Star Citizen Thread v6

Status
Thread Closed: Not open for further replies.

Memnoch

M
I see where you are going with that. But Elite has procedurally generated planets and hand crafted content like stations, planetary bases, ships etc. So we can clearly have both. Unless you are suggesting the ships were procedurally generated as well? Your position is that it can't be both but it clearly can.

Hand crafted ships, hand crafted stations, starports, side arms, missiles with planets that employ PG for terrain generation. These stations may or may not be hand placed on a planets surface or could also employ PG based on altittude, region etc.
 
Last edited:

Thargon

Thargon
dayrth said:
They infer that because that's exactly what it means. A thing can not be hand crafted and proceduraly generated. They are antithetical.
Click to expand...

Except when they can? I believe they are using PG to generate the rough world features, then handcrafting certain rock placements, points of interest etc. They are therefore using both systems both procedural and handcrafted.

I don't see the problem with having both.
 

Cotic

Cotic
It was most defintiely alluded to that PG games/worlds were boring and that 100% handcrafted was the key to a good game. Reddit and the forums were rife with scoffing at games that used PG and this was one of the ways SC was going to stand out, by making everything unique and not the samey, samey crap you get with PG apparently. This message was repeated many, many times by many people in numerous ways.
There were plenty of people, myself included, who were vocally sceptical about them being able to deliver on that premise but that didn't stop people putting their fingers in their ears and singing "la la la la CR is going to save PC gaming."
 
Last edited:

Memnoch

M
Alluded to? Alluded!? Many people? Which exactly?

Let's go back to the link that dayrth posted above. Thanks for that by the way. Slightly further into the passage that he quotes, he says:

"The ultimate goal is to have very specific hand crafted worlds and locations that have character.”

But a little earlier, on the same page he states:

"“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,”

Both can't be right but he states both in the exact same interview.

Isn't it far more reasonable to accept that he is clearly talking about hand crafted locations like city ports and what not, as he says in the second paragraph, and these are plopped on to a procedurally generated world?

You can't cling to one quote because it backs up your beliefs and casually ignore the multiple times he states in the same interview that they do use PG. And this was from 2016! He is quoted about using PG even earlier, in early 2014.

I'll pop that link down below here again.

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

Have a read through again and see where he states multiple times that SC does indeed use PG and at no point states that it does not. It's clearly using hand crafted and PG techniques and technologies.

Anyone wondered what Earth, or the other planets, would like in ED if they removed the hand made overrides? Was that ever posted?
 
Last edited:

dayrth

Volunteer Moderator
dayrth
Thargon said:
Except when they can? I believe they are using PG to generate the rough world features, then handcrafting certain rock placements, points of interest etc. They are therefore using both systems both procedural and handcrafted.

I don't see the problem with having both.
Click to expand...

There is no problem with having both. The problem is with CR saying it will be all hand crafted then later saying they will use some PG. Both statements made by CR. One of them must be false. IIRC the reason we got in to this discussion in the first place was me trying to explain why it's not the fault of the public if they are fooled by CIG's marketing and why I no longer trust what CIG tells me. The constant contradictions and changes to past statements is exactly why.
 
Last edited:

Memnoch

M
dayrth said:
There is no problem with having both. The problem is with CR saying it will be all hand crafted then later saying they will use some PG.
Click to expand...
The thing is he never said that. He never said "all". You inferred that, as many others did. But he never said it and yet you heard it.
And by later do you mean the next paragraph?

In actual fact, to quote the paragraph that I believe you think he says "all", the words he actually uses are "very specific hand crafted worlds". Now I could infer that he means some of these worlds, very specific ones will be hand crafted, while others would not be.

Show me where states it will "all" be hand crafted. He just doesn't and I don't understand why you keep saying he does. Your own article you link to undermines that.

Playing devils advocate for a moment, suppose you are right and somewhere in that article he states it will all be hand crafted. Why then would he state in the next paragraph that the game will employ PG for creating the planet terrain? Not a week later. Not a month later. Not a patch later. But during the same interview.
 
Last edited:

dayrth

Volunteer Moderator
dayrth
Memnoch said:
The thing is he never said that. He never said "all". You inferred that, as many others did. But he never said it and yet you heard it.
And by later do you mean the next paragraph?
Click to expand...

“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.”

You are quite right. The word 'all' is not in there. The word 'some' is not in there either though. I find it very difficult to interpret that statement the way you do. Especially this bit: 'the world and universe is going to be hand crafted'.
 

Memnoch

M
I fixed your quote for you.

"Ultimately the world and universe is going to be hand crafted."

Meaning the end result. A goal, where they mean to get to, which he also mentions.

"The ultimate goal is to have very specific hand crafted worlds and locations that have character."

They clearly aren't there yet.

If you wanted to interpret that one way it could suggest that they intend to remove the PG elements at the end, then their ultimate goal would be a game that was hand crafted. But that isn't any more likely of happening as you winning this argument, sadly.

You say it was never to have PG but to interpret what you quote it could mean they intend to take PG away at the end, neither of which is true.

But none of that is needed. You don't need to look that deeply at all.

If you acknowledge that earlier in the interview he states that they use PG for terrain generation, why would he then at the end suggest they don't? He wouldn't.

What did you think he meant when he stated that they use PG for planet generation and terrain, paragraph 7, or 8 if you include the sub-title?
 
Last edited:

Cotic

Cotic
Memnoch said:
Alluded to? Alluded!? Many people? Which exactly?

Let's go back to the link that dayrth posted above. Thanks for that by the way. Slightly further into the passage that he quotes, he says:

"The ultimate goal is to have very specific hand crafted worlds and locations that have character.”

But a little earlier, on the same page he states:

"“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,”

Both can't be right but he states both in the exact same interview.

Isn't it far more reasonable to accept that he is clearly talking about hand crafted locations like city ports and what not, as he says in the second paragraph, and these are plopped on to a procedurally generated world?

You can't cling to one quote because it backs up your beliefs and casually ignore the multiple times he states in the same interview that they do use PG. And this was from 2016! He is quoted about using PG even earlier, in early 2014.

I'll pop that link down below here again.

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

Have a read through again and see where he states multiple times that SC does indeed use PG and at no point states that it does not. It's clearly using hand crafted and PG techniques and technologies.

Anyone wondered what Earth, or the other planets, would like in ED if they removed the hand made overrides? Was that ever posted?
Click to expand...

Oh please... it was the general consensus at the time. If you weren't following SC back then it's no surprise that you are ignorant of how and what people were claiming. It's all fine looking at this in hindsight and being critical but that completely ignores the actuality of the events.
 

VidarSnipes

V
Memnoch said:
"The ultimate goal is to have very specific hand crafted worlds and locations that have character."

They clearly aren't there yet.
Click to expand...

They aren't there yet because the game isn't finished, and certainly wasn't finished back when he said that. To me it's perfectly clear that the game was supposed to be hand-crafted, with closed-off landing zones (thing ArcCorp's Area 18) with a team working on R&D on procedural generation, so there would be a possibility of making fully explorable, PG planets afterwards.
 

Memnoch

M
The consensus? Ah, you mean something was stated and then everyone came up with their interpretation of the facts? Was this on Reddit by any chance?

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

VidarSnipes said:
To me it's perfectly clear that the game was supposed to be hand-crafted, with closed-off landing zones (thing ArcCorp's Area 18) with a team working on R&D on procedural generation, so there would be a possibility of making fully explorable, PG planets afterwards.
Click to expand...
Seems likely. I haven't seen a single shred of evidence that points to CR saying they won't or don't use PG, quite the opposite. What I do see however is interpretation of what was said, consensus being drawn up etc.
 
Last edited:

dayrth

Volunteer Moderator
dayrth
Memnoch said:
....But that isn't any more likely of happening as you winning this argument, sadly.
Click to expand...

Am I not winning? Darn. Was there a prize? ;)

Memnoch said:
If you wanted to interpret that one way it could suggest that they intend to remove the PG elements at the end, then their ultimate goal would be a game that was hand crafted.
Click to expand...

You could interpret it that way, but that would be a totally insane way of managing any project. 'I don't want it built this way, but let's do it anyway and scrap all our work later.'
 

Cotic

Cotic
Memnoch said:
The concensus? Ah, you mean something was stated and then everyone came up with their interpretation of the facts? Was this on Reddit by any chance?
Click to expand...

As already stated, the forums and the subreddit, ergo the places where most interested fans of the game discuss it.

What exactly is your problem?
 

Memnoch

M
dayrth said:
Am I not winning? Darn. Was there a prize? ;)
Click to expand...
Tried to Rep you for that but it won't let me! :)

You could interpret it that way, but that would be a totally insane way of managing any project. 'I don't want it built this way, but let's do it anyway and scrap all our work later.'
Click to expand...
Some have said far harsher things about CIG I think.
 

dayrth

Volunteer Moderator
dayrth
I'm off now. Going to play a bit of ED before bed (work tomorrow :(). but I would like to say thanks Memnoch. That was the most stimulating discussion I've had on the forums for a long time and it was nice to have a robust disagreement without it degenerating into insults. You have not changed my mind, and I'm sure I have not changed yours, but it was fun.

A good night to all :)
 
Status
Thread Closed: Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom