Yaffle
Volunteer Moderator
There remains the possibility of simply not posting if one has nothing to say on the topic.
Star Citizen Thread v6
- Thread starter Brett C
- Start date
- Status
There remains the possibility of simply not posting if one has nothing to say on the topic.
Star Citizen: Around the Verse - Cyclone and Ship Persistence
TLDR
Source: https://relay.sc/transcript/around-the-verse-cyclone-and-ship-persistence
[video=youtube;IY6Ju2UR0hA]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IY6Ju2UR0hA[/video]
Studio Update
Austin
Austin
- Refactoring of shopping code is now to the point where Austin Design team is now plugging items back into the shops, this include first pass at getting kiosks up/running for commodity trading
- Focused on getting shops related to PU/landing zones functional first and will be making a pass of Area 18 shops as well
- Armour can now be bought piece by piece
- Remaining ships have been implemented into the price fixer tools
- This tool is also used as a way to gauge whether or not the ships they’re building are over/underpowered for their intended purpose
- Progress has been made on getting Miles Eckhart ready to go, lot of work on the feather blending system and got him working with a small subset of his animations
- Received additional code support to allow reputation to dictate his conversation past with the player
- Now have the ability to assign specific missions with mission brief tags
- Josh Coons finished images/videos of the Cutlass Black and moved onto create base material and whitebox meshes for Cutlass variants
- He will complete the first pass on exterior looks for the variants before moving on to the Constellation Phoenix to allow Design to flesh out some key gameplay system for Cutlasses
- Chris Smith working on bugs for Hornet/Constellation Andromeda and will move on the promo video for Constellation Aquila next
- Backend Services team preparing for deployment of diffusion, game servers now have full access to diffusion API and they’ll start using it with the shopping service in 3.0
- Started converting the persistence cache and general instance manager into smaller stateless, full diffusionized services
- PU Animation team started research/development for how to implement their wild line(dialogue spoken by an NPC) system
- Feather blending allows them to blend performance capture of the wild lines with a large number of useable animations
- Going through existing animations and filling in gaps missing from original performance capture with new transition animations
- Austin Ship Animation team continue to refine the cockpit/turret experience
- R+D phase of implementing button presses using Item 2.0 system, this helped finalize dashboard/cockpit metrics across different ships that use same cockpit type
- UK Engineers refactored some backend systems allowing to fully implement blending of base G-force pose blend spaces
- DevOps team working on increasing capacity of build/deployment pipelines in preparation for 3.0
- Making additional change/bug fixes to support new delta patcher
- IT department upgraded Austin network
- Audio team member Jason Cobb continued work on derelict crash site sound design for different moon environments/performed a variety of particle audio implementation experiments for revamped ship debris noises/playtested and mixed refinements for ship emergency state audio and captured sound effects for various props and materials
- Austin QA has been testing new Cutlass Black
- New missions/wrecks/NPCs in Stanton
- Ship testing continued as more ships converted to Item 2.0 system
- Large scale playtests of Arena Commander, Star Marine and Stanton ongoing weekly
- Testing more mobiGlas applications like Starmap, the personal manager, mission manager and mission board
- Testing character gravity/free fall as well as cargo mechanics
- Engine/editor testers are testing new tech like capsule based actor entity, entity component update scheduler and director/actor animation and control
- New stamina/oxygen breathing system are getting some balance changes
- Four new people joining the Player Relations team
- Updating ship specifications in the database
- Ground vehicles can now be added to the ship matrix as well as anything that comes up
- New sizing scheme for ships
- Resdesigned ship detail page
- Reworked ship matrix database to make it easier to update
- Spectrum v0.3.6 with Evocati
- New features include new text editor
- New tools like hyperlinks, hyperlink formatting, preview posts and drafts
- Mini profile which include post count and karma
- New jump to track reply
- Working on refreshing some UI elements
- Engineering team working on getting most of the digital distribution channels ready for the Delta patching system.
- CIG's entry into land vehicles with a new manufacturer has lore that's been around awhile associated with rugged military vehicles
- The Cyclone is a fun fast four-wheeled and steered land vehicle partial to jumping off ramps with marketing design aesthetics, though clearly from a military origin
- If the Ursa Rover is the tortoise and the Cyclone is the hare, then the Nox is, as with Goldylocks, just right and in the middle
- Besides it's being fast and super rugged, it's built with modularity similar to the real world
- The variants include one for cargo, infantry support, recon and exploration as well as racing and even an anti-air version
- The recon version can not only map terrain, but drop beacons
- The racing version basically has nitrous and will be similar to a Baja racer
- The anti-air model will have two size two missile racks with a countermeasure package that includes not only chaff and flares, but smokescreens and a size one EMP
- It's always a struggle to balance function with design with the feedback within the pipeline
- The first one of any type of entity or asset is always the hardest due to the unknown, but the most challenging tends to be making the deadlines . . . but they always do
- Gameplay Programmer Chad McKinney talks about how the technology involved with persistence will change in the upcoming 3.0 update.
- Persistence as it is now is a simple system that tracks player accounts, specifically loadouts and ships with their loadouts. While this works for the gameplay in 2.6, it limits the player to what they can do. They can't pick up items and store them on their ship, trade, etc because the server doesn't track those things.
- With 3.0 players will be able to start making changes to the world around them in subtle ways such as picking up cargo from an outpost they found or parking a Dragonfly in their Cutlass and having it remain there regardless of whether they log out or not.
- While it seems like a simple thing, it's actually fairly complicated and required a rework of the way persistence is handled in many backend systems.
- They've revamped the system to track legal ownership of entities and physical ownership. The difference between the two is physical ownership is having the item in front of you and in your hands or on your ship and in your possession at that moment, with legal ownership being your entitlement to a given entity like a ship for instance.
- Players can legally own a ship, an item, etc, but another player can physically take it and claim it as their own and it'll remain in that other players possession until someone else takes it from that player too. However it isn't without consequence, players can become wanted if they steal other players ships, cargo, items, and will be marked to the authorities as a criminal.
- This goes deeper as the gameplay for pirates can become very rewarding, but at a high cost. Players can steal cargo for instance and roll the dice by not including the cargo on their manifest when they come across authorities, or get creative by using secret compartments to store the cargo, or take the safest route to avoid authorities entirely.
- The technology doesn't stop there, with Diffusion, a service that allows for a new way of interacting with all the backend services at the same time will allow for more things in the world to become persistent. With 3.0 the amount of things that will persist in the world will still be fairly limited, but in the future it'll expand from affecting a small area in the world to having the entire world be affected by a variety of player actions from supply and demand, to wars, to NPC activity and so much more. A player will be able to take something from a planet and another player won't ever see what was taken, on the flipside a player can leave something and another player will find it.
- With 3.0 Player health, Stamina, Ship health and ammunition will become persistent so no longer will players be able to fire all their ammunition with no penalty, also if you fly your ship and a wing gets blown off, the next time you log in it will be still missing until you go and get it repaired or make an insurance claim.
"With kilometres of a single planet's surface to explore, and hundreds or perhaps even thousands of planets to someday be added..."
Emphasis mine. Devil is in the detail as always...
Mu77ley
Volunteer Moderator
It's going to be a small generic CryEngine map you load from the main menu, isn't it.
So will insurance costs go up if you keep getting your ship stolen? They must do otherwise people will just spend a couple of hours gaming the system to earn millions. But if insurance costs go up does that push people out from playing the game how they want to?
Do the space suits simulated gravity in it?!
Guy_sticking_up_for_SC: "But see, in Elite Dangerous....."
STOP....just stop. Why do people keep dragging elite into this? Whatever Elite did or will be doing has no effect on Star Citizen nor is it an excuse or example for anything SC related. Star Citizen stands by its own. It will have to live up to the success as a released game that ED is but that apart it does have to fulfill all kinds of stuff that ED doesnt have or doesnt have down perfectly. Because CRoberts claimed these things so it doesnt matter if ED does have a feature or not (example persistance).....Star Citizen needs to have it that is the issue here. And persistance is a very simple term in the industry but CiG seems to have obvious problems defining or describing it which is a bit strange.
Whenever somebody brings up ED in order to defend or justify things in Star Citizen the one thing that always immediately pops into my head is
"ED is a released fully functional game /thread"
You can of course go into explaining and addressing ED core issues but as we have been told countless times before.....this thread is not the place to do that. Its a bit of an unfair situation I agree. People can compare SC with ED in order to point out shortcomings or obvious flaws of the first but it simply doesnt work the other way around. It doesnt matter if ED doesnt have thing A either or took a similar route. You cannot bring up ED in order to defend or justify the direction or current status of SC. Star Citizen never aimed to be Elite or be "as good". It always...right from the start shouted to become the BDSSE....and it simply doesnt live up to that promise in anything we see.
So if people bring up ED or NMS or any other game I expect the discussion to keep centering around Star Citizen which has to stand up and hold its own against any claims made. BDSSE is a hard title to defend because it encompasses so many things that other games dont set foot into. Other games usually focus on certain areas in which they excel. Star Citizen promises to do that and so much more only....it doesnt. Even on the things that other games do have Star Citizen comes up short.
- Flight model in Elite Dangerous
- Procedural tech in NMS
- any current successfully released FPS game
- multiplayer capabilities found in any current MMO
and the list goes on
And you have to admit that in every single point Star Citizen comes up short. It does not reach nor succeed any of the standards the other games set. And that is not the other games fault. Its Star Citizens responsibility to deliver and meet promises made. The only thing that Star Citizen has currently going for it is the current game level in the PU. 2 stations , lots of space, spawnable ships and the ability to move your character within this level. Apart from the visual quality there is nothing special about it. Its at best a "proof of concept" which you d expect at the beginning of the crowdfunding but in its 6th year of development its the summit of CiGs efforts and personally I find that really lame, lazy and outright hilarious especially when I watch CR+Co flapping around going 5 different directions in 5 weeks and using words they obviously dont know the meaning of and STILL trying to sell their product as "superior" when it comes to competition.
I admit....if everything they ve shown us in past ATVs would be true.....then we are witnessing the creation of the BDSSE life. Only.....I dont believe it. Not with the "changes" made on the fly, constant "adjustments" of their delivery dates and using comparisons and explanations that make no sense from a technical stand-point. On the other hand delving into CRoberts personal career and getting the TRUE story about Wing Commander explains a lot about the current status of Star Citizen. I didnt know who Chris Roberts was in 2012. I knew Wing commander of course. Pretty much every gamer of a certain age knows Wing Commander and here is the dude who claims to have created WC, why would I dont believe it? With WC as his credentials I had high hopes (and also expectations) for Star Citizen and believed it possible. I remember in 2012 when I showed the trailer to my wife having sparkles in my eyes she flat out told me "this isnt possible" and I was like "uh well its the guy who made Wing Commander and they got more then 10x the money they needed so lets wait and see and btw...what do YOU know anyway". So hope, optimism and defensive reaction. Check. I just didnt "hate" her for her opinion or made threats to her health or "punish" her for her skepticism you know.....
Anyway.....Wing Commander was a great game for its time and I remember it fondly. That goes for the game, not for the man who created it. And learning now that Chris Roberts actually was the man who drove Wing Commander into a wall during its development and had to be kicked off the project in order for me to get my hands on the game I remember enjoying.....it doesnt seem to be CRoberts who made all that possible apart from providing the idea. Electronic Arts actually owns all the credit for providing the money, patience, more money and the ability to make a hard decision and make cuts (personnel and content) in order to release a game worth playing.
Chris Roberts is actually the man who ruined Wing Commander and EA had to safe it and if you remember WC fondly and liked the idea your thanks should go to EA for making it a reality....not the man who was unable to do as he promised.
And now we have Star Citizen and knowing all these historical facts (they are facts, face it) explains a lot about Star Citizens development and its current status. It also makes the empty promises made in ATVs hard to swallow. Letting your community run rampant defending your tech demo with 10 different versions and open hate, aggression.....sure, its individuals and CiG is not responsible for it but the truth is not taking immediate actions to distance yourself from their toxic behavior or punishing certain things (we already know they punish you for stuff you do on other non-related forums *BEER4TheBEERGod* and distance themselves from negative people *Derek Smart*) throws a bad light on the company itself. After watching this spiel for years I really believe that there is a reputation management at work here directing and supporting all the toxicity and hostility present in the SC community. CiG taking very one-sided actions on their own forums only provides more evidence that their focus lies in deterrence, distraction and manipulation. The ATVs they absolutely swarm us with and all the empty talk about things in progress behind the curtains...its all distraction and the SC ultras going around negrepping and shouting down anything remotely negative is the deterrence. You need to have courage these days in order to publish a negative article about it or voice your heretical doubts openly hence you are met by the ever vigorous SC ultra who has no qualms to crush you....with CiGs blessing
So lets try to not get distracted whenever another game comes up as an example eh? The focus is still Star Citizen and while bringing up single examples is fine droning on about the condition of other games in hope to defend Star Citizens own lack of progress is just distracting....sometimes I think by intentional design as well but of course, just my opinion. Truth is that its sometimes really hard to stay on topic when talking to certain people on this forum. Its always the same people btw.
I can understand and support "hopeful patience" expressed by many people who despite the overwhelming proof to the contrary keep their optimism and I actually respect them for it. I dont understand the fanaticism surrounding Star Citizen, the need to talk very simple things to death and bring terms and mechanics into the discussion which only ends up in a point where nobody knows the original question anymore. Or to change official statements into something they are not. CiG after years of watching this still provides the base by being as vague as possible and their defense force (either paid or sad people) tries to "protect" their treasure with all means necessary which in turn granted them the title "most toxic community in the gaming industry" in the first place. And I have no problems finding examples justifying that title. If I can find all those things then CiG can too but somehow they obviously think this completely abominable behavior is "okay".
I know I m ranting and dont actually answer any questions, sorry
(no, I m not)
You and me both buddy only our expectations are drastically different I guess
STOP....just stop. Why do people keep dragging elite into this? Whatever Elite did or will be doing has no effect on Star Citizen nor is it an excuse or example for anything SC related. Star Citizen stands by its own. It will have to live up to the success as a released game that ED is but that apart it does have to fulfill all kinds of stuff that ED doesnt have or doesnt have down perfectly. Because CRoberts claimed these things so it doesnt matter if ED does have a feature or not (example persistance).....Star Citizen needs to have it that is the issue here. And persistance is a very simple term in the industry but CiG seems to have obvious problems defining or describing it which is a bit strange.
Whenever somebody brings up ED in order to defend or justify things in Star Citizen the one thing that always immediately pops into my head is
"ED is a released fully functional game /thread"
You can of course go into explaining and addressing ED core issues but as we have been told countless times before.....this thread is not the place to do that. Its a bit of an unfair situation I agree. People can compare SC with ED in order to point out shortcomings or obvious flaws of the first but it simply doesnt work the other way around. It doesnt matter if ED doesnt have thing A either or took a similar route. You cannot bring up ED in order to defend or justify the direction or current status of SC. Star Citizen never aimed to be Elite or be "as good". It always...right from the start shouted to become the BDSSE....and it simply doesnt live up to that promise in anything we see.
So if people bring up ED or NMS or any other game I expect the discussion to keep centering around Star Citizen which has to stand up and hold its own against any claims made. BDSSE is a hard title to defend because it encompasses so many things that other games dont set foot into. Other games usually focus on certain areas in which they excel. Star Citizen promises to do that and so much more only....it doesnt. Even on the things that other games do have Star Citizen comes up short.
- Flight model in Elite Dangerous
- Procedural tech in NMS
- any current successfully released FPS game
- multiplayer capabilities found in any current MMO
and the list goes on
And you have to admit that in every single point Star Citizen comes up short. It does not reach nor succeed any of the standards the other games set. And that is not the other games fault. Its Star Citizens responsibility to deliver and meet promises made. The only thing that Star Citizen has currently going for it is the current game level in the PU. 2 stations , lots of space, spawnable ships and the ability to move your character within this level. Apart from the visual quality there is nothing special about it. Its at best a "proof of concept" which you d expect at the beginning of the crowdfunding but in its 6th year of development its the summit of CiGs efforts and personally I find that really lame, lazy and outright hilarious especially when I watch CR+Co flapping around going 5 different directions in 5 weeks and using words they obviously dont know the meaning of and STILL trying to sell their product as "superior" when it comes to competition.
I admit....if everything they ve shown us in past ATVs would be true.....then we are witnessing the creation of the BDSSE life. Only.....I dont believe it. Not with the "changes" made on the fly, constant "adjustments" of their delivery dates and using comparisons and explanations that make no sense from a technical stand-point. On the other hand delving into CRoberts personal career and getting the TRUE story about Wing Commander explains a lot about the current status of Star Citizen. I didnt know who Chris Roberts was in 2012. I knew Wing commander of course. Pretty much every gamer of a certain age knows Wing Commander and here is the dude who claims to have created WC, why would I dont believe it? With WC as his credentials I had high hopes (and also expectations) for Star Citizen and believed it possible. I remember in 2012 when I showed the trailer to my wife having sparkles in my eyes she flat out told me "this isnt possible" and I was like "uh well its the guy who made Wing Commander and they got more then 10x the money they needed so lets wait and see and btw...what do YOU know anyway". So hope, optimism and defensive reaction. Check. I just didnt "hate" her for her opinion or made threats to her health or "punish" her for her skepticism you know.....
Anyway.....Wing Commander was a great game for its time and I remember it fondly. That goes for the game, not for the man who created it. And learning now that Chris Roberts actually was the man who drove Wing Commander into a wall during its development and had to be kicked off the project in order for me to get my hands on the game I remember enjoying.....it doesnt seem to be CRoberts who made all that possible apart from providing the idea. Electronic Arts actually owns all the credit for providing the money, patience, more money and the ability to make a hard decision and make cuts (personnel and content) in order to release a game worth playing.
Chris Roberts is actually the man who ruined Wing Commander and EA had to safe it and if you remember WC fondly and liked the idea your thanks should go to EA for making it a reality....not the man who was unable to do as he promised.
And now we have Star Citizen and knowing all these historical facts (they are facts, face it) explains a lot about Star Citizens development and its current status. It also makes the empty promises made in ATVs hard to swallow. Letting your community run rampant defending your tech demo with 10 different versions and open hate, aggression.....sure, its individuals and CiG is not responsible for it but the truth is not taking immediate actions to distance yourself from their toxic behavior or punishing certain things (we already know they punish you for stuff you do on other non-related forums *BEER4TheBEERGod* and distance themselves from negative people *Derek Smart*) throws a bad light on the company itself. After watching this spiel for years I really believe that there is a reputation management at work here directing and supporting all the toxicity and hostility present in the SC community. CiG taking very one-sided actions on their own forums only provides more evidence that their focus lies in deterrence, distraction and manipulation. The ATVs they absolutely swarm us with and all the empty talk about things in progress behind the curtains...its all distraction and the SC ultras going around negrepping and shouting down anything remotely negative is the deterrence. You need to have courage these days in order to publish a negative article about it or voice your heretical doubts openly hence you are met by the ever vigorous SC ultra who has no qualms to crush you....with CiGs blessing
So lets try to not get distracted whenever another game comes up as an example eh? The focus is still Star Citizen and while bringing up single examples is fine droning on about the condition of other games in hope to defend Star Citizens own lack of progress is just distracting....sometimes I think by intentional design as well but of course, just my opinion. Truth is that its sometimes really hard to stay on topic when talking to certain people on this forum. Its always the same people btw.
I can understand and support "hopeful patience" expressed by many people who despite the overwhelming proof to the contrary keep their optimism and I actually respect them for it. I dont understand the fanaticism surrounding Star Citizen, the need to talk very simple things to death and bring terms and mechanics into the discussion which only ends up in a point where nobody knows the original question anymore. Or to change official statements into something they are not. CiG after years of watching this still provides the base by being as vague as possible and their defense force (either paid or sad people) tries to "protect" their treasure with all means necessary which in turn granted them the title "most toxic community in the gaming industry" in the first place. And I have no problems finding examples justifying that title. If I can find all those things then CiG can too but somehow they obviously think this completely abominable behavior is "okay".
I know I m ranting and dont actually answer any questions, sorry
(no, I m not
)You and me both buddy only our expectations are drastically different I guess
Yeah, I noticed that too. 'kilometers of a single planet' is like saying "I am not bald, look at the dozens of hairs on my head'. The scale is off. I also noticed the little disclaimer in the beginning that many of the things are 'going to be in 3.1, 3.2 etc'. Its a strange article, seems more written by a fan than a journalist tbh. 'You can not only look with your mouse, but also click!'. A fair amount is about 'what Chris Roberts wants', or 'what they are currently working on', suggesting its not really about 3.0 again but about amazing features that will come after the next patch.
We'll see. Its going to be an interesting last week of august either way. Its one alpha patch they;'ve been working on for 1.5 years, its bound to have at least something.
We'll see. Its going to be an interesting last week of august either way. Its one alpha patch they;'ve been working on for 1.5 years, its bound to have at least something.
Last edited:
It's going to be a small generic CryEngine map you load from the main menu, isn't it.
thats what they can bring up in SCs defense in the future.
"See? they never promised us whole planets to walk over and do stuff on, only KILOMETERS of space"
I've never said it was a quote from you! Can you please stop trying to paint this as a personal attack on you, it's making me feel very uncomfortable.
It's going to be a small generic CryEngine map you load from the main menu, isn't it.
Nah, they're marketing moons too hard for them to be so limited, otherwise they would focus on professions. Still, I think there is a small possibility that lunar landings will be delegated to a module sepsrste from wider PU.
Cant imagine either. If we're starting putting down bets, my money'd be on relative small planets, but within the PU and fully open and seamless with a handful of major POI per moon. Which would be fine for a start. They are obviously years from having a meaningful beta, but I am interested in the planets all the same.
I'm not sure about seamlessness, I remember at least one PU video with severe slowdowns on dropping from QD. Still, I'm sure 400 people strong company has to be able to go into the footsteps of various developers, such as people behind Space Engine, Space Engineers, Empyrion, Rodina, Infinity: Battlescape, Frontier: First Encounters, ED, or that Ubisoft tech demo eventually.
Almighty Bob
Banned
I agree Sleuth,
IF, We get seamless transition to planets from space, a thing that some doubted would never happen and I was sceptical of. It would be a good thing as long as the journey down is not too long, I would be interested to see how they pull of combat in a mixed atmosphere/space transition. It could be an excellent escape tactic for weaker ships, or a disaster if they have not thought through a model for it. EG can ship2ship missiles and bullets survive re entry at steep or any angles.
I'm pretty excited for 3.0 but also nervous of being let down again. Either way I expect I will get a few hours of game play whilst we see how they did.
IF, We get seamless transition to planets from space, a thing that some doubted would never happen and I was sceptical of. It would be a good thing as long as the journey down is not too long, I would be interested to see how they pull of combat in a mixed atmosphere/space transition. It could be an excellent escape tactic for weaker ships, or a disaster if they have not thought through a model for it. EG can ship2ship missiles and bullets survive re entry at steep or any angles.
I'm pretty excited for 3.0 but also nervous of being let down again. Either way I expect I will get a few hours of game play whilst we see how they did.
Last edited:
Merkir has a point. Ultimately we should be talking about the game and it's development, not the people that like/don't like it. Play the ball.
you realize that you are the exception to the rule and that yes, the verbal majority of the SC community is vile and toxic? I would use the exact same terms when describing the SC community as a whole and it would not include you (!) because you stand apart. But if I d wanted to add this disclaimer to every statement of mine in order to avoid stepping on peoples toes you would experience the true meaning of "wall of text" let me assure you. So being offended or feeling addressed is your personal decision. I dont think he meant you with it neither would I if I used those terms. You are free to distance yourself from this "vile and toxic" part of the SC community but until you do so (either in statement or action mind you lets keep it lax) the publics awareness of the SC community is directed by the verbal majority.
Lets not forget that none of us (well maybe one or two are) is a lawyer or CEO him-/herself. At base we are gamers speaking their minds and trying to stand within forum rules. Things get heated often but I m willing to cut people some slack because we are not in court and we are not talking about a life and death situation here so taking such a pedantic approach to every single term is counterproductive and exactly the reason why the mods have to step in.
When I see people using the term "haters" on this whole forum I could either claim "hate mongering" myself or simply think about it for a second then dismiss it or admit that indeed I am termed correctly. Its still an individuals opinion maybe made in the heat of the moment. I could address him demanding a clarification or make a statement to his claim. Just saying "hate monger" and moving on is the easy way out (and I did it a couple times myself) but then....I dont need to post that. I could report the post or ignore the poster. I think you are overreacting a little here but thats only my opinion.
I don't think you are thinking this through. At the current speed of ships in SC, it would take a very long time to actually transition, so in other words there would be no mixed atmosphere/space combat. And that is just ignoring the fact that there is no difference between the two and it would have zero effect on combat, it is not like it really matters.
There is also the problem that the time to kill is so low that you don't have time to get away, coupled with the low skill flight model and people die right away.
Last edited:
in the end that is very good advice, I concur
Also the SC community usually is not the focus of our discussuions. Its just that they keep coming up due to their connection and effect on the development
Last edited:
![[VR] Merkir](https://forums-cdn.zaonce.net/data/avatars/m/141/141091.jpg?1553527154){kind=avatar}
And if the SC sceptics did indeed stick to determined but respectful scepticism of SC and SC fan comments, I'm sure they would be seen as far more credible. The people continuously denigrating the entire SC community are doing neither themselves nor their fellow sceptics any favours.
Personally I'd not get my hopes up that much. I think it may be safer to see 3.0 as a 'proof of concept' that the tech now works, that there are planets possible on which you can land and move about. (advanced) modeling of atmospheric entry of ammo and such is not something I'd expect now, or even within a few years. The computational demands and amount of data that would need to be shared across all players in the instance would be huge and cause major issues, whereas basic gameplay loops are currently still missing.
So I think it is better to set the sights a bit lower, and hope for
1) Three moons, seamless, in the PU.
2) The start of basic gameplay loops.
3) Performance improvements.
Next goal then would be to flesh out the basic gameplay loops into a place where they can be considered release-worthy, which should happen Q3 of 2018, and the addition of other systems, stations and planets in 2019, with beta starting at the end of that year. All just IMHO, but it seems a reasonable schedule. Ofcourse, that is assuming they have the money to stay afloat for that period of time, which noone really knows either way, and the majority of backers are willing to support them that long.
- Status