The Star Citizen Thread v 4

Status
Thread Closed: Not open for further replies.

ghcannon

G
Zyll Goliath said:
How difficult is for you to admit that this was such an obvious CIG mistake,and it was very sad one or funny I guess really depend how are you look at it...The worst thing it's not the actual knowledge about the CE and what this guys didn't know back then...the problem is that they need 3 DAYS&John Pritchett to figure this out....We are in 2016(back then maybe 2013) age where we can all communicate with each other instantly(like me&you) all over the world + GOOGLE the things... and NO ONE can figure this simple and obvious task for 72h......you see that's the problem....
Click to expand...

Not sure why you think that I think it was a complex thing to fix or that they didn't take too long or anything related to CIG's solving of the problem for that matter. I've no opinion other than that I can appreciate the complexity of an engine you haven't worked with before.

I simply stated that for them it was a bug when they saw they have that problem. It's a simple statement.
 

dsmart

Banned
D
viceroy_blue said:
Now, I'll elaborate on the "persistent" universe that is being advertised. I'll list what you will (and won't) be getting:
-A MMO like universe with thousands of people. Nope.
-More than 12 (or 24, even 48 people, if you like) different players in the same universe. Nope.
-Long lived effects of your actions. E.g. reputation, criminal counter, etc. in a universe. Nope.

What will you get then?

-Saves of your ship modifications
-Saves of your credits
-Saves of your clothes

All available now in a "baby" persistent universe, which is not capable of supporting more than tens of players, and no different than any single player game.

-Instances will be connected in the future.

I, too, like gambling sometimes, but when I know I am gambling and I actually have a chance of winning.
Click to expand...

Yes, that's pretty much it for their "persistence" atm. Remember that when PU 2.0 was launched back in Dec 2015, that was touted as "persistence" as well. Of course there was nothing persistent about it.

And as for the "connecting instances" part, they can't do it with that engine architecture. I actually touched on that subject in the "Death by a thousand cuts" section of my Condition Red blog.
 

MarktJones

MarktJones
I've never seen such a pointless argument about what is or isn't a bug. Ultimately it was a daft mistake and quite a funny story. I expect the Star Citizen devs found it funny (I've not watched the video), you've got to laugh at the stupid bugs/mistakes/whatever you want to call it.

Sounds like it's going to be a fun few months for people working on SQ42, having Chris Roberts constantly watching over their shoulder...
 

Asp Explorer

Asp Explorer
MarktJones said:
Sounds like it's going to be a fun few months for people working on SQ42, having Chris Roberts constantly watching over their shoulder...
Click to expand...

That is actually a fun thought. Having the "boss" hovering over their shoulder leads to opportunities to ask "How would you fix this?"

Good leadership is by example.
 

dsmart

Banned
D
ghcannon said:
It is/was a bug - please stop arguing you seem pretty funny.

A bug is not only, like mr BOT said, a mistake when writing code.
It's any behavior that deviates from the intention of the code/solution. A soon as they found the issue it's classified as a bug. Yes, it may have been as simple as toggling a stupid initialization parameter - that simply means that the bug will be/should be easy to fix.
Capish ?
Click to expand...

I've worked with lots of engines and are familiar with all the leading ones. The water level setting in CryEngine is not a bug. It's a feature of the engine being that it's for fps games. If you're making a space game, it's up to you to ensure that you disable it. Just like any game engine that has features that you either i) want to or don't want to use ii) setup according to the game you're building

Engines don't build the game for you.

Which brings me to the hilarity: In Aug 2014, CIG setup F42-GER staffed with some former CryTek engineers. Yet, this bug was in Star Citizen. The whole time.
 

Clawhammer

Clawhammer
dsmart said:
Yes, that's pretty much it for their "persistence" atm. Remember that when PU 2.0 was launched back in Dec 2015, that was touted as "persistence" as well. Of course there was nothing persistent about it.

And as for the "connecting instances" part, they can't do it with that engine architecture. I actually touched on that subject in the "Death by a thousand cuts" section of my Condition Red blog.
Click to expand...

And how got the aion people get their instances and presistence to work with the cryengine?
 

MarktJones

MarktJones
Asp Explorer said:
That is actually a fun thought. Having the "boss" hovering over their shoulder leads to opportunities to ask "How would you fix this?"

Good leadership is by example.
Click to expand...

We should have a competition, what motivational things do you expect Chris Roberts to be shouting at the SQ42 team?

Winner gets the attentions of several newly registered members of the forums :p

- - - - - Additional Content Posted / Auto Merge - - - - -

Stigbob said:
If CIG have successfully removed the space ocean from their tiny little map, does that mean the hangar aquarium fish will die ?.
Click to expand...

Damn it, I should have asked that one.

Must spread..etc...etc.
 

milligna

milligna
We should have a competition, what motivational things do you expect Chris Roberts to be shouting at the SQ42 team?
Click to expand...

"MORE BUT LESS!"

"I want to SMELL space!"

"I thought you said we'd be redoing that ladder?"

"Do you know how to unclog my vape pen?"

always-be-closing.jpg
 
Last edited:

dsmart

Banned
D
1500 said:
http://www.polygon.com/2016/5/30/11720714/what-to-expect-from-the-pc-gaming-show



Edit: Ninjad

http://i.imgur.com/5Pfw8p0.jpg
Click to expand...

They have finally come to the conclusion that they have nothing worthy to show. At this particular E3 event, any attempt to show SQ42 (which insiders tell me is complete and utter crap) will immediately show that both Star Citizen (aka PU) and SQ42 are completely screwed. Considering the dip (it is over 50% decline YOY from May 2015) in funding, showing anything less than stellar, will kill it.

Of course, one could argue that because I revealed what they were going to show* and indicated that it was utter rubbish, probably didn't help. There is absolutely no version of this whereby either of these two games gets completed and/or released in 2016. I had already posted that SQ42 was a mid to late 2017 release, amid the usual abuse from those-who-shall-not-be-named.

*So, not only is there now no release date for either Star Citizen or Squadron 42, but now reports remain consistent that, unless they cut and rush, it would take a miracle for even SQ42 episode one to see the light of day before mid to late 2017. Let than sink in.To add insult to injury, with all the different broadcast shows that they have, not only have they not shown any gameplay footage to backers, but now word is that they are going to be showing a “reveal” trailer at the upcoming PC Gaming Show or failing that, they will show it at the end of June. Yes, instead of showing backers what they have already paid for, they’re going to instead do the reveal at a third-party gaming event. That is how much respect they have for backers who made this whole thing possible.
Sources say that the trailer is about 2:30 mins long, will feature segments (you’re a turret gunner) from the first mission showing both Hamill and your commanding officer, Kelly, in some Godawful scene; and with dialog that makes even the        Vandul sequence look like an Oscar worthy performance. Oh, and apparently the only combat sequence is of a Starfarer under some sort of attack and lasts for all of about 30 secs. So basically, the majority of the trailer is of mocap bull     that has no relevance to gameplay. Essentially, it’s just Chris justifying his expensive mocap shoots and equipment, live actors – and a        script that reports say is as cringe-worthy as you could possible expect from the guy who made the Wing Commander movie and a string of horrid movies thereafter. All of which, in case most have forgotten, were buried in yet another failed venture. NOTE: They will most likely change the trailer now. But that’s fine because it’s highly unlikely they will change the game script because of a minor trailer leak. Then again.
Click to expand...
 

ghcannon

G
dsmart said:
I've worked with lots of engines and are familiar with all the leading ones. The water level setting in CryEngine is not a bug. It's a feature of the engine being that it's for fps games. If you're making a space game, it's up to you to ensure that you disable it. Just like any game engine that has features that you either i) want to or don't want to use ii) setup according to the game you're building

Engines don't build the game for you.

Which brings me to the hilarity: In Aug 2014, CIG setup F42-GER staffed with some former CryTek engineers. Yet, this bug was in Star Citizen. The whole time.
Click to expand...

I well understand what an engine feature is also. So you can assume we're on the same page. When they got this supposed problem they didn't say : "oh, let's put this in the feature tracker so we can go in later and disable the feature that's causing problems".
Instead it was something like "oh, let's put this in the bug tracker and spend 3 days figuring out what's wrong"
It just happened to be an unintendedly enabled feature. It might as well have been a thread lock that took the same amount of days to fix.

And ofcourse now it's clear that it's a matter of perspective. I choose to have the perspective of a developer. And as a developer, if I had that problem, I'd have to be pretty drunk to call my problem a 'feature'.

I can't lie - a part of me thinks your negative opinion of the project gives you the other perspective, under which it may as well be called a feature.
 

Asp Explorer

Asp Explorer
dsmart said:
Which brings me to the hilarity: In Aug 2014, CIG setup F42-GER staffed with some former CryTek engineers. Yet, this bug was in Star Citizen. The whole time.
Click to expand...

I think it's possible that the magic Germans simply did not point that out for the lulz. I am definitely no game developer, but it would make sense to me to check out the predefined states of whichever tool I had to use to get X done. Wether it's a RO-LPAR or a green light for Neutral on a bike.
 

ianw

I
Stigbob said:
If CIG have successfully removed the space ocean from their tiny little map, does that mean the hangar aquarium fish will die ?.
Click to expand...

I've spoken to one of my people who is a leading expert in "the programming".

He assures me that each fishtank has it's own instance and each fish it's own fizziks grid in which the space ocean can be on or off.

TLDR: Your fears are unfounded!
 

BOT #00001

BOT #00001
I don't understand why this is so difficult to grasp. CryEngine is NOT Star Citizen. CryEngine is the engine Star Citizen is built with. The water setting is NOT a bug in CryEngine. The undesired behavior caused by the incorrect setting of the water level in Star Citizen IS a bug.

Just like a variable isn't a bug in C++, but referencing the wrong variable in a program built on C++ IS a bug.
 
Status
Thread Closed: Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom