Notice: While Next has made this mod obsolete, for those that wish to remain on the Atlas Rises build of the game, I am keeping this mod available as-is. I will not, however, be seeking to update it for compatibility for Next, simply because that's not necessary.
I don't use mods anymore because I think vanilla offers a better art direction but this is a nice little fix for something that is known to be bugged. That I will use, thank you :)
I didn't keep a close eye on it, so I can't provide any guarantees, but it didn't appear to make performance significantly worse on my end. Given that I already run at subpar performance compared to most, I feel like if it reduced performance any further I'd hopefully notice.
Tbh, it's genuinely going to vary based on fauna densities alongside this. So a low fauna, high flora (so high density forests) planet may perform fairly well, but a high fauna, high flora planet will likely just tank performance.
Yeah. =/ I didn't notice at first, and at a glance, as I typically avoid lush planets (I'm more of a dead/desert/frozen planet kind of traveler) so they still seemed okayish to me. However once I put this together it was just abundantly clear how much had changed.
It's really odd, as it appears to be an unintended mishap in setting changes. If I had simply tossed in the density value alongside the existing multiplier value, these forests (alongside some other things) would be much denser (as in, like 5 times as much). However, in my tests, it just struck me as looking a tad too off, with it appearing as though some trees were overlapping a bit more than usual, so I scaled it back to more closely match Path Finder settings.
It's as if they recognized they weren't appearing correctly and kept upping the multiplier, while completely overlooking that it wasn't multiplying anything.
8 comments
Tbh, it's genuinely going to vary based on fauna densities alongside this. So a low fauna, high flora (so high density forests) planet may perform fairly well, but a high fauna, high flora planet will likely just tank performance.
It's really odd, as it appears to be an unintended mishap in setting changes. If I had simply tossed in the density value alongside the existing multiplier value, these forests (alongside some other things) would be much denser (as in, like 5 times as much). However, in my tests, it just struck me as looking a tad too off, with it appearing as though some trees were overlapping a bit more than usual, so I scaled it back to more closely match Path Finder settings.
It's as if they recognized they weren't appearing correctly and kept upping the multiplier, while completely overlooking that it wasn't multiplying anything.