Star Citizen Thread v6

[Mole HD]

I wonder if the poor devs are thoroughly sick of the Stanton system by now.

I know I certainly am.

They're probably more sick of CR adding and insisting on complete tosh like engine trails and the physics of whisky in a glass instead of letting them concentrate on getting the game to work...

I mean...the bloody lifts don't work...the UI needs urgent work...the netcode is looking like we'll be stuck with 24 player instances in 3.0 with current baby PU framerates as a result...and he's worried about whether the contents of an NPC's glass looks right?

I don't think CR realises that if 3.0 bombs due to persistent delays beyond Gamescon...he won't have to worry about selling new space motorbikes, he'll be having to resell all the backer pledges he'll have to fork out.

 

[darkoff]

Will made that statement not knowing that Delamar had been moved to the Stanton system for 3.0...his understanding was that the system Delamar and Levski is located in was certainly not in Stanton and therefore not in the 3.x series of releases.

If you read further down that particular thread, the drama just kinda bleeds right out of the apparent revelation...unless you're just plain looking for one

sources for that? i have only seen this response.

the guy that posted that should also post the full discussion instead of direct replies because we cant know what he is responding to.

and if the case is that Will just didnt know. Whats stopping the repeat of this?

“There was a lot of documentation,” one source said. “Too much. It was just a giant cluster of documents and data, a lot of which conflicted with other bits. Sometimes documents were out of date and sometimes someone worked on something that someone else had already done. Other times there were two people making the same thing simultaneously but unaware of each other, and so they’d end up making two different things designed to do the same job. This was across all of the studios.”

source: http://www.kotaku.co.uk/2016/09/23/inside-the-troubled-development-of-star-citizen

 

[Mole HD]

sources for that? i have only seen this response.
http://i.imgur.com/0Tuvg6m.png
the guy that posted that should also post the full discussion instead of direct replies because we cant know what he is responding to.

and if the case is that Will just didnt know. Whats stopping the repeat of this?

source: http://www.kotaku.co.uk/2016/09/23/inside-the-troubled-development-of-star-citizen

https://robertsspaceindustries.com/spectrum/community/SC/forum/3/thread/no-levski-in-3-0-sad-face/321532

The thread has now been closed due to incorrect information being presented...namely, the OP quoting the indicated reply from Will Maiden out of context of the conversation in which it appeared....just like it was done in this thread

We all know the project management of SC wasn't too good...still needs work, but it's certainly got a bit better since that outdated Kotaku report you link to.

I still maintain that feature creep and blatant interference from CR is the main issue with the non appearance of a playable SC to date.

 

[darkoff]

https://robertsspaceindustries.com/...rum/3/thread/no-levski-in-3-0-sad-face/321532

The thread has now been closed due to incorrect information being presented...namely, the OP quoting the indicated reply from Will Maiden out of context of the conversation in which it appeared....just like it was done in this thread

We all know the project management of SC wasn't too good...still needs work, but it's certainly got a bit better since that outdated Kotaku report you link to.

I still maintain that feature creep and blatant interference from CR is the main issue with the non appearance of a playable SC to date.

here is the full discussion http://i.imgur.com/YJrGXZX.png

also yeah i also think Will just didnt know. But i also believe that this points to same problems that kotaku article pointed out. Like the whole production mess still exists. and they still cant get estimates down properly. And the documentation is a mess with tons of conflicting info.

 

[Memnoch]

Genuinely, it was said by CR himself. The low number was justified for the hand crafted locations.

Which location exactly? Or perhaps a better question would be "What is a location?"

Is a location a star system?
Is it a planet/moon?
Is it a continent on a planet/moon?
It is a startport/trade base?

Going down that list, where do you think the use of PG should stop? Or if you wish go up and where should it start?

I can see them handcrafting a planetary base but any further up the list and this becomes implausible and it worries me slightly that some seem to refuse to acknowledge this. Say what you like about CIG and what they claimed. Lets play devils advocate for a moment and suggest they outright lied. But look at that list above and ask yourself: Why did I think that was even possible?

A handcrafted planet, no PG at all....have you even heard of something called Speedtree? So they aren't allowed to use that either and every tree has to be hand modeled? Come on.....

 

[dayrth]

Which location exactly? Or perhaps a better question would be "What is a location?"

Is a location a star system?
Is it a planet/moon?
Is it a continent on a planet/moon?
It is a startport/trade base?

Going down that list, where do you think the use of PG should stop? Or if you wish go up and where should it start?

I can see them handcrafting a planetary base but any further up the list and this becomes implausible and it worries me slightly that some seem to refuse to acknowledge this. Say what you like about CIG and what they claimed. Lets play devils advocate for a moment and suggest they outright lied. But look at that list above and ask yourself: Why did I think that was even possible?

Again, it doesn't matter what you think is plausible or where I think PG should be used. CR said it would not be used. ANYWHERE. This turned out not to be true.

 

[VidarSnipes]

Let's see how much this will be confirmed when 3.0 is released. The images on derelicts ships impressed me.

CIG themselves have stated that object container streaming, which isn't coming with 3.0, is required to have more than 4-5 points of interest (though it's unclear, if it's a number of POIs per planet, or surface POIs in total).

 

[Memnoch]

Again, it doesn't matter what you think is plausible or where I think PG should be used. CR said it would not be used. ANYWHERE. This turned out not to be true.

I agree with you by the way. But you keep dodging my question. How did you think it would be done without PG? It couldn't and it was foolish of them to suggest that. Perhaps if I was being kind I would suggest that claim stemmed from his experience of the older games that didn't require it because the game worlds were so small.

Now this comes along and PG is an absolute necessity. So I do see what you were saying, I am questioning the rationality of believing it.

While I'm Googling this quote from CIG/CR and not having much like I'd be very interested to know the following:

What would a 100% hand crafted "location" look like? What would be considered acceptable by its advocates? What level of fidelity?

 

[dayrth]

I agree with you by the way. But you keep dodging my question. How did you think it would be done without PG?

I did answer your question. I did not think about it at all. I am a software developer but I don't do games (I do databases), so I have no idea what is involved. I was told it would be done so just accepted the word of someone who should have known what they were talking about. In this respect I count myself as being in the VAST majority of people who might be interested in buying a computer game. Most people don't even know what PG is. The people who post here tend to be a bit more clued up than the general public. Perhaps that's why they also tend to be more sceptical of CIG.

 

[Memnoch]

https://robertsspaceindustries.com/comm-link/transmission/13783-Letter-From-The-Chairman-41-Million

31st March 2014

"Procedural Generation R&D Team – This stretch goal will allocate funding for Cloud Imperium to develop procedural generation technology for future iterations of Star Citizen. Advanced procedural generation will be necessary for creating entire planets worth of exploration and development content. A special strike team of procedural generation-oriented developers will be assembled to make this technology a reality."

So back then they were already talking about it.

https://gamerant.com/star-citizen-39-million-procedural-research-stretch-goal/

25th February 2014

“Advanced procedural generation will be necessary for creating entire planets worth of exploration and development content. A special strike team of procedural generation-oriented developers will be assembled to make this technology a reality.”

I'm still looking and not finding any quote yet about him saying it won't have PG though I'm sure its only a matter of time but it does look like any claims of the like were probably based on the original vision for the game and then when the money came rolling in, and this $39 million mark seems key here, suddenly it was on the table.

Bear with me. This ones a bit of a stretch:

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2...-melt-your-pc-with-new-space-sim-star-citizen

10/10/2012

"Space ships operate under a procedural physics system, with thrusters generating forces on the rigid body of the craft for realistic motion."

It's PG right? ;-)

Still no luck finding this quote of his/CIG's. Perhaps its on the original Kickstarter site?

 

[dayrth]

https://robertsspaceindustries.com/comm-link/transmission/13783-Letter-From-The-Chairman-41-Million

31st March 2014

"Procedural Generation R&D Team – This stretch goal will allocate funding for Cloud Imperium to develop procedural generation technology for future iterations of Star Citizen. Advanced procedural generation will be necessary for creating entire planets worth of exploration and development content. A special strike team of procedural generation-oriented developers will be assembled to make this technology a reality."

So back then they were already talking about it.

2014 was supposed to be the year it released. I'm talking about the preceding two years. GIC have contradicted a lot of things they originally said since then. Which is why I no longer believe what they tell me.

"Space ships operate under a procedural physics system, with thrusters generating forces on the rigid body of the craft for realistic motion."

It's PG right? ;-)

No.

 

[Memnoch]

Anyone cut me some slack and link me to a post by CR stating that SC would not have any PG in it because I'll be jiggered if I can find it.

Running a search for "chris roberts procedural generation site:kickstarter.com" with the time constraint of 1/1/2010 to 1/1/2014 and all I get is a single link to the ED Kickstarter.

 

[VidarSnipes]

"Procedural Generation R&D Team – This stretch goal will allocate funding for Cloud Imperium to develop procedural generation technology for future iterations of Star Citizen. Advanced procedural generation will be necessary for creating entire planets worth of exploration and development content. A special strike team of procedural generation-oriented developers will be assembled to make this technology a reality."

You forgot to bold the "for future iterations of Star Citizen" part. Just saying.

 

[Memnoch]

You forgot to bold the "for future iterations of Star Citizen" part. Just saying.

I can highlight it if you wish but it doesn't change the fact I can not find a single shred of evidence that CR ever stated there would be no PG. Not one and I am genuinely trying. Even if it was in video only form, say a YT interview or the like, someone somewhere would have transcribed this I would have thought.

Is this perhaps some invention, revisionist history or simply faulty memory that leads people to believe this was actually stated?

And I guess for the record, back in 2014, everything released from that point would be a "future iteration", given that time tends to flow forwards, yes?

I'll keep looking but its not looking good.

 

[dayrth]

Anyone cut me some slack and link me to a post by CR stating that SC would not have any PG in it because I'll be jiggered if I can find it.

Running a search for "chris roberts procedural generation site:kickstarter.com" with the time constraint of 1/1/2010 to 1/1/2014 and all I get is a single link to the ED Kickstarter.

“Even though we have 100 star systems, which pales in comparison to billions or quintillions or whatever, with three or four planets each, that is 400 worlds that you have to build with enough detail for a first person shooter, which is what we are doing,” says Roberts. “Ultimately the world and universe is going to be hand crafted. I think that will make a better experience and game that way, because you feel like it all has a purpose and it all means something, so that the world makes sense to you. The ultimate goal is to have very specific hand crafted worlds and locations that have character.”

https://www.redbull.com/gb-en/making-star-citizens-planets-believable

 

[Memnoch]

That post clearly does not say there will be no procedural generation. I thought as much. This looks like a clear case of CR making one statement and the community inferring another. He says it will be hand crafted. The community therefore believes it will have no procedural generation.

I suspected this would be the case.

In fact let's follow the link and look inside shall we, which I didn't do initially.

"We are using the procedural generation to create the undulation in the terrain or determine the distribution of trees or rocks and we are using that to fill out large areas, but the areas are specified by an artist,” says Roberts."

Did you link the wrong page perhaps?

The top of the article says:

"Chris Roberts talks procedural planet generation and crafting realistic worlds for an FPS."

"Then you paint the big area, you basically say ‘this area is mountainous, this is woodland, and this is where the ocean is’, and then the procedural code takes that and uses that as a guide to place the biomes correctly and alter the height map."

Pretty sure you linked to the wrong page.

 

[Asp Explorer]

Either way - there is this delightful nugget dropped by Genuine Roberts himself.

[video=youtube_share;kGZJP5oVUn8]https://youtu.be/kGZJP5oVUn8?t=227[/video]

 

[dayrth]

He says it will be hand crafted. The community therefore believes it will have no procedural generation.

They infer that because that's exactly what it means. A thing can not be hand crafted and proceduraly generated. They are antithetical.

 

[Memnoch]

They infer that because that's exactly what it means. A thing can not be hand crafted and proceduraly generated. They are antithetical.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Affirmative_conclusion_from_a_negative_premise

Not an expert but I think this applies here. The article you link to even states they are using PG, multiple times, which I quoted. It was your link, not mine.

 

[dayrth]

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/antithetical