Most of 'good looking surface' in SC comes from atmospheric lighting. But I don't care about that flogged dead horse, so I will stop.
Star Citizen Thread v6
- Thread starter Brett C
- Start date
- Status
I just did a Google image search for planetary surface images for the two games.
Yeah, the atmospheric lighting is probably lending itself to make the surfaces look less harsh. I don't know much about the technology or techniques they use to simulate atmopsheric scattering. I also play Infinity: Battlescape and it has similar lighting effects but doesn't look quite as good and they are still very early on in development.
Last edited:
oooh wow yeah that was really impressive! I went out and bought a $400 jpeg after watching those two balsa wood ships face off. My favourite bit was when that little fighter rocketed in and bounced off the big ship like it was made of rubber.
So much work. What a worthwhile use of their time.
That battle between the Idris', even second time around, was quite disappointing. Everything about that seemed placeholder but the one thing to me that didn't look totally out of place was as one of them was coming in to land. It didn't whizz about like the smaller ships and looked close enough to not jar my suspension of disbelief. I wonder if they toned down the thruster power or something?
Not really, for now what gear you wear only gives you the ability to breath in space, there is no information for now of any suit that help you endure tempteratures (btw... endure certain temperature where? even in 3.0 that will not be active, there will be no big changes in temperature or nothing of that even active. That's just your/their dreams for now, nothing tangible in the alpha, not even in 3.0 so for now it continues to be not relevant, atleast not more of what we currently have in 2.6, I'm sure the code behind it is important and maybe the start of something that may be someday relevant, but for now there is no big change in that between 2.6 - 3.0). If someday the temperature in the planet, or station makes you need a specific suit then that day your words will be right, but for now it changes almost nothing of the actual game and much less the gameplay.
Being able to shot or pilot a ship is not diferent if you do it in you pink uniform or in you blue one.
Didn't we saw some NPCs doing stuff last year aswell? I think so, so no big changes and come one... the NPCs talking to you when you enter the store or passing by are triggers it can be done right now in 2.6 with no difficult. when we see the total interaction of those NPCs, walking, drinking, eating, sleeping, doing stuff, reacting to players, buying, repairing things that need to be repaired and other things then I will agree with you. Until then yeah, we saw some NPCs, about the AI we saw little to be fair.
and I said "The only survival feature was the oxigen, there was little else...", It affects the gameplay... yeah but is only the oxigen for now. There is no more survival featgures, and the oxigen is great but... not enough.
Is not relevant to the project and I don't care if it was featured since the beggining, we have a game with no gameplay loops, no core mechanics and no idea of how the professions and many mechanics will work. With that on the table the facetrack is the last thing they should be working on. So I maintain what I said, is useless and doesn't help the game in any way.
Yeah but we didn't saw(ghost box joke) anything new about cargo transportation, it was like last year... or maybe worst.
Is a ship, John is just a dam ship, it can be big but is a ship, nothing more and nothing less. Is not a great progress that will make 3.0 better o that gives us any idea of how the game will be. And even then the battle was a laggfest.
In fact, it concerns me that they only got the Idris to fight right now... when SQ42 should already be released. Is not a great sign.
But I'm going to say one thing that I liked about the Idris fight, the damage states of the exterior were nice, I liked that, I really thought that was a nice detail.
We already saw ships landing on ships, and again nothing that we the players will make use of for quite a long time... and seeing how the ursa and the Idris behave together we will have to wait for quite some time.
Not really John, and believe me, I really want to see progress.
Last edited:
Oh please, we've been comparing imagination to reality for the entire lifecycle of Star Citizen. Why start now?
Without going too far OT, if you are wanting comparison shots for a commentary between SC and "the other game", look no further than https://forums.frontier.co.uk/showthread.php/145711-Gratuitous-Selfie-Thread/page187 188 pages of gratuitous selfies in the explorer forum.
Does anyone think when 3.0 is finally in the hands of the players that the 2 landable bodies will have significant variety over their whole surfaces? I'm inclined to think "ooh this bit is pretty", will soon be replaced with "hmm, this bit is pretty but looks exactly the same as 2 valleys ago..."
Does anyone think when 3.0 is finally in the hands of the players that the 2 landable bodies will have significant variety over their whole surfaces? I'm inclined to think "ooh this bit is pretty", will soon be replaced with "hmm, this bit is pretty but looks exactly the same as 2 valleys ago..."
I have no doubt it would. The only game that I know of currently that has changes as your latitude changes is Planet Nomads. Neither of the other games show much variation across the entire planet. So your summary of it being a pretty but no more pretty than two valleys ago is acccurate. I would like to see them try and do something that should be relatively simple: snow cover as elecation changes. That can't be that hard to do surely.
I'd like to see them concentrate on making the space part of their space game before they worry about building planets. Given that they've so far failed to create a satisfying flight model and don't even appear to have a plan for the basic mechanics and gameplay loops or how they're going to deal with the huge issues raised by selling ships for real money, wasting time creating planets to land on because Crobberts is jealous that other games have done it seems like yet another in a long line of fantastically wasteful endeavours that distract from the real problems they should be solving.
I guess its all about what attracts the most funding. What do their marketing people feel is the biggest draw for those interested in SC. They don't want to sell you what they have right now, but what may come online 2-3 years away. That's the vision being sold.
What we saw at Gamescom 2017 was Supermarionation but they promse Battlestar Galactica.
What we saw at Gamescom 2017 was Supermarionation but they promse Battlestar Galactica.
Last edited:
Indeed, and this is why everyone should be extremely skeptical. Their primary concern is getting more money, and backers should be asking themselves why that's the case after they've apparently received more funding than the combined development and marketing budgets of some of the most expensive games ever made.
In case there's anyone who can't answer this for themselves: it's because they've spent (wasted) most of the money, and are now reliant on continued funding to keep the lights on. Those who say that they don't mind waiting until 2020-whatever for this game should also consider whether they're happy to keep forking up cash for that entire time as well, because that's the only way they're going to stay in business.
Last edited:
How do you expect this to play out?
Hilariously and predictably.
You're on the Games forum, so checking the Screenies and Exploration Selfies threads for update 4k screen shots not worth the effort to compare apples with apples?
That isnt to say they werent a pretty asteroid and moon in the Demo, I'd more wonder about the 1G driving on that tiny body
Now when you guys asking there is an interesting poll about more or less the same question:"What is, in your opinion, the inevitable fate of Star Citizen?"
Here are the results as from some reason link can´t be posted
What is, in your opinion, the inevitable fate of Star Citizen?
41.91 % (347 votes)Slow implosion of game with no real release
22.83 % (189 votes)Standard release with more features coming at a later date
18.36 % (152 votes)Release as minimum viable product
7.85 % (65 votes)Quick implosion of game with no real release
6.64 % (55 votes)Eventual full release with all promised features
1.81 % (15 votes)No idea / don't care
0.6 % (5 votes)Other (explain in comments please)
828 total votes.
Here are the results as from some reason link can´t be posted
What is, in your opinion, the inevitable fate of Star Citizen?
41.91 % (347 votes)Slow implosion of game with no real release
22.83 % (189 votes)Standard release with more features coming at a later date
18.36 % (152 votes)Release as minimum viable product
7.85 % (65 votes)Quick implosion of game with no real release
6.64 % (55 votes)Eventual full release with all promised features
1.81 % (15 votes)No idea / don't care
0.6 % (5 votes)Other (explain in comments please)
828 total votes.
Last edited:
Despite your assertion that no-one can know for sure how much money CIG has (which is a fair point), I have a reasonable level of confidence that they've been burning through it faster than it has been coming in. Given the number of false starts, refactoring and rework, which involves repeatedly "going back to the drawing board", the level of technical debt will soon be overtaken by financial debt.
It's hard to predict how it will all end, though. There are so many legal entities, that it's possible that some may be allowed to declare insolvency to write off debt while others continue trading.
But if and when this happens, it will be the reaction of backers that will either allow CIG to continue or to fold.
Hmmm........ They recieved more money than what hideo kojima get for developing MGSV.
Yet their game after 5 years still pretty crap, while MGSV despite the weaker story and cut content was pretty polished and solid in gameplay and mechanic term
And it was an in-house engine created from scratch.
Also how konami treat their employee is pretty well known now, despite all that...... MGSV is excellent in terms of gameplay, no bugs, no big issue.
While SC cryengine keep screwing up
Yet their game after 5 years still pretty crap, while MGSV despite the weaker story and cut content was pretty polished and solid in gameplay and mechanic term
And it was an in-house engine created from scratch.
Also how konami treat their employee is pretty well known now, despite all that...... MGSV is excellent in terms of gameplay, no bugs, no big issue.
While SC cryengine keep screwing up
Last edited:
No i was not aware of that. But i see you have been advised to grab some images for comparison from the forum megathread. I think that would be a fair comparison since players pick beauty spots to take pictures of, and you can be sure CIG were showing off nice areas as well.
- Status