The Star Citizen Thread V2.0

[Aleksej]

Technically i don't know if anybody tried this but can you drop out of hyperspace and fly over to a planet and actually get there without hyperspace?

Because in Elite when you drop out of Hyperspace it kind of loads a map from the engine. Most people here don't believe it's a map but it actually is a map because for example you can't see the asteroids on a planets ring unless you fly to it with hyperspace then you have the drop out of the travel map in to the local map with the asteroid belt details so it is a map switch.

But that's not what is important the important part of it is how you do it. SC will follow a similar principle and they said this from the very beginning that space travel will aim to be as immersive as possible and that you will never feel that.



It panic mode mate. In those 6 months many other things happened with Cryengine and other aspects of the game and you are calling them lazy out of your inability to use a certain controller in an alpha of an unreleased game which hasn't even reached 1.0 yet. Be patient as i said engine coding is way more difficult than game development things take time if you are this impatient come back in a few months when AC will have way more features and polish but calling people lazy isn't the way to go about it.

Of course you can travel without hyperspace. However it will take a lot of time.

No, definitely laziness. Saying that it is due to CryEngine that they have to perform some additional programming is a really bad reason. They have chosen this engine, they know that controls mappings are top priority - then it should be implemented from Day 1. How come modifying XML files be different? Control bindings are implemented but in a very wrong way - cover their laziness by saying to players do whatever you want in XML.

 

[Stormprooter]

try ingame thruster power distribution, probably you can reduce overall power and increase some precision, i also guess that some ships will have better thruster placement and you can even influence particular speeds like reduce yaw and increase roll, but probably this all will be ready to play with only in v1++, but CR told you already can do this so..

Well, I'm willing to give it a go, have you tried it?
If so, did it work at all?
I will RTFM, but any quick tips on how to do it?

Thanks

 

[Severian]

Technically i don't know if anybody tried this but can you drop out of hyperspace and fly over to a planet and actually get there without hyperspace?

Because in Elite when you drop out of Hyperspace it kind of loads a map from the engine. Most people here don't believe it's a map but it actually is a map because for example you can't see the asteroids on a planets ring unless you fly to it with hyperspace then you have the drop out of the travel map in to the local map with the asteroids in the belt so it is a map switch.

But that's not what is important the important part of it is how you do it. SC will follow a similar principle and they said this from the very beginning that space travel will aim to be as immersive as possible and that you will never feel that.

Definitely seamless in ED, as in no walled in areas. Devs confirmed that awhile ago. And yes, you can fly directly from one planet to another, or star even. Just takes aeons.

Your computer can't generate an entire galaxy in real time, so level of detail on distant objects is zero of course. But there is no "wall", it seamlessly loads and unloads data as you go. It's all one big "map".

SC can't now, nor ever will be able to do this using even the double precision version of Cryengine. It will always be a series of connected maps.

 

[Mr.Nowak]

Of course you can travel without hyperspace. However it will take a lot of time.

No, definitely laziness. Saying that it is due to CryEngine that they have to perform some additional programming is a really bad reason. They have chosen this engine, they know that controls mappings are top priority - then it should be implemented from Day 1. How come modifying XML files be different? Control bindings are implemented but in a very wrong way - cover their laziness by saying to players do whatever you want in XML.

It is not bad reason. This is an open game development things take time. Yes they chose the engine and yes its a top priority but AC released in 0.8 not 1.0 which is the feature complete AC they plan. Sorry mate but if you want that kind of support from day 1 you need to wait for the 1.0 release not get in it from the beginning.

The players themselves discovered XML's what CIG is trying to do is getting custom keybindings and proper controller support for Star Citizen in the game and this has been developing since months and it takes time. Sorry but you seem to be too impatient for this project and call out people lazy just because you are not getting your candy at 0.8 of AC when it will be released for 1.0. Then just wait for 1.0.

Definitely seamless in ED, as in no walled in areas. Devs confirmed that awhile ago. And yes, you can fly directly from one planet to another, or star even. Just takes aeons.

Your computer can't generate an entire galaxy in real time, so level of detail on distant objects is zero of course. But there is no "wall", it seamlessly loads and unloads data as you go. It's all one big "map".

SC can't now, nor ever will be able to do this using even the double precision version of Cryengine. It will always be a series of connected maps.

The aim for SC is a seamless experience and i am pretty sure they can do it and CR explained how and within the technicalities of the Cryengine it is doable too.

But when you say the level of detail on distant objects is zero well yes but why do you have that transition and you are in a completely different area in the game. To me in the engine it looks like the travel map and the local maps of Elite are indeed maps. Because you need to fly in to that asteroid belt for example for it to load that section of the game and there is a proper transition which isn't totally seamless.

 

[Aleksej]

It is not bad reason. This is an open game development things take time. Yes they chose the engine and yes its a top priority but AC released in 0.8 not 1.0 which is the feature complete AC they plan. Sorry mate but if you want that kind of support from day 1 you need to wait for the 1.0 release not get in it from the beginning.

The players themselves discovered XML's what CIG is trying to do is getting custom keybindings and proper controller support for Star Citizen in the game and this has been developing since months and it takes time. Sorry but you seem to be too impatient for this project and call out people lazy just because you are not getting your candy at 0.8 of AC when it will be released for 1.0. Then just wait for 1.0.

I am not impatient. Flight controls are always the main feature in flight sims. What's the reason to release flight sim if you cannot have proper controls?

 

[Mr.Nowak]

Severian here is an example of the map switch in the engine : http://youtu.be/6yvKlPbCRB0?t=4m26s

So the travel map and the local map are different imo atleast on the technical side.

I am not impatient. Flight controls are always the main feature in flight sims. What's the reason to release flight sim if you cannot have proper controls?

Because people wanted to get their hands of it and because some controls work? They are just not optimized at the moment? These things take time and don't happen quicker by saying the dev team is lazy! Which is disrespectful calling people who work hard and have passion for games be it from any game studio even from EA is not cool.

 

[Aleksej]

Severian here is an example of the map switch in the engine : http://youtu.be/6yvKlPbCRB0?t=4m26s

So the travel map and the local map are different imho.



Because people wanted to get their hands of it and because some controls work? They are just not optimized at the moment? These things take time and don't happen quicker by saying the dev team is lazy! Which is disrespectful calling people who work hard and have passion for games be it from any game studio even from EA is not cool.

With that I do agree. However, I think that you already know that this was not my impatience. I always said that releasing feature complete v1.0 would be much better and I would wait for that. Instead we received v0.8 just to please someone.

 

[Mr.Nowak]

With that I do agree. However, I think that you already know that this was not my impatience. I always said that releasing feature complete v1.0 would be much better and I would wait for that. Instead we received v0.8 just to please someone.

That is true but the earlier there is feedback the better it is for CIG to notice their issues and improve on them though.

 

[Aleksej]

That is true but the earlier there is feedback the better it is for CIG to notice their issues and improve on them though.

Well, yes. However this also lead to numerous threads describing the "bad" flight model, which actually is not that bad. And all this was caused by clumsy flight controls. This could have easily be avoided and there would be mode useful feedback that would not have been derailed by the "bad" flight model.

 

[Severian]

IThe aim for SC is a seamless experience and i am pretty sure they can do it and CR explained how and within the technicalities of the Cryengine it is doable too.

It won't be. It's not technically possible using the Cryengine. Not an opinion, a mathematical fact. There will always be loading of the next map, covered by cut scenes or some such, but that is inherent to the engine.

But when you say the level of detail on distant objects is zero well yes but why do you have that transition and you are in a completely different area in the game. To me in the engine it looks like the travel map and the local maps of Elite are indeed maps. Because you need to fly in to that asteroid belt for example for it to load that section of the game and there is a proper transition which isn't totally seamless.

Already told you, it's syncing to another instance. It doesn't do that in single player, watch the demos.

 

[Mr.Nowak]

It won't be. It's not technically possible using the Cryengine. Not an opinion, a mathematical fact. There will always be loading of the next map, covered by cut scenes or some such, but that is inherent to the engine.

Already told you, it's syncing to another instance. It doesn't do that in single player, watch the demos.

We will see that on SC but after 64 bit it is possible just like Elite you can move to a planet but without hyperspace nobody would dare because it's unbelievably slow also we saw a glimpse of the inter solar travel in the latest commercial which looked pretty much how i imagined it flying fast through planets similar to Elite.

And as you said it's an instance. Engine wise that transition is transitioning from the travel map to the local map. So technically it is not the same map. So not completely seamless as everybody is claiming it to be.

Pretty sure SC will follow a similar model but everyone that backs E: D is claiming SC will be something it is not designed as. The design states seamless transitions and CR said that you will be able to fly anywhere but there will be huge instances just like E: D. So pretty similar concepts that were laid out roughly at the same time by both games.

 

[Thargon]

https://robertsspaceindustries.com/comm-link/transmission/13951-Flight-Model-And-Input-Controls

Have you read this? lol

 

[Mr.Nowak]

https://robertsspaceindustries.com/comm-link/transmission/13951-Flight-Model-And-Input-Controls

Have you read this? lol

Yea i was impressed. The Psychist and Mathematician they hired excluding CR seems to have payed off. I mostly got interested by the gameplay effects of center of mass and thruster damage. Will have and has cool gameplay implementations in SC.

Spoiler

 

[Aleksej]

EDIT: spoiler tag for the image added.

 

[Thargon]

My point being, is although the simulation says it's complex and realistic, the reality is, what you end up with is something that is uncontrollable and horrible to play.

 

[Mr.Nowak]

My point being, is although the simulation says it's complex and realistic, the reality is, what you end up with is something that is uncontrollable and horrible to play.

It has more to do with the controls and the tweaking of the IFCS systems as Chris said the system is not perfect but i have already seen some Pro's really utilizing the systems to gain an advantage in multiplayer. Pretty cool. It has ways to go though and they admitted that.

 

[Aleksej]

My point being, is although the simulation says it's complex and realistic, the reality is, what you end up with is something that is uncontrollable and horrible to play.

These are all design choices, which sometimes are pretty strange as "we want to have realism here but we do not need it there". Like with gimbaled weapons, their large angles of fire and ability to control them with head-tracking devices, which makes head-tracking devices necessary to play the game, however this was never posted under minimal requirements.

 

[Thargon]

It has more to do with the controls and the tweaking of the IFCS systems as Chris said the system is not perfect but i have already seen some Pro's really utilizing the systems to gain an advantage in multiplayer. Pretty cool. It has ways to go though and they admitted that.

Don't get me wrong, it's wonderful they've spent the time and development effort to get a simulation like this developed, but I just hope that it's just a case of tweaking something, rather than something fundamental.

Hopefully, as you say in a few weeks things will improve. I hope they do.

 

[Mr.Nowak]

These are all design choices, which sometimes are pretty strange as "we want to have realism here but we do not need it there". Like with gimbaled weapons, their large angles of fire and ability to control them with head-tracking devices, which makes head-tracking devices necessary to play the game, however this was never posted under minimal requirements.

Talking about the weapons the direction that they are heading for is looking great in my opinion.

In Arena Commander V1.0 (and Star Citizen as a whole) there will be both fixed weapons and gimbaled/turreted weapons. The fixed weapons will have a slow auto convergence of perhaps -/+ five degrees to allow them to focus at a point that is user definable (defaults to half maximum range) or will adjust to the distance of the current target. We didn’t have time to finish this feature so for v0.8 we just made all fixed weapons gimbaled in order to not give the Hornet a huge advantage over the Aurora and 300i. This is not the long term plan.

Fixed weapons will have a lead indicator (just like in a real combat aircraft). We are also considering altering how the gimbaled guns look reticle operates. Right now you just have to place it over your target and the targeting computer gimbals the guns to achieve that firing solution, when the dotted lines collapse inside the reticle it means that all guns have achieved the solution. We are thinking about making it so you have to place the look reticle over the lead indicator in order to achieve the firing solution.

This will allow a pilot who is not using the full power of his gimbaled guns (it’s not always easy to aim and fly into two different directions or if you’re in a combined look and fly mode like the “Freelancer” mouse mode) to fly in a more optimal manner for leading the target (you want to heading at where the target is heading not where it is now)

As for people thinking that gimbaled weapons spoil the “skill” in the game, gimbaled / turreted weapons are a mainstay of current military equipment and will likely be even more so in the future. That doesn’t mean a hit is automatic. The weapon still has to come to bear on the target and you have to be pointing your ship’s nose in such a way as the firing solution can be met. And that’s assuming the target doesn’t start changing course or speed erratically!

— Chris Roberts

 

[psykokow]

HI everyone,
Sorry to interrupt your discussion but we have had a lot of reports from this thread since it reopened and I figured a quick update of a particular issue may be worthwhile.

One thing in particular that seems to rile people up is the continued use of the phrase 'turret simulator' 'turret commander' 'turrets in space'.

Now I totally understand the use of describing the gameplay as 'turrets in space' the continued use of the phrase could be described as baiting for a response.

In the interests of continued and positive debate and postings in this thread, please bare this in mind.

Thanks for your attention.