You got time 
1 Like
I will wait for steam sale. Was planning to buy it at launch if the reviews were decent. Not supporting this knowingly launching a game when performance isnāt up to par.
1 Like
At one point, I was seriously considering adding it to my Steam library so that I would have it always available there. Now, like you, Iām going to hold off until itās sorted and on Steam sale and just go with whatever comes with the Game Pass version for the foreseeable future.
1 Like
Reviews are starting to come in. Some good, some bad. Most of the bad cite performance and technical issues as being the gamesā downfall. Hopefully things get better soon.
Hereās the video version of IGNās 6/10 rating, that shows a fair number of performance and graphical issues.
The review aggregators are probably the best place to monitor the reviews as more of them come in.
OpenCritic - 77 average - 69% recommended - 28 reviews
metacritic - 77/100 - PC Version - 36 Reviews
2 Likes
Had a look at the original Skylines review score aggregate, I was curious to see if that also started off a bit flawed and improved over time. But I see that had an 85% aggregate, so a bit stronger release although Skylines 2 is not too far off. Iām sure once they patch up the bugs and improve performance itāll be just as much of a classic as the first one.
1 Like
Iām still pissed.
2 Likes
Hopefully, to your advantage, theyāll have ironed out all of the issues by the time the console version releases.
1 Like
Pre-installation done. Ready to make my PC suffer later on!
1 Like
3 Likes
Getting absolutely slated on steam reviews due to the performance. Absolutely deserved for releasing a game you know isnāt ready.
1 Like
The publisher most probably forced them to release it by a specific deadline. The devs have been quite open to the fact that it lacks polish and optimisation, but the publisher has the final say. I feel sorry for CO for having been forced to release it in this state and the poor reviews itās been getting.
1 Like
Devs sign contracts with publishersā¦I donāt see why we should seperate devs from publishers when they willingly sign these deals that give publisher the final say. Seems to me devs want their bread buttered both sides. Want the publisher money but then also want to shift the blame to publishers when things go wrong.
Yeah, I would give the devs about 10% of the blame. You want to get your game published at all in a market flooded with games, then you sign the contracts. Because this is a sequel to a really popular game the dev might have a bit more say in the details, but if the IP is owned by Paradox, then Paradox has a lot of push and I assume the devs have no choice. So it feels like they just wanted a piece of bread, no matter how its buttered.
The fact that they warned us before the game even released, means the devs did not have a lot of say here. Now watch how the studio gets closed in a month or two because that seems to be the norm.
1 Like
You can self publish. See larian, rimworld,ect as examples. If you chose to sign with someone like paradox and it hurts you I have little sympathy for the devs. Same way I have little for what BioWare has become post EA.
Are you a software developer who needs to sustain his own cashflow, having to manage the salaries, well-being and efficiency of loads of staff members? Do you have huge project budgets that you need to manage and juggle that oh-so-relevant project cost/time/scope triangle to ensure quality is of acceptable standards?
Sometimes larger companies (like CO) have to get some support from bigger brothers (like publishers) to assist in realising their projects. Not everyone has infinite coffers to just keep building until they feel their product is ready. I suspect itās a large part of why BG3 was released in early access and stayed there for years - it helped them fund the development and polish of the final product.
Itās easy to be salty about a game releasing in a sub-optimal state due to the pressures of a publisher, but software development is an incredibly unpredictable industry. Dealing with projects of AAA-game scope with hundreds of people doing different things is really a huge ask.
Games with the scope (and hype to live up to) like CS2 need to carefully tread the project management triangle. The projectās scope was quite large, so keeping the time and cost in-tact obviously had to have an impact on the quality it released at. Give it some time for them to iron out the wrinkles and appreciate the effort that theyāve already put into the game. If you have Game Pass, you can even play it at no extra cost to you. The game will improve over the coming months, so just enjoy the journey! 
Source: Iām a co-founder of a software company dealing with projects of various scale over the past 9+ years, with more than 60 completed projects and around 50 staff across 4 regions.
1 Like
If they released the game as early access no problem. They released as a finished product, knowing full well it isnāt ready.
The rest is not the consumer problem. Itās a choice they made. Why should consumers accept half finished games and the excuses from developers. Would you accept a half finished car with the 4th wheel arriving a few months later.
We have become way too accepting of shoddy products in the gaming industry. Gamepass making us able to get the product cheaply doesnāt excuse poor optimisation. This isnāt only an cities skyline issue, itās just the latest of a long list of games released like this.
1 Like
You really canāt compare the two. Having a fourth wheel added later is a legitimate safety and usability concern on a car. Having an infotainment update coming months after release is another issue. My Volvo has OTA updates that have improved the infotainment system years after I bought it, and Iām okay with that.
The game is playable as it is. Yes, it needs some spit and polish, but it will get there. Games have been growing in scope over the years, so we need to temper our expectations a bit.
MVP, I work with that concept every day. Minimum viable product.
Indeed. Software projects canāt afford traditional waterfall approaches anymore. Requirements shift and industries adjust. Much faster than they did 10-20 years ago. So the only feasible option for building software these days is successive prototypes, or āMVPsā as you correctly note them to be.
1 Like