out in December so will probably need to buy it after that anyway!
Soldato
Didn't pre-order this in the end. (unless I bought it and forgot... which I've done with something else recently!)
Think I'll be holding fire a few weeks to see how the release goes and what patches appear.
Disapointing to here performance is this bad. I was pretty hyped from all the dev teasers a while back showing the new features.
Think I'll be holding fire a few weeks to see how the release goes and what patches appear.
Disapointing to here performance is this bad. I was pretty hyped from all the dev teasers a while back showing the new features.
'City Planner Plays' is apparently playing on a 7950X3D & 4090, and isnt even getting stable 30fps at 1440p on high settings 
'Biffa' getting 50-60fps on medium with 1440p, also a 4090, not sure of CPU.
Its sounding like its GPU heavy, and yet the best GPU on the market is being crippled.
'Biffa' getting 50-60fps on medium with 1440p, also a 4090, not sure of CPU.
Its sounding like its GPU heavy, and yet the best GPU on the market is being crippled.
Man of Honour
'City Planner Plays' is apparently playing on a 7950X3D & 4090, and isnt even getting stable 30fps at 1440p on high settings
'Biffa' getting 50-60fps on medium with 1440p, also a 4090, not sure of CPU.
Its sounding like its GPU heavy, and yet the best GPU on the market is being crippled.
Been watching Biffa, I might be wrong but I think the 5800x3D was mentioned as his CPU at one point
Yup, i was reading comments on reviews on reddit, the person who mentioned the CPP performance also mentioned Biffas specs, i just glazed over that and repeated what someone else mentioned for him earlier and it didnt include CPU.
Im also seeing CPP was getting 30% CPU, 100% GPU utilisation, also 17GB RAM & 10.2GB VRAM.
Pretty sure VRAM/RAM will utilise more if it can, so should still be fine on 8/16GB but... yeah, rather you than me.
There was also a pretty interesting point in the IGN review, showing how the assets are bending to the terrain terribly.
Its easier to include a timestamped link to see for yourself, its about 35sec worth:
They go on to show CS1, and how it at least kept the zoned area flat and bent terrain outside that space. CS2 looks like it terraforms around any building asset, so stuff can float, be wonky, and just plain impractical.
It shouldnt be hard to fix this, but its becoming pretty clear that the various Dev Diaries and YouTuber videos have been actively avoiding these scenarios. I just dont understand why they're in a 'finished' game, it'd be understandable in a first-pass alpha build, but not for their release date build. Its just very questionable why things are like this, and coupled with the fact that they'd been working on PDXMods for CS2 for multiple years, and waited until a week before launch to announce it, it just feels like theres aspects of the development that they are well aware are unacceptable or going to anger/frustrate the community, and they're simply not going to mention it or leave it to the absolute last minute to do so. Their statement on performance was that it "wasnt where they wanted it to be" - that turned out to mean a 4090 cant hold 30fps at high setting 1440p!!
Im also seeing CPP was getting 30% CPU, 100% GPU utilisation, also 17GB RAM & 10.2GB VRAM.
Pretty sure VRAM/RAM will utilise more if it can, so should still be fine on 8/16GB but... yeah, rather you than me.
There was also a pretty interesting point in the IGN review, showing how the assets are bending to the terrain terribly.
Its easier to include a timestamped link to see for yourself, its about 35sec worth:
It shouldnt be hard to fix this, but its becoming pretty clear that the various Dev Diaries and YouTuber videos have been actively avoiding these scenarios. I just dont understand why they're in a 'finished' game, it'd be understandable in a first-pass alpha build, but not for their release date build. Its just very questionable why things are like this, and coupled with the fact that they'd been working on PDXMods for CS2 for multiple years, and waited until a week before launch to announce it, it just feels like theres aspects of the development that they are well aware are unacceptable or going to anger/frustrate the community, and they're simply not going to mention it or leave it to the absolute last minute to do so. Their statement on performance was that it "wasnt where they wanted it to be" - that turned out to mean a 4090 cant hold 30fps at high setting 1440p!!
Soldato
My wife played CS1 a lot and has pre-ordered this. CS1 ran fine on the PC downstairs and she was asking if it will run CS2 okay. Judging by the comments, I'm fearing not.
Its a Ryzen 5 3600 with 16Gb RAM and a 1070 Ti
It I was to upgrade one component for now, what would it be? I'm thinking the RAM.
Its a Ryzen 5 3600 with 16Gb RAM and a 1070 Ti
It I was to upgrade one component for now, what would it be? I'm thinking the RAM.
Yup I fear thats going to be a big ask on that spec, unless she is planning to build a village of 2 streets.My wife played CS1 a lot and has pre-ordered this. CS1 ran fine on the PC downstairs and she was asking if it will run CS2 okay. Judging by the comments, I'm fearing not.
Its a Ryzen 5 3600 with 16Gb RAM and a 1070 Ti
It I was to upgrade one component for now, what would it be? I'm thinking the RAM.
I picked this up for 25 quid ages ago on cdkeys but I did so expecting this situation and knowing that CS2 is all about the base foundation and the back end changes over CS1, I never expected it to be anywhere near as CS1+Mods for quite some time but ultimately will end up surpassing CS2 by quite a margin, so as I am in it for the long haul, I'm ok with keeping my preorder.
German site, but some reasonable benchmarks: https://www.pcgameshardware.de/Citi...enchmarks-Performance-Tuning-Tipps-1431613/2/
I run the google translate addon in chrome, so its translated it for me, but theres a pop up covering the page. You want to click the first option, which means 'continue with adverts' rather than 2nd option, which looks to be membership.
Base spec:
AMD Ryzen 5 5600X (6C/12T)
Asus X570 Crosshair VIII Hero,
32 GiB DDR4-3600 (1T)
Windows 11 x64
Drivers = AMD Software 23.10.2, Nvidia GRD 545.84.
1080p on Very Low settings:
4090 = 79.0fps avg & 46fps 1% low
7900 = 78.7fps & 45fps
3080 = 78.5 & 44fps
6700XT = 72.2 & 42fps
1080p on High settings:
4090 = 38.1 & 24fps
7900 = 34.4 & 20fps
3080 = 24.4 & 19fps
6700XT = 18.3 & 17fps
1440p on High settings: (I cba listing v.low results, its fugly! nobody would play at 1440p V.Low)
4090 = 28.8 & 18fps
7900 = 22.8 & 16fps
3080 = 16.3 & 15fps
6700XT = 11.0 & 9fps
No 4K info, but i dont think its hard to imagine.
They dont list results for medium settings, which its looking like it might be the most sensible option for a reasonable framerate. I've played a few games locked at 15 & 30fps (60fps was doable, just unnecessary for what i was playing) and i can live with 30, but on a 4090 its obscene to think that is acceptable.
It really feels like they're going to launch, and then 2-3 days we're going to get the worn out "We hear you" statement where they say its not good enough and they're going to go fix it, as if this has come to them as some big surprise as performance had been fantastic up until release. It sucks, they've canned one launch, but now its looking like they want/need to collect that pre-order cash and then finish it, and on PC its somewhat playable on top-tier spec machine, but consoles never stood a chance so they had to pull the plug there. They know its damn unacceptable, and clearly dont care.
I run the google translate addon in chrome, so its translated it for me, but theres a pop up covering the page. You want to click the first option, which means 'continue with adverts' rather than 2nd option, which looks to be membership.
Base spec:
AMD Ryzen 5 5600X (6C/12T)
Asus X570 Crosshair VIII Hero,
32 GiB DDR4-3600 (1T)
Windows 11 x64
Drivers = AMD Software 23.10.2, Nvidia GRD 545.84.
1080p on Very Low settings:
4090 = 79.0fps avg & 46fps 1% low
7900 = 78.7fps & 45fps
3080 = 78.5 & 44fps
6700XT = 72.2 & 42fps
1080p on High settings:
4090 = 38.1 & 24fps
7900 = 34.4 & 20fps
3080 = 24.4 & 19fps
6700XT = 18.3 & 17fps
1440p on High settings: (I cba listing v.low results, its fugly! nobody would play at 1440p V.Low)
4090 = 28.8 & 18fps
7900 = 22.8 & 16fps
3080 = 16.3 & 15fps
6700XT = 11.0 & 9fps
No 4K info, but i dont think its hard to imagine.
They dont list results for medium settings, which its looking like it might be the most sensible option for a reasonable framerate. I've played a few games locked at 15 & 30fps (60fps was doable, just unnecessary for what i was playing) and i can live with 30, but on a 4090 its obscene to think that is acceptable.
It really feels like they're going to launch, and then 2-3 days we're going to get the worn out "We hear you" statement where they say its not good enough and they're going to go fix it, as if this has come to them as some big surprise as performance had been fantastic up until release. It sucks, they've canned one launch, but now its looking like they want/need to collect that pre-order cash and then finish it, and on PC its somewhat playable on top-tier spec machine, but consoles never stood a chance so they had to pull the plug there. They know its damn unacceptable, and clearly dont care.
Soldato
I think I'm going to hold off for a while and see how it goes.
I basically never get excited or hyped by ganes, time before last was Battlefield 2, if that gives you any idea, and that game was totally worth it to be fair, I built a PC specifically to play it and it was absolutely worth it.
But I got roped into the Starfield hype, mainly because I really liked previous Bethesda games, and it's turned out to be a bit of a turd. I didn't buy a whole new PC but £700 GPU which I'm now playing the likes of rocket league etc on...as I'm already done with Starfield.
Anyway, point I am making is yes the first game was bloody epic, sure it has performance issues, but just because the first one was so good, doesn't mean this will be at all.
Look at Kerbal Space Program as another example.
I basically never get excited or hyped by ganes, time before last was Battlefield 2, if that gives you any idea, and that game was totally worth it to be fair, I built a PC specifically to play it and it was absolutely worth it.
But I got roped into the Starfield hype, mainly because I really liked previous Bethesda games, and it's turned out to be a bit of a turd. I didn't buy a whole new PC but £700 GPU which I'm now playing the likes of rocket league etc on...as I'm already done with Starfield.
Anyway, point I am making is yes the first game was bloody epic, sure it has performance issues, but just because the first one was so good, doesn't mean this will be at all.
Look at Kerbal Space Program as another example.
Yeah, if i didnt have it on Game Pass, as disgusted with things as i am, i'd still be leaving my pre-order in
It looks like i'll be able to brute force my way through a decent amount of gameplay, but its sickening to think that people with 2023 mid-tier systems to 2020 high tier, are going to be crippled unless they play at 1080p medium. This is a simulation heavy game, and yet theres no reports of CPUs struggling, its all GPU being hammered.
I'd also like to hear about whether people are seeing better results with 32/48/64GB of RAM, because that doesnt seem to be getting any attention, and could be a big factor. The official streams upgraded and things were better for them, and i kinda understand YT 'Lets Play' folk arent likely to do benchmark stuff swapping hardware around, but it could be heavily influencing a lot of these poor results.
Man of Honour
Just realised I can pre-load on Game Pass, got it downloading now, only 15GB
Definitely in the videos I've watched, 64gb made a significant improvement (though still not flawless)Yeah, if i didnt have it on Game Pass, as disgusted with things as i am, i'd still be leaving my pre-order in
It looks like i'll be able to brute force my way through a decent amount of gameplay, but its sickening to think that people with 2023 mid-tier systems to 2020 high tier, are going to be crippled unless they play at 1080p medium. This is a simulation heavy game, and yet theres no reports of CPUs struggling, its all GPU being hammered.
I'd also like to hear about whether people are seeing better results with 32/48/64GB of RAM, because that doesnt seem to be getting any attention, and could be a big factor. The official streams upgraded and things were better for them, and i kinda understand YT 'Lets Play' folk arent likely to do benchmark stuff swapping hardware around, but it could be heavily influencing a lot of these poor results.
