The Star Citizen Thread v5
- Thread starter Brett C
- Start date
- Status
I've only just started watching this - but from a physics perspective I'm already banging my head on the keyboard.
Ok - it's pretty clear that there is no basic understanding of Newtons third law, let alone an understanding of inertia and torque. This is quite sad.
Ok - it's pretty clear that there is no basic understanding of Newtons third law, let alone an understanding of inertia and torque. This is quite sad.
Last edited:
Thanks Rolan, I actually quite enjoyed that, really very interesting to see how much work goes on behind the scenes in something as simple as firing a gun.
However, did he say (@ 1:48) that this is (awesome) legacy code that is going to be replaced in the new weapons system? In which case... errr... why bother fixing it!?
What a pity they didn't pick an engine specialising in FPS mechanics... ...oh........ :-/
It's rubbish. I wrote an article about it earlier today.
None of this matters because it is highly unlikely that they're going to be around long enough to even get to that sort of thing.
Wow, before you write anymore. Research "confirmation bias" and hopefully you realize why everything you wrote was a groundless waste of your time.
It can equally well be argued that:
Wow, before you pay anymore. Research "Star Citizen released product" and hopefully you realise why everything you paid was a groundless waste of your money.
CIG are going round in circles chasing their own tail. You cannot have a "firm technological foundation" that "progress will rapidly ramp up" if they are only now realising that they have to break the laws of physics for something as simple as discharging a weapon - getting it completely WRONG - but yet boasting about unparalleled levels of realism and fidelity and utterly correct physics that Genuine Roberts coded himself.
Now - this isn't the Bugsmasher guy's fault - he is simply coding out procedure to obtain expected in-game result as per the design documentation. The initial state was the correct one, projectiles move slowly enough for their trajectory to rise along the barrel recoil, and I remember some source saying this was intended behavior as someone wanted realistic ballistics. They just didn't work out how to model a collective mass and introduce dispersion after confinement.
Last edited:
Its called development. Its going through exactly the same things all video games have gone through. That arguments doesnt even make any sense. Plans alwasy change mid-deveopment, accuracy sacrificed for gameplay, and when your budget is growing, delays added for more content. All of which are positives to end product.
Last edited:
So, as a gun nut the barrel rise from the recoil would be impacting all of the projectiles fired from a shotgun. With that said, they probably used an original script for a sub-machine gun or full auto weapon.
Anywho, the real reason I posted is to ask if anyone else is questioning the reloading mechanics of that shotgun? Pump handle goes forward not backwards?!
Last edited:
Well the entire gun recoils simply as a function of putting the cartridge contents forward. Rise is due to the torque in a fluid (the meatbag firing it) but here modeled simply as a constant. All of the projectiles would be impacted if the engine realistically modeled velocity - however as it cant process individual projectiles quickly enough, the "rise" affects the last few as the aimpoint has changed. That is completely expected in-engine.
Now, what they went and did is say gun doesn't "fire" until after the projectile has left the barrel. Put the shotgunner on top of a fast ship in-engine at full speed, and get him to fire his weapon, and you'll be able to watch the shot go "forward" as it rapidly vanishes behind you.
That's really a shame the engine can't model all of that.
And that's an interesting remark about the gun not firing until after the projectile has left. In any case it seemed like a waste of a video to "fix" something that will be replaced at a later date. Why not work on the tutorial?
Why bother? The blank code page they use now is rather stable, and a showcase on what to expect in the future.
Especially games like Daikatana, to which Star Citizen has many similarities!
Especially games like Daikatana, to which Star Citizen has many similarities!
Hmmmmmmmmmmmmm
No new content at 65 million, right? They should have been able to deliver in 2015, right?
Both of those two facts contradict you.
I'm pretty confident that the engine actually could model that. That's not the problem though. The problem is that Player 1 has spawned 10 projectiles of death at speed Y in direction X. Player 1 can send data to the server describing these projectiles, the server can verify and arbitrate them, and pass that data on to all other 39 players in the instance. Server knows that Player 20 is somewhere in the expected range and direction of death projectiles, so sends priority clarification. Player 20 client responds after checking and says "Yes! I was in the hitrange - deducted 20 hitpoints". All the other player clients parse this back and forth. Server verifies and is happy.
Player 2 shot Player 1 before he even drew his gun, but is on dialup.
The joys!
Heh you are right, odd
It is funny how people see videos of assets not in game and then just assume that it is in the game. Until it is actually playable CIG's own history means you can't trust that it will show up. There are countless videos that CIG have shown that have never turned into anything of substance.
Sadly CIG took 5 years to add a poorly implemented FPS into a FPS engine. Then done nothing for another half a year.
Last edited:
Average non-technical people who just watch ATVs can easily fall into CIG marketing trap - thats how they got those 2000+ whales who now are keeping lights on in CIGs offices...
I quess 3.0 "Lite" in 2017 Q4 will be enough "progress" to keep them invested at least till 2019.
Last edited:
- Status