The Star Citizen Thread v5

Status
Thread Closed: Not open for further replies.

Snarfbuckle

S
Neo-ST said:
Exactly.
But I wouldn't say those were intended for thunder stealing, rather for trying to keep head above water.
Click to expand...

With them being delayed with 3.0 and needing up to 4.0 to have the needed mechanics in place for SQ42 I can understand them needing to "feed" the community with snippets of assets, I just wish they could do it in a more coherent way.

- show off even greybox status and demo of a random mission segment in SQ42
- show of the same thing with larger assets like Shubin mining station even in an unfinished state

With 300+ employees they have game assets but they show us as little as they can OR wait until said asset is in a (mostly) finished state.

The only time I have seen whitebox/greybox status was with the Caterpillar design.
 

Stigbob

Stigbob
Snarfbuckle said:
With them being delayed with 3.0 and needing up to 4.0 to have the needed mechanics in place for SQ42 I can understand them needing to "feed" the community with snippets of assets, I just wish they could do it in a more coherent way.

- show off even greybox status and demo of a random mission segment in SQ42
- show of the same thing with larger assets like Shubin mining station even in an unfinished state

With 300+ employees they have game assets but they show us as little as they can OR wait until said asset is in a (mostly) finished state.

The only time I have seen whitebox/greybox status was with the Caterpillar design.
Click to expand...

They can't do any serious work on mission design beyond a simple scenario outline (ie "we'd like a carrier defense mission") before finalizing the flight model and ships. Tweaks to speed/maneuverability/weapons will drastically alter how the fight pans out in that (and any other missions). So if they go with mission design now they are just lining up problems and rework for themselves on every mission after each tweak.

Cart before the horse.
 

Stigbob

Stigbob
Mu77ley said:
ie. exactly what they've actually been doing since day one.
Click to expand...

Of course, just because it's self evidently counter productive won't stop CiG from doing it. I'm predicting future delays for this reason, not making excuses for CiG's silence.

If you own x-wing alliance (or any space game with a mission creator) you can quickly test this yourself make a balanced mission where the sides are even then change one sides fighters to something more maneuverable and observe the collapse of your balancing efforts.
 
Last edited:

Cmdr Eagleboy

Cmdr Eagleboy
Mission system - infrastructure beneath them - can be developed before missions, if you have very good idea of requirements. In fact, I expected to CIG demo such system long time ago. Fact they don't have it means they don't have it. So that's simply it.
 

Snarfbuckle

S
Stigbob said:
They can't do any serious work on mission design beyond a simple scenario outline (ie "we'd like a carrier defense mission") before finalizing the flight model and ships. Tweaks to speed/maneuverability/weapons will drastically alter how the fight pans out in that (and any other missions). So if they go with mission design now they are just lining up problems and rework for themselves on every mission after each tweak.

Cart before the horse.
Click to expand...

Depends, last time they talked about missions was not to make them linear like older games but more optional similar to Far Cry 3 where you basically had a mission map and an objective.

- You get a map
- You get a job
- You get a selection of tools
- The rest is up to you

Sure, some ships and mechanics will be completely unsuitable for the job but it would not be impossible.

If they then in mission testing finds out that X ship or weapon is too good or too bad they can adjust values accordingly.
 

Stigbob

Stigbob
Snarfbuckle said:
Depends, last time they talked about missions was not to make them linear like older games but more optional similar to Far Cry 3 where you basically had a mission map and an objective.

- You get a map
- You get a job
- You get a selection of tools
- The rest is up to you

Sure, some ships and mechanics will be completely unsuitable for the job but it would not be impossible.

If they then in mission testing finds out that X ship or weapon is too good or too bad they can adjust values accordingly.
Click to expand...

They need to tie their missions into the mo-capped cut-scenes, so there's not going to be very much at all in the way of player choice. Simplistic three nav points and an enemy wing at one of them is a lot more likely and would be more like the MVP Chris Roberts has told you you're getting. Even then changes to the flight model would make it either far too easy or too hard, so they still need a finalized flight model before they can start.
 
Last edited:

Cmdr Eagleboy

Cmdr Eagleboy
Stigbob said:
They need to tie their missions into the mo-capped cut-scenes, so there's not going to be very much at all in the way of player choice. Simplistic three nav points and an enemy wing at one of them is a lot more likely and would be more like the MVP Chris Roberts has told you you're getting. Even then changes to the flight model would make it either far too easy or too hard, so they still need a finalized flight model before they can start.
Click to expand...

I don't remember any of WC having multiple paths to victory - basically either you lost mission and started again, or you won and scenes went on as planned.
 

Snarfbuckle

S
Stigbob said:
They need to tie their missions into the mo-capped cut-scenes, so there's not going to be very much at all in the way of player choice. Simplistic three nav points and an enemy wing at one of them is a lot more likely and would be more like the MVP Chris Roberts has told you you're getting. Even then changes to the flight model would make it either far too easy or too hard, so they still need a finalized flight model before they can start.
Click to expand...

Which they can easily do. Depending on the success or failure of a mission they can add cutscenes or when you get close to X or Y objective.

And they have explained how they plan to do the mission system including the campaign.

http://www.pcgamer.com/inside-squadron-42-star-citizens-ambitious-singleplayer-campaign/

“Obviously, I’m worried about consistency and quality,” he admitted. “But I’m not the guy who goes, ‘Oh yeah, that’s good enough!’ I say, ‘Guys, this is gonna have to be scrapped or redone completely.’ I want to play it. I’ve put all this effort in. My point is, I’m committing a decent amount of my life to get this thing done, and I don’t want to come out on the other end and realize I dropped the ball or it wasn’t good enough.”
Click to expand...

While that quote sounds good I honestly think that is also one of his flaws. There is no such thing as perfection which means unless he is satisfied with each detail there will be delays.

At the same time that was in 2013...
 

AndyJ

AndyJ
Zetta said:
Yeah we have seen stuff before, no disagreement there but this coming out a couple of days after the other game and being shown 6 months early hints at a few things.

It's certainly more than coincidental as well. We had pupil to planet one day after Horizons' release (iirc), alien languages very soon after Thargoids interdiction, character faces one or two days after character creation. There's definitely an attempt at thunder stealing or one-upping on the competition.

It's not a bad thing although I do wish CIG's stuff was in game rather than a mockup or a talk of how things are hopefully going to be.
Click to expand...

I think it's just coincidence rather than any attempt at thunder stealing.

It's not from a CIG presentation, it's 10 minutes from the end of a 7 hour long Unreal Engine 4 presentation at GDC 2017 - the final section covered physics and animation.
(https://www.twitch.tv/videos/125625961?t=06h58m02s)

The presenter is the CEO of 3Lateral and explains that his company creates "high end creatures and characters for games and for film", in particular they focus on digital humans. They have presumably asked if they can use assets from SC as it's a current project they're involved in & it likely has more highly detailed skins/scans to manipulate and demonstrate with.

Although this demo is for Unreal Engine, they have Crytek games on their CV (Ryse: Son of Rome) and even GTA V.
(http://www.3lateral.com/projects)

CIG contracted them to scan/create SC avatars (such as Mr Oldman) as far back as 2013 from what I can tell. ([edit] wrong link: https://forums.robertsspaceindustries.com/discussion/comment/1541346/#Comment_1541346)

So it was a planned presentation that happened yesterday and the target audience was a hall full of game developers. 3Lateral were demoing their own model creation / animation tech in that context - i.e. to potential users/customers.

Obviously the inclusion of SC characters is relevant to that fan base, hence it's ended up on Reddit today.
 
Last edited:

Tippis

Tippis
Cmdr Eagleboy said:
I don't remember any of WC having multiple paths to victory - basically either you lost mission and started again, or you won and scenes went on as planned.
Click to expand...

WC2 and 3 kind of had it, in a rather simple choose-your-own-adventure book style: you could either be on the winning path or the losing path, and if you were on the losing path, you could get back on the winning path if you did well enough. WC4 had something similar, but even more simplistic.

But yes, it was more a case of multiple paths to failure, and most of them having a way to recover from that path. Also, that was more for the campaign as a whole rather than individual missions, although you could fail a mission and still continue the campaign on the wining path.
 
Last edited:

Asylum

A
Snarfbuckle said:
With them being delayed with 3.0 and needing up to 4.0 to have the needed mechanics in place for SQ42 I can understand them needing to "feed" the community with snippets of assets, I just wish they could do it in a more coherent way.

- show off even greybox status and demo of a random mission segment in SQ42
- show of the same thing with larger assets like Shubin mining station even in an unfinished state

With 300+ employees they have game assets but they show us as little as they can OR wait until said asset is in a (mostly) finished state.

The only time I have seen whitebox/greybox status was with the Caterpillar design.
Click to expand...

Fear not, the guys who toured saw brilliance (bought and idris) but can't talk about it at all because they signed an NDA "sorry". ;)
 

Zetta

Zetta
AndyJ said:
I think it's just coincidence rather than any attempt at thunder stealing.

It's not from a CIG presentation, it's 10 minutes from the end of a 7 hour long Unreal Engine 4 presentation at GDC 2017 - the final section covered physics and animation.
(https://www.twitch.tv/videos/125625961?t=06h58m02s)

The presenter is the CEO of 3Lateral and explains that his company creates "high end creatures and characters for games and for film", in particular they focus on digital humans. They have presumably asked if they can use assets from SC as it's a current project they're involved in & it likely has more highly detailed skins/scans to manipulate and demonstrate with.

Although this demo is for Unreal Engine, they have Crytek games on their CV (Ryse: Son of Rome) and even GTA V.
(http://www.3lateral.com/projects)

CIG contracted them to scan/create SC avatars (such as Mr Oldman) as far back as 2013 from what I can tell. ([edit] wrong link: https://forums.robertsspaceindustries.com/discussion/comment/1541346/#Comment_1541346)

So it was a planned presentation that happened yesterday and the target audience was a hall full of game developers. 3Lateral were demoing their own model creation / animation tech in that context - i.e. to potential users/customers.

Obviously the inclusion of SC characters is relevant to that fan base, hence it's ended up on Reddit today.
Click to expand...

Seeing that it's a part of a much larger presentation (which CIG wouldn't have any control over) certainly makes it seem coincidental. Thank you for reminding me that correlation != causation.
 
Last edited:

Snarfbuckle

S
Viajero said:
Man, if I had a credit for each time a SC fan, or even CIG, has said this. If it was also true we would prolly have a game by now.
Click to expand...

All im saying that tying X sequence to Y action is not difficult.

It has been done in games since forever and is not a technological leap in itself.
 
Status
Thread Closed: Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom