Are you satisfied with the direction in which the game is developing

[Furious_Crawdad]

Quote removed - Don't quote images - Rule 2.3

Just so we are all on the same page here: do you categorize criticism about the game as negative comments, and praises of the game as positive comments? And what about "bashing SCS"? For instance, saying something like "The state of the games compared to the general quality of games in 2023 is very poor, in terms of graphics and physics" - would you categorize this as a negative comment and/or bashing scs?

[Eggtooth]

Just so we are all on the same page here: do you categorize criticism about the game as negative comments, and praises of the game as positive comments? And what about "bashing SCS"? For instance, saying something like "The state of the games compared to the general quality of games in 2023 is very poor, in terms of graphics and physics" - would you categorize this as a negative comment and/or bashing scs?

Nope, I don't categorise them like this. I categorise comments like these:

viewtopic.php?p=1798110#p1798110

...and everything after it, (counting response to Max' comment as the one proving them wrong) as senseless bashing for sake of bashing. This and everything they wrote after this initial post I linked to, despite being given clear answers as to why they are wrong, even from SCS dev himself, counts to me as trolling and bashing of SCS due to failrue to actually accepting the truth as given by someone who works at SCS. No matter how much you prove that person wrong, they will continue to bash SCS with downright false information.

This is not critique to me.

Almost anything that @Optional Features writes can count as productive criticism though as example of proper critique.

Also this:
viewtopic.php?p=1797223#p1797223

This is also bashing. It offers absolutely no constructive critique besides "hurr durr SCS is slow" and a personal attack.

[Furious_Crawdad]

Well I just spent some time reading all of that and to me it sounds like angry people arguing for the sake of arguing. There's a lot of this in these forums unfortunately, some people here find arguing occupational therapy. I didn't see any bashing of SCS to be quite honest. I mean, they had a problem to solve (roads were ice-skating-rings-flat) and worked out a makeshift solution that is on the cheap side. A better alternative would be to re-do the asphalt prefab to contain imperfections. Would it be more time-consuming? Well, yes. Proper solutions to problems usually are. Is the solution they came out with sort of a gimmick? Yes. Is it better than nothing at all? Yes. These are facts, not SCS bashing. Going for the cheapest solution is what any business interested in making money goes for, 999 times out of a 1000. The only people going for the absolute best solution are artists, people passionate for their craft. Videogame developers are on the other end of the spectrum.

I think it's important to re-evaluate what most people here call "bashing SCS", because lumping all negative comments about development into that category is not beneficial to anyone. Not directly pointing my fingers at you, Eggtooth. It's a forum-wide issue. I feel like if person A gives two or three negative feedbacks in a row on game development direction, he's instantly granted a "SCS basher" card and tossed into the foe list of many people. Constructive criticism is fundamental for the improvement of a product, as if we all just praise SCS for whatever they release, the pace of improvement will slow to a crawl and eventually stagnate. Would you bother improving your product if 100% of your customers were happy with the current state of it? No.

But I agree with what you said about no only criticizing, but providing a possible workaround. Just keep in mind that while any Joe can find fault, not everybody has the mental acuity to come up with a solution. I rather this Joe posts what he dislikes about the game here in the forums, so the rest of people can collaborate in suggesting a solution. Bashing the guy for bringing up an issue is worse than what people call "bashing scs".

And I must say, that whole argument about the bubbly people is not entirely wrong. You see threads flourish with random talk about states, industries, speculations and whatnot, yet when a thread comes out raising a problem that needs fixing or improving, the bubbly people try their best to drown out said thread and hope it disappears. What they should be doing instead is participating in said thread and suggesting solutions, because I don't believe for a second that all of them believe this game to be perfect as it is. Going ultra-defensive in favor of SCS is probably the main cause of all this endless useless fights, and the polarization of people in here, lumping themselves to either "SCS lover" or "SCS hater" as if there was no possibility of being somewhere in-between.

In truth, there is no SCS lover, as even people who love this game and play nothing else get super happy when a new feature comes out or something gets fixed or improved, so it's hypocrisy on their part.
In truth, there is no SCS hater, as those laballed as such are here criticizing the game because they want to see it get improved, flourish, and if they hated it they would be playing something else and be somewhere else.
Less fighting and more collaborating people. You'll find that going less defensive and finding common ground to agree with will render the attacker feeling awkward and toning down his words, and vice-versa.
When laying fault at the rude people, remember we caused him to be rude in the first place. Instead of putting so much effort in finding reasons to disagree, put the same effort in finding common ground.

[Eggtooth]

snip

You see nothing wrong then with someone arguing they are right and denying comments from SCS employee? You see absolutely nothing wrong with that? Not even the fact they said it was random but Max came in and told them it wasn't random? If to you this isn't bashing SCS, then surely, all is fine (even though it isn't).

[Furious_Crawdad]

Do I see something wrong with someone arguing they are right when they aren't?
Of course. It's a cancer of modern society. I only wish people bothered to dig for more information and facts and opened their minds to learning, before standing their ground.

On a side-note, you may have misread his post, he doesn't deny Max's reply, he's just dodging the responsibility of acknowledging he was wrong. Some people feel like they will melt if they admit they were wrong, when in fact be proven wrong should be celebrated, for it is elevating someone to a new level of understanding, furthering awareness. Yet, this concept has been skipped by this generation.

Now, as for bashing: "violent physical assault or severe criticism" as per dictionary. Do I think he was bashing SCS? No. He was being a ****, that's for sure. But I can't remember ever seeing true BASHING of SCS in these forums. I've seen criticism and dislike of certain things, but nothing strong enough to be categorized as bashing. I'm not saying 100% of what transpires in these forums is fine and dandy, as there is a lot of ego and misinformation and, most of all, unhappy people trying desperately to find a place in this world where they have a voice, who also happen to feel passionate about trucks, and also are incapable of admitting they are wrong. The combination of these 3 attributes can result in blood-boiling "how dare you" situations where beating other people into a pulp becomes more important than being right. And by being right I mean being factually right, not believing you're right, which are 2 very different things.

But like I said above, cut the guy some slack, he might be having a miserable day and came to the forums to vent. When talking to someone like that, don't throw more gasoline into the fire, just let him vent and tackle the topic at hand, find common ground. (like we're doing now )

[Optional Features]

It is fair to see that the game as a base is good. It is not good however, to repeatedly bash SCS for not doing what you want. It's not that they don't listen, but game development is hard. It's not easy as snapping finger. Bumpy roads features, is actually very, very complex despite how easy it sounds. It took two programmers, according to Max, to pull this off.

Some of the things I want are dumb, and some SCS should be thinking about on their own. It's that second set of things that frustrates me the most.

Why, 10 years into the development of one game, and seven into another did the fans have to ask for the road surface not to be completely smooth?

Why do we have to ask for different types of cargo to be unloaded different ways (or at different facilities)?

Why do we have to ask for cargo to have different physics or for different types of trailers to have animations and functionality according to their real life design?

At times I feel like if SCS was a car maker, we'd have to ask for a steering wheel or seats. Some stuff should be requested, but some of it seems quite fundamental to the type of game this is.

[Eggtooth]

Do I see something wrong with someone arguing they are right when they aren't?
Of course. It's a cancer of modern society. I only wish people bothered to dig for more information and facts and opened their minds to learning, before standing their ground.

On a side-note, you may have misread his post, he doesn't deny Max's reply, he's just dodging the responsibility of acknowledging he was wrong. Some people feel like they will melt if they admit they were wrong, when in fact be proven wrong should be celebrated, for it is elevating someone to a new level of understanding, furthering awareness. Yet, this concept has been skipped by this generation.

Now, as for bashing: "violent physical assault or severe criticism" as per dictionary. Do I think he was bashing SCS? No. He was being Removed - Rule 2.3, that's for sure. But I can't remember ever seeing true BASHING of SCS in these forums. I've seen criticism and dislike of certain things, but nothing strong enough to be categorized as bashing. I'm not saying 100% of what transpires in these forums is fine and dandy, as there is a lot of ego and misinformation and, most of all, unhappy people trying desperately to find a place in this world where they have a voice, who also happen to feel passionate about trucks, and also are incapable of admitting they are wrong. The combination of these 3 attributes can result in blood-boiling "how dare you" situations where beating other people into a pulp becomes more important than being right. And by being right I mean being factually right, not believing you're right, which are 2 very different things.

But like I said above, cut the guy some slack, he might be having a miserable day and came to the forums to vent. When talking to someone like that, don't throw more gasoline into the fire, just let him vent and tackle the topic at hand, find common ground. (like we're doing now )

Yes, when you put it like that, then yes, it's something I can 100% agree with. I admit that I ain't perfect and I do mistakes too, but one thing I hate, is being unable to admit being wrong. This is something that makes my blood boil. I don't think finding common ground with person like this is possible. Notice how you have managed to find that ground with me, funny how it works, eh?

Personal feelings are not an excuse for this kinda behaviour in my opinion.

Now what constituted to me as bashing, is saying the feature is meaningless or just "decoration" while saying false information (doesnt depend on terrain or contribute to simulation aspect).

While I do think people need to be less of a twats, I do think there are legit criticisms here and I have no ill will towards people I've pointed out.

It is fair to see that the game as a base is good. It is not good however, to repeatedly bash SCS for not doing what you want. It's not that they don't listen, but game development is hard. It's not easy as snapping finger. Bumpy roads features, is actually very, very complex despite how easy it sounds. It took two programmers, according to Max, to pull this off.

Some of the things I want are dumb, and some SCS should be thinking about on their own. It's that second set of things that frustrates me the most.

Why, 10 years into the development of one game, and seven into another did the fans have to ask for the road surface not to be completely smooth?

Why do we have to ask for different types of cargo to be unloaded different ways (or at different facilities)?

Why do we have to ask for cargo to have different physics or for different types of trailers to have animations and functionality according to their real life design?

At times I feel like if SCS was a car maker, we'd have to ask for a steering wheel or seats. Some stuff should be requested, but some of it seems quite fundamental to the type of game this is.

There's more to that. SCS has been growing since 2013. They only now have more than 50 employees (since 2018), to actually start making meaningful changes. That's why only now they are getting momentum. 1.47 was one of the better updates, along with FMOD and lighting update. As I've said, all comes down to engine. Any change they make can break other things. You'd actually have to be in the studio and see the code to understand. Why I understand is because I've seen the code. Just not SCS code. Other game code. It's unbelievable how simple things can have thousands lines of code and break things that are unrelated.

I think 1.47 is step in a very good direction and I hope that 1.50 and beyond will bring us good additions and improvements.

[Optional Features]

@Eggtooth I believe they have close to 300 employees, actually.

And there are solo developers that are producing games that are better in one way or more. Heck, there are solo modders that have put out work on the level of the vehicle team.

It's not a manpower issue or a financing issue: it's a direction issue. Every time we see an improvement to the photo mode, viewpoints, cutscenes, or a one-time-use cargo like that big potato from the Idaho event, that could have been something else that players used for weeks or months or years. It's just what the devs are focused on, which up to this point has been scenery and stuff that appeals to kids over realism and functionality.

[LincolnCFCruz]

@Eggtooth I believe they have close to 300 employees, actually.

And there are solo developers that are producing games that are better in one way or more. Heck, there are solo modders that have put out work on the level of the vehicle team.

It's not a manpower issue or a financing issue: it's a direction issue. Every time we see an improvement to the photo mode, viewpoints, cutscenes, or a one-time-use cargo like that big potato from the Idaho event, that could have been something else that players used for weeks or months or years. It's just what the devs are focused on, which up to this point has been scenery and stuff that appeals to kids over realism and functionality.

I'll just add one more thing to what you said. SCS has around 280 employees... Asobo Studio, developer of Microsoft Flight Simulator has 250 employees. Using the excuse that SCS has no money is totally false, during every DLC release, SCS stays at Steam's top 10 best sellers page and is also s multimillion dollar company! The difficulty that SCS have is managing both games and also getting more developers. If you go right now to SCS LinkedIn you are going to find a lot of junior devs and a lot of 3D artists, this explains why SCS can do this insane amount of map DLCs and bararely doing real work on the ancient Prism3D engine.

Maybe if SCS communicated more about what is going on, things could be better... I miss Carthoo, he knew how and when to communicate!

[Optional Features]

I'll just add one more thing to what you said. SCS has around 280 employees... Asobo Studio, developer of Microsoft Flight Simulator has 250 employees. Using the excuse that SCS has no money is totally false, during every DLC release, SCS stays at Steam's top 10 best sellers page and is also s multimillion dollar company! The difficulty that SCS have is managing both games and also getting more developers. If you go right now to SCS LinkedIn you are going to find a lot of junior devs and a lot of 3D artists, this explains why SCS can do this insane amount of map DLCs and bararely doing real work on the ancient Prism3D engine.

Maybe if SCS communicated more about what is going on, things could be better... I miss Carthoo, he knew how and when to communicate!

If you look at the seasons mod of Grimes, the cargo and trailer modeling of B4rt and Southernman, the truck designs of overfloater, the wheels of smarty, the mapping of the reforma team, the complicated oversize load trailers of nitromodz, the sounds of kriechbaum, the skyboxes of juninho, and the list goes on, you have a level of quality beyond any dlc yet.

And that's not mentioning features. The SCS lowboy in ATS has no adjustable height, a limited number of configurations (all of which are a single unit), no neck detach, etc etc.

The SCS lowboy in Farming Sim (converted to FS17 by me and some people I worked with in the past and since improved by others).

Adjustable neck height, three deck options (beam, regular, and wide), detachable neck, buyable (infinitely combinable) parts (jeep, booster, neck in two lengths, stinger), cargo straps, and best of all, stackable parts. No hauling a 100+ foot trailer around empty unless I want to.

You know how much I would pay for a trailer with all that in the truck simulator? Probably at least $50. It would be one trailer to rule them all: adjust it and configure it based on the parts owned and the load in need of delivery.

[ external image ]
[ external image ]

And the difference between lowbedding in ATS vs a farming game is I don't know if the cargo can be hauled in the farming game. Above, I barely fit on the deck: had to spin it around and adjust it to fit. Below, I didn't know if I would make the bridge: ended up with probably less than a foot of clearance.

When I play ATS, I know that any load I book with an owned trailer has a near 100% chance of success in all aspects (loading, hauling, unloading, etc). It will fit on the deck without a thought, and nothing on the route will challenge me. I can't be overweight. I don't have to get a permit. I rarely have to put in much effort to make a turn, and all the bridges are like 20 feet high.

It's an Easy Road as I sometimes think the game itself should be called.

[ external image ]
[ external image ]

That's how real trucking is: everything doesn't fit. Everything isn't perfect. Sometimes you don't have the right trailer for the job. Sometimes you have to take a detour because of low clearance (or a railroad crossing that's too steep). All things a trucking game should theoretically include.

I don't think it's not a manpower problem: not to be unkind, but I think you could replace the 300 with 30 modders and have twice as immersive a game.