Prison Architect 2 from Double Eleven and Paradox Interactive was recently revealed with an entirely new look, and while the original has full Native Linux support, the sequel will not.
The shops do not need to be connected to industry nor to residential or outside connections to function. It just fakes all of the commerce information.
The devs might call that a bug to save face, but it doesn’t mean they didn’t deliberately ship it like that.
Yes, they likely intentionally shipped a buggy simulation due to a variety of factors. That doesn’t mean the simulation is fake, it means it isn’t finished, much like a lot of the rest of the game (missing LODs being a big one).
I’m guessing they had a start on the simulation, but it wasn’t complete enough for release so they shipped with it partially enabled.
No it wasn’t finished but they shipped it as a full priced finished game and deceived a lot of people.
They weren’t honest about the state of the simulation either, the UI updates as if there’s a full simulation running but it’s all magic fairy numbers to appear as if the simulation is functional. They faked it and just hoped nobody noticed.
It’s like releasing a factory game but you don’t have to link anything up to churn out products, instead you can just plop down the final stage factory and call it a day. This isn’t just unfinished, it’s deceitful and unacceptable.
Yes, the game absolutely failed to live up to the advertising on launch, and still falls short to this day. That’s a fact.
That doesn’t mean the economy is fake, it just means the implementation of the economy at this point is buggy. The game has high CPU usage, so it’s obviously calculating something, I’m guessing it was just not well tested (if at all) like much of the rest of the game. The game was not ready for release, yet they released it anyway, and they seem to admit it (look at the last minute perf revision at launch as an example).
I think the game was half baked and the execs decided to release anyway. The systems seem to be there, they’re just not properly hooked up/implemented, and they’re definitely buggy. That’s a very different thing from not existing whatsoever.
The difference isn’t particularly important to players right now, but it is important for the game in a year or so down the line. If they acknowledge it as a bug, there’s a good chance they’ll fix it (and for something that big, that means it’s probably already partially implemented). If they say “working as intended,” it’s incredibly unlikely.
No, from the evidence I’ve seen, they’ve partially implemented the simulation. It seems the code is there (from high CPU usage), it’s just not working properly.
So it’s a bug. It’s not working as the developers have said it should, and they seem intent on fixing it.
No Linux support won’t even be the worse thing about this game.
I sadly bought Cities: Skylines 2, a simulation game like this from the same publisher and they got caught faking the simulation in it.
Why? CS2 was shit from the start
I am a big fan of city building games and took a chance. Fuck me for wanting a new game to play after work I guess.
My understanding is that the simulation isn’t faked, just buggy. That’s not that much better, but buggy means it’ll probably be fixed eventually.
Oh it’s fake.
The shops do not need to be connected to industry nor to residential or outside connections to function. It just fakes all of the commerce information.
The devs might call that a bug to save face, but it doesn’t mean they didn’t deliberately ship it like that.
Yes, they likely intentionally shipped a buggy simulation due to a variety of factors. That doesn’t mean the simulation is fake, it means it isn’t finished, much like a lot of the rest of the game (missing LODs being a big one).
I’m guessing they had a start on the simulation, but it wasn’t complete enough for release so they shipped with it partially enabled.
You’re just making excuses at this point.
No it wasn’t finished but they shipped it as a full priced finished game and deceived a lot of people.
They weren’t honest about the state of the simulation either, the UI updates as if there’s a full simulation running but it’s all magic fairy numbers to appear as if the simulation is functional. They faked it and just hoped nobody noticed.
It’s like releasing a factory game but you don’t have to link anything up to churn out products, instead you can just plop down the final stage factory and call it a day. This isn’t just unfinished, it’s deceitful and unacceptable.
Yes, the game absolutely failed to live up to the advertising on launch, and still falls short to this day. That’s a fact.
That doesn’t mean the economy is fake, it just means the implementation of the economy at this point is buggy. The game has high CPU usage, so it’s obviously calculating something, I’m guessing it was just not well tested (if at all) like much of the rest of the game. The game was not ready for release, yet they released it anyway, and they seem to admit it (look at the last minute perf revision at launch as an example).
I think the game was half baked and the execs decided to release anyway. The systems seem to be there, they’re just not properly hooked up/implemented, and they’re definitely buggy. That’s a very different thing from not existing whatsoever.
The difference isn’t particularly important to players right now, but it is important for the game in a year or so down the line. If they acknowledge it as a bug, there’s a good chance they’ll fix it (and for something that big, that means it’s probably already partially implemented). If they say “working as intended,” it’s incredibly unlikely.
What you call a “bug” everybody else sees as fake.
They literally didn’t implement a simulation, they simulated the simulation.
No, from the evidence I’ve seen, they’ve partially implemented the simulation. It seems the code is there (from high CPU usage), it’s just not working properly.
So it’s a bug. It’s not working as the developers have said it should, and they seem intent on fixing it.
Those goalposts shift a lot. You are just guessing at this point despite the evidence being pretty much against any actual simulation happening.