Star Citizen Discussion Thread v11

Status
Thread Closed: Not open for further replies.

LeSabre

LeSabre
kukeke11 said:
But you can test weapons and vehicles balance there, and it wont have less player since player cap is 50 already. It perfectly simulates battle scale though, a ground battle would probably take place in a certain areas radius. So would you feel better about the testing if CIG said that you just all spawn in the same place but you the whole galaxy is out there and you arent confined so you can get along with the ground battle.
Basically if lets say I was superhuman it wouldn't matter where I punched you I would still knock you out if I was super human, only difference terrain provides is tactical and there is no need to nerf tactical and strategic advantages.
Click to expand...

Testing weapons and vehicle balance seems kinda pointless since none of that is coming anytime soon, game releasing soon? No. You don't test things for gameplay balance when there is no gameplay, see, there is no end goal here for "balancing" since there is still a million or more changes and additions that need to be done before any 'balancing' will be effective, any one of those will knock the "balance" way out. Arena commander was made for "vehicle balance testing" and look at how well that's worked out, it didn't and was just another waste of money which is mostly forgotten about.

I didn't mention 'lower than 50' mate, I said "You can't test balancing or server stability/performance issues in an 'open' game by closing it off into a small arena with limited players. That would make the data incomparable and completely useless". How does anything tested in a 50 player arena translate to whatever lofty goal for player numbers the PU has? It doesn't, the player cap is one of the problems, anything tested with a low cap like that will be useless for anything except the 'testing' module itself which means they don't need the results of such testing for the game the backers have paid for, ie; waste of time and money.

The only time I would "feel better" (lol) about the 'testing' is if they actually wanted to test something with a goal to achieving results that would mean a game with balance. What they are doing at the moment is stalling and stamering while making a streamers play area/mode more stable/attractive so that he can make them more money.

Tactics and strategy? It's a shameless and souless BF clone for gathering cash, CI`g only does one tactic and only has one strategy, marketing.
 

kukeke11

K
LeSabre said:
Tactics and strategy? It's a shameless and souless BF clone for gathering cash, CI`g only does one tactic and only has one strategy, marketing.
Click to expand...
What ? I said the only difference terrain gives is Tactical or strategical that's why it doesn't matter that this is a small play area in a set terrain. Shows your negative mindset said tactical and strategic about something else and you turn it into a statement about tactics and strategy of CIG.

Somewhat agree with the things you said before that statement(That they are going to do a lot of changes in the future anyway so the testing in a sense is too soon). But still love your last sentence, what the fudge I don't even understand how your brain connected those 2 things. Now so you understand why I said Strategy and Tactical difference is because vehicle performance data will be the same across all terrain only difference from open world other areas in this area would be the tactics and strategy involved with this terrain, it is not like the vehicle will gain 200000 times the destruction force in another area.
 
Last edited:

LeSabre

LeSabre
kukeke11 said:
What ? I said the only difference terrain gives is Tactical or strategical that's why it doesn't matter that this is a small play area in a set terrain. Shows your negative mindset said tactical and strategic about something else and you turn it into a statement about tactics and strategy of CIG.

Somewhat agree with the things you said before that statement(That they are going to do a lot of changes in the future anyway so the testing in a sense is too soon). But still love your last sentence, what the fudge I don't even understand how your brain connected those 2 things. Now so you understand why I said Strategy and Tactical difference is because vehicle performance data will be the same across all terrain only difference from open world other areas in this area would be the tactics and strategy involved with this terrain, it is not like the vehicle will gain 200000 times the destruction force in another area.
Click to expand...

Why my brain connected those two things = I didn't see the point of going on about Tactics or strategy since they are completely irrelevant to SC due to there being no goals, no territory to claim, no rewards or gains for being tactical or strategic, CI`g don't care if you see it as tactical or strategic, I doubt they even bothered to give it that much thought and instead once again rely on backers to theory craft.

My "negative mindset" comes from witnessing 8 years of constant CI`g grade smoke and mirrors with the end result being as near as makes no difference $300m for a bunch of not connected 'modules' that plain don't work as singular or connected entities and big empty promises about a pc game. Basically, action and reaction. If someone tells you fibs for 8 years, you gunna think their word has any value or honesty?

Vehicle performance data is completely irrelevant, there are years ahead yet for changes to wreck any data that they possibly could collect right now, we know how often they 'refactor' (lol) ships and anything else that moves so it's a massive waste of time and money. That is what they do best, the illusion of progress, covering lack of insight with 'testing' labels, do you not think by now they would have a bit of knowledge or experience on how ships/vehicles work given any set of values?

It's literally all parody at this point and it is my civic duty to point and laugh at it.
 

Arcondes

A
kukeke11 said:
But you can test weapons and vehicles balance there, and it wont have less player since player cap is 50 already. It perfectly simulates battle scale though, a ground battle would probably take place in a certain areas radius. So would you feel better about the testing if CIG said that you just all spawn in the same place but you the whole galaxy is out there and you arent confined so you can get along with the ground battle.
Basically if lets say I was superhuman it wouldn't matter where I punched you I would still knock you out if I was super human, only difference terrain provides is tactical and there is no need to nerf tactical and strategic advantages.
Click to expand...
If CIG have a Plan how the „Vision“ of CR dream Game should look why did‘t they know how space combat, ground combat, should work? Why should people test this? What are they QA guys doing? As sayed before I was an evocati since they started this „special“ testing.
This and the new game mode is only a smoke bomb. CIG listening to Feedback you think? As former evocati I wrote many feedbacks for the UI because Ed ui far better usable or the stupid mobiglas and so on. I got pretty good feedback from the other evos from CIG? Nothing. And now look at the Ui look at the mobiglas look at the FM look at the combat. Look at the whole Pu. Some Bugs are so persistent that i ask me what the QA guys are doing. I think we all want cool space games to play with. But for CIG it‘s only to milk the player base in my opinion.
 

Mole HD

Mole HD
Agony_Aunt said:
My god, its full of jank.

The worst advertisement for SC is videos of people actually playing it.
Click to expand...

Big Fry is merely taking the mickey though...his vids remind me of Soviet Womble doing ARMA :)

But...they're certainly not doing it any favours...even my mining vids are more exciting and tactical. Slightly less janky too :rolleyes:

By the power of Greyskull...save us from Eve online players who think this kinda gameplay is marvellous.
 
Last edited:

Surefoot

S
Mole HD said:
They're certainly not doing it any favours...even my mining vids are more exciting and tactical. Slightly less janky too :rolleyes:
Click to expand...
TBH elevators are still death traps, going on ramps and ladders will make the physics engine throw a fit, sometimes even the train at A18 will create issues when you try to disembark, and FPS movement is that janky (when seeing other players) or even worse depending on your connection lag... After a while we learn how to work around these bugs (and many others). I still dont find that particularly enjoyable, especially when running cargo, since there's the added pressure of losing everything.
 

[VR] Mad Mike

[VR] Mad Mike
Agony_Aunt said:
Best Tactical Shooter of 2020?

No.
Click to expand...
No indeed.... BUT that said iron out the jankiness and I think it looks good. Put it this way , hypothetically replace the ships with ED ships and if it was a teaser of ED 2020 with the warning still far from ready, I would be suitably interested.

PS don't forget we had the spinning sidewinder of doom, the teleporting space stations of destruction and air traffic controllers who were seemingly asleep at the desk back in beta. If you made a video back then you could easily rip it apart ... But it turned out ok in the end.

Even now in the production version, apparently SLFs break the game in a MP instance
.. how long since SLFs were released?
 
Last edited:

Azirphaeli

Azirphaeli
I think I can touch on why people dislike microtech and other worlds in SC, at least my perspective on what's causing the issue.

Now, let me make this clear, I'm not dunking on SC planet tech. For what it is, it's really good. It rivals or surpasses the best in the industry right now, and I mean released stuff not MS FS 2020. I mean NMS, Space Engine, Elite, that sort of stuff.

The problem is that SC is going for both very high quality art assets on worlds with atmos/life/signs of habitation (city worlds/plants/etc..) and we human beings live on an earth-like world (in fact, THE earth-like world) that has an atmo, life, and signs of habitation. As such, we have expectations that are hard wired into us about what these sorts of worlds are expected to look like and more importantly how they behave. What a forest actually is, size and density wise. What the area around a city is expected to look like. Large scale things like road networks and river basins, erosion, how liquids pool at different elevations and flows down towards sea level (instead of just a global water height like most games have to use when using proc gen)... to small scale stuff like how clouds realistically move based on wind, how trees bend and sway, birds flying away as you approach a bush. Loose paper blowing through the street of an empty part of a large city and how debris will pile up.

Let's be real, no game is going to do all this with one fully explorable planet let alone more than one. it's why Space Engine earth-like worlds look so good from space, but look empty and kinda meh at surface level. No matter how pretty it looks, no matter how high quality the engine and assets are it'll always feel off. Especially the closer and closer it gets to trying to look as realistic as possible while not being real. The uncanny valley of a planet, instead of a person.

It's also the reason why Noctis IV, IMO, really worked. Because the fidelity of the engine and assets were so poor that you steered away from comparing it to what you know already and instead your imagination could fill in the gaps that were not there. NMS at least does everything somewhat alien like which helps. Elite's worlds so far are all no atmo, just balls of rock with varying colors and composition. This sets expectations, we're not expecting familiar stuff because those aren't familiar worlds. We are very familiar with how things should be on a habitable world with humans on it. In SC we have worlds like that, and they aren't doing what they should be.

Again, I am not trashing SC for this. I have plenty of things I can dig into SC about after all but this isn't one of them. If FDEV updates Elite this year with leggies and atmos, it'll probably have the same issue. Very nice to look at worlds that make great screenshots.. but still they just don't feel like they should. This will lead to people thinking the same thing, despite all the great assets and the engine they'll feel a bit lifeless, a bit empty, a bit off.
 
Last edited:
Status
Thread Closed: Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom