The Star Citizen Thread v5

Status
Thread Closed: Not open for further replies.

Stigbob

Stigbob
CMDR_Orlando said:
I expect +10$ millions after Citizencon. Probably $140 millions by the end of the year, maybe even $150 millions. Why so much? Star Marine will bring a lot of gamers who have no actual interest in flying spaceships (or are just intimidated by it). With COD exposing (even more) the space theme to the masses I'm sure some of them will feel interest in playing Star Citizen/Marine or any other Sci-Fi shooter for that matter.
Click to expand...

Why would anyone (not just FPS fans) believe that this time Star Marine v2.0 is actually coming ?. Remember the way they hyped it last time ?. "COD killer" "weeks not months" all the usual talk and no product. When the reality sank in the Crobbler actually had the sheer gall to sulk when asked where it went "it's already in the game".

Based on their past performance it's just another empty promise they aren't competent enough to deliver on, they just want to sucker in some more rubes.

Do not under any circumstances buy an Idris.
 

CMDR_Orlando

Banned
CMDR_Orlando
Tippis said:
It would look the same if they went for the intelligent route. That's the whole point: they've over-engineered it for no good reason. Now they're trying to get out of that jam by over-engineering it even more. They've wasted time and money on something with no pay-off, and now they're wasting more time and money to poorly fix that so that it goes back to something sensible that could have been had through far better methods.

What is?

Sure there is. There are plenty of ways it can happen. And it did, as was shown back during the discussion of the demo. It could simply be a case of the model not animating properly (which also happened on multiple occasions, if you'll recall), but again, it doesn't really matter.
Click to expand...

No that is completely wrong, they went with the intelligent route because that way they save a lot of work/time. Star Citizen is a 1st person game trough and trough, they want no shortcuts in animations, no black screens or instant teleportation to go inside vehicles or doing mundane tasks like sit on a chair, grab a drink etc. If they went with the traditional route they would have to make separated animations for 1st person view for EVERY little action. That might be the best thing to do for games like BF, COD and shooters in general but not the ideal for Star Citizen / Chris Roberts vision.

It's impossible that you saw a shadow not representing what the characther does because that's not how their engine deals with lightning/shadows as it is all casted in real time dynamically changing with the object that casts the shadow.

In single-player games the "faking" it's even funnier:

These videos showcases how hard it is to make 1st and 3rd Person animations look good in both play-views while representing exactly what the player is doing. Ofc Mirror edge or Farcry were never supposed to be played like that and there was no work on those animations but that's what their animation looks like from the outside perspective. There's a reason why so few games go that extra mile. It's not easy, it costs a lot of time/money and it's not necessary/worth it because the game is not going for that extra fidelity.

[video=youtube;DH6JOBj3qOA]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DH6JOBj3qOA[/video]

[video=youtube;yPSCeVSM0Sg]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yPSCeVSM0Sg[/video]
 
Last edited:

lysan

lysan
Soliluna said:
Biggest point to take from his design and implementation choices for geometry and visuals in general is that he is limiting the potential consumers for the product. ED has the luxury of scaling down quite well - CryEngine has never been known for scaling well and looking at the assets in Star Citizen it won't scale well either.

He's unnecessarily hindering the potential sales of the game by not only focusing on the niche space game audience, but also the niche high-end PC audience.
Click to expand...

CMDR_Orlando said:
No that is completely wrong, they went with the intelligent route because that way they save a lot of work/time. Star Citizen is a 1st person game trough and trough, they want no shortcuts in animations, no black screens or instant teleportation to go inside vehicles or doing mundane tasks like sit on a chair, grab a drink etc. If they went with the traditional route they would have to make separated animations for 1st person view for EVERY little action. That might be the best thing to do for games like BF, COD and shooters in general but not the ideal for Star Citizen / Chris Roberts vision.

It's impossible that you saw a shadow not representing what the characther does because that's not how their engine deals with lightning/shadows as it is all casted in real time dynamically changing with the object that casts the shadow.

In single-player games the "faking" it's even funnier:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DH6JOBj3qOA
Click to expand...

And yet everything we see from SC FPS are a 3rd person shooter game.

Again say one thing do another just like the controls discussion.
 

Tippis

Tippis
CMDR_Orlando said:
No that is completely wrong, they went with the intelligent route because that way they save a lot of work/time.
Click to expand...
It obviously didn't. They're having to implement an entire interpolation system to counteract something that shouldn't have been there to begin with. They did something stupid and are now fixing it in a stupid way. Both of which wasted work and time, and made the game wholly incapable of even the most basic of camera control options, to say nothing of more modern and advanced options.

Also, before you say it “looks great”, let's see how it actually works in-game. These kinds of smoothing systems have a very nasty tendency to make camera movement hideously sluggish and imprecise — absolute death to any kind of FPS gameplay — and it requires very little for that laggy feeling to kick in.

And no, you don't need to make separate animations for 1st-person view unless you absolutely want to show the action “in your face”, so to speak, just to clearly communicate to the player what they're doing. But that's not the end goal here, so no duplication is needed. Not that any of that is relevant to the business of how to make a sensible camera system to begin with.

It's impossible that you saw a shadow not representing what the characther does
Click to expand...
Apparently not. Your only real option here is to guess exactly why what the player did was not properly reflected in the shadow. I've given you one option; you're free to think up others of your own, but “it did not happen at all” is not one of those options.
 

Frank

Frank
Lysander lysan said:
3rd person is so Arcady, I just hope FD never will make fps in ED with that.
Click to expand...

You will probably get your wish. FD are adamant that there shouldn't be a 3rd person view of their spaceships I'm sure they will follow suit when we're on foot.

Personally that prospect saddens me. Virtual reality has a real problem with 1st person shooters which all but vanishes when you're a disembodied floaty view that's trailing behind your shoulder.
 

1500

1500
CIG the Rube Goldberg of the gaming industry.
RubeGoldbergSimpleAlarmClock.jpg
 
Last edited:

CMDR_Orlando

Banned
CMDR_Orlando
Lysander lysan said:
And yet everything we see from SC FPS are a 3rd person shooter game.

Again say one thing do another just like the controls discussion.
Click to expand...

:S 3rd person? You don't even have a crossair/ui in 3rd person view lol

Tippis said:
It obviously didn't. They're having to implement an entire interpolation system to counteract something that shouldn't have been there to begin with. They did something stupid and are now fixing it in a stupid way. Both of which wasted work and time, and made the game wholly incapable of even the most basic of camera control options, to say nothing of more modern and advanced options.

Also, before you say it “looks great”, let's see how it actually works in-game. These kinds of smoothing systems have a very nasty tendency to make camera movement hideously sluggish and imprecise — absolute death to any kind of FPS gameplay — and it requires very little for that laggy feeling to kick in.

And no, you don't need to make separate animations for 1st-person view unless you absolutely want to show the action “in your face”, so to speak, just to clearly communicate to the player what they're doing. But that's not the end goal here, so no duplication is needed. Not that any of that is relevant to the business of how to make a sensible camera system to begin with.


Apparently not. Your only real option here is to guess exactly why what the player did was not properly reflected in the shadow. I've given you one option; you're free to think up others of your own, but “it did not happen at all” is not one of those options.
Click to expand...

They new it would be hard, maybe they underestimated the time it would take them to achieve that aimed smoothness, as this is crucial for a FPS game, maybe it also helped with the delay for Star Marine (most likely). The thing is that they succeed in what they proposed to do in the first place. First person and 3rd Person integration, I wasn't sure that all that trouble would justify the end's but after playing the universe and watching my shadow casted in the wall while I reload my weapon mimicking exactly what I was doing in fps it hit me, this is the Fidelity and Immersion that Chris Roberts allways aimed for. That's why our funding is making the dream come true, allowing for this extra mile, it's these "tiny" details all together that make Star Citizen stand out from the crow.

Showing the action "in your face" is exactly what Star Citizen wants, that's why they give a great deal of importance to the human male body, specially the hands, as we will play and interact a lot with them throughout the verse.

Tippis said:
Apparently not. Your only real option here is to guess exactly why what the player did was not properly reflected in the shadow. I've given you one option; you're free to think up others of your own, but “it did not happen at all” is not one of those options.
Click to expand...

If you could provide a link, a screenshot or the video of that exact moment that would be nice.

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

Soliluna said:
Which one?
Click to expand...

This one:
[video=youtube;RAbtzAh5NXs]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RAbtzAh5NXs[/video]
 

Voivod

Voivod
kwik said:
star citizen, reinventing the wheel. again. this time with cl_bob 0. truly, revolutionary tech. That 60fps video finally makes SC look better anyway.

Noticed it's got a bit quiet now that we know that those emails CIG have been sending out about refunds are not faked.
Click to expand...

lol :D
 

CMDR_Orlando

Banned
CMDR_Orlando
Asp Explorer said:
Motion blur is an abomination that should be wiped from existence. Why is it even in there?
Click to expand...

Because it's the default setting of Cryengine :p
It can be removed in the console with the command: r_montionblur 0
I'm sure later they will add it to the graphical settings options in the menu.

Backer42 said:
It is a 2011 feat. Star Citizen pretty much looks like a 2011 game.

I think it's time for a complete remaster to bring it to 8th gen standard.
Click to expand...

I clearly hope you are trolling when you say that Star Citizen looks like a ps3 game. But since you keep repeating it I don't know anymore. [big grin]
 
Last edited:
Status
Thread Closed: Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom