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

[Trakaplex]

True. It won't be worth to complain about Texas in a game when I can drive real Texas lol. I liked Montana better tbh. The towns are more realistic, to scale, etc. I wasn't too critical of Montana though. Texas doesn't seem as realistic in 1:20 which can explain fewer sales than Montana. More fictionalized of a map. The other odd thing is that some parts of Texas have plenty of space then just I-35, no. I'm just complaining about SCS maps in general that have the same repeating generic assets like street lighting and restaurants. I haven't played the Texas DLC in a while and might not soon. In fact, I was kind of scared of the Texas results.

Maybe SCS can redo their devving methods instead of mere zoning. That would help the game a lot.

[flight50]

Texas seems like its a culprit of price. My guess............once newer dlc's come online, the older Texas gets, the more discount people get. Oklahoma and Kansas are 2023 maps. Texas will start getting bundled. That is when more of Texas will sell if you haven't bought it. If we get some solid game features that are heavily requested, that too will get Texas more sales. Imho, ETS2 fans that play ATS, they understand the price of Texas, how big it is and what it brings because ETS2 maps are the same size and price. But for people that do not own ETS2, never bought a dlc, 17.99 is territory they don't know about and don't like the price of Texas.

[harishw8r]

Yeah, I would guess it's the price 'cause, personally, I think Texas is extremely well-mapped despite the long mapping period and the iterative updates the team had to go through internally. I think DFW and Houston are neatly done - they seem huge, the landmarks are accurate, and they have those large industries. I wouldn't expect a downtown drive there, whereas for cities like Amarillo or the infamous rebuilt Redding, CA, making the city larger makes it exciting. The rules for individual cities will be bent depending on multiple factors, and I find it normal.

And like Iberia, Texas is a huge steal for the deal, and that's what would ultimately matter.

Also, agreeing with flight's comment on mapping. If I'm not wrong, Utah was formed by a new team and back then they did have a lesser experience. Idaho was excellent but had some misses, that was more like a growth/development phase. Mapping quality has only increased since then. Even though Wyoming was created by new mappers, the leads have gained immense experience over the years and that helped. Take any of the map leads (Jakub, Patrik or Davido), the quality of their projects have only increased over the years.

[flight50]

^You are forgetting Simon. Simon is the Texas map lead and has been around since Washington at the least. He worked with Patrik on that project and was trusted enough to create ATS's largest dlc to date...Texas and I don't think he disappointed at all for his first dlc and the most complicated at that. But yes the mapping has come a long ways imho and I can honestly say that the quality does not warrant needing map mods for me. But notice I said for me. I'm not speaking for anyone else. I use ProMods Candas only because SCS is not mapping there. I don't use any map mods done in the US anymore. I am perfectly fine waiting for new map from SCS. Mapping since Idaho has reached a new level. That standard is set now. Time for gameplay with little lesser focus on visuals. Outside of PBR and AA, graphics are good enough for many. I'd rather get gameplay going now.

Features is a whole other beast outside of visuals. The visual foundation is set and I'd like to see the foundation set for more gameplay. This upcoming engine update should be that. DX12 and multi core would have to be at the top of that list for laying that foundation. Hopefully, at some point this year, Pavel will spill the beans on what's coming, what can we expect. He won't tell us everything but enough excitement could be generated to keep interest going from the feature seekers.

[Meteor197]

While this is certainly no excuse for SCS to be lazy, I think we would all do well to consider this. It has been brought up before that even if new immersive features are added, that people will eventually get bored of that. Which is essentially true - sure, you can moderate the amount you play which helps tremendously, but in theory, what would you do if you built every possible truck configuration you could ever want, driven every possible job with lots of immersion a gazillion times, etc? I know if I didn't have anything left to change/add within my profile (and no new podcasts to listen to while driving), the game could have as many trucks and features as possible, but I would probably get sick of it and only revisit it once in a while for the sake of nostalgia. Since we won't live remotely long enough to have to worry about that, I realize it sounds silly, but then I got to thinking of how the game was when I started playing in 2016 and 2017, and I put just as many hours in then as I do now. Three states with unrealistic rudimentary maps and almost all the same few copy-and-paste prefabs, four truck models, no owned trailers. Perhaps not in terms of hardcore type features, but consider how the game otherwise is leaps and bounds bigger and better than it was just a few years ago. Yet I would say I was just as content playing the game in 2017 as I am now. It's because I didn't know any different, and while we have more now, I notice I still spend about the same amount of time thinking about the future of the game and yearning for yet more maps and trucks and whatnot, as I was years ago when the game had much less, and would get old super quick if I had to go back to that.

All of this is to say, part of the problem here is that pesky part of human nature that is constantly seeking something more/new/different. I don't think we would know what to do with ourselves if we had nothing new whatsoever to look forward to, or nothing missing from the game to complain about. So while I don't think there is anything wrong with desiring new content, my point is that in the long term I don't think it's going to make as much difference in your enjoyment of the game as you think it will. You may as well enjoy what is there and be thankful you have it at all, and try not to drive yourself crazy over what you perceive to be missing. Of course that's easier said than done and I'm no exception, but I'm just trying to be positive and put things into perspective. Again, nothing wrong with wanting improvements but I suggest you don't work yourself up too much over any lack thereof.

Also, this is not me saying that I am perfectly content with the game as is - there are plenty of things I think SCS should do better on. Nor am I accusing anyone of being a perfectionist. I used it to illustrate my point that it's not healthy to focus too much on what isn't there.

[harishw8r]

^You are forgetting Simon.

I did not. I was just considering the map leads who led more than one released project.

[flight50]

Got it. Your post didn't really imply that but I get it. All those others took less time too. Each of those other map leads, each of their maps combined...WA/CO, WY/MT and UT/ID....each of those took 2 years or less. Texas alone took 3.5. Simon would have had at least 2 dlc's as well if it wasn't Texas. He basically did 3 years worth of maps.

His team did have to redo a lot considering the lenght of time it took due to techonolgy improvements and just different mapping methods.

[Izmaragon]

Really? TX is worth its price tag imo... Granted, some of the streamers I've noticed you youtube dont have Texas for some reason, maybe some need to consider gifting the newer states to them or something...

I have well over 6000 hours played in ets2, and another 3000 plus hours in ats. I can understand how people can get bored... Like I said earlier in the thread; play other games, space your interests out. Don't get burned out, instead prevent that from happening. If people insist on only playing one game, thats their choice to get burned out faster...

I primarily play ats these days because it is more open than ets2 is... And we can point to European density as being at fault for that, not necessarily anything to do with the game. Although, it could redesigned to be slightly more open somewhat in some areas... Literally too many barriers and such to really enjoy driving in the Europe side currently...

I think it goes for both games when I see from a few threads that this past year was the highpoint of interest and such before it suddenly all seemed to come crashing down... The Engine is being worked on, we know that, but the problem is the engine mechanics that HAVE to change.. No more simplistic hiring manager please, give us a far better interface and we dont care if it makes the really old back up saves break, we need change.

Period.

[rbsanford]

this past year was the highpoint of interest and such before it suddenly all seemed to come crashing down...

I don't think interest came down; it's just that now there's a very vocal minority of cynics that have their own idea of how the game should be, and how it should be like so-and-so other game, but instead of playing that other game, they waste time complaining that SCS isn't doing what they want.

I started playing ETS2 back in 2014, and both games are pretty much the same as they were back then, and have improved in ways. It's always been about moving goods across a detailed, open-world map; I don't think the intent was ever to make it a hardcore deep-immersion simulator with a completely accurate world (which would be impossible without a 1:1 scale map and a crazy amount of work) that can be modified in-game by the player and can be modded to allow the flying of planes, with soft-body physics and walk mode and etc, etc, etc. It was always just a casual driving game, and in this forum and r/trucksim (the only fan communities I've frequented) everyone knew this and just enjoyed the game, even though they had ideas for improvements and additions. Of course you won't like the direction the game is headed if you expect a completely different game than what it's always been.

[Optional Features]

A vocal minority wouldn't cause drops in player numbers like this.

[ external image ]

Dismissing all opinions other than yours as miniscule, and therefore not worth listening to isn't a strong argument, and we can do better.

Also, just because you don't see people's opinions shared doesn't mean they don't hold them. When SCS asked fans what feature they'd like to see, walk mode was one of the most mentioned features, and in a separate video by a well known scs speculator, again, it was one of the most mentioned things.

Again, this goes back to optional things. The more room players have to differentiate their games, the more people will play. I don't want to play the game your way although that is currently the only option, and I don't expect you would want to play the game my way. So with optional features, I can enjoy a more interactive game, and you can drive from point A to B. Everyone is happy, and more people play.