The Star Citizen Thread

[JustAPigeon]

Just had another go - blew up a Vanduul - have to say though I'm not getting any feeling of momentum or speed at all in the hornet - it's just like pointing weapons around as if I'm turreting - sorry to say not impressed at the moment with the feel at all.

Exactly this. I couldn't get my X52 to work so had to fly using the keyboard and mouse. Felt horrible to fly around, and in the end I was just picking off ships by moving my mouse cursor over targets and holding mouse buttons down, didn't have to bother with throttle controls.

They've got some serious work to do to get a decent flight feel out of this.

 

[Aleksej]

I wouldn't get too jealous, the current OR support in Star Citizen is utter gash. Pretty much unusable.

I am not jealous I really simply cannot understand why is it so difficult to implement support of both devices.

 

[Neo-ST]

I am not jealous I really simply cannot understand why is it so difficult to implement support of both devices.

Maybe because TrackIR uses closed source software, which means, they need to develop support for SC, so probably CIG needs to wait for them.

 

[ianw]

If you take a look at things they plan to improve in v0.9 then you might feel a little bit better about v0.8.


Anyway, does X52 joystick work in AC or not after all ?

My X52 worked okay - I'll wait and see how things change but at the moment it's just not doing it.

Will go back in and have a quick pop at the 300i and Aurora see how they are..

 

[Mu77ley]

I am not jealous I really simply cannot understand why is it so difficult to implement support of both devices.

I guess the simulation side of things just isn't a priority for them right now (judging from the DFM streams I've seen so far). I'll try and reserve judgement until I get to fly it tonight thou.

 

[Bains]

If you take a look at things they plan to improve in v0.9 then you might feel a little bit better about v0.8.

Tough one.

What's missing on that list in any kind of suggestion it needs to made tougher, i.e recalibrated for fans of combat space sims rather than acrade space shooters, and the only way this will happen is if there is an almighty reaction on the RSI forums.

I doubt this will happen because:

1. Now we are in the '40 million era', gamers with this preference are the minority.

2. Even if this group do try to make the argument and be heard, the large body of fanboys SC has attracted will see any such suggestion as criticism of the messiah and torpedo it out of general principle, just like every other suggestion.

 

[Aleksej]

Maybe because TrackIR uses closed source software, which means, they need to develop support for SC, so probably CIG needs to wait for them.

February update added Star Citizen to the list of the games in TrackIR software.

 

[psyron]

Compared to ED i would give SC Arena Commander a 10% ... Looks really poor.

I agree with most previous comments - looks like a space shooter for me, not a space simulation.

Also i don't like the cockpits. The cockpit struts look much too big resulting in a poor view into the space.

But as we know the fanatic SC-Fans will not criticize their own game - since they already paid a lot of money for it and don't want to be ridiculized for it.

 

[psyron]

Tough one.

What's missing on that list in any kind of suggestion it needs to made tougher, i.e recalibrated for fans of combat space sims rather than acrade space shooters, and the only way this will happen is if there is an almighty reaction on the RSI forums.

I doubt this will happen because:

1. Now we are in the '40 million era', gamers with this preference are the minority.

2. Even if this group do try to make the argument and be heard, the large body of fanboys SC has attracted will see any such suggestion as criticism of their masters voice and torpedo it out of general principle, just like every other suggestion.

Well said! Fully agree on this.

So happy to know that ED fans are more mature and looking for a real space simulation instead of a high-detailed-space-shooter.

 

[ianw]

Just tried the 300i - feels slightly different but still no real sense of momentum or acceleration compared to ED.

 

[Celonius]

I prefer Elite, now, the only thing I like from SC is that the level of destruction of the ships is better (you can destroiy the parts), and also like is less orbital.

Anyway, prefer ED:

 

[Bains]

Well said! Fully agree on this.

So happy to know that ED fans are more mature and looking for a real space simulation instead of a high-detailed-space-shooter.

Well, I am an aggrieved SC backer and recent ED convert, but from what I've seen I'd 100% agree with you on the comment on the ED fan base.

 

[kvmetternich]

My only concern is that a lot of things should be implemented in the later stages of development instead during the alpha stage.
I mean, here we are testing a space sim so the priority should be the physics, the fly model,comands,networks stability etc.
What's the point to implement right now 3rd person avatar , the helmet, the little jeep etc.?

 

[daemonmp3]

First impressions?

Very disappointed with AC if I'm honest considering how long it has taken CIG to release anything.

First thing I did was try the Free Flight, less than a minute I was getting 'Warning you are aproaching simulation boundary' so pretty much flying in a goldfish bowl then.

Everything also seems very dark and there is no Gamma / brightness setting in the options screen.

My Thrustmaster Tflight x is very twitchy in it, seems to have a 'lag' sensation which means your constantly overcompensating your pitch and roll though looking at a few posts it's not just consigned to that joystick.

Mouse works very well and had no problems destroying Vanduul with it though would much prefer to use a joystick as personally it just feels wrong using a mouse for a Space flight sim.

I'm sure they will get these things sorted in time but I really do think some of these are 'basics' that should have been fixed before the Alpha. Did no-one notice during the internal testing that the ships handles like sh*t if you use a joystick? etc.

Anyway, that's enough from me. I think I'll leave it a few weeks and see if they sort any of the major issues out.

Cheers,

Chris.

 

[Knightshark]

What's the point to implement right now 3rd person avatar , the helmet, the little jeep etc.?

It much easier to make money out of it! Looks great, ideal for teaser material.

 

[psyron]

Well, I am an aggrieved SC backer and recent ED convert, and on track record not sure if I the praise the undoubtedly more mature ED fan base deserve should also be extended to me, but thank you anyway.

The impression i got after following the news from ED and SC the past year is that their developers have two completely different approaches to make a game:

1. Details first: RSI have first thought about details first and are now trying to fit their detailed crafted space ships into a space simulation.

2. Game mechanic first: FD in contrary have stated from the beginning that they have tested a lot on how the game mechanic actually has to be to bring the best game experiences. Details will come afterwards.

The obvious reason why RSI have started with details rather with core mechanics is the show-effect: They wanted to attract a lot of people with detailed crafted space ships. And they obviously succeeded: > 40 mil. dollar.

But now the big dissappointment will inevitably follow ... SC-Fans are caught like flies surrounding a light bulb

 

[xyphic]

What's the point to implement right now 3rd person avatar , the helmet, the little jeep etc.?

They've done the right thing there, to be honest. The public are a fickle bunch and if they'd seen nothing but marketing videos for over a year's worth of development, there'd be massive unrest (even more so than there has been already). The work they've done isn't for naught either, as they're all things that would have to be done *at some point* so doing them early on in development is sensible. The only thing I don't really understand is the fish tank.

 

[Adept]

I'll copy the text from my thread on the SC forum:

Arcadey Commander:
--------------------

Do you guys remember all those threads on how Star Citizen will be a true space sim. Complex physics modelling, full support for HOTAS & pedals setups, etc etc. Oh yes, and people pooh-pooing Elite for being "simple and arcadey" in comparison.

Well, now we have the first look at how flying and core space-ship gameplay is shaping up in SC, and I'm looking at a very depressing picture. 3rd person perspective for situational awareness, and ships that chase the mouse and guns that track the mouse pointer. Fans of the ultra casual style of War Thunder, World of Warplanes and Freelancer will be right at home, but those who bought into the hype and got a HOTAS setup are shafted severely.

Just like in War Thunder it doesn't matter at all if the game technically supports joysticks. With a flight model where the ship chases the cursor and guns can be pointed at the same time, joysticks are pointeless and a mouse is the only real way to fly. If somebody wants to be really high-fi, I suppose a mouse and throttle may be the way to go.

Remember the discussions about the bad placement of the fixed class 1 mounts on the 300i? Looks like it turns out they aren't class 1 afterall. Instead they track the mouse cursor just like everything else.

gg, sim fans lose, casuals win

 

[blibbka]

The impression i got after following the news from ED and SC the past year is that their developers have two completely different approaches to make a game:

1. Details first: RSI have first thought about details first and are now trying to fit their detailed crafted space ships into a space simulation.

2. Game mechanic first: FD in contrary have stated from the beginning that they have tested a lot on how the game mechanic actually has to be to bring the best game experiences. Details will come afterwards.

The obvious reason why RSI have started with details rather with core mechanics is the show-effect: They wanted to attract a lot of people with detailed crafted space ships. And they obviously succeeded: > 40 mil. dollar.

But now the big dissappointment will inevitably follow ...

Pretty accurate summation of my own thoughts.

 

[Bains]

The impression i got after following the news from ED and SC the past year is that their developers have two completely different approaches to make a game:

1. Details first: RSI have first thought about details first and are now trying to fit their detailed crafted space ships into a space simulation.

2. Game mechanic first: FD in contrary have stated from the beginning that they have tested a lot on how the game mechanic actually has to be to bring the best game experiences. Details will come afterwards.

The obvious reason why RSI have started with details rather with core mechanics is the show-effect: They wanted to attract a lot of people with detailed crafted space ships. And they obviously succeeded: > 40 mil. dollar.

But now the big dissappointment will inevitably follow ...

I think there's more to it that this. FD had more of a clear unswerving vision for the overall game, but were open to feedback on the fine detail and gray areas in between. CR's clarity of vision extended as far as highly detailed ships, the rest was/is hazy and up for grabs - democratisation of game design and all that, which in turn means whatever the majority want.

This was fine at the sub 10million backing level because that was more a community of 'core' gamers, but at the 40 million level its just a case of more people play COD than arma, so the tastes of the COD gamer will be primary consideration.

Personally for such a scenario I think Spock should consider rephrasing his famous line to:

"The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few, or the one, unless we're dealing with a space sim and the many are COD gamers, in which case their views should be dismissed as uninformed guff at all times"