The Star Citizen Thread

Status
Thread Closed: Not open for further replies.

Boomotang

Banned
B
Jack Booted Thug said:
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.
Click to expand...

It won't be the same animation every time, and it won't flip the helmet every time. Devs have already said that they will add variety. But it's their first goal to get all the different animations required, which are a LOT. Makes sense to me...
 
Last edited:

Viking

Viking
Jack Booted Thug said:
What defines a combat situation?
Click to expand...

Nobody knows for sure, but we've been told a couple of combat situation types.

In SC you'll be thrown out of cruise mode(?) if there are any dangerous situations ahead, such as asteroids or hostiles which you need to take care of before resuming your flight. That defines one type of "combat" situation.

Another situation is when you combat opponents, you can't jump to another system until you've cleared the danger. However, you can use your engines to get far away (hence, clear the danger) and then jump, if you're close to a jump point.
 

tooterfish

T
Boomotang said:
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.
Click to expand...
No... no, I'm not. In fact I'm not comparing at all, if you read carefully (take off your rose tints and try it) I'm decrying the "kitchen sink" approach to SC's design. It's going to bite them eventually in my opinion.

I'm not going to get drawn into an argument the merits of each game, so you can just stop right now fella.
Boomotang said:
SC will never have that. SC's universe contains Artificial Gravity. ED's does not.
Click to expand...
Yeah... that's totally scuppered that prediction. Oh wait no it hasn't.

I'll bet you 10 spacebux that by the end of the year, SC will have a station/ship with docking bays on the "walls" and "ceiling". Not because it needs it like Elite does, but because it looks cool.
 
Last edited:

Viking

Viking
SC will have space stations you can dock to and walk around inside, plus dock to other ships though docking hatches/rings.
 

withnail

withnail
Contrary to popular belief, I have found the Elite Dangerous thread on the SC forums to be more positive.

Both games are going to be great, and we always knew that SC was going to take a different route to ED. The scope of SC is impressive, and I, for one, am looking forward to it.

I hope they carry it off!
 

Slawkenbergius

Slawkenbergius
Boomotang said:
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........:rolleyes:
Click to expand...

I wasn't trying to make an issue of it, and pointed out that Elite has also taken ideas from other games. In fact, I think 'fire groups' also existed in MechWarrior, but were called 'weapon groups'. Maybe RSI borrowed from MechWarrior too (or whatever game MechWarrior borrowed the idea from) and chose the same name by coincidence, or maybe both sets of devs came up with the idea independently, or maybe RSI's fire-groups thing is something else completely. It's just amusing trying to spot ideas that may have been borrowed.

Here you go:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vl2gWUjO3rE&feature=player_embedded

It's actually quite interesting to see how much MechWarrior is like the ground-based equivalent of these games.
 
Last edited:

Viking

Viking
Slawkenbergius said:
It's just amusing trying to spot ideas that may have been borrowed.
Click to expand...

Why? What's the purpose of doing that, other than point it out here as what sounds very close to "stealing" IP?

The whole industry influence each other all the time. Nothing strange about that. CR has said many times that Star Wars is his biggest insperation and what made him decide to make his own games. So if SC looks a bit like Star Wars it's no coincidence.

Then again, CR was one of the pioneers, like DB, and both of them has made history with new ideas. You can say that many of the space sims has used their games as inspiration, not so much the other way around.
 
Last edited:

Dr Wookie

Dr Wookie
Heh, the pax footage certainly looks better (and more favourably received) than it did on the live stream... hurray for judicious editing :p!

I've stumped up $40, mainly for Squadron 42, but I have to say I found a fair number of things that were off-putting, such as the flight model, the spinning weapons on the HUD, and the heavily retro weapons systems... I hope they are differentiated by something other than the colours of their particle effects!

Plus, I'm really not a fan of the 3rd person perspective and I'm glad that ED doesn't have it.
 
Last edited:

Styggron

S
It was great looking at the footage.

I quite like the third person perspective, always did, I am so glad it is there, actually I think in SC you can turn off the cockpit altogether which would be my preferred option and just use a HUD. It is a pity it is not an option with ED but then again they are different games :) There is plenty out there for everyone.

Fantastic to see an exterior view and a fast yaw which I really like from what I can see in the footage. Until I fly it though I can't really comment on the flight model, all I know is what I can see in clips and vids and I like what I see so far :)
 

Doctor_Demento

Doctor_Demento
Trying to run 3rd person POV combat = dead

I've been in bed sick all day but got up to move around. Read this and I think some of you are mistaken about 3rd person POV. Yes SC has it. But when you go to 3rd person you lose all your onscreen controls. And it doesn't go back very far either. They have shown the 3rd person stuff so people can see the ships and their movement, animation and what the weapons look like firing. The game is designed for 1st person POV just like ED is. You can use 3rd person to land perhaps if that helps you do so. But flying and combat in it will put you at a disadvantage. This has been stated over and over and over for a very long time now. Official statement from game dev: http://partedveil.com/index.php?p=2&quote=907282 OK back to bed now. :(
 

Slawkenbergius

Slawkenbergius
Viking said:
Why? What's the purpose of doing that, other than point it out here as what sounds very close to "stealing" IP?
Click to expand...

Just wasting time on the forums, as usual.... It's like pointing out homages in films, or anything like that. There's no real point to it, but as a bit of a geek, it's something I find entertaining.
 

Viking

Viking
Doctor_Demento said:
But flying and combat in it will put you at a disadvantage. This has been stated over and over and over for a very long time now. Official statement from game dev: http://partedveil.com/index.php?p=2&quote=907282
Click to expand...

Yes, you're right about that. They won't get any HUD or other combat controls.

My objection to the 3rd POV is simply that it can maybe be exploited and I don't want a remote possibility for that to happen. Plus I react somewhat to that they show it to us while combatting, when it only heightens the expectations in those who want 3rd POV in combat too that they'll have their way.

The more they show us it's possible, the less likely it is we'll ever be able to get rid of it, I think. It's like showing candy to kids and telling them they can't get it until Saturday, then remind them again the next day it's not before Saturday by showing the candy again, and the next day, the next, etc. It'll only make them wanting the candy more. :)

Actually, I think it's already a lost cause to get rid of the 3rd POV during combat. It's too late to change now.
 

drbosnovich

D
I dunno, there was a lot of 3PV hoo-haa in the wake of the DFM demo in December (woo alliteration), since the radar wasn't working, people used 3PV view to see what direction the attackers were coming from.

CIG had to put out lots of statments in the aftermath, which I think were pretty clear that 3PV was not a viable combat option and they were commited to ensuring it wasn't; by adding things like camera intertia, switching delays and so on. I'm sure if it's shown to be exploitable in alpha, they'll alter it to ensure that it isn't.

Another interesting discussion coming out of the DFM reveal is the 'decoupled mode'; which appears to damp attitude changes, unlike its Elite counterpart. It also seems possible that lateral translation is only available in this mode, and it appeared to me that lateral translation was damped; Which seems odd and somehow unworkable given lateral becomes fore-and-aft (which isn't damped) at the push of a rudder pedal.

Anyway we'll see how the control schemes compare; it's amazing how after all these explanations and videos, it really is guess-work to see how it will actually behave. Certainly the fact that 'freelancer mode' exists in SC will mean CIG will have to do some serious control tweaking to ensure it genuinely is controller-agnostic.
 

tooterfish

T
Viking said:
What do you mean by "oriented on one plane"?
Click to expand...
I mean that "up" is always the same direction, unlike Port Zelada, where "up" entirely depends on where you're stood.

This only applies to the larger structures I've seen. I've no idea how ship to ship docking will end up working, hopefully we'll see all kinds of wonky orientations with those. Should make boarding videos good for a laugh.
Viking said:
My objection to the 3rd POV is simply that it can maybe be exploited and I don't want a remote possibility for that to happen.
Click to expand...
I share your concerns here 100%.

You can already see it happen in the newer vid, where he hides his ship in the shadow of that object (I can't remember what it is exactly, debris?). He's in 3rd POV and peering over the object while his ship is entirely hidden from view.

That's the thing about 3rd POV, people get used to abusing it without thinking about it. Then they complain that they can't use 1st POV because it's claustrophobic... well compared to 3rd POV, of course it is! That's the point...
 

Styggron

S
Doctor_Demento said:
I've been in bed sick all day but got up to move around. Read this and I think some of you are mistaken about 3rd person POV. Yes SC has it. But when you go to 3rd person you lose all your onscreen controls.
Click to expand...

Not if you have a HUD overlay you don't. :)


and we are of course discussing SC as this is the SC thread. ;)
 

Doctor_Demento

Doctor_Demento
Nice try Styggron......grin

Just got up again and seen your post Styggron. LOL, nice try. You are aware 3rd party mods can be disabled. And it is my understanding they plan on doing just that for several 3rd party apps people plan on trying to use to get by stuff that has been hard coded out the the game. You know what they say. Build a better mouse trap and someone will try to build a better mouse. Good example is FRAPS and using the RivaTuner Statistics Server. If you run the server tuner then the FRAPS doesn't work. All they have to do is code out one single port and that app is toast...........grin. ;)

OK back to bed. Man this sucks. :(
 
Status
Thread Closed: Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom