Game Discussions Star Citizen Discussion Thread v12

LOL



QYO3JQT.png
 
:
LOL



QYO3JQT.png
:D

Good enough for me to brave Spectrum and give him an upvote... especially for the last of the stretch goals...

'24. Server Guessing, to allow for all players to take part in one massive dumpster fire where servers diegetically guess where actors are supposed to be in the game world'
 
Last edited:
Huh? Not a single post in 11 hours, instead of usual 5 pages per day? What heresy is this? Did SQ42 got released?!!!
Mole landed on the pyramids, others are storm chasing and the new Star Wars game released another trailer and one or two of us were engaged in that crazy little thing called work. SQ42 rests in the same place it did 11 hours ago, albeit they now have 2 level designers.
 
Also, a video was released that finally killed off the notion that SC's graphics were less “cartoony” than any of the myriad of actual games that deliver an actual space sim experience.
 
This is your brain on Star Citizen

I Pledged the game because of videos where they described fixing head bobbing. The first person camera is attached to the head,, between the eyes. When a person walks they bob. Insted of making the camera fixed, they researched how our brains stabilize our own vision. Human brains were to complex to do but they discovered bird brains were easy to simulate.

I mean, they couldn't simply have fixed the height of the camera and adjust as needed. No, first they made it bob, then they wrote extra code to cancel it out.

latest
 
This is your brain on Star Citizen
I Pledged the game because of videos where they described fixing head bobbing. The first person camera is attached to the head,, between the eyes. When a person walks they bob. Insted of making the camera fixed, they researched how our brains stabilize our own vision. Human brains were to complex to do but they discovered bird brains were easy to simulate.
I mean, they couldn't simply have fixed the height of the camera and adjust as needed. No, first they made it bob, then they wrote extra code to cancel it out.
Translation:

Since headbob went out of style almost as soon as it went in some time during the mid-90s, 1PV-camera stabilisation has been a known and solved problem for almost a quarter of a century. Consequently, no-one at CI¬G had any idea how (or why) to make that happen, even though it's built into the engine they chose. Instead, they decided to cumbersomely break the engine and reintroduce the problem. This, shockingly, turned out to cause problems. However, since it's a known and solved problem, CI¬G had no idea how to fix it (but they now knew why) and instead they decided to cumbersomely counter-break the engine. Not fix, because that would require them to be knowledgeable enough to be familiar with the known and solved problem, but counter-break so that a new level of breakage was in place to counteract the previous level of breakage. This was an obviously bird-brained way of doing things to anyone who had ever touched a video game in the last quarter-century, and consequently CI¬G thought that this was a technical reference to the methodology they've tried to implement. Thus, they adopted that as the “explanation” for why they had added the most mindbogglingly unintelligent thing ever to their game: because bird brains.

I guess that someone was trolling then. I mean "fixed head-bobbing" is really stupid. Not even CIG would do that.
You underestimate the stupidity at play at CI¬G.
Because yes, yes they did.

Much like how they implemented the IFCS to effectively create no-clip flying because they couldn't get their heads around how physics works, and the physics engine was the thing they had to use to ensure they didn't end up with no-clip flying. It's all systems upon systems to arrive right back where they'd be if they had done nothing at all.
 
Translation:

Since headbob went out of style almost as soon as it went in some time during the mid-90s, 1PV-camera stabilisation has been a known and solved problem for almost a quarter of a century. Consequently, no-one at CI¬G had any idea how (or why) to make that happen, even though it's built into the engine they chose. Instead, they decided to cumbersomely break the engine and reintroduce the problem. This, shockingly, turned out to cause problems. However, since it's a known and solved problem, CI¬G had no idea how to fix it (but they now knew why) and instead they decided to cumbersomely counter-break the engine. Not fix, because that would require them to be knowledgeable enough to be familiar with the known and solved problem, but counter-break so that a new level of breakage was in place to counteract the previous level of breakage. This was an obviously bird-brained way of doing things to anyone who had ever touched a video game in the last quarter-century, and consequently CI¬G thought that this was a technical reference to the methodology they've tried to implement. Thus, they adopted that as the “explanation” for why they had added the most mindbogglingly unintelligent thing ever to their game: because bird brains.


You underestimate the stupidity at play at CI¬G.
Because yes, yes they did.

Much like how they implemented the IFCS to effectively create no-clip flying because they couldn't get their heads around how physics works, and the physics engine was the thing they had to use to ensure they didn't end up with no-clip flying. It's all systems upon systems to arrive right back where they'd be if they had done nothing at all.
I don't know - I think it's rather a marketing piece by them to blind naive backers with stuff that was never done before. They would never do that but just tell how they fix a non-existing problem so it looks like they're busy with something to justify the time and money spent. They are pulling all kinds of busywork nonsense out their rears and people are just too gullible to believe it.
 
I don't know - I think it's rather a marketing piece by them to blind naive backers with stuff that was never done before. They would never do that but just tell how they fix a non-existing problem so it looks like they're busy with something to justify the time and money spent. They are pulling all kinds of busywork nonsense out their rears and people are just too gullible to believe it.
Oh yeah, sure the brain-research part is definitely that.
But the part where they first stupidly implemented head-bob, and then stupidly implemented anti-bob also definitely happened.

But it works so well for the general appearance of ineptitude at CI¬G to assume that when someone said it was a bird-brained solution, they genuinely thought that the solution was somehow actually related to bird brains. :p
 
I don't know - I think it's rather a marketing piece by them to blind naive backers with stuff that was never done before. They would never do that but just tell how they fix a non-existing problem so it looks like they're busy with something to justify the time and money spent. They are pulling all kinds of busywork nonsense out their rears and people are just too gullible to believe it.
As Tippis said - in the case of head bobbing, that actually is what happened. For a while there was head bobbing in the game, it felt awful to play and resulted in about the amount of hilarious clipping bugs as you'd imagine - so CIG added something to counteract the head bob so it basically appeared there wasn't any, even though there still is, for... reasons... Presumably for the third-person view? Although we've seen numerous counterexamples in the last year or so of the old "first-person and third-person views are identical" claim, so...
 
I guess that someone was trolling then. I mean "fixed head-bobbing" is really stupid. Not even CIG would do that.
I seem to remember watching a video segment from CiG about that very subject, including a clip from another video demonstrating avian head bobbing in action. I’d try to track it down, but I take one look at the Star Citizen YouTube channel, and abandon any hope of finding something in all that. 🤷‍♀️
 
Got a link? Where is it posted? When?

You keep posting these things and I can't find them. Doesnt mean its not true. Supposed backers could be mailing comments directly to you.

They usually come from Miribot, although IIRC, this one came from someone else. But due to some kerfuffle about accusations of brigading, we they normally just do a screenshot and omit the source. However, i trust Mirbot (actually not a bot, actual name is Mirificus, good guy, trustworthy, rarely gives opinions, just posts snips from SC backer posts).

Remember, these things don't just come from the SC sub or Spectrum. Quite a few come from YouTube comments, twitter, comments sections on articles, and other forums.
 
Got a link? Where is it posted? When?

You keep posting these things and I can't find them. Doesnt mean its not true. Supposed backers could be mailing comments directly to you.
I remember there was a video in witch some developer explained that. It was hilarious, I can't even understand how in hell the Citizens watching that cold not see how stupid all the video was.
found it:
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom