That is the one thing you guys have it great about here. People are used to the proper way of things. On the RSI forums there is a large number of 3PV kids who haven't grown up/evolved into proper 1PV pilots. They want to do their whole life in 3PV even if it is an exploit. They always want things so damn easy. LOL!
The Star Citizen Thread
- Thread starter Ril
- Start date
- Status
That is the one thing you guys have it great about here. People are used to the proper way of things. On the RSI forums there is a large number of 3PV kids who haven't grown up/evolved into proper 1PV pilots. They want to do their whole life in 3PV even if it is an exploit. They always want things so damn easy. LOL!
There is actually a new Star Citizen DFM video out. Chris Roberts certainly does seem to be copying ideas right out of Elite shamelessly. It's actually amazing. The new DFM footage shows the cockpit freezing over after you turn all your heat generation systems off....Hmmm wonder where they pinched that idea from? Scanner is also looking suspiciously Elite like.
Yeah I noticed the frosting; seemed a little too obviously similar. The elite scanner however has been the best space-sim implementation since 1984, and many sims (starlancer, X series for example) have rightly used the same idea. It would be crazy to use anything different.
While I support this game, and as I said previously I do have a fair amount of funds in, I am disappointed in the direction that RSI is taking.
Sure the graphics are nice, and the flight model looks interesting within limitation; my beef really has to do with this flipping 1st / 3rd PoVs. Not only does it appear required -e.g for landing - and a god eye view for advantage that will essentially force the game in that mode; it also will be a nightmare for anyone using HMD's as either a person will have a huge disadvantage by staying 1PoV or that person will require a huge / multiple airplane bags within easy reach.
The space combat game looks pretty, but the mechanics feels more like a Call of Duty type environment than a space game. In that it disappoint me.
At the very least, it differentiate itself enough from ED in that the only common ground will really be that they both are in space, and they both will be enjoyable within their own context. I do have a feeling thought that personally I will be spending more time in ED than SC if only due to the better immersion(tm) available in ED, especially when it comes to VR and presence.
It may be that things may change as they go forward, but each iteration so far is demonstrating that many of the kickstarters fundamental discussions and presentations are falling, victims to the incessant demands of a very active newer community that is looking only for their next COD fix. Sad, really.
Won't stop me from supporting it, still looking forward to the story in S42 and to what else they will do. Too bad that it fell a notch or two in my book thought.
------- The above post is only my humble opinion on review of the latest video. Things may change so my opinion may also change. so take it with a grain of salt.
Last edited:
It's been fairly obvious they'll throw in any feature they think sounds/looks coolest from the get go, that's why the design is so bloated.
The design initially didn't feature any procedural generation at all for example, because "richly detailed hand crafted universe" is a good marketing soundbyte. Then Elite, No Man's Sky, Limit Theory... oh, PG is cool now? Yeah we were totally always going to be looking into that!
If the game ever gets finished to spec it'll be amazing. And of course, it looks stunning. But it's built up so much in the minds of its fans, you can't help but think a lot of people are going to end up very disappointed.
Edit: Elite's new Coriolis made such an impact that I'm counting the days when a spinning space station you can land inside makes an appearance in SC... you know its coming.
The design initially didn't feature any procedural generation at all for example, because "richly detailed hand crafted universe" is a good marketing soundbyte. Then Elite, No Man's Sky, Limit Theory... oh, PG is cool now? Yeah we were totally always going to be looking into that!
If the game ever gets finished to spec it'll be amazing. And of course, it looks stunning. But it's built up so much in the minds of its fans, you can't help but think a lot of people are going to end up very disappointed.
Edit: Elite's new Coriolis made such an impact that I'm counting the days when a spinning space station you can land inside makes an appearance in SC... you know its coming.
Last edited:
I wonder how many forum members at SC know that one of their biggest concerns is non existent over here?
I've followed the 3PV arguments over there for over a year and this DFM reveal has really opened them up again.
I know balancing hasn't even started yet though.
I do quite like the idea of the GLOC mechanic as a thing you learn to manipulate to your advantage - the nearest thing we have to that I guess is the speed sweet spot mechanic which TBH doesn't really make as much sense but is something you can learn to use.
I actually think too big a deal is made of the 3PV thing; and that its effective tactical utility will be about the same as the external view was is wing commander; virtually useless. I think anyone trying to extend their visual awareness will pay a high penalty in control, ability to aim, and will end up dead; and if that isn't the case in Alpha it will be fixed to ensure it is. I'm guessing, but I suspect the ability to watch someone from behind cover will be pretty instubstantial given the effectiveness of sensors and the range and spacing between ships in the PU; I may be wrong of course, but the counter argument is equally speculative.
Certainly, I think CIG do themselves no favours by overly concentrating on external views in their videos; it brings up this kind of debate, and makes the physics look all wonky.
But the fact is that most people will want a 3PV in the game; for pretty pictures as much as anything; and seeing as I suspect it won't make much of a difference combat-wise, I'm really not opposed to the idea, even though I don't personally like it, and much prefer the elite stance.
Clearly they need to make sure of some things, such as G-loc effects also affecting your control and vision in 3PV; and limiting the rotation speed and zoom effects to prevent it being overly useful as a tactical tool. But I think it's pretty clear that those kinds of huge exploits will not be in the final game.
Certainly, I think CIG do themselves no favours by overly concentrating on external views in their videos; it brings up this kind of debate, and makes the physics look all wonky.
But the fact is that most people will want a 3PV in the game; for pretty pictures as much as anything; and seeing as I suspect it won't make much of a difference combat-wise, I'm really not opposed to the idea, even though I don't personally like it, and much prefer the elite stance.
Clearly they need to make sure of some things, such as G-loc effects also affecting your control and vision in 3PV; and limiting the rotation speed and zoom effects to prevent it being overly useful as a tactical tool. But I think it's pretty clear that those kinds of huge exploits will not be in the final game.
Last edited:
I actually think this is the community's problem to solve. CIG exist to please the fans (and rightly so), which means if the fans say the best damn space sim ever is a ninja pirate zombie robot in space, that's what they'll get.
Being a fan of a crowdfunded game is harder than a traditional game. You need to be willing to demand a clear vision from the company, and complain when their focus drifts from that vision. It's difficult to complain about things that are great in their own right just because they don't fit the vision, but without a publisher to crack the whip there's no-one else to do it. For example, Mazhurg's post above is a great example of the sort of critical friendship crowdfunded games need.
In the infamous Saitek infomercial, they also mentioned they had this concept of 'fire groups', which sounded suspiciously familiar...
Then again, I'm pretty sure Elite's bobbleheads are ripped off from MechWarrior so it's hard to get all high and mighty about that kind of stuff. I hope Frontier won't be afraid of pinching an idea or two from the dogfighting module if they think it's a good fit!
Since I suspect it'll be exploited, some of us will do our best to convince CIG to not allow switching to 3PV during combat. Players can always watch their ship and scenery in 3PV in non-combat situations.
They really love their helmet flipping, don't they
Thing is - you never flip a helmet. They are too heavy to spin like that, too expensive to drop, and if you mess the flip it'll break your nose
[Sentence redacted]
Fiction provides quite a bit of leeway to do whatever you want to.
Last edited by a moderator:
What defines a combat situation?
I don't like the third person in Star Citizen. It is jarring in both the walking and flying aspects.
E: D feels a lot better in that it is easier to experience "being in the ship" as opposed to merely "controlling an avatar whose eyes you can look out from time to time."
I would say you never flip a helmet the same way each time and that you never flip a helmet every single time.
Otherwise it just ends up looking like scripted candy.
I HATE it in games when you hit a "use" button and instantly magically teleport inside of your vehicle.
Last edited:
I didn't get that at all. They plonked a new stick on someone's desk, and they were all 'oo this stick is soo well suited to SC. Look I could bind some commands to some of the buttons! It's new and unheard of functionality'.
I agree with people about the animations; it reminds me of frantically stabbing the A button in a JRPG hoping it will somehow make the incredibly slow and unstoppable letter-by-letter messages speed up. but the 'I want to make my pilot go to the toilet three times per day' brigade is very powerful in SC. Insta-spawn is horrible, but so is watching the same, 15 second long animation every time you do some common task.
One big problem with having such a slow animation is that it would interfere with stuff like escaping from a firefight by getting into your ship and flying off. Once the script has taken over, it's roughly 10s for the character to get into their ship and out of the line-of-fire. For me, that's far too long to be exposed for. It would kind of equally suck if they just say that you're invincible during the animation though.
At the very least, I'm hoping that there's a much faster animation for entering your ship during combat.
At the very least, I'm hoping that there's a much faster animation for entering your ship during combat.
Last edited:
This one made me laugh...rofl
ED's PG created content will be in the game from the start. SC PG created content won't be in the game until well after full release. They aren't relying on it for their game.
SC's FPS gameplay will be in the game from the start. In fact, it's already in the game, just without the guns. It looks pretty cool to be walking on the landing pad in space that has Artificial Gravity, and then jump off of it into the zero G environment.
When will ED have FPS gameplay where you can walk around in your bigger ships, or climb into the cockpit? You're comparing apples and oranges.
Edit: Elite's new Coriolis made such an impact that I'm counting the days when a spinning space station you can land inside makes an appearance in SC... you know its coming.
SC will never have that. SC's universe contains Artificial Gravity. ED's does not.
Last edited:
Really? You consider "fire groups" ripping off ED? Come on man, you're better than that.
Tons of board games use dice too. Are they ripping each other off? Might as well take out shields in SC, because ED's alpha had them first........
Seriously. First you guys complain that you don't like SC's flight model (without being able to play it first hand mind you) as much as ED's, and then you complain that they have similar features to ED? Give me a break...
Last edited:
- Status