The Star Citizen Thread v5

[Dr Wookie]

Someone criticised me a few days ago for saying "i guess" "my opinion" etc... many times on my posts. I guess that answers your question.

Of course, when i post stuff like that the lower image is an improvement over the upper one (see below), that's a fact:

http://i.imgur.com/uSdbyWx.png

I think that this shows definite progress. Seeing the editor, I got quite excited about the possibilities of procedural placement of object entities or whatever to build up wrecks, cities etc. in the future. I also liked some of the atmospheric scattering effects.

Even though the demo was plainly scripted, I see it as more an indicator of the possibilities of SQ42.

It's a pity that the proc gen terrain still looks stuck in the nineties! Also, as a series of scripted events, it felt kinda flat.

I was disappointed (though unsurprised) to see nothing of SQ2, and thought the social media thing was nonsense, but then again I'm not an org kind of guy.

I wonder what ProkarGarlic though of the show... they promised blown minds, and I remain distinctly unamazed

 

[Dooguk]

I wonder how many backers would have ploughed money into this, knowing that the focus would be switched from SC to SQ42

 

[frostypaw]

I dunno, they have earned almost 3.5 million dollars, and we're not even halfway through October. And while I can agree that their funding meter doesn't include refunds, I think otherwise it's largely truthful. Seriously, regular f2p mobile games rake in millions, and they have no macrotransactions like SC.

Oh aye - but look at the dates and remember which day was the Big Show Reveal day. The floppiness is right there on the chart for all to see

 

[knowles2]

Just listening the the Planet Coaster stream that's on at the moment. Dev on the stream said said that there's no mocap in it*, all the animation was done by 6 people and if you played it all back-to-back it would take over 2.5 hours to play it all.



*that confirms btw that the mocap jobs listed on the Frontier website some time ago were most certainly ED related.

or it for their next franchise.

There end of year report state they are planning on launching at least 2 more franchises in the coming years.

 

[Hi-Ban]

So much this...it's all about graphical fidelity and when you make excuses for polish to FlM in beta you have a pretty obvious problem.

Pixar doesn't animate their films anywhere near print Rez...

Final fx shots in Star Wars probably come in a day before lock.

Gameplay is king where I come from. I had to use my imagination playing games growing up more than maybe some now.

How old are you Hi ban by chance? You put a a LOT of weight on graphics...also noticed some serious PC master race syndrome going on so in assuming you are in your low 20's if that

I am in my low 30s, thanks. But anyway, i'll explain you what is all this about.

I don't put a lot of weight on graphics, but i admit graphics are important in a game which aims to push the limits of PC gaming.
Anyway, all this is because the citizencon "planets v2" demo was all about showcasing the graphics and scale of it, people already knew that before citizencon. But people here started criticising that the demo had scripted events, which was totally unrelated to what the demo was all about, and anyway they should already know the AI stuff is not done yet.
Then when they were explained that the planets v2 demo was all about the graphics and scale and nothing about gameplay, they suddenly went like "bah, those graphics are crap" "Nothing impressive here" "dated graphics" etc...
You see a pattern here?

After a discussion in which they tried to compare the graphics of SC with those of ED to make SC look graphically worse and failed hard on their attempt, then they suddenly all turned to criticise the sandworm and "how unoriginal it is" "plagiarism" etc...
You see the pattern again?

No matter what, always criticise SC, everything about SC must be bad. If CIG do something good, they must always make it look bad. If they do something wrong, they must make it look like a crime. If they don't do anything wrong, then they must make up something bad. This, ad infinitum.

With all my respect to this guys, but after almost 1500 pages of the same stuff repeated over and over and over, it's starting to get a bit tiresome.

Now you might question yourself if you should have asked other people about their age instead, right?

 

[DLewth]

At least their PBR implementation and textures in general are absolutely on point.

Well, the PBR is part of Cryengine, they just haven't found a way to ascend the male chicken there, yet. But yes, credit where it's due, the textures are very nice. When you fly around space in your underpants, they are seriously high fidelity underpants that are beyond compare in the genre. Eat your heat out, Bioware...

 

[knowles2]

Outsider of course, it's not cancelled

I hope that true.

 

[knowles2]

Ha ha. Imagine sitting in the pilot seat, look to your left and right, only to see your co-pilot and navigator are the Chuckle Brothers. (Look them up non UK people)

To me to you,

 

[lysan]

dsmart talking about "refactoring" of devs. Assume he means layoffs.

Getting rid of Europeans and hiring Koreans? That was what I heard.

 

[Neo-ST]

I am in my low 30s, thanks. But anyway, i'll explain you what is all this about.

I don't put a lot of weight on graphics, but i admit graphics are important in a game which aims to push the limits of PC gaming.
Anyway, all this is because the citizencon "planets v2" demo was all about showcasing the graphics and scale of it, people already knew that before citizencon. But people here started criticising that the demo had scripted events, which was totally unrelated to what the demo was all about, and anyway they should already know the AI stuff is not done yet.
Then when they were explained that the planets v2 demo was all about the graphics and scale and nothing about gameplay, they suddenly went like "bah, those graphics are crap" "Nothing impressive here" "dated graphics" etc...
You see a pattern here?

After a discussion in which they tried to compare the graphics of SC with those of ED to make SC look graphically worse and failed hard on their attempt, then they suddenly all turned to criticise the sandworm and "how unoriginal it is" "plagiarism" etc...
You see the pattern again?

No matter what, always criticise SC, everything about SC must be bad. If CIG do something good, they must always make it look bad. If they do something wrong, they must make it look like a crime. If they don't do anything wrong, then they must make up something bad. This, ad infinitum.

With all my respect to this guys, but after almost 1500 pages of the same stuff repeated over and over and over, it's starting to get a bit tiresome.

Now you might question yourself if you should have asked other people about their age instead, right?

What would you imagine accomplishing with your post exactly ?

 

[Asp Explorer]

Getting rid of Europeans and hiring Koreans? That was what I heard.

Really? I'm a bit lost for words about that. If that kind of thing happens - CIG might lose some of those juicy tax breaks they are so fond of.

 

[Hi-Ban]

What would you imagine accomplishing with your post exactly ?

Why do you assume i'm trying to "accomplish" anything at all?
I'm just explaining the guy what is this thread about, because the thread title can lead to confusion.

 

[lysan]

Really? I'm a bit lost for words about that. If that kind of thing happens - CIG might lose some of those juicy tax breaks they are so fond of.

Well, it can all be and just rumors, but maybe there are some refactoring on the way in the pipeline.

 

[Neo-ST]

Why do you assume i'm trying to accomplish anything at all?

So you're just ranting ?

 

[darkoff]

I am in my low 30s, thanks. But anyway, i'll explain you what is all this about.

I don't put a lot of weight on graphics, but i admit graphics are important in a game which aims to push the limits of PC gaming.
Anyway, all this is because the citizencon "planets v2" demo was all about showcasing the graphics and scale of it, people already knew that before citizencon. But people here started criticising that the demo had scripted events, which was totally unrelated to what the demo was all about, and anyway they should already know the AI stuff is not done yet.
Then when they were explained that the planets v2 demo was all about the graphics and scale and nothing about gameplay, they suddenly went like "bah, those graphics are crap" "Nothing impressive here" "dated graphics" etc...
You see a pattern here?

After a discussion in which they tried to compare the graphics of SC with those of ED to make SC look graphically worse and failed hard on their attempt, then they suddenly all turned to criticise the sandworm and "how unoriginal it is" "plagiarism" etc...
You see the pattern again?

No matter what, always criticise SC, everything about SC must be bad. If CIG do something good, they must always make it look bad. If they do something wrong, they must make it look like a crime. If they don't do anything wrong, then they must make up something bad. This, ad infinitum.

With all my respect to this guys, but after almost 1500 pages of the same stuff repeated over and over and over, it's starting to get a bit tiresome.

Now you might question yourself if you should have asked other people about their age, right?

isnt it more like you stop talking after getting shown that
a) elite pg is more fidelitious, so fidelitious that you call fake on ingame screenshots
b)Sandworm from dune really? Why cant star citizen have a original looking sandworm?
c) You still cant say what was so special about citizencon demo.
whats the wow element Chris was talking about in interviews.
the sand texture? the tree's? the light house? the miniature bengal carrier?

maybe the dynamic scripted weather system? [squeeeee]

 

[Hi-Ban]

So you're just ranting ?

See my edit on the previous post.

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

isnt it more like you stop talking after getting shown that
a) elite pg is more fidelitious, so fidelitious that you call fake on ingame screenshots
b)Sandworm from dune really? Why cant star citizen have a original looking sandworm?
c) You still cant say what was so special about citizencon demo.
whats the wow element Chris was talking about in interviews.
the sand texture? the tree's? the light house? the miniature bengal carrier?

maybe the dynamic scripted weather system? [squeeeee]

Sorry, i'm not going to bite. But nice try!

 

[Neo-ST]

I'm just explaining the guy what is this thread about, because the thread title can lead to confusion.

No you're not, plus I don't think he needs your "guidance", he's been here for a while.
You're just ranting on our ranting. The difference is, our ranting is justified.

 

[Asp Explorer]

The difference is, our ranting is justified.

It's not ranting. It's exquisitely handcrafted, high-fidelity, immersed in realism, systemic rejection of refactoring

 

[frostypaw]

Anyway, all this is because the citizencon "planets v2" demo was all about showcasing the graphics and scale of it, people already knew that before citizencon. But people here started criticising that the demo had scripted events, which was totally unrelated to what the demo was all about, and anyway they should already know the AI stuff is not done yet.
Then when they were explained that the planets v2 demo was all about the graphics and scale and nothing about gameplay, they suddenly went like "bah, those graphics are crap" "Nothing impressive here" "dated graphics" etc...
You see a pattern here?

After a discussion in which they tried to compare the graphics of SC with those of ED to make SC look graphically worse and failed hard on their attempt, then they suddenly all turned to criticise the sandworm and "how unoriginal it is" "plagiarism" etc...
You see the pattern again?

Dude - everyone can go back and read and see that's not what happened. What are you trying to achieve here?

 

[Hi-Ban]

Here is the first part of the QA about the Polaris:

https://robertsspaceindustries.com/comm-link//15559-RSI-Polaris-Q-A-Part-2