The Star Citizen Thread v5

Status
Thread Closed: Not open for further replies.

briguy168

briguy168
ianw said:
Oopsie - I don't think you understand hearsay evidence!

Basically - it's anything you haven't witnessed yourself. So - when you - and I - see the same video - we can only give evidence as to what we have seen. A video.

Our opinions as to how that video came to be are inadmissible as evidence because we didn't witness how the videos were made as they were being made.

Therefore we cannot give any admissible evidence as to their authenticity.

Look it up if you don't believe me.
Click to expand...

dictionary.com said:
unverified, unofficial information gained or acquired from another and not part of one's direct knowledge; an item of idle or unverified information or gossip; rumor:
Click to expand...

IDK, seems to me that you are misusing the term hearsay. CIG has said the demo was run in-game, not in-editor or in-engine but in-game. They have established their claim. Your assertion that it's fake is contrary to that claim; ergo the burden of proof is upon you to prove that your opinion is a fact and not "acquired from another and not part of one's direct knowledge". So either post this undeniable evidence that shows it's fake or shut up.


PS. I find it amusing that none commented that these series of posts were on page 666 [knocked out]
 

CMDR_Orlando

Banned
CMDR_Orlando
ianw said:
Are there any jump points you can highlight where we can tick all the things that sounded promising - that are now functioning well in game?
Click to expand...

Almost everything "visual" we have playable ingame is documented in those Jump Point articles:
From ships, space stations, hangars, weapons, UI, logos, props, avatars. There's also interviews with Dev's ranging from design team, to network guys, Q&A etc
Add that to lore stories and it's always around a 60+ pages pdf.

All the subscribers stuff can be found in their sub-reddit: https://www.reddit.com/r/RSIsubscriber/

Good list with the content of each JP: http://sc-convoy.com/?page_id=376
 
Last edited:

AlPilg

AlPilg
briguy168 said:
IDK, seems to me that you are misusing the term hearsay. CIG has said the demo was run in-game, not in-editor or in-engine but in-game. They have established their claim. Your assertion that it's fake is contrary to that claim; ergo the burden of proof is upon you to prove that your opinion is a fact and not "acquired from another and not part of one's direct knowledge". So either post this undeniable evidence that shows it's fake or shut up.


PS. I find it amusing that none commented that these series of posts were on page 666 [knocked out]
Click to expand...

If he said it was run in game he has a funny definition of it, or he's downright lying. It was not run in any sort of playable game whatsoever.

Why do I care, I don't really you best get on with it.

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

Just don't put anymore money into it.
 
Last edited:

ianw

I
briguy168 said:
IDK, seems to me that you are misusing the term hearsay. CIG has said the demo was run in-game, not in-editor or in-engine but in-game. They have established their claim. Your assertion that it's fake is contrary to that claim; ergo the burden of proof is upon you to prove that your opinion is a fact and not "acquired from another and not part of one's direct knowledge". So either post this undeniable evidence that shows it's fake or shut up.


PS. I find it amusing that none commented that these series of posts were on page 666 [knocked out]
Click to expand...

CMDR_Orlando said:
Almost everything "visual" we have playable ingame is documented in those Jump Point articles:
From ships, space stations, hangars, weapons, UI, logos, props, avatars. There's also interviews with Dev's ranging from design team, to network guys, Q&A etc
Add that to lore stories and it's always around a 60+ pages pdf.

All the subscribers stuff can be found in their sub-reddit: https://www.reddit.com/r/RSIsubscriber/

Good list with the content of each JP: http://sc-convoy.com/?page_id=376
Click to expand...

You're still not getting it guys.

I used to get paid for this stuff - the definition of hearsay evidence is not up for debate - it's not something we don't quite understand.

I'll try and explain it in simple terms.

You can say you've seen interviews, subscriber stuff and all that guff. And I can't argue with that because I don't know what you've seen - how could I?

But you can't say that the gamescom videos weren't faked unless you're claiming to be a CIG employee who witnessed them being made. Is that what you're claiming?

So - assuming you're not an employee all you are doing is commenting on something you've seen someone else claim. Just like I am - is that really so difficult to understand/acknowlege?
 
Last edited:

tooterfish

T
briguy168 said:
IDK, seems to me that you are misusing the term hearsay. CIG has said the demo was run in-game, not in-editor or in-engine but in-game. They have established their claim. Your assertion that it's fake is contrary to that claim; ergo the burden of proof is upon you to prove that your opinion is a fact and not "acquired from another and not part of one's direct knowledge". So either post this undeniable evidence that shows it's fake or shut up.
Click to expand...
CIG also said Star Marine was weeks from release... but their previous form for lying to backers is besides the point anyway. When people say this was fake they mean it was an interactive set piece, not that it was entirely rendered in Maya.

Do you understand the distinction between a heavily scripted vertical slice and real live dynamic gameplay? And how much easier it is to get one up and running over the other?

With the vertical slice you can ignore inconvenient use cases, use temporary solutions that aren't robust enough for public builds, work around bugs, skip or gloss over parts where stuff just doesn't work yet and just plain hack crap together and get away with it (because no one's going off reservation). A vertical slice is a marketing tool more than it is a genuine milestone. In fact many studios are loathe to do them because they take resources away from real development, but they're often required to by their (evil) publishers for... wait for it... showing off at trade shows!

A vertical slice does not necessarily transfer to real live gameplay for all the reasons I gave above. If you don't understand that then you clearly don't understand development, Mr Netcode.
 
Last edited:

briguy168

briguy168
Noctrach said:
Every forum has its extremes, your apparent lack of any criticism of the game and its development is as extreme as some of the folks here who criticise everything about it. Whatever the cause, there's some clearly worrying or disturbing trends surrounding the development of Star Citizen that are seemingly not even being acknowledged by a large part of its fanbase. I'm not saying people should blindly condemn CIG for the stuff they do, but at the very least publically raise an eyebrow and call them out on some of the stuff.

I've seen big publishers like EA, Ubisoft, Sony, Microsoft and Activision declared Satan incarnate for lesser things than what CIG seems to get away with.

I play Elite with some other folks, all of us absolutely love what this game represents but you wouldn't be able to tell from some of our conversations. The fact we are so critical of it is borne out of our passion for it to succeed into becoming what it has the potential to be. Yet, this also means we feel the need to point out what we think is holding it back.

This is what you don't see on the RSI forums at all, and sparsely on the SC subreddit, frequently padded with the required "I love this game and all of you and have the deepest respect...but...". It's just a bit uncanny, especially in light of the recent NMS drama over hype fueled by blind faith and fanboyism...

It's the same thing where people desperately try to avoid comparing SC, Elite and NMS at all because "they do different things". That's just wrong, they have massive similarities between them and discussion on which one did a certain feature better is not only natural and healthy, but might actually turn out to improve the genre as a whole. (Provided the discussion remains somewhat respectful and sufficiently supported with arguments, subjective or otherwise)

An umbrella statement like "the entire demo was fake" is as much ignoring the facts as pretending there was nothing questionable about it.

Examples of imo obvious and fair questions following this demo:
- Why does the FPS gameplay seem to be so incredibly unpolished/alpha when SQ42 is supposedly coming out by end-of-year.
- Why was there no actual AI beyond stationary NPCs, even though SQ42 is a singleplayer that's going to heavily rely on such tech.
- This entire sequence was choreographed/scripted, how are these quests going to be without player-driven gameplay?
- Voice acting everything like this takes an insane amount of work, is the release going to feature more than 3-5 hours of these quests?
- If so, how much time are they expecting to spend on them? (SWTOR took over 5 years to get all their writing and voice acting done)

I could go on, but I think my point is clear.

Being passionate about a game means not only cheering when things turn out right, but also questioning or criticising things that don't. Otherwise you come of as... a bit of a cultist. (The inverse is also true though)

Edit: apologies for wall of text :eek: got carried away typing.
Click to expand...

No problem at all, it was pleasant to read something that is both balanced and down to earth.

I do agree that in any community, there are extremes and it is sad that people have to praise the game to get their concern not down voted to hell or for people to not jump on them; however, I don't blame them when you have a group of people who are either egging on someone who seems to have an inferiority complex and stubborn enough to commit to a 24-hour FUD campaign or really want to see a studio crash and burn. The same old arguments get tiring especially when a certain person is spreading around misinformation.

For most of those concerns, a reasonable explanation could be that it was an earlier build they had to "polish" for the Gamescon event. It's no different than other game studios that branch off of their MAIN months before an event to get it in as pristine shape as it can be while development continues. As for SQ42, yes it's true that one influences the other but the MMO Star Citizen is a completely different beast than a single-player game. We already know they have all the performance capture data and are tying that data to the in-game assets and story elements; they have mentioned that QA is already testing SQ42. I think the most reasonable thing to do is wait until Citizen Con to proclaim doom and gloom and not take the state of a, most likely, months old build to purport said doom and gloom.

You don't think that these concerns are also in the back of every most backers mind???
 

Instrument

I
Barking_Mad said:
I know showing text based missions don't make good advertising or demos, but really if I was backing this game it's the sort of thing I'd want to be told 'We've created a whole bunch these for you to do, with some variations.' Instead it's a one off mission that has apparently zero replay value as the mission giver double crosses you at the end.

It's something that sounds like it should be in S42, not the PPU.
Click to expand...

there was an interview with CR where he says most of the missions will be from jobwell and only be text, there will be NPC's in all the areas that give out missions but these will be rare
 

briguy168

briguy168
ianw said:
You're still not getting it guys.

I used to get paid for this stuff - the definition of hearsay evidence is not up for debate - it's not something we don't quite understand.

I'll try and explain it in simple terms.

You can say you've seen interviews, subscriber stuff and all that guff. And I can't argue with that because I don't know what you've seen - how could I?

But you can't say that the gamescom videos weren't faked unless you're claiming to be a CIG employee who witnessed them being made. Is that what you're claiming?

So - assuming you're not an employee all you are doing is commenting on something you've seen someone else claim. Just like I am - is that really so difficult to understand/acknowlege?
Click to expand...

So I guess if a developer came on here and said that the demo was in-game, however unavailable to the public, then you would have to prove that the demonstration was fake...that is some asinine bull crap and a 100% misrepresentation of how burden of proof works. Your whole premise is like the US astronauts claim they went to the moon and then you saying no they didn't because of x.
 

LeSabre

LeSabre
The thing that I keep in my mind is, that video of apparent gameplay they showed off, with everything working as a game should, no crashes, no glitchyness, no random blackscreens, all very nice looking and cinematic.

If that is the current state of where they are with technology and all the various facets needed to create a really swish level, why the heck are they allowing their beloved backers, the people who've funded this, to languish, fester, to grow so annoyed that refunds happen on the completely broken and hopelessly lol worthy PU? Why can no one play this (suddenly out of nowhere, with all features in and working reliably) level for themselves? Why hide something so obviously acceptable? Why can't people play that now instead of "going outdoors in my underpants in space".

I feel, they have shot themselves in the foot, firstly by not showing their backers this much sooner (seriously they should have been at this stage 2 years ago, inb4 lol hiring staff and finding offices lol) and secondly by now having a benchmark of their own creation that everyone can hold them to. How long until a cut down version minus the planet landing (that had a loading screen that few had spotted, think how Wing commander 1 used to load stuff in during autopilot and you'll see it) and minus any smoothness but plus lots of jank? Not forgetting that this is what they are very good at, creating an impressive display of creative goodstuff, only to completely forget about it a few months after.

As for the "its all live gameplay", yeah about that, go back through the stream and watch for when the camera is looking at the 'players' of the "mission", then count how many times there is a discrepancy or complete disconnect between what they are doing with their controls and what is happening on the screens they are playing on, bonus points for catching the two times where hands were not on any controls but ship movement happened/player view was changing on their screens.

As far as I'm concerned, its just usual gamescom hype that almost every publisher or development company does, it's just CIG fans are really ridiculously easy to hype up as they are so quick to forget the past, as per donkeys and carrots.
 
Status
Thread Closed: Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom