The Star Citizen Thread v5

[GaryII]

If 3.0 can produce stable instances of 24 to 48 players / ships, it will begin to show real promise as a foundation to build a game on.

I doubt SC 3.0 Pre-alfa will have stable netcode, because its pre-Alfa
We can expect more stable netcode at BEta stage I guess.
SC ships are very complex (complex interiors, damage states, multicrew) - a lot of data needs to be send to all players (PC clients) -its really difficult task for devs

 

[Mu77ley]

Sorry - what 'evidence and facts' ?

What?

He's asking you to provide those evidence and facts you claimed to be using when in fact you did no such thing.

 

[Stigbob]

It's still not about ED though is it - again - stay on topic.

You've got to remember that the invested get their internet space feelings hurt when people laugh at star citizen and say bad things that are true, so they lash out at ED expecting to hurt other peoples space internet feelings.

This doesn't work because ED is a good real non-scam of a game and the comparisons always leave Star Citizen looking like it was designed by people who throw whitewash and drive a car with square wheels. So we wind up laughing at Star Citizen some more.

And thus the circle of life continues.

 

[Zetta]

Is there anywhere that tracks releases and content in them? A while back cr said more pipelines will come online speeding stuff up. It would be good to see that increase.

Not that I'm aware of.
There's a thread on the subreddit discussing content for release and all I see parroted over and over is that building the tools is what's taking the time, once they are in place it will enable them to bring out more and more content, faster and faster, not seen any proof of that yet though.

https://www.reddit.com/r/starcitize...estly_you_think_its_realistic_to_get_the_full

 

[lysan]

You are perhaps being a bit inconsistent.

To the point though. I know FD's it's not the perfect solution and one player with a dodgy connection can have an effect on everyone in the instance. However, I find MP in ED works very well. High FPS, smooth movement and this is with 20+ other commanders in my instance as well as dozens of AI. From what I have seen of SC you can't even get that many players in an instance, let alone at a decent FPS and no glitching, and that's without any AI. I just don't see how that makes CIG netcode better than FD netcode.

We often team up with people from the US, Australia and Europa, just it is not perfect, yes we sometimes have problems, however a few relogging and it normally works.
Could it be better? of course it could, however I'm sure FDEV are trying to make it work as good as possible. It must be a nightmare to get all the connections to work when people are connecting from very different places. SC can hardly make it work over LAN!

 

[ianw]

Not that I'm aware of.
There's a thread on the subreddit discussing content for release and all I see parroted over and over is that building the tools is what's taking the time, once they are in place it will enable them to bring out more and more content, faster and faster, not seen any proof of that yet though.

https://www.reddit.com/r/starcitize...estly_you_think_its_realistic_to_get_the_full

I think that was probably just another one of CR's throw away lines that he thought sounded good at the time - like the money being worth 4 times as much because no eeeevil publisher or whatever crud that was.

On the SC networking thing the problem they have is that big space clan battles with 50 - 100 players was meant to be something that SC had and we were also told that their networking plan was far superior to using P2P.

So they really do need to pull a rabbit out of the hat on that one.

 

[Jex =TE=]

Yes you're right CIG is stating their "product" is in Alpha, FD is not. It's you who is stating that ED is in alpha/early access. This assertion (if you even believe it yourself) is merely your opinion.

I think the difference is that FD is confident enough that their product stands up on its own merits and is of merchantable quality where as CIG would be laughed out of any room if they tried to claim their lavishly funded efforts were an actual merchantable product as opposed to the in-progress mismanaged mess that it is, hence the alpha/early access fig leaf.

However that is merely my opinion.

If someone decides to call an elephant a snozzleear (LOL) that does not reclassify the nomanclature.

ED is unfinished
ED is bug ridden
ED is still adding features.

In fact, you could safey say neither game is even in Alpha state yet because they lack many of the key features that will go into the finished product.

As I understand it, SC is not early access because, if I buy the $45 package right now, I won't get to play it? ED on the other hand is just like The Forest in that I can play the game, it has tons of features already but is still early access as it's not finished. The devs of the Forest call it an alpha build, just like the devs at BIS call DayZ an alpha build.

We've already heard from FD how they're new to this kind of gaming. BIS are not new to any kind of gaming and can recongnize an alpha build when they see one. Therefore, given all of that I think it's safe to say ED is an early access game that's currently in alpha awaiting the compeltion of features and the many bugs the game has, ironed out. Some of those bugs include,

The PowerPlay fiasco
MP netcode
Missions
AI
Interdictions

This is why I call it alpha state and early access

 

[Asp Explorer]

Naaah - they will be advertising Org vs Org mass space battles soon enough, with multi crewed Idrises and fleets of stuff.

Hosted at special CIG premises of course, with an entry fee steep enough to ensure that only Proper Org's and no Scrub Wannabes sign up. They'll be offered discounts on oxygen free, gold plated LAN cables and get to use CR's own personal Gator hub from 1996 at very reasonable rates

They'll have to pay extra to get someone to flip the switch to 100Mbit mode though.

 

[MarktJones]

If someone decides to call an elephant a snozzleear (LOL) that does not reclassify the nomanclature.

ED is unfinished
ED is bug ridden
ED is still adding features.

In fact, you could safey say neither game is even in Alpha state yet because they lack many of the key features that will go into the finished product.

As I understand it, SC is not early access because, if I buy the $45 package right now, I won't get to play it? ED on the other hand is just like The Forest in that I can play the game, it has tons of features already but is still early access as it's not finished. The devs of the Forest call it an alpha build, just like the devs at BIS call DayZ an alpha build.

We've already heard from FD how they're new to this kind of gaming. BIS are not new to any kind of gaming and can recongnize an alpha build when they see one. Therefore, given all of that I think it's safe to say ED is an early access game that's currently in alpha awaiting the compeltion of features and the many bugs the game has, ironed out. Some of those bugs include,

The PowerPlay fiasco
MP netcode
Missions
AI
Interdictions

This is why I call it alpha state and early access

Wrong forum. Try to talk about star citizen or go somewhere else.

 

[Jex =TE=]

I'd love to see Jex's own networking architecture and implementation - go on, show us how the experts do it, please

Extra points if you go the HTTPS route!

You know there's a list of rebuttals you should never use, the one above being one of them.

Can you explain to us all here how me writing the netcode is going to show the "experts" how it's done when I don't have access to the code to begin with?

Could you write a letter to DB for me and ask him to email me the entire game code so I can spend the next 3 months pouring over it for them?

Now do you see how this is not something you should use as an argument because it doesn't get anyone anywhere and doesn't even make any sense?

How would me writing a bunch of code suddenly make FD implement it into their game? How are we going to test this? When will I get access to their test servers? How are we going to QA this and bug test it?

Are you saying that if I can't manage all of this somehow I'm at fault and this absolves FD of still having a bad game with bad netcode how exactly?

 

[Soliluna]

You know there's a list of rebuttals you should never use, the one above being one of them.

Can you explain to us all here how me writing the netcode is going to show the "experts" how it's done when I don't have access to the code to begin with?

Could you write a letter to DB for me and ask him to email me the entire game code so I can spend the next 3 months pouring over it for them?

Now do you see how this is not something you should use as an argument because it doesn't get anyone anywhere and doesn't even make any sense?

How would me writing a bunch of code suddenly make FD implement it into their game? How are we going to test this? When will I get access to their test servers? How are we going to QA this and bug test it?

Are you saying that if I can't manage all of this somehow I'm at fault and this absolves FD of still having a bad game with bad netcode how exactly?

Check it out, I don't think you could have seen this yet or you wouldn't be calling the implementation bad.

[video=youtube;EvJPyjmfdz0]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EvJPyjmfdz0[/video]

 

[Jex =TE=]

Did you ever tried to play SC pre-Alfa 2.5 ?!
1) there is not lot of gamaplay
2) it crashes about once in every hour
3) lot of bugs
4) a lot of ships and game mechanics currently are just on paper compared to Elite

Maybe Elite does not fell for everybody as finished game but its not definitely in pre-Alfa I can give it Beta stage at worst scenario..

I've never played SC - I'm waiting for the game to come out first before I drop any money on it. This way if the game sucks I won't be one of those people that wasted their time and money on it.

It's a weird kind of development when an alpha state actually requires your game to be feature complete. We know ED is not feature complete and we know more work is coming so that definitely makes it early access. Maybe we need a new term for it and call it Alpheta?

 

[Zetta]

These Elite VS Star Citizen guys certainly seem to share the same traits.

 

[Asp Explorer]

I was just looking for an excuse to make a UDP joke.

You just might not get it though.

 

[Jex =TE=]

We have a new Twister contender ladies and gentlemen! More evidence and fact based discussion to follow. Evidence: SC is better than ED, Facts: Because otherwise I'll scream and cry.

Originally Posted by Jex =TE= View Post (Source)
SC netcode isn't relevant because it's not a finished and released product like ED claims to be.
Originally Posted by Jex =TE= View Post (Source)
ED is an early access game and is in alpha right now - you just bug tested Engineers a while back.

I just quoted so everyone here can see what I said.

Those terms are not mutually exclusive.

the cluse is where I said this...

not a finished and released product like ED claims to be.

 

[MarktJones]

I was just looking for an excuse to make a UDP joke.

You just might not get it though.

You should be shot.

 

[Sir.Tj]

Enough of the bickering please or the thread will have to have a cooldown period.

 

[Esvandiary]

I looking for a UDP joke to make an excuse.

You just get it though. might not

Now you're talking sense!

I agree with others, though - the networking will be one of the biggest sink-or-swim cases for SC-the-MMO. They've made some pretty mighty promises for the kind of gameplay they can achieve!

 

[Jex =TE=]

Horizons was early access, and you don't need it to play the game, Elite Dangerous is the main game and its released. Huge difference right there. SC is not in any way or form released. And they are talking money for features that are ditched (coop and the modding manual comes to mind).

I can't comment on what SC are doing or not doing. I don't understand why people sank so much money into either. If SC had got $30million at kickstarter and that was it, we'd probably have a game right now.

I think this is a case where too much money has stalled the progress of the game but I don't really care.

All I care about is the end product. I can wait 10 years for ED to eventually get it right and I can wait another year or 3 for SC to come out. I have other games and things to do with my time and am not addicted to one single game that I need to feel complete's my life - I think this might be why so many people sank so much cash into SC because they're desperate for a life changing game - however, I withhold the right to retract that claim as total nonsense

 

[killminster]

If someone decides to call an elephant a snozzleear (LOL) that does not reclassify the nomanclature.

...

This is why I call it alpha state and early access

Again, merely your opinion and rationalizations. A couple of your points of issue I would agree with (powerplay? pfff....).

Yet if you're going down the line that any game that now takes an iterative approach, paid for DLC, adding content through paid for expansions "is still early access as it's not finished" then I guess that goes for the likes of WOW and any other games that have offered expansions. If you compare CIG efforts thus far compared to Blizzard or even Frontier, the amount of decent playable game/alpha/early access you have received for the unholy amount cash thrown is an insult quite frankly.

Also, more in general, the fact that this thread is supposed to be discussing Star Citizen, yet consistently is steered towards "yeah but this game (usually Elite) is worse!!!" arguments is just deflection, people can't even defend SC on it's own merits so they just have to shout "LOOK OVER THERE!!!!" and hope people stop criticizing SC for two or three posts. It's not really that effective a strategy is it.