There is the theory that the map size is still 8000x8000x500 m with just the ships and player characters being scaled down to millimeter sizes and that is the reason why everything glitches and breaks.
The Star Citizen Thread v5
- Thread starter Brett C
- Start date
- Status
CMDR_Orlando
Banned
So what your saying is that it's a spacesim in a shoebox?
I don't know why but I find that very hard to believe.
What other games is he even referring to? Doom? Crash Bandicoot? Turok on the N64?
Probably because you don't understand game development.
It's not a particularly uncommon trick to use to get more out of your space budget. Of course, it causes all kinds of issues with stuff like physics, collision detection, movement sync between separate objects, and similar mechanisms that rely on high precision maths, all of which would show up a lot in a game that used such a trick…
Last edited:
Because if there is zero interaction between players in "zoom between the planets" mode then it is a simple collection of rooms.
CMDR_Orlando
Banned
Maybe GTA5 and Witcher3 as they have big world landscapes?
Here's Stanton System with all the planets, with the respective moons, derelict ships, space stations and all that it seems a good bunch of content for one System alone.
Not expecting all that by the end of the year in 3.0 but in the following updates.
But that would make the comparison completely nonsensical because you're not even doing anything planet-like and the horizon is irrelevant because you're never supposed to see it as anything more than a skybox detail anyway.
It would be like crowing that you have real-time crop growing in your Harvest Moon clone whereas in Star Craft, they use a build queue mechanic.
I'm pretty convinced, that this whole "64 bit" story never ever happened. Higher precision doesn't lead to more rounding error glitches. Quite the opposite, something like the Elite's Cobra engine runs smooth on a whole galaxy scale.
Additionally Roberts despite pretending to be a programmer, is incompetent enough, so he can't actually verify if he has a game engine with 64 bit precision. And with all the yes men he surrounded himself with no one will tell him the truth.
Insignificant_The_Galaxy_Cat
Banned
Yes, it IS hard to believe a word that Chris Roberts says, because Command
rlando, if this build of the game was available and, more importantly, *playable*, then why wasn't it made available to the gaming public at Gamescom itself, rather than at a totally sterilized, self-contained and fully controlled "presentation" in a separate venue down the road?I have NEVER known any developer, large or small, that has come to a major gaming convention with a playable development build of an upcoming title, only to have it NOT be available to be played in any capacity? And then compound that with saying this "secret build" will be available in a vague, undefined date, but please, carrying on paying for assets and content FOR said build that will not be available until it's released date (which nobody knows), at several times the price of a AAA game?
I believe the term that best describes this behaviour from CIG and Chris Roberts is that they are "stringing along" Star Citizen backers with another heap of hype and promises that on past history, they have never come close to delivering on... Or are you pleased as punch about the latest iteration of the PTU and how it's currently performing? (IE, *terribly*)
Last edited:
CMDR_Orlando
Banned
Another well put fan-made recap of Gamescom presentation focusing on the npc Miles Eckhart characther.
[video=youtube;KGxWpilwA-8]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KGxWpilwA-8[/video]
[video=youtube;KGxWpilwA-8]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KGxWpilwA-8[/video]
It will be released before the end of the year.
(Which year is not mentioned.)
There was one - can't remember what it was called tbh - I think it had some reference to Elite in the name.
You mean they didn't go with "the Pilots Federation"?
Last edited:
The vitriol present in this thread is oozing through the facade of cultivated courteousness many here try to imply they posses.
It is revolting. Are we schoolyard children or are we civilized adults?
The simple fact is that that demo was performed over twenty times to gaming journalists before the official presentation, none of whom have even begun to posit that it was on rails, in fact quite the opposite. 'Scripted', in terms of Mr. Roberts and team following a pattern of actions? Yes, of course it was. Only a complete dolt would perform a media demo / presentation without a plan. 'Scripted', as in 'on-rails' and simply a collection of movies? Demonstrably false.
As one datum of evidence of that statement, I point to comments by Giuseppe Nelva from Dualshockers, "And if you’re wondering if there are any smoke and mirrors involved, there aren’t. The demo was played right in front of me, and I could request to do things that would have failed in a staged presentation. Everything worked like a charm." <Link to Dualshockers.com article - EXTERNALLY HOSTED>.
As a counterpoint to my statement, I bring to you this article by Leif Johnson from Motherboard who states, "The very success of Star Citizen's presentation calls its ambition into question. Star Citizen bills itself as a game with a similar galaxy-spanning outlook as No Man's Sky, but I can't imagine the other hundreds of the corners of the galaxies will be populated with spaceports so vividly realized as the one Roberts showed." <Link to Motherboard.com article - EXTERNALLY HOSTED> Interestingly, he does not call the demo faked, just the scope "Hard to believe." I cannot find a single media outlet that saw the demo publishing that the demo was faked. If there is one, please link it in this thread.
We can sit and debate semantics of whether the technology is a 'demonstrator' or is 'In' or 'Not In', but I won't bother to give it much time. What is the point? All of ED's tech was at one point a 'demonstrator' and 'Not in' the game. As for Star Citizen, we will know soon enough. Why attempt to dissuade people from backing whatever they wish? I don't tell people not to play ED because it is a grindfest that dwarfs any I have ever seen; I tell them flight mechanics are good, graphics are good, and be prepared to spend a lot of time playing to advance.
Star Citizen has massively vaulted in scope, and will be a AAA title. How long are typical AAA games in development? How many AAA titles have no forced timelines applied by investors who need to see a profit? Only one comes to mind, and we are talking about it now. We should all be questioning our preconceived notions and be mature enough to realize that our expectations have to be objective, not subjective. Not one of us here has any experience with a project of this magnitude; nobody does. It has never happened before. Our predefined timelines are meaningless, and referencing them only points to our own ignorance.
So, perhaps we should all take a deep breath, wait expectantly to be amazed or disappointed, and live and let live.
- Not a sock puppet
It is revolting. Are we schoolyard children or are we civilized adults?
The simple fact is that that demo was performed over twenty times to gaming journalists before the official presentation, none of whom have even begun to posit that it was on rails, in fact quite the opposite. 'Scripted', in terms of Mr. Roberts and team following a pattern of actions? Yes, of course it was. Only a complete dolt would perform a media demo / presentation without a plan. 'Scripted', as in 'on-rails' and simply a collection of movies? Demonstrably false.
As one datum of evidence of that statement, I point to comments by Giuseppe Nelva from Dualshockers, "And if you’re wondering if there are any smoke and mirrors involved, there aren’t. The demo was played right in front of me, and I could request to do things that would have failed in a staged presentation. Everything worked like a charm." <Link to Dualshockers.com article - EXTERNALLY HOSTED>.
As a counterpoint to my statement, I bring to you this article by Leif Johnson from Motherboard who states, "The very success of Star Citizen's presentation calls its ambition into question. Star Citizen bills itself as a game with a similar galaxy-spanning outlook as No Man's Sky, but I can't imagine the other hundreds of the corners of the galaxies will be populated with spaceports so vividly realized as the one Roberts showed." <Link to Motherboard.com article - EXTERNALLY HOSTED> Interestingly, he does not call the demo faked, just the scope "Hard to believe." I cannot find a single media outlet that saw the demo publishing that the demo was faked. If there is one, please link it in this thread.
We can sit and debate semantics of whether the technology is a 'demonstrator' or is 'In' or 'Not In', but I won't bother to give it much time. What is the point? All of ED's tech was at one point a 'demonstrator' and 'Not in' the game. As for Star Citizen, we will know soon enough. Why attempt to dissuade people from backing whatever they wish? I don't tell people not to play ED because it is a grindfest that dwarfs any I have ever seen; I tell them flight mechanics are good, graphics are good, and be prepared to spend a lot of time playing to advance.
Star Citizen has massively vaulted in scope, and will be a AAA title. How long are typical AAA games in development? How many AAA titles have no forced timelines applied by investors who need to see a profit? Only one comes to mind, and we are talking about it now. We should all be questioning our preconceived notions and be mature enough to realize that our expectations have to be objective, not subjective. Not one of us here has any experience with a project of this magnitude; nobody does. It has never happened before. Our predefined timelines are meaningless, and referencing them only points to our own ignorance.
So, perhaps we should all take a deep breath, wait expectantly to be amazed or disappointed, and live and let live.
- Not a sock puppet
Insignificant_The_Galaxy_Cat
Banned
Nice Meltdown.
And yes, totally a sock puppet.
*Edit* Oh, and by the by, that's odd... When the story of Streetroller getting his $2500 refund made it onto the main pages of all the major gaming websites bar one or two examples, a lot of Star Citizen backers were claiming that these sites were run by "hack" journalists who didn't know what they were saying, were taking the story out of context (somehow) or, most amusingly, were in the pay of a certain DS to write a negative headline about CIG.
However, now that there have been some gaming magazines writing a *positive* stance on a largely scripted demo run of SC 3.0, the tone has shifted to "Ahh! See? Now the major publications are writing this and this and this about how GREAT the Star Citizen presentation is! Take that sceptics and GOONS!" without realizing just how ironic their about face to media reportage actually is.
Also, just because some major gaming outlets SAY wonderful things about something they saw "behind the scenes", doesn't mean they are necessarily truthful about it... like the example set by Atari and the "Driv3r-gate" scandal, as seen here.
Last edited:
Prove it!
Because in many cases, they are backing it based on the uninformed and overhyped interpretations of PR from zealots who cannot critically approach the advertising campaign dumped in their faces and who consequently misrepresent what the game is, will be, and even can be.
Oh, and there is nothing even remotely “demonstrably false” about calling it on-rails. For that to be the case, they would have to let player and press actually play it, and that's not going to happen. Without that, there simply cannot be any kind of demonstration of falsehood.
Last edited:
got some new info today
glad I bought in last week because I'm hearing they are closing pledges after 2.6 hits
guys, seriously, buy in now. even if its just the start package, you don't want to miss this game
- StarNetwork is completely rewritten code that allows thousand of simultaneous players with near 0 lag (I've seen it myself)
- right now "Apostles" (higher tier than evocati) are playing the 3.0 build on servers with hundreds of people
- the demo shown at 3.0 was unscripted and not rehearsed (gaming mags did not play the exact same scenario at all and were shown a different planet)
- you don't need a beefy vid card to play this; chris is noted as saying you can play with onboard graphics 100% confirmed
- demo was running at a flawless 60fps and was only capped because of the low refresh rate of the giant center stage television
- AI for pirates was using the new StarAI 2.0 system (subsumption ai) -- so real it felt like you were playing against human opponents
- AI questgivers will have their own personalities, likes and dislikes and preference on race
- FPS combat will contain "extremely tactical" situations (one scenario I personally saw was hiding from pirates aboard a constellation and venting the onboard air and disabling gravity to fight them)
- new cover system is unlike anything ever done in games before (pretty incredible)
- alien races: saw the two alien races and wow, I am blown away. gently caress off nms. note: aliens 100% confirmed to fit inside buildings
- missiles have been removed from the game just for patch 2.6 to 3.0 (they are working on a better system)
- 100% this is be here before year end
glad I bought in last week because I'm hearing they are closing pledges after 2.6 hits
guys, seriously, buy in now. even if its just the start package, you don't want to miss this game
- Status