The Star Citizen Thread v8

Status
Thread Closed: Not open for further replies.

Tippis

Tippis
frostypaw said:
Is the entire game to be played in third person? There are so few first person videos - harder to drool over your $40 toy car from the inside I guess
Click to expand...

It's meant to be played entirely in first-person. Why haven't they removed the camera view that makes it impossible to test and balance anything that involves situational awareness (such as combat)? Because it's alpha, and testing isn't a relevant part of what the evocati and public test universe builds are supposed to provide. :D
 

Skizomeuh

Skizomeuh
It's because first-person POV is in most case counterintuitive and counterproductive because of poorly thought/badly implemented/conflicting cockpits, UI and gameplay mechanisms.
 

Agony_Aunt

Agony_Aunt
Tippis said:
It's meant to be played entirely in first-person. Why haven't they removed the camera view that makes it impossible to test and balance anything that involves situational awareness (such as combat)? Because it's alpha, and testing isn't a relevant part of what the evocati and public test universe builds are supposed to provide. :D
Click to expand...

AFAIK that is wrong. As i understand they will keep third person in, both for on foot and flying/driving.
 

BlackSpaceCowboy

BlackSpaceCowboy
TenakaFurey said:
So being in a playable state next year MIGHT be doable if...big IF...CIG get their netcode fixed AND they give up on the idea of "1000 player instances" (or rather, the players give up on it since what CIG means
by "instance" isn't what players are expecting) and get used to working on their own.

Acceptable performance...in other words...will depend on how many other players you want in the game with you.
Click to expand...

The idea of 1000 players in an instance is ridiculous. In a year, I would be happy with 10 players and decent frame rate.

Have you noticed that today games are often unfinished on release? So, they will most likely release a basic version of SC where you can travel to various systems and do basic missions.

Everyone talks about when it will be "finished" but most likely it won't be finished. It will be released unfinished and continue developing for years like ED and like Eve Online.

I think an unfinished very playable release in a year or two seems likely.
 

Tuub t Tute

T
BlackSpaceCowboy said:
The idea of 1000 players in an instance is ridiculous. In a year, I would be happy with 10 players and decent frame rate.

Have you noticed that today games are often unfinished on release? So, they will most likely release a basic version of SC where you can travel to various systems and do basic missions.

Everyone talks about when it will be "finished" but most likely it won't be finished. It will be released unfinished and continue developing for years like ED and like Eve Online.

I think an unfinished very playable release in a year or two seems likely.
Click to expand...

Not the "unfinished like ED" trope... ED was a complete standalone game, release with all major game loops in place and playable (some more engaging than others).

It is disingenuous to try and compare whatever state SC might finally (4 years time is my guess) release in, with ED.
 

Agony_Aunt

Agony_Aunt
BlackSpaceCowboy said:
The idea of 1000 players in an instance is ridiculous. In a year, I would be happy with 10 players and decent frame rate.

Have you noticed that today games are often unfinished on release? So, they will most likely release a basic version of SC where you can travel to various systems and do basic missions.

Everyone talks about when it will be "finished" but most likely it won't be finished. It will be released unfinished and continue developing for years like ED and like Eve Online.

I think an unfinished very playable release in a year or two seems likely.
Click to expand...

A year.... no way. Still far too much missing. If they try and release in a year I suspect they will get ripped to shreds by the critics. So much would still be missing. Two years.... maybe, at a stretch.

I mean, really, they have to get all the basic gameplay loops in and fulfil most of the kickstarter stuff, including all the ships people have paid for over the years (including a use for them - so in the case of the Pioneer, that means base building!) and 100 systems.

If they go for release without any of those, i see problems.

Ok, its always going to be a soft release, but at some point they have to remove that alpha label and enter beta, and then have a 1.0. Its that 1.0 that is the first real release, the one they can say to the world, ta da, we have a game!
 

TenakaFurey

T
BlackSpaceCowboy said:
The idea of 1000 players in an instance is ridiculous. In a year, I would be happy with 10 players and decent frame rate.
Click to expand...

10 players in a space game is another way of saying single player.

Have you noticed that today games are often unfinished on release?
Click to expand...

Nope. I've noticed that a lot of games are FINISHED upon release but have room for what we all like to call "expansions" and "additional features that aren't critical to the core game".

Star Citizen right now is not finished. Why? Not because there are additional features and gameplay and mechanics that can't be added later but because it hasn't gone through a full testing and development cycle, because it is missing core critical functionality and because there is no gameplay, mechanics or content in the so-called game right now.

OTOH...ED, which is the usual culprit when this argument is used...released after a full testing and development cycle, released with critical core functionality intact and released with gameplay, content and mechanics in game.

Right now...Star Citizen is missing the netcode necessary to support the player base it is aiming for. And for all they've been promising it for 3.2, it was promised for 3.1 after being delayed from 3.0, promised for 3.0 after being delayed from 2.6, is two years late...at least...and should have been part of the core engine technology before they started development of the actual game.

Star Citizen is missing server code necessary to support the instance size it is aiming for. Core critical technology without which the game cannot function.

Star Citizen is missing procedural generation routines. For all they say they have it, the current game doesn't appear to use them at all.

Star Citizen is missing gameplay, mechanics and content. There is a MASSIVE technology debt already built up which will take years to clear at the current rate of progress. The games developers have admitted that they haven't even gone through the design phase for much if what they need and want to implement. You cannot design around a vague concept such as "mining" or "salvage"....designers need to, indeed MUST, map out the steps of how each activity works into gameplay. And CIG haven't even done that.

Star Citizen is missing a functionally complete engine. One of the most basic and important tasks any developer needs to do is have a working and complete engine BEFORE they begin game development. CIG doesn't have this, hasn't even completed this most critical stage of the development process.

Even to get to a BASIC state of bare functionality, CIG needs to complete the engine and integrate new server code, bypassing netcode if it forgets about multiplayer capability. It needs to design gameplay, content and basic mechanics. It needs to create the gameworld and implement the design in code. And do so while trying to keep a preAlpha tech demo polished and playable.

Whatever is going to be the state of the game in a year won't be "playable" as you suggest. Even CIGs own timetable, its own roadmap, optimistic as it was...let's not forget much of what was slated for 3.1 is now to appear on 3.2 if not later..., only gave us a 3.4 with what was originally planned for 3.0.
 
Last edited:

Agony_Aunt

Agony_Aunt
Zetta said:
Nice thread defending paid priority testing access for subscribers and concierge https://www.reddit.com/r/starcitizen/comments/86ct33/what_happened_to_wave_1_testers/
Click to expand...

This started a few months back didn't it? They promise the kickstarters they would always get first dibs on new stuff and then changed it to bump subscribers ahead of them. A bit of a poor move i think, and one i don't think they would have done if they didn't need the money, which of course then once again brings up the spectre of how much money does CIG actually have left and how much more do they need?

Of course, the old kickstarters probably are no longer so interesting for CIG. A lot of them wanted what was originally pitched, not this monster MMO that CIG are now working on, and most have problably spent as much as they can, or at least holding off. Its the newer whales they are now courting.

It might come back and bite them in the rear end though. Some of the older backers are going to be salty, and seeing their concerns being dismissed and downvoted, can't imagine that will sit well with them. It might even provoke some new refunds.
 

BlackSpaceCowboy

BlackSpaceCowboy
Agony_Aunt said:
Ok, its always going to be a soft release, but at some point they have to remove that alpha label and enter beta, and then have a 1.0. Its that 1.0 that is the first real release, the one they can say to the world, ta da, we have a game!
Click to expand...

I think they'll just keep doing what they're doing and release a work in progress. I recently bought Aerofly fs 2. It's a flight sim but it's still missing many features and is actively being worked on. I have another sim called IL-2 and that was recently updated with a ton of new features. That game has been out for years. Of course, there is ED which is clearly a WIP. Still waiting on space legs and atmospheres.

I guess this how big games will be developed now.

(This is just my opinion. Everyone is entitled to their own. I'm a developer but not a game developer. I believe they'll come to their senses due to budget and focus on more realistic objective. Once they make that decision the game is not far from completion. It just won't be everything it was promised to be on the kickstarter. But it won't be the only game that didn't fulfill its kickstarter promises)
 
Last edited:

VidarSnipes

V
BlackSpaceCowboy said:
Of course, there is ED which is clearly a WIP. Still waiting on space legs and atmospheres.
Click to expand...

Lack of "space legs and atmospheres" doesn't make a space sim game unfinished. Holy hell, when did all those space games started to be about as a little of space as possible? I don't remember Freespace and I-War being lesser games just because there was no walking around.
 

Tippis

Tippis
BlackSpaceCowboy said:
I think they'll just keep doing what they're doing and release a work in progress. I recently bought Aerofly fs 2. It's a flight sim but it's still missing many features and is actively being worked on. I have another sim called IL-2 and that was recently updated with a ton of new features. That game has been out for years. Of course, there is ED which is clearly a WIP. Still waiting on space legs and atmospheres.
Click to expand...

All of those are finished, though. Their expansions may not be, but the games themselves are and have been for quite some time.

You're still confusing the work being done on expansions with the finished product that is the base game. While there certainly are games that are released unfinished, they remain exceptions to the norm (unless they're made by Bethesda). The reason is simple: word gets out and you lose sales if the game doesn't run right. Or people just get refunds, often generating lots of bad word of mouth in the process, which hurts sales even further. And that's before we even get into the really threatening parts of releasing an unfinished game, such as lawsuits and lost jobs or even having the entire companies get dismantled. So no, most everyone will try to release an actual finished game, because it's usually far too risky to do otherwise.

If you torture the notion of “finished” to exclude all things that are still receiving updates, then all that happens is that the label becomes completely worthless and you're not actually saying anything any more. By that measure, stuff that is still not “finished” include the Khufu pyramid; the formation of Earth; the universe, and your left foot. If you have to so utterly misrepresent the meaning of a word to support your point, then your point is just flat out wrong and has no support whatsoever.
 
Last edited:

MTBFritz

MTBFritz
BlackSpaceCowboy said:
I think they'll just keep doing what they're doing and release a work in progress. I recently bought Aerofly fs 2. It's a flight sim but it's still missing many features and is actively being worked on. I have another sim called IL-2 and that was recently updated with a ton of new features. That game has been out for years. Of course, there is ED which is clearly a WIP. Still waiting on space legs and atmospheres.

I guess this how big games will be developed now.
Click to expand...

There is a difference between a game being "Work in Progress" and a "Not really a game". I doubt there ever has been a game in history that wasnt thought of being a bit "too short" or could use the one or other thing to become even better. Even 10/10 score games are worked on for years after release. What you are trying to say is that GTA5 was unfinished and incomplete upon release which is plain wrong.

What we expect from a game once it releases is that it provides entertainment value in tune with what you spend on it. We expect the game to have all its major game loops working and no major things missing. While getting a buggy game is possible nowadays developers usually try to fix this and its more of an exception then the Norm. No Mans Sky was the last released game that was missing major and promised mechanics and the company got their just reward for it. It also was an exception for the time.

Of course ED is WIP, like every other game too. Whatever major AAA title today doesnt have a row of DLCs lined up to ensure its next couple of years? ALl of these games are WIP.

They are however COMPLETE upon release. With that difference in mind its hard to imagine Star Citizen hitting "release game" quality in the next 3-4 years to be honest. Not with the crawling pace of progression they show and not with the inability of its management to commit to certain things and make decisions.

It always comes down to Star Citizen defenders judging other competing games with the harshest and most brutal skala ever while at the same time their beloved Star Citizen is treated like a child. No bad word, no jokes, tiny voices of sarcasm or uncomfortable questions are met with deadly force and parental instincts and its every need is covered by yet more money without anything in return.

Its just funny that you try to talk down other games when the one you stand up for has nothing to show at all and is limping along on two broken legs. Star Citizen is not dead yet and you are right, there might still be a game at the end of this horror movie. But until that happens (far far in the distant future) Star Citizen simply has no right to be named on par with other released titles which have delivered. Its just not in the same club yet.
 

ZeeWolf

ZeeWolf
ED is following a pretty common, "Mine-craft" development paradigm as with other online games. So yeah, work is "in progress".

I think to successfully achieve that, you do need a robust complete game experience though, backed up by strong development iterations and consistency.

I really don't see another practical way to build an online open ended space game, otherwise where do you draw the line? You are a person in a multi-player world with access to vehicles that can go to any number of planets and there is an economy and you can do stuff to make money and there's stuff going on. If that's your game idea you will get no interest from publishers and the gamers will tear you apart for not delivering life v2 (as we can see from NMS, Elite etc)

I don't see that kind of development with SC, just vertical slices of stuff made for demonstration purposes. I'm not sure how much work they have done on the race module or arena commander or Star Marine or the social module in quite some time? Layers and layers of non-connected thin un-fun stuff. Do the next shiny thing (landing on planets) and talk about that for 2 years then onto something else when the backers loose interest.

Chris Roberts seems to suggest in some interviews that he sees Star Citizen in constant development like ED, but in other interviews he firmly says he's delivering a complete experience over time, suggesting quite implicitly that his way of developing in perpetual pre-alpha with no release dates, missed/removed mile-stones, on pre-order cash raised by marketing a complete game he couldn't deliver was the correct way. The only thing we can be certain of is he's not doing it on his own dime.
 
Last edited:
Status
Thread Closed: Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom