The Star Citizen Thread v5

Status
Thread Closed: Not open for further replies.
Why have Discord when you can have your own totally-not-a-reskinned-Discord? :D

IF they can get it integrated into the game properly, it may actually be a pretty good thing in terms of comms and social stuff - it will all depend on how slick the interface is and how reliable it is, so I'm reserving judgement.
 
Last edited:
If there is one thing that proves that some of SC backers have totally lost the plot. Is their denial about how long this thing has been in development.

"We’re already one year in - another 2 years puts us at 3 total which is ideal. Any more and things would begin to get stale." - Chris Roberts - 3rd October 2012.

This is from the Man Who Can Do Know Wrong, and they still deny it. It is now in it's 6th year. Deal with it.

But there was a vote and an unbelievable thousand and something backers voted for whatever the expanded scope meant ;)

/sarcasm.

CR's narrative changes and conduct post escapist article disabled my ability to eat up his drivel.

Before escapist I was buying ships and happy to be doing so...

The state of the released FM and the community team telling us with much chagrin FM gets nailed in beta when at the time it was full speed ahead with SQ42.

How do you mission/ai design a single player experience where your results would carry directly over into the PU without a locked FM?!?!

You don't, you block the action of the narrative the same way an animated film pre visualizes what will need to be antimated. In the case of SC there is a massive interactive portion that simply cannot be nailed down without many other still incomplete game features.

It was CR who ultimately turned me hyper critical, I don't want the game to fail at all, but the smell of coming out of their offices since hasn't re-aligned my confidence.

Just my opinion.
 
But there was a vote and an unbelievable thousand and something backers voted for whatever the expanded scope meant ;)

/sarcasm.

CR's narrative changes and conduct post escapist article disabled my ability to eat up his drivel.

Before escapist I was buying ships and happy to be doing so...

The state of the released FM and the community team telling us with much chagrin FM gets nailed in beta when at the time it was full speed ahead with SQ42.

How do you mission/ai design a single player experience where your results would carry directly over into the PU without a locked FM?!?!

You don't, you block the action of the narrative the same way an animated film pre visualizes what will need to be antimated. In the case of SC there is a massive interactive portion that simply cannot be nailed down without many other still incomplete game features.

It was CR who ultimately turned me hyper critical, I don't want the game to fail at all, but the smell of coming out of their offices since hasn't re-aligned my confidence.

Just my opinion.

Who here wouldn't want another space game? I'm guessing nobody. This is what the SC zealots cannot seem to grasp. I would love the game that Roberts tried to sell me exist, but you know what? It can't.
It's too big and it's too full of wavy hands ideas to work. Another $1m stretch goal, fine, wavy hands, make something up to fit, let the backers fill in the blanks.
Derek Smart is right. Star Citizen, as sold to the backers, will not exist.
 
But there was a vote and an unbelievable thousand and something backers voted for whatever the expanded scope meant

I see that argument coming up time and time again WHENEVER IT FITS A PRO-SC argument. At the same time polls being anti-SC or adressing critique at the game are labeled a "minority" or "just a few". So the double-standard is really strong in the SC-fanbase. It was said in this thread a couple hundred (thousand?) pages back. Increasing the scope of the game is completely on CIG and CR...not the fans. And that is the truth.

I mean there are approximately 500.000 or less backers (nobody knows as the backer count is broken) I guess and out of those 1000 voted on that poll yet whenever it comes up its described as "the playerbase decided". I can chuckle at this but taking it seriously? nope.

P.S. hey all, I m following this thread since v4 but never had the courage (and eventually the reputation) to post in here. IMO its the only SANE place on the internet that allows for a neutral discussion about the topic. Derek Smarts blog is a tad too extreme (even tho his questions are good ones) and heavily moderated, other sites obviously fear the wrath of the SC-swarm and RSI forums......LOL sorry (even tho now that more people seem to wake up sceptical posts have a lil more weight there). Its a shame that the most vocal pro-SC people on this forum are obvious shills (didnt know this term before this forum hehe) and the rest doesnt last long enough due to their inherit SC-fan behaviour in posting or simply dont add anything to the topic. I commend you all for staying on topic most of the time and resisting the open taunts, derail attempts, hostility and deformation of truth which keep coming up.

edit: failed at posting....also typos
 
Last edited:
There is nothing in the ED kickstarter that is not doable.

Why do you guys even bother comparing ED to SC? Its rather simple....one of these is a released game, the other is (barely) an alpha. There IS NO comparison because Chris Roberts needs to deliver first before the games can be compared. I mean the BEST certain posters can bring up is "but sc WILL be better when it comes out" which is wishfull thinking and living the dream, not a realistic assessment. Also posts like "its already better then any other game" crack me up really because I do watch twich and promotional videos about it and the only things I see is bugs, missing core mechanics and make-believe gameplay.
 
*Mod hat off



And yet all those only offer a minuscule peek at the complete set of content/qualities/mechanics that have been promised... And that are still not available. And that minuscule peek is bug ridden at that. The answer of a big part of the community to that is unsurprisingly... "alpha".

And therefore all hype, all excitement, all the toxic anti-consumer "evangelism" as TB puts it, is still very much done on the basis of unseen content/quality... i.e. dreams. Much like NMS was. Which is precisely TB's point.

I would argue that Star Citizen sheer momentum of TB's "evangelism" reaches to levels that NMS, even without playable alpha peeks, could never reach, because it is founded in the exactly same type of non yet seen content/quality hopes and hype and then supported to the hilt by a continuous and unrelentless barrage of CIG (yet undelivered) promises claiming not only the most transparent development ever but also the BDSSE. For all its faults not even NMS was bold enough to attempt that.

There's a huge difference between NMS and SC/SQ42:

Hello Games were not taking in multi-thousand Dollar pre-orders from customers to build the game (they took some cash from Sony as a publisher, I imagine, but they already had a small studio and didn't hugely expand IIRC).

The most that NMS customers lost was 60 bucks but, more importantly, the hypers lost face and suffered from their previous expectations when the game came out. You could call this a personal insult.

If people can't see that Star Citizen is a whole other level of potential fail then I really give up. Not only is the potential insult of having been screwed over present, but the money involved is much higher.

And pro-tip for those following along: People who've given CIG money have made a transaction, so are customers. Not donors. Especially not investors. Now, said customers may be happy writing their purchases off, but that doesn't change the fact that they are purchases in the first place.
 
Last edited:
The most that NMS customers lost was 60 bucks but, more importantly, the hypers lost face and suffered from their previous expectations when the game came out. You could call this a personal insult.

If people can't see that Star Citizen is a whole other level of potential fail then I really give up. Not only is the potential insult of having been screwed over present, but the money involved is much higher..

One difference we've already seen, though, is that while NMS's fanatics responded by reaching for their pitchforks, in the case of SC we've already seen people smiling through gritted teeth and pretending they're happy with the state of the game, or claiming that being part of the development (i.e. watching from the sidelines with everyone else while Roberts drives the project off a cliff) has already been worth their money, and they will no doubt claim to be thrilled with whatever gets the official MVP seal of approval. They're not fanatical about the game itself as many were with NMS, they've constructed a whole cult of personality around Roberts as an infallible hero of gaming (which I'm sure he enjoys). If it all burns to the ground, they'll just blame DS, or the sub-concierge proles, or the media, or anyone at all except Roberts himself. The opposite of what happened to Sean Murray.

There are several people who post here in maniacal and often incoherent defence of SC who I can't imagine ever admitting to being disappointed by anything CIG/Roberts delivers, or fails to deliver. It remains to be seen whether that's because of... reasons (grey market, reputation management etc), or whether they're genuinely representative of the really "invested" fans, and how well they'll keep up the facade should a 1.0 release ever appear.
 

Viajero

Volunteer Moderator
*Mod hat off

There's a huge difference between NMS and SC/SQ42:

Hello Games were not taking in multi-thousand Dollar pre-orders from customers to build the game (they took some cash from Sony as a publisher, I imagine, but they already had a small studio and didn't hugely expand IIRC).

The most that NMS customers lost was 60 bucks but, more importantly, the hypers lost face and suffered from their previous expectations when the game came out. You could call this a personal insult.

If people can't see that Star Citizen is a whole other level of potential fail then I really give up. Not only is the potential insult of having been screwed over present, but the money involved is much higher.

And pro-tip for those following along: People who've given CIG money have made a transaction, so are customers. Not donors. Especially not investors. Now, said customers may be happy writing their purchases off, but that doesn't change the fact that they are purchases in the first place.

If what you mean is that the level of personal investment (monetary and emotional) of the community is orders of magnitude larger compared to NMS and that it just magnifies the "evangelism" concept described by TB and applicable to SC, then yes, totally agree aswell.
 
Last edited:
I m sorry I dont care about DS's game one bit but his questions are sound and he has a technical base to speak from. He also CARES to explain his point of view while the other side of the argument best come-back is "lol you dont understand game development". If anything your saying that he tried and failed actually makes him an EXPERT about this topic as he experienced the risks and fell into the holes this whole venture holds. Lets just stay with Star Citizen and what THAT game has to offer. I mean you are putting more effort into discrediting others then in bringing up convincing arguments for SC itself.
 
One difference we've already seen, though, is that while NMS's fanatics responded by reaching for their pitchforks, in the case of SC we've already seen people smiling through gritted teeth and pretending they're happy with the state of the game, or claiming that being part of the development (i.e. watching from the sidelines with everyone else while Roberts drives the project off a cliff) has already been worth their money, and they will no doubt claim to be thrilled with whatever gets the official MVP seal of approval. They're not fanatical about the game itself as many were with NMS, they've constructed a whole cult of personality around Roberts as an infallible hero of gaming (which I'm sure he enjoys). If it all burns to the ground, they'll just blame DS, or the sub-concierge proles, or the media, or anyone at all except Roberts himself. The opposite of what happened to Sean Murray.

There are several people who post here in maniacal and often incoherent defence of SC who I can't imagine ever admitting to being disappointed by anything CIG/Roberts delivers, or fails to deliver. It remains to be seen whether that's because of... reasons (grey market, reputation management etc), or whether they're genuinely representative of the really "invested" fans, and how well they'll keep up the facade should a 1.0 release ever appear.

Yes, it's a very weird situation, and why the word "cult-like" is used, although maybe "cult of personality" may be slightly closer to the truth but still inaccurate as it is part of the userbase pinning that image on CR as opposed to CR/CIG themselves. Sure, he's a salesman, but those quite often aren't the people you want with final say on a product (as they're constantly tempted to say "yes" to features to gain more customers).

I can't wait to see how it all pans out!

*Mod hat off

If what you mean is that the level of personal investment (monetary and emotional) of the community is orders of magnitude larger compared to NMS and that it just magnifies the "evangelism" concept described by TB and applicable to SC, then yes, totally agree aswell.

I can't see how any proposed computer game item can be worth a list price >$10k, whatever it is. Ditto miracle cures, talking to the dead, pretty much every religious claim ever. :x Quite simply I don't do this belief thing. OK, maybe I'm also a bit of a cynic...

I was defrauded of some money a number of years ago (ebay scam) and I keep in mind how much I wanted to believe that I was actually going to receive what I paid for and wouldn't accept that I'd been scammed. Emotional investment and ego are powerful things. Luckily I learned that lesson in a way that didn't really inconvenience me and am way more careful with claims from people selling stuff, including Frontier, so although an Elite fan I waited until around Beta 1.2 before getting involved! Star Citizen doesn't pass my smell test - it may end up being released and great, but until then I am not convinced.

Still, any solid news on 3.0 or Sq42 yet?
 
1) Fight model: after 4 years and 100m+ they still do not have set final fight model...

2) Universe hancrafted and/or PG -> the same: after 4 years and 100m+ they just have Tech-Demos and theorycrafting...

I am sorry, but here I see a lot of red flags and lulzbackets...

P.S.
In 2013 I backed SC for 80$ thank god I did not wasted more.. ;)

1.
Thats not exactly strange to be honest.
They are still Alpha and are adding the Ground Work. So doing Adjustments like actual Inertia Calculations for each Ship is likely not on their Agenda.

2.
This is not Surprising either. Their Original Plan did not include such an Massive World in the First Place.
So them not keeping up is honestly said within expectations.
Anyone believing into Miracles is self at fault here.
It should have been Obvious that such an massive thing would not work out within an such Short Time Frame.


3.
Why wasted ? :)
If you dont like having backed it. Demand a Refund.
As easy as that. :)
Thats why they are Offering such a Service.


I'm not quite sure what you mean? The game is based on a physics engine, so all SC ships already have mass (otherwise you would have infinite acceleration). Ships obviously lack weight because there is no gravity.

It's possible the mass numbers are all placeholders, but I doubt that's correct (as a lot of 'hype' has been based around how physically accurate the thrusters/mass are).



Yes, this is something ED has also been doing since the Engineers patch. The only quirk is that SC lacks any procedural "content", so procedurally generated planet areas are (at this point) functionally wastelands. If you want 10 things to do on a SC planet, then CIG need to handcraft & test those 10 things on that planet.


1.
Ah.
The Physics Engine is only the Base System for Calculating things.
But for the Physics Engine to Calculate anything. It needs the Values to Calculate.

For an Ship Model to be Calculated Accurately and for its Movement to make Sense.
You need to Include.

Positions Thrusters (All of them including each small Support or Direction Thruster)
The Power of each of these Thrusters.
The Mass of each Module and each Part of the Ship including the Density of that Part and that Position.
The External Influence Factors like Stations Gravity etc.

Now for SC the Thrusters already need fine Detail Work. Because they aint always Placed Symetrical. Which means they need additional Support Thrusters to work which will be requiring some fine detail Calculations to be worked out.
The Mass per Module is actually the thing which causes the Illogical View People get when an Big Ship Turns around with no Inertia behind it.
For an Ship to work properly. You not only need to put a Number into its Weight. But you also need distribute this weight among the Ship so the Physics Engine recognizes that the Long End of the Ship turning needs to have more Inertia than when Rolling Sidewards for example. This is not done in SC right now. So especially with the longer Ships your Nose turning looks super Unnatural because its super long away from the Core of your Ship but just starts and stops with no inertia.
As I said. This is not exactly hard to do. But its alot of work. Because if you want to have it handled by the Physics engine. This is like a Hundred or more Values for each Ship which need to be added and calculated properly.
These then need to be tested and adjusted as well to look right.

The Engine does not know how heavy each part of the Ship is supposed to be after all ;)
So just having a Ship with an Weight wont be doing anything for the Physics engine.


2.
Yes and No.
ED is doing Procedural Generation almost entirely.
With a few Handcrafted things in.

SC is doing mostly Handcrafted World while adding Procedural Generation for Large Areas within one such Created Object.
This is much much muuuuch more Work.
But also makes the World much more Engaging. Because you can set Parameters, Events, Objects etc etc for each Procedural Generated Area Alone.
So each of these Areas can be using entirely Different Values these Values are in each case Set by the Humans behind it. To Fit the Surrounding Area and to make Sense with the Remaining World.

This way the World Feels much less Generic.
But it also means that this is much more Work of course.
It allows for an much Bigger World than doing 100% Handcrafting. But of course nowhere close to the Size of an 100% Generated World.
It will surely have Areas which Feel Generic. But here as well. Nowhere close to 100% Generated Worlds. And this is the good thing. It can feel more Natural than a 100% Handcrafted World. Because Handcrafting is not Forcibly Logical in all Areas :)

I'm only asking as a small backer of Star Citizen (and someone who feels they've already lost their kickstarter money), what's the present TL : DR state of Star Citizen?

Specifically, what's the state on Squadron 42?

I'm tempted to download the latest Beta but cutting through all the vitriol and Hype is just putting me off.

Ta.

The SC MMO Universe is making Fairly Big Strides in Going Forward and is taking Shape.
So is the Additional Content and NPCs etc.
The Physics are currently Bad. They are almost entirely Ignored by SC.
SQ42 has no real News worth telling right now.

I said this Before.
But an more Realistic Idea for Release is 2019.
We might see an Fairly well Playable Beta in the End of 2017.
 
If there is one thing that proves that some of SC backers have totally lost the plot. Is their denial about how long this thing has been in development.

"We’re already one year in - another 2 years puts us at 3 total which is ideal. Any more and things would begin to get stale." - Chris Roberts - 3rd October 2012.

This is from the Man Who Can Do Know Wrong, and they still deny it. It is now in it's 6th year. Deal with it.

Development of the game began in 2011.
The Kickstarter began in 2012 and used in game pictures using whatever engine they had.

BUT...Foundry 42 where the heavy work is being done wasn't set up until 2013. And a lot of the early work apprars to have been scrapped.

How long development has been ongoing depends on how you want to show things.

6 years is true....but major development has been ongoing for only 3 with the formation of Foundry 42 and true development...as opposed to preliminary work before the Kickstarter...only began with Kickstarter so 4 years would be accurate as well.

So....it has been in development for 5 years.
But the first was mainly preliminary and preparing for the Kickstarter
Game development itself only began after Kickstarter...so about 4 years by that standard. But the third parties didn't work out and Foundry 42 allowed them to cope with the increased scale and scope inhouse so that is only three years with a 'full' development team
 
To be fair, that's also true about E: D. Still a great game though, so maybe StCit* will become a (good?) game too. :)

*SC means Space Crusade or Star Control or SuperCruise to me. ;)

During Kickstarter FD promised so little that it was obvious that for lot of potential ED backers that wasn't enough.

During KS there was no promise of 3D cockpit, VR, FA off, or any of huge gameplay mechanics really. We didn't know how we will fly around, or what scale of universe will be.

Only thing not shown up from Kickstarter is full fledged wrecks. Currently we have some sort of partial state for them, but nothing that you could explore while EVA. And to be granted, having such wrecks would make sense only when EVA would appear in first place.

So no, FD during KS didn't promise anything they can't deliver.

Now, if you talk about DDF it has always come with disclaimer. DDF is dream goals of FD team, some of them already rejected or delayed various reasons. But it has never been pitched during Kickstarter or even after that as something that will happen anyway. Some fans including myself got a bit hyped too much about possibilities during beta period.

Yes, there's offline mode FD promised, and later walked back and it has been discussed to death. Still, it was an extra and only thing where FD admitted they failed to do.
 
Last edited:

Viajero

Volunteer Moderator
You never needed the *mod hat off - statement. It was always redundant.

At one point it started looking like you're parading that title. I know you never meant that - but it did.

Well, I know some patrons know it is really not needed indeed *nods*. But some time in the past, when I hadn't yet started to take it off, I was quoted a few times in mod context leading to the usual confusion. And took it off since then when not modding just to be absolutely 100% clear.
 
Last edited:
Status
Thread Closed: Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom