Star Citizen Discussions v7

Tippis

Tippis
CmdrKull said:
I’ve always been confused about this... is he saying Chris overvalues the shoelaces, or is he saying Chris doesn’t understand that the shoelaces are so important? It kinda reads like the second, but what part of this project screams “we don’t care about trivial minutiae “?

Edit: and then I read it again and it seems like he’s saying just that: he cares too much about shoelaces, he doesn’t understand macro.
Click to expand...

He's saying that Chris doesn't get the distinction between the two. That, depending what grabs his attention at any given time, he may spend as much time on some minor pointless detail as he would at some other point on an entire design direction. Basically, he doesn't quite grasp the whole “direction” thing of providing a set of parameters for the designers to follow and then let the professional artists do what they do best. Instead, he has to (unprofessionally) dive down into the work that they should be doing and, due to being an amateur at best, get stuck on things that they would identify as not worth worrying about.

More importantly, since he doesn't understand the distinction, there's no way to correct this behaviour. He won't respond to the argument “that doesn't really matter and we'll deal with that… you should instead focus on choosing between overarching design A or B so we can move forward.”
 
Last edited:

Navigare Necesse Est

Navigare Necesse Est
frostypaw said:
The shoelaces are unimportant. Most people only see them from a significant distance compared to the size of the object. The important bits are the basic shape/colours - the stitching and laces being perfect can come later.
Click to expand...

Who uses shoelaces for space boots? Though I hear SC doesn't take survival in vacuum too seriously neither.
 

Skizomeuh

Skizomeuh
He's theorycrafting physical fidelity of shoelaces's fiber structure in zero g, while not having started to think about designing the shoe, and missing the fact it's an octopus that he'll dress up.
 

Navigare Necesse Est

Navigare Necesse Est
AJW said:
At the risk of going off-topic, the Mercury program astronauts did. Sometimes the simplest solution is the best one. https://www.nasa.gov/audience/foreducators/spacesuits/historygallery/mer-1961.html

Not that CIG show much sign of going for simple solutions. Or of achieving their goals in the time it took NASA to land a man on the moon...
Click to expand...

OK, but that's rather a zipper for closing / sealing.

I see it now, they work together. One fastens, the other holds together tightly. Neat.
 
Last edited:

TenakaFurey

T
CmdrKull said:
I’ve always been confused about this... is he saying Chris overvalues the shoelaces, or is he saying Chris doesn’t understand that the shoelaces are so important? It kinda reads like the second, but what part of this project screams “we don’t care about trivial minutiae “?


Edit: and then I read it again and it seems like he’s saying just that: he cares too much about shoelaces, he doesn’t understand macro.
Click to expand...

He is saying that Chris Roberts cannot tell the difference between what is important and necessary, what might be nice to have and what is totally irrelevant.

When looking at an NPC, the pallet and silhouette are important. The detail of the shoelaces is not, not least because you will never see it. Worse, because increased detail and complexity usually costs CPU cycles, this lack of ability to prioritise can and will hit game performance. Worse, extra complexity increases the risk of buggy code and for something that is as important as shoelaces, that risk isn't worth it.

When everything is important - nothing is.

We see this in general game development. The engine is perhaps the single most important aspect of the game because it ties everything together. It is important to get it right, to ensure it works. If it goes wrong, the game goes wrong. Had Chris Robert spent a year or two just modifying or writing an engine, he probably wouldn't have $160 million, but he'd also very likely be much further along in actual development.

But it seems like everything ahs a high priority to him...that everything is just as important as the engine. Everything needs to be developed at the same time. So he has people working on the engine (pre-Alpha) and functionality (Alpha) and content and assets (Beta) and they all appear to be getting the wrong level of prioritisation...Beta is more important than pre-Alpha, probably because it is flashy and can sell. But because Beta depends on the engine, a lot of what they are showing now will need to be reworked as the engine and the rest of the game changes.
 

Azirphaeli

Azirphaeli
dannysquid said:
Isn't it simply that what they're trying to do is crazily ambitious? And probably impossibly, undebuggably ambitious with finite time and money, regardless of which engine you're using or how talented your team are.
Click to expand...

What about Star Citizen is ambitous exactly?

Is it the pretty graphics that can also be seen in any new AAA title?
Is it the procedural generated worlds that can be seen in titles as new as No Man's Sky, Space Engine, and Elite Dangerous or in titles as old as Noctis IV? (That the original concept for the game didn't include at all, btw)
Is it seamless space to planet that can be seen is many of those listed titles?
Is it walking around ships like in everything from Space Engineers to Hellion?
Is it the mediocre FPS gunplay that can be seen in countless titles? (which also, btw, wasn't supposed to be in the game and I am sure backers such as my self do not want)
Is it the very bad flight model and ship-to-ship combat that's been done before and done better?

If the answer is: All that in one game then I got bad news for you that's not ambitious at all. Many games have released with amalgamations of features found in other games all mushed into one. Sure, not these exact features but there's nothing ambitious about that.

Star Citizen is nothing but another game, that's all it is. People need to recognize that. Nothing they are doing is new or crazy.

I'd say the only thing ambitious about SC is the sheer amount of your money CR wants to throw away on the project he clearly has no clue how to run.
 
Last edited:

DLewth

DLewth
Zetta said:
The gist I got is that they are pushing out the "minimum viable 3.0 build" to the PTU. Sounds like there's a whole host of stuff not ready for 3.0 and that's being kept aside so that people can get to play some of it.
Click to expand...

Ahh, that sounds better. Seems weird to call an alpha a 'product' but I guess terms change.
 

1500

1500
DLewth said:
Ahh, that sounds better. Seems weird to call an alpha a 'product' but I guess terms change.
Click to expand...

Well this is CIG after all. Remember how CIG had to explain that when they say "polish" they didn't mean "polish". Or how when CIG says "refactor" they don't actually mean "refactor", or "fidelity", "physics", "mass", "weeks", "months", "all hand on deck", "innovative", "our tech", "never been done before", "competent".
 
Last edited:

Britney

B
Star Citizen is this at the moment:

- videos of people talking and discussing possibilities of a game in development
- videos about virtual items, potential gameplay experiences and mechanics
- written documents about virtual items, potential gameplay experiences and mechanics

- a shop for ingame items

- fragmented software-prototypes based on Cry Engine with rudimentary functions of the later game
 

Tippis

Tippis
1500 said:
Well this is CIG after all. Remember how CIG had to explain that when they say "polish" they didn't mean "polish". Or how when CIG says "refactor" they don't actually mean "refactor", or "fidelity", "physics", "mass", "weeks", "months", "all hand on deck", "innovative", "our tech", "never been done before", "competent".
Click to expand...

“Develop”
“Space”
“Game”

…oh, and let's not forget “backer” and “pledge.”
 
Last edited:

1500

1500
From the SA thread,

Sean Tracy, interviewed on newegg. Gets asked the question "what is star citizen". Making it up as you go along.

[video=youtube;qblLBI33Uvw]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qblLBI33Uvw&t=46m2s[/video]
 
Last edited:

DLewth

DLewth
1500 said:
Well this is CIG after all. Remember how CIG had to explain that when they say "polish" they didn't mean "polish". Or how when CIG says "refactor" they don't actually mean "refactor", or "fidelity", "physics", "mass", "weeks", "months", "all hand on deck", "innovative", "our tech", "never been done before", "competent".
Click to expand...

Tippis said:
“Develop”
“Space”
“Game”

…oh, and let's not forget “backer” and “pledge.”
Click to expand...

"promise", "release", "transparency", "realism", "orbit", "scale".

Hmm. Point taken.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom