Yup, but I'm assuming that with around 39 million Bucks at their disposal, or at least whatever's left of that after they spent s***loads on making all those cheesy pseudo-TV talent shows, that SC will be utilising CRYENGINE (note the caps, i.e. the current fourth generation version of it, where they started dropping the iteration number, not CryEngine 3). A commercial developer license with a royalty deal for that engine is what, a million Bucks maybe? Well within their price range, however, how suited is that to the task? I dunno.
how does ED compare to SC ?
- Thread starter inquisiteur
- Start date
Yup, but I'm assuming that with around 39 million Bucks at their disposal, or at least whatever's left of that after they spent s***loads on making all those cheesy pseudo-TV talent shows, that SC will be utilising CRYENGINE (note the caps, i.e. the current fourth generation version of it, where they started dropping the iteration number, not CryEngine 3). A commercial developer license with a royalty deal for that engine is what, a million Bucks maybe? Well within their price range, however, how suited is that to the task? I dunno.
Neither do I. Not looked into the latest version.
I don't think most people on this thread are talking down Star Citizen, seems to me that many here are backers and are looking forward to it. What most people are talking down, appears to be all the cheesy marketing and stuff, which let's face it, is crass and deserves to be talked down. But, when we fight our way through all that stuff, footage of the actual game itself looks great and I suspect most people would agree with that.
In the meantime, a hundred ways? What are the other 58 ways to talk it down? I've only found 42 of them!
Last edited:
Yeah, it's a bit of a shame that people are so partisan and, at times, scarily defensive of ED when they could both be great games. And to add other ones, I'm becoming more and more interested in Limit Theory and Eve Valkyrie... looking forward to all 4 to be honest, despite that each and every one (including ED) will have cons, as well as pros.
I think the cryengine is one of the best engines they could have picked. It's probably some excellent piece of mad german engineering All the brainiest german nerds who want to work on high tech games stuff want to go there, and they are somewhat obsessed with realism and software design that generalizes well. Anyway at least it covers all the first person and vehicle stuff really well, not just render wise but also character animation and asset pipeline etc.. Actually I was worried about FD pulling off cool first person gameplay but then I saw the video of The Outsider
Generally whether the engine supports seamless terrain over 50 square kilometers or several light years makes no big difference, because the essential mechanisms for streaming and recentering the physics simulation etc have to be there for both cases. And as they only have "boxes in space" they probably don't have to change anything for that at all.
And since PG needs to be custom developed it makes no difference either. You can always add a custom "node" that uses the GPU directly. There is the thing of terrain engine, normally you use clip maps for a "flat earth" terrain. But again for a space sim you have to develop custom code anyway. The nerds at CryTek probably jump at the chance to implement PG stuff into their engine as well.
PS: Sorry about annoying people with SC bashing. But if not in this thread, then where?
All the brainiest german nerds who want to work on high tech games stuff want to go there, and they are somewhat obsessed with realism and software design that generalizes well. Anyway at least it covers all the first person and vehicle stuff really well, not just render wise but also character animation and asset pipeline etc.. Actually I was worried about FD pulling off cool first person gameplay but then I saw the video of The Outsider Generally whether the engine supports seamless terrain over 50 square kilometers or several light years makes no big difference, because the essential mechanisms for streaming and recentering the physics simulation etc have to be there for both cases. And as they only have "boxes in space" they probably don't have to change anything for that at all.
And since PG needs to be custom developed it makes no difference either. You can always add a custom "node" that uses the GPU directly. There is the thing of terrain engine, normally you use clip maps for a "flat earth" terrain. But again for a space sim you have to develop custom code anyway. The nerds at CryTek probably jump at the chance to implement PG stuff into their engine as well.
PS: Sorry about annoying people with SC bashing. But if not in this thread, then where?
if not in this thread, then where?
This may be a silly question, but do the SC devs pick up constructive criticism on their forums?
Jenner
I wish I was English like my hero Tj.
That is sadly quite prevalent around here.
Hmm, I'd say SC devs are too fat and rich and don't have to pick up anything.
EDIT: Ahh sorry I did it again
hmm, well I just watched this video and it reminded me what amazing creative talent they have working on SC and how very different it is to Elite. So in the interest of balance here is some excellent behind the scenes work from the Foundry 42 guys.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yaq7LUOZIkI
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yaq7LUOZIkI
My criticism is the pronunciation of Idris (2:28). And also the phraseology "no rock left unturned" (1:43). Makes me mad.
For that reason I'm out.
For that reason I'm out.
Last edited:
Can be either:
http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/cobra
Originated from the Latin Colubra (snake) it would be pronounced Ko as David says it I believe.
Last edited:
I don't think there's many (any?) people here that "have it in" for SC. It's fair enough to point out things that one does not like about the SC project and then to compare those to ED.
Personally I hope SC turns out to be a great game and it's certainly ambitious.
There may well be quite a bit of ignorance about what's going to be in SC (I noticed you correcting someone over the page as to trading) - but then I guess most posters here aren't going to be as knowledgeable about SC as they are ED, no surprise there. It's good that you and others are able to correct those misunderstandings.
Agreed, and personally (and I've said this a few times now) I am particularly looking forward to the Squadron 42 campaign. This part of SC does mark it out as quite different (yet similar) to E : D.
Yup, that probably sums up a difference. Squadron 42 is a bit like 'be in the movie' whereas ED will be more like 'write your own movie'.
See the Sq42 stuff really does look excellent - its this aspect that I look forwards to most in the SC project now. Used to be the MP but I think that the team in Foundry can really come up with a great SP game in the SC universe. I get much more of a "DB feeling" from Erin Roberts too which in a weird way gives me confidence in that side of the whole thing.
Yeah, that Squadron 42 video was very impressive, especially as that team is relatively new. The mining machine thing looked epic.