Told you so.

[cpbtrading]

That's my point, you can't tell how close you got to the planet. Planet surfaces tend to be fractals, and one of the properties of fractals is that they look the same independent of scale. Look at a real picture of an asteroid, how big is it? It could be the size of Texas or the size of a potato, you have no way of knowing.
:
The canyon like features in the video could have been dried stream beds a few metres across or the grand canyon a few km across or the a rift valley hundreds of km across.
:
So on the one hand we have the dev telling us the planets are to scale and thousands of kms across, on the other hand we have you saying the planets are not thousands of kms across based on your interpretation of the altitude above a planet approached in beta with no means to judge scale, that you admit might be wrong.
:
I can see why people are sceptical.

I do say, we can't tell until we are at the surface, but they could let us there now really. But I don't think they would do that, mainly for the reasons I state, but we'll find out come Horizon. However, if there is a loading screen, then that will answer for sure what I expect is the case. I fully expect a loading screen something similar to the 'jump' now.

 

[babelfisch]

I do say, we can't tell until we are at the surface, but they could let us there now really. But I don't think they would do that, mainly for the reasons I state, but we'll find out come Horizon. However, if there is a loading screen, then that will answer for sure what I expect is the case. I fully expect a loading screen something similar to the 'jump' now.

As someone else already told you: They can not let you there now, the surfaces are not implemented yet. But you can try my experiment orbiting earth, it will give you the same results. I think it should take around 40 hours.

 

[cpbtrading]

As someone else already told you: They can not let you there now, the surfaces are not implemented yet. But you can try my experiment orbiting earth, it will give you the same results. I think it should take around 40 hours.

Only being at the surface would truly work. They are implemented now, its at what stage. We know they're low detail smooth surfaces as of now. I'm not interested in that, its their scale I would be interested in.

 

[CrustyGoth]

From what I can gather so far apparently it says 1:1 scale all over the Horizons preorder page and you don't trust that because there is no offline mode. If FD have specifically given you the answer but you refuse to take it what exactly do you expect us to say to convince you?

 

[beelbeebub]

I do say, we can't tell until we are at the surface, but they could let us there now really. But I don't think they would do that, mainly for the reasons I state, but we'll find out come Horizon. However, if there is a loading screen, then that will answer for sure what I expect is the case. I fully expect a loading screen something similar to the 'jump' now.

Isn't it just as likely that, as planetary landings are not yet enabled, the planetary meshes and textures are not yet available in the Level of Detail needed for a close approach? After all, if you can't get close to planets except via a long slow trek, why put the effort into coding for mesh and texture generation at high detail for launch. Of course, if someone were to trek to a planet they'd find the mesh and texture very poor giving a misleading impression of scale. Maybe that's why FD locked planetary approaches, because someone might get the wrong end of the stick.
:
I'm almost certain that there will be some form of "jump" effect, i.e. a loading screen, but mainly because that would make the architecture the same as for space and because there will need to be some mechanism to allow faster travel around the planet.

 

[chrisragnar]

They said quite the opposite.

Your right, guess i dont read the newsletter as carfully after 50+ uninteresing ones

 

[CaptainKremmen]

Yep, I was expecting to play SP offline too, but look how that turned out.

Are you quite sure you were expecting to play SP offline?

Because...


16/11/2014:

I understand the disappointment of players who expected a SP (offline mode). But I can't remember seeing it written that there would be an SP offline mode, only a solo which needed connection to the internet. But there again I haven't followed all the forum or publicity (that's for sure), so it could have been mentioned and I missed it.

<snip>

But I guess, if there's an ideal thread for illogical and contradictory axe-grinding for the sake of it, you can't go past this one!

 

[Roybe]

Planetary scale is 1:1. It is also promised that the whole of the planet will be explorable.....not bases with invisible walls that stop you from wandering around...which it appears some other games might be employing.

So, you should be able to wander 6000 kilometers from your landing spot to the city you saw landing. How populated said city will be/feel...what the NPC's will do or say...who knows that is years and years away.

 

[babelfisch]

Only being at the surface would truly work. They are implemented now, its at what stage. We know they're low detail smooth surfaces as of now. I'm not interested in that, its their scale I would be interested in.

You are wrong, my method is much more accurate than your method of watching curved horizons on your monitor .

 

[Leadfoot]

I like how "planetary landings" consist of asteroids and no atmosphere planets. Reason, they dont have the resources to do it any other way. Cant make a new flight system for atmospheric flight. Cant do true procedural generation. And its not due to a lack of skill, but a lack of funding. Well, you fanboys wanted it so bad, here it is. Enjoy a half baked expansion whil bugs a year old still persist and the universe is bland and barren. ED had one chance to weather the two incoming hurricanes of SC and NMS, and that was to fit a niche and not tryin g to compete. I loved ED untill I ran out of things to do. Props to Braben and co for making a fun game. But now i must mourn the dangerous.

Well, as you are aware, it is being developed. That means built pieces at a time. Landing on a planet with no atmosphere is easier to develop than landing on one with an atmosphere, so that would be the obvious first step. They've told us that this'll be fleshed out with updates leading to more and more features in this update.

Flowers don't pop right out of the seed, you know; they sprout, reach, grow, and eventually reach maturity over a period of time. You can't just grab the sprout and manually stretch it into a fully grown plant. This is a similar situation.

Patience, my pet. Good things come to those who wait.

 

[cpbtrading]

Isn't it just as likely that, as planetary landings are not yet enabled, the planetary meshes and textures are not yet available in the Level of Detail needed for a close approach? After all, if you can't get close to planets except via a long slow trek, why put the effort into coding for mesh and texture generation at high detail for launch. Of course, if someone were to trek to a planet they'd find the mesh and texture very poor giving a misleading impression of scale. Maybe that's why FD locked planetary approaches, because someone might get the wrong end of the stick.
:
I'm almost certain that there will be some form of "jump" effect, i.e. a loading screen, but mainly because that would make the architecture the same as for space and because there will need to be some mechanism to allow faster travel around the planet.

I understand where your coming from with your answer in the first part of your post. That the level of detail will be low, its in older videos where players have done just that and got close to the surface. But I disagree with why they've locked it out to stop players. But that's just different points of view.
.
To your second part, yes there will be loading screens, that is what I'm fully expecting, why! just for the reasons I have been talking about. The scale in game, for me, doesn't look or seem correct. So yes.. I'm fully expecting loading screens. Although many other games in the genre, won't or haven't got them. Just a shame FD here, needs to say one thing then sort of give the impression of something else. I'm just questioning the scale in-game, I've asked in the thread regards Horizon, but I don't expect an answer.

- - - Updated - - -

Are you quite sure you were expecting to play SP offline?

Because...


16/11/2014:




But I guess, if there's an ideal thread for illogical and contradictory axe-grinding for the sake of it, you can't go past this one!

Your correct I couldn't remember seeing it written down, as I said there. Until someone pointed it out then refunds started happening. Doesn't stop me being disappointed either way.

 

[WreckWren]

"Star Citizen has stopped working.

Windows is checking for a solution to the problem..."

Downloading... XXX/20+GB

Every damn update. I had to stop checking it so frequently just based on how poorly it's distributed, and that's not even getting into the versions that are unplayable.


One such unplayable update was the one that caused me to buy E: D, and since that I've played several hundred hours - a lot compared to the 5 or so I've accumulated floating around in a tiny sphere being blinded by bloom effects.


No doubt it'll be moderately interesting, but SC seems all about flash and not substance. We've got a very average looking FPS mode, a couple square KM of empty space, a corridor & some bloom effects to show for the 80+ million invested.

 

[tdshooter]

not trying to compete? if you mean not make planetary landings they had plans for that for a very long time lol

 

[Cmdr Eagleboy]

I will be broken record and i will repeat - there won't be loading screens regarding graphics of the game (please go learn what LOD is). Only transition will be network related. Also your view is wrong on so many levels. That alpha planet - LOD crashed previously while player being very high above planet. After that instead of crash sphere disappeared.

Seriously, stop these vague FUD attacks.
ED has 1:1 planets and landings will be seamless.

 

[cpbtrading]

I will be broken record and i will repeat - there won't be loading screens regarding graphics of the game (please go learn what LOD is). Only transition will be network related. Also your view is wrong on so many levels. That alpha planet - LOD crashed previously while player being very high above planet. After that instead of crash sphere disappeared.

Seriously, stop these vague FUD attacks.
ED has 1:1 planets and landings will be seamless.

That's your view and indeed your entitled to it. I just don't agree with it.

- - - Updated - - -

I will be broken record and i will repeat - there won't be loading screens regarding graphics of the game (please go learn what LOD is). Only transition will be network related. Also your view is wrong on so many levels. That alpha planet - LOD crashed previously while player being very high above planet. After that instead of crash sphere disappeared.

Seriously, stop these vague FUD attacks.
ED has 1:1 planets and landings will be seamless.

No, I was hoping and expecting planet landings, I just want to know the scale in-game. I have approached FD for it (planet size/scale, in-game), not expecting an answer though. But I'd be very interested to find out.

 

[Cmdr Eagleboy]

That's your view and indeed your entitled to it. I just don't agree with it.

No dear cpbtrading, those are facts. Unless you have evidence on contrary, and you are ready to accuse FD of lying that is.

 

[cpbtrading]

No dear cpbtrading, those are facts. Unless you have evidence on contrary, and you are ready to accuse FD of lying that is.

That is what I'm looking into now, if I get an answer, which I won't I can almost guarantee that. Oh, and it is only your view, which again, I don't agree with.

 

[Cmdr Eagleboy]

That is what I'm looking into now, if I get an answer, which I won't I can almost guarantee that. Oh, and it is only your view, which again, I don't agree with.

So you don't trust what FD have stated till now?

 

[newman1702]

That is what I'm looking into now, if I get an answer, which I won't I can almost guarantee that. Oh, and it is only your view, which again, I don't agree with.

The only issue with this line of reasoning is that it's a closed loop requiring no evidence - indeed, even the lack of evidence is presented as evidence in and of itself. In addition, you've ignored some pretty sound counter arguments and measuring methods. When you were told that orbiting Earth at a certain speed is a much more accurate method than landing and eyeballing the curvature of the horizon on your monitor (to say nothing of gauging scale through pre-alpha videos on youtube), you promptly ignored it. If you're so sure, go and measure.. then go park in Saturn's rings and tell me that Saturn is only some 100-200km in diameter (or whatever number you wish to claim). This all after being proven wrong about 1:1 being impossible in a 3d engine.

 

[Gully Foyle]

Who let the toddlers out of the playpen?
Jeez come on people, could we please stop working ourselves into a frenzy over something that hasn't even happened yet?
There is zero wrong with FD rolling out planetary landings slowly. There are reasons such as beta testing etc. They ain't EA or Blizzard or even SquareEnix.
How about you cut them a little slack? Get the Lifetime Pass and you will see stuff happen faster!
Chill out, impatience is silly and the extreme entitlement some CMDRs show is laughable and a sign of the instant on/get it now mentality the western world has evolved into due to our consumeristic culture.
In other words: Honk On Bobo!