PMs also underlie the same forum rules as the general thread meaning that if somebody is using foul language/bypasses the swear filter or generally harasses you reporting him/her is possible and I am sure the mods will take care of it. In addition features like ignore are also available.
The Star Citizen Thread V10
- Thread starter Sir.Tj
- Start date
- Status
Jacques d'Orleans
Banned
Well, after cutting out about 30% from the last 0.63 build and so on and so forth and even more bugs than five years ago, well, I would say they've Fallout 76ed hard.
Back to topic: Any news about Squander 42?
Edit: Guardfrequency has a new podcast. FF to 38:35
https://guardfrequency.com/242/
Last edited:
Jacques d'Orleans
Banned
Yes. It's not out yet.
Sherlock and Captain Obvious have graced us with their presence.
Well, after cutting out about 30% from the last 0.63 build and so on and so forth and even more bugs than five years ago, well, I would say they've Fallout 76ed hard.
Back to topic: Any news about Squander 42?
Edit: Guardfrequency has a new podcast. FF to 38:35
https://guardfrequency.com/242/
Apparently the roadmap to the roadmap also gets stuff pushed back.
Hopefully they can get it patched in Roadmap roadmap 2.0
Aye...to be honest, I put more cash into Hellion than I ever have into SC.
Small team, good game...one which I really enjoy too.
Viajero
Volunteer Moderator
Huh, really? At the top of the file it says "Unless otherwise indicated, this document describes the actual IFCS and flight physics functionality in the game as of 3.2."
... but yeah, that doesn't mean they didn't rip it out after he left, of course.
Also notice John Pritchett's disclaimer in the note towards the end. He mentions that all that physics based theoretical system design was oversimplified to a specific fixed value set tuning for specific parameters in each ship for ease of use by game designers, (game designers didnt even know how to handle the system) thereby killing in one swift blow all attempts to fidelity he may have conceived.
In essence, and if I understood it right, he attempted to create a relatively detailed system only to then oversimplify everything so poor game designers could easily assign whatever arbitrary speed or acceleration rates they felt were "right" for each ship balance, irrespective of the mass/geometry and thruster "size" of said ship. Which incidentally is exactly how any other space sim game in history does it. In other words, he basically created a simulation in order to produce the exact same result other games achieve via assignment of arbitrary flight model variables. Wasted effort much?
In order for John's system to work as intended, the ship design process would have needed to be exactly the opposite of what it has been so far. The ship design process would have needed to take all that into account first and iterate, i.e. to propose a certain mass and geometry and thruster location that in turns allows a certain flight behaviour. Then test that ship's flight and if flight was not as expected then back to the drawing board to change geometry, mass and/or thruster locations etc (within the limits of somewhat realistic thrusters strength) and iterate until expected flight behaviours were achieved.
But as we all know that is not how CIG designs ships, ships are designed with geometry and thruster locations etc selected by the rule of cool so to generate sales which in turn has been giving game designers all kinds of headaches to ensure ships flew minimally reasonably and could be balanced versus each other at all. The solution to this design flaw, as Pritchett explains, was to actually cheat the very own system he had created. Pritchett actually posted lamenting this situation in the old forums 2 or 3 years ago. I presume he must have felt somewhat frustrated by all this.
Sometimes a 21 pages game design document happens to be reduced to a one liner.
Last edited:
Well still have to decide, if I spend that amount on tangible beers with verifiable effects or waste it on Croberts purely fictional "vision".60 bucks is hardly playing the high risk stock market, Fritz [haha]
...Considering most folks will spend double that on a weekend having a few beers with friends. You don't get that 'investment' in entertainment back either...except for some wholly subjective fun
It eats in the digital entertainment budget regardless of the amount. I can spend one thousand dollars on Star Citizen jpegs and get a "concierge" or I can get a bunch of finished, polished and released games on disc. Honestly I prefer the latter, it's more varied and lasts longer.
Also I'm not really fond of pay to play multiplayer games, because these quickly die off, when the next trend shows up. So for me it's paid singleplayer (that was what I originally backed) or free multi player. Obviously paid subscriptions are completely out of the question.
In other words, what should have been a grand design ended up being cobbled together with gaff-tape and string.
Ladies and Gentlemen: Star Citizen.
[SUB]Now available in the Cayman Islands.[/SUB]
Last edited:
That is what happens when your projects runs through a multitude of producers and when you don't have game design parameters nailed down first.
The original design was ships with Newtonian thrusters behaving according to their physical properties. After every citizen chose his favorite role and a fitting ship model he likes, he progresses through modifying his vessel and installing upgrades.
Then MMO monetization 2.0 happened and suddenly it was boring "progressing through tiered ship models" as everywhere else. Now physical properties didn't matter anymore, because game designers assign "slow and clunky garbage can" and "completely overpowered turret in space" according to their pay to win balance sheet to certain ship models. An Aurora is no longer a one seater you modify with whatever for your loner missions, but a a starter trashcan you throw away as fast a possible after going through the grind. In the end everyone is going to end up in the "best ship for everything" like in every other game. A detailed physics-based flight model for that is just a waste of time.
Last edited:
Welcome to the Threadnaught-J.
Speaking as an original Kickstarter of Star Citizen, I pulled my money out, thankfully before CIG changed its terms of services again to deny refunds, when I learned about the dozens of shell companies that Chris Roberts has created over the years. This, to me, reeks of "Hollywood Accounting," a practice designed to pull money out of a project so that the production company won't have to fulfill its contractual obligations. It does not help that the original project I backed has morphed from a spiritual successor to Wing Commander and Privateer into a first person shooter set in space, with space ships that one occasionally flies. When I combine the above with the horrible mismanagement of this project, I'm glad I got my money out when I could, and use that money to buy other games when they're on sale (No Man's Sky) and when they eventually get released (Rebel Galaxy Outlaw... once they're on Steam).
Speaking as a space game enthusiast, on the other hand, it's still on my watch list, and I'm glad to see that there are signs of CIG finally getting their act together. I'm now curious enough about how the game will handle that I intend to give the next free fly weekend a whirl, to see if my machine can handle it. Should this game actually get released in decent shape, despite its troubled development period, it'll probably be on my "I'm only willing to spend $20-$30" list of games, given that from what I've seen, it may not be the type of game I can enjoy off and on for years. That way, if it's a poor fit for me, like No Man's Sky turned out to be, I'm not out a lot of money.
Last edited:
60 bucks is hardly playing the high risk stock market, Fritz [haha]
...Considering most folks will spend double that on a weekend having a few beers with friends. You don't get that 'investment' in entertainment back either...except for some wholly subjective fun
Personally, 60 bucks represents a significant portion of my yearly video game budget, primarily because when I buy a video game, I expect to get at least as much entertainment out of it as several rounds of weekday morning golf (when green fees are more reasonable). Ideally, I expect to play a $60 game for at least a year, off and on.
And $120 on "a few beers" over a weekend? :O One more reason I'm glad I don't drink. More money for video game hardware.
I'll echo what Mole and Asp said below: it's a pity because I was enjoying reading a genuine looks at Star Citizen, and make sure you report such abusive behavior to the mods. Nobody should feel threatened by discussing a video game.
In regards to travel times https://old.reddit.com/r/starcitize...nd_lorville_is_boring_as_hell_some/?limit=500
This one is very good!
Looks like they sold out to some "Investors"...could be some Loan Sharks actually..
OK, maybe its all good now for SC - they have actually "Publisher" now, who will keep them in check, so Answer the Call 2019 is real now.
Good one, they may figure out that Immersion is NOT fun, if you are doing the same stuff for 50 time...that is unskippable and imho is worse then Loading screens , that are so hated by hardcore SC fans...
This.
The "drawback" to this system (as cool as it would have been) is that it was designed for a fully realistic flight system and not a rule of cool system.
I also think that designing ships would have become far more strict since artists would have been forced to more think about realism, thruster values and center of mass values than making a cool ship. But perhaps then we would have had ships not being labyrinths of hallways and weird FPS map interior designs.
What we will get is most likely a 2 step system with the following:
- Coupled Flight = Thrusters have value X (Unique to each ship) and the IFCS will ensure those limits are not broken
- Decoupled Flight = Thrusters have a far higher maximum than X (called Y) and the IFCS will allow this but not allow values above Y
Also, sometime gameplay has to overrule realism as well.
Personally, 60 bucks represents a significant portion of my yearly video game budget, primarily because when I buy a video game, I expect to get at least as much entertainment out of it as several rounds of weekday morning golf (when green fees are more reasonable). Ideally, I expect to play a $60 game for at least a year, off and on.
And $120 on "a few beers" over a weekend? :O One more reason I'm glad I don't drink. More money for video game hardware.
It depends on where you go I guess, but you can easily get stuffed with booze for less.
Yes, you must contact a Moderator with this if there is inappropriate behaviour! This affects us all as their attitude will not only pertain towards SC but overall in forums; please report.
Last edited:
And players complained about the 6 seconds it took to heat-shields to drop when departing a landing pad in Elite...
- Status