I think you mean 'alpha testers'
And yeah, my initial thought is just to post on Spectrum for everyone to pile in and see what happens. Nothing much else to do but test right now is there ...
Game Discussions Star Citizen Discussion Thread v12
- Thread starter Yaffle
- Start date
-
- Tags
- star citizen
And yeah, my initial thought is just to post on Spectrum for everyone to pile in and see what happens. Nothing much else to do but test right now is there ...
But Turbulent also has a 25% stake in Ci¬G and 2 active board members
If it's as the agent suggests that Turbulent can plan and hit dates...which I assume is correct... and might be maneuvering themselves into a position of favour...I can see the oversight commitee that the investors (apparently) have set up being swayed by that owing to the persistent no show that is the hallmark of Roberts and Ci¬G.
In other words, if that scenario played out and investors demanded that Turbulent took over as lead developers for the game(s), the majority of CIG's crew would be out of jobs (a few might be picked up by Turbulent) and yet Roberts would still be quids-in. Sounds so obscene that it's sadly plausible.
CIG don't even know how many players they might eventually support because they've failed to develop the magic server technology they've been crowing about for years. Chances are they'll never support significantly more than they do right now, so there's no value in trying to design game play that would require a server population orders of magnitude higher. ToW was never "needed", it was just another marketing tool to distract from the main dumpster fire using what few tools they have, basically rearranging deck chairs on the Titanic.
As Tippis suggested, that's what the ETF and PTU phases are supposed to be exclusively for. ToW made to ETF but never progressed past it...it was that dire.
No, because gameplay has been the bottom of the priority list for the entirety of development. There's very little to any of these parts that can be combined into an engaging whole.
- There's a meh mining mini game
- the ability to carry objects
- a bad flight model
- vehicles
- questionably fun FPS combat
- poor AI
- space combat
- barebones mission system
- Lots of art assets including some plantets
- Janky networking foundation
- A poorly recieved quantum travel system.
Last edited:
combat testing in ETF. lol
ETF members* are about screen shots and space trucking.
SC needs mixed arms combat balancing, doesnt have to be ToW. But the current ETF aint gonna cut it either.
*most, there are some in there, but not enough
You can. You select several hundred of beta testers to be sure to have at least 40 of them when you launch your test. You create a lobby to get them together on your test zone. You give them, in a controled zone, the vehicles and weapons you want them to use. You assign them objectives with some tools in game to be sure they fight each others...
Strangely, that's what ToW will be...
Take a look at the history of Freelancer to give you an idea of what should happen.
Proper companies have QA systems and departments to manufacture the rare edge cases that worry them, they then create controlled tests/scripts and test them in a controlled and repeatable manner.
However, they do this only once everything else is working broadly fine as there's zero point in testing the "really, really hard and rare" stuff until the ordinary stuff is solid.
What proper companies don't do is divert resources onto obscure aspects of a system that may never be used before (let's say) 99 of the promised 100 systems are in and running.
Last edited:
Equally strange that it never made it past ETF and an entire company has since gone radio silent about it...I could almost imagine it was another failed project from Ci¬G...oh wait!
Rexzilla used to do that. Until his contract ran out.
I'm glad someone is testing space trucking...pity it never shows up in the development of the arcade space combat game that SC is rapidly morphing into
combat testing in ETF. lol
ETF members* are about screen shots and space trucking.
SC needs mixed arms combat balancing, doesnt have to be ToW. But the current ETF aint gonna cut it either.
*most, there are some in there, but not enough
They could have done that without TOW. I remember seeing a video of people organising something similar maybe a year ago. Did I mention, no need for TOW?
The fact that 40 players gathering around shooting each other isn't a common thing should be a hint to how important something like TOW should be in a development that still doesn't have basic mechanics in. It's just anoher shiny distraction.
Only limited to a small subset of the available vehicles, with walled off locations, running off a different networking system. Exactly like the PU isn’t. Great testing environment.
But hey, they added voiceovers and lore and interstitials while they load in the different stages... just like the... wait a minute...
Face it, the PTU is the no-brainer locale for a testbed. If this was genuinely about testing future PU encounters and performance they’d do it there. They have everything they need to set that up, as you yourself note. (Location spawns, the mission system, test focuses etc).
ToW is an attempt to make a marketable Battlefield Rush clone from existing assets. It’s that simple. And it’s incredibly transparent.
...Except Rush mode in Battlefield was pretty good...64 player servers even on an Xbox with vehicles, aircraft, different classes... I was a god at Rush mode on the Xbox
This is how it's done...in a proper game
Last edited:
Hey, it's clear that no one outside CI-G know anything about roadmap development. Because it has never been done before.ROFL, what a load of drivel. "Roadmap Update" (still no roadmap)
So we should stop this FUD and just wait for them to deliver the Best Damn Roadmap Of Roadmap Ever.
BDRORE or Idris!!
All I can think of is either Amazon or Epic taking it over. Amazon because it'd look bad to have one of the most mediatised game project fail on your engine/infrastructure, Epic because Sweeney is in Zuckerberg mode, throwing all of the money at everything that moves so whichever ends up being successful is his. In both cases money wouldn't be an object, they could throw everything away apart from the concept art, and get it done from scratch with a properly defined scope and project management.
If they want to test with 40 people they can just tell some devs/QAs to do it. You don't need the Evocati or the PTU - even though volunteer players can help ofc (Factorio does this once in a while).
Sorry Ant but isn't it a bad idea to make a game out of it? Because then again 'quality' comes into play and stuff is being redone for looks even though that shouldn't matter since it's only a test environment.
@Agent I'm too scared to say it in SA but you're my favorite character in all this
Sorry Ant but isn't it a bad idea to make a game out of it? Because then again 'quality' comes into play and stuff is being redone for looks even though that shouldn't matter since it's only a test environment.
@Agent I'm too scared to say it in SA but you're my favorite character in all this
Viajero
Volunteer Moderator
I still cant get my head round it. Please somebody correct me if I have this wrong.
By my reckoning quarter three will be over before we have the four-step process in place, let alone the road map, LET ALONE the beta release.
- CIG still claim that sq 42 will have a beta release in quarter three this year.
- We are already a third of the way through quarter three.
- CIG have recently announced they will be working on "... a four-step process that will to lead into the formation of the actual updated roadmap."
- CIG have said that there will be weeks between each of these stages.
- We have not seen stage one yet.
YET... there are still people who believe what CIG tell them and are willing to put more money in to this......... I don't even know what to call it now
Well, regarding SQ42 beta release for Q3 we had back in March CIG stating that they were broadly happy with SQ42 progress. In his last post 2 days ago Zyloh refers to that March post and re-confirms that they are happy with SQ42 development.
If CIG were now to cancel or postpone SQ42 beta later than Q3 then these statements would become full on misrepresentation, highly likely willful misrepresentation.
They have also never stated if the beta would be open to the public, a section of it, or not at all and only internal. It would not be tremendously surprising if CIG announced the beta to be only internal (or open only to a tiny section of devoted fans) and meet Q3
although given the current outcry it would be interesting to see the community reaction and see if it buys it.On the inside, it would be also very interesting to see the reaction of the Calders if an eventual SQ42 beta annoucement was made but was not really accurate to the truth of its current state
Rock and a hard place. The only proper way out is to actually gasp make a product.
Last edited:
Well, yes, it's not like ETF wasn't
combat testing in ETF. lol
ETF members* are about screen shots and space trucking.
SC needs mixed arms combat balancing, doesnt have to be ToW. But the current ETF aint gonna cut it either.
Even more strangely, ToW is not needed for any of that and ToW will not even be able to deliver all of that. But strangest of all, ToW lacks the feature set and functionality needed to turn any of that into actionable data; to use it as a test bed.