Game Discussions Star Citizen Discussion Thread v12

Agony_Aunt

Agony_Aunt
Tippis said:
Now, now. You know it's frowned upon to compare SC with actual games — it puts SC at a significant unfair disadvantage. :p
Click to expand...

Saw that on a SC reddit thread yesterday when ED came up in the comments. Obviously the poster has never seen all the times backers have compared SC to ED to say how SC is better... they said we had to wait until SC is released before a fair comparison can be made.

I agree, but i fear nobody will live that long.
 

ECity

ECity
From today's Polygon article:
"Time is money in Elite," Hughes said, "so we didn’t really want people to have to find it laborious to engage with these [social hubs] when they’ve got stuff to do. So we’re trying to find that really fine balance between them feeling unique within the three kind of categories that I outlined, that they’re efficient to navigate through.."
Click to expand...
 

Agony_Aunt

Agony_Aunt
From the polygon announcement about ED dev diary 2:

But the Odyssey update, on the surface at least, appears to bring Elite ever closer to its main competitor — the lavish, sprawling, multi-genre games in the Star Citizen universe.
Click to expand...

Closer? LOL. Pull further ahead. And "sprawling"? SC is not sprawling, its got less than 1 system. Also not sure why he says games (plural). SC is in alpha, SQ42 is sitll not playable.

Also in the comments section, when someone asks what the difference is, this is a response:

Currently, there is more to do in SC.....
Click to expand...

I can only presume they have no idea of what you can do in ED.
 

Agony_Aunt

Agony_Aunt
Blast from the past in 2016

www.pcgamesn.com

Star Citizen right not to ape “basic, bare minimum” approach of Elite: Dangerous, claims Chris Roberts

When a game takes as long in development as Star Citizen, it’s only natural those on the outside would look to compare it to other, arguably similar titles that have managed to reach the market in far less time. For those eagerly awaiting Cloud Imperium’s epic space sim, the game that has them g
www.pcgamesn.com www.pcgamesn.com

“You’re just trading and earning some money and upgrading your ship,” Roberts is quoted as saying, branding Elite: Dangerous as “the same game you had 20 years ago”.

He continues, “It’s better to have your engineering considerations taken care of now, rather than trying to retrofit as you go along. It definitely is a harder approach to take, but I think long-term it will build a better foundation.”
Click to expand...

CIG spend years retrofitting stuff because they didn't do the tech first.
 

Agony_Aunt

Agony_Aunt
SC fantasyED (Oddssey) fantasy
Me and my org mates get together, stand on the balcony, looking at the setting sun. Joe is stood there drinking a cocktail he got from the bar. We discuss our plans for our upcoming mission. We plan to go raid a base on Yela for drugs. Two will go in air support while two go in on vehicles and enter the base, get the goods, and get out.Me and my squadron mates get together, stand on the balcony, looking out at the nearby planet. Joe is stood there drinking a cocktail he got from the bar. We discuss our plans for our upcoming mission. We plan to go raid a base on Buba 5g for drugs. Two will go in air support while two go in on vehicles and enter the base, get the goods, and get out.
SC reality (when its released)ED reality (when Odyssey comes out)
o7 commando. What you doing?

Grinding. Trying to save up for an Idris. You?

Same!		o7 CMDR. What you doing?

Grinding. Trying to save up for a Fleet Carrier. You?

Same!
 

Agony_Aunt

Agony_Aunt
Server meshing and object containers means that the Jump Point can itself be an instanced space. Server meshing means star systems will not be monolithic spaces but discrete boxes of space handled by different server instances. As far as your client will be concerned, there should be literally nothing different to flying in the Stanton system to a jump point ring, flying through the Jump Point space, and emerging into space in Pyro and flying around in it -- your client is loading object containers. Once server meshing is in, going from one object container to another will sometimes be an instance transition and needs to happen seamlessly.

Object containers mean space isn't one single global gridspace that can't overlap with anything. CIG should be able to have an object container tunnel between two star systems and as far as the game is concerned it's just loading containers one after another.

Unless CIG totally throws away their own object container solution they've spent the last like 4 years making, jump points will not be a disguised loading screen but just another piece of space. CIG have described it as being "on rails" in the sense that you will not be flying with total freedom but needing to navigate the tunnel from one end to the other.

As for failing to traverse the jump point correctly, they've said you'll die or, if you're lucky you'll take massive amounts of damage and get dropped out into some random place in space - presumably in either the star system you left or the one you were trying to go to.
Click to expand...

I know backers love to pull stuff out of their rear ends, but this one has me laughing.

There is zero gameplay or technical reason why CIG should make seperate systems all part of the same map. It adds more technical challenges and from a player perspective it would make zero difference, unless they were going to allow travel between systems without using jump points.... which would presumably take forever (like in ED) and people would do like once and never do it again. Or they could simply use QT between systems to disguise the loading of different areas.

There is no sane reason for CIG to actually do it like this guy is claiming they are doing it.
 

Tippis

Tippis
Agony_Aunt said:
There is no sane reason for CIG to actually do it like this guy is claiming they are doing it.
Click to expand...
Doubly so since CI¬G themselves have said — and even demonstrated — that they're not doing something that pointlessly silly.

It has got to be hard to be an SC theorycrafter dreaming up all these fanciful non-solutions to non-problems, only for CI¬G to constantly end up having to use the same tried and tested methods as everyone else, only much more poorly implemented.
 
Last edited:

Tifu

Tifu
Agony_Aunt said:
Blast from the past in 2016

www.pcgamesn.com

Star Citizen right not to ape “basic, bare minimum” approach of Elite: Dangerous, claims Chris Roberts

When a game takes as long in development as Star Citizen, it’s only natural those on the outside would look to compare it to other, arguably similar titles that have managed to reach the market in far less time. For those eagerly awaiting Cloud Imperium’s epic space sim, the game that has them g
www.pcgamesn.com www.pcgamesn.com



CIG spend years retrofitting stuff because they didn't do the tech first.
Click to expand...

No (technical) foundation, no progress. That's why SC is where they are right now. They kept having to go back and rework/ refactor stuff so it all would all hold together and not collapse due to sheer instability.

All those wasted years...and now ED is going to leverage the BGS to power dynamic missions for commanders going about on foot. SC could have done this themselves long before this point.
 

Vasious

Vasious
Agony_Aunt said:
I know backers love to pull stuff out of their rear ends, but this one has me laughing.

There is zero gameplay or technical reason why CIG should make seperate systems all part of the same map. It adds more technical challenges and from a player perspective it would make zero difference, unless they were going to allow travel between systems without using jump points.... which would presumably take forever (like in ED) and people would do like once and never do it again. Or they could simply use QT between systems to disguise the loading of different areas.

There is no sane reason for CIG to actually do it like this guy is claiming they are doing it.
Click to expand...

I might be mis understanding the technical side of it

But isnt the idea the poster is talking about is that the Jump point could be its own "map" to travel through rather than an loading screen.

This part
"Server meshing means star systems will not be monolithic spaces but discrete boxes of space handled by different server instances "
Seems to suggest the opposite to your
"There is zero gameplay or technical reason why CIG should make seperate systems all part of the same map."

So you are both on the same page

Both systems separate map and the poster adding a third map for the jump point transit between them

All the other stuff seems to be about making it a seamless transition from the point of view of the client as it is passed from one server to the next.
 

Firkrayt

Firkrayt
LittleAnt said:
I use 'might' and 'maybe' because I'm not allowed to use 'will' in this thread.
Click to expand...
Essentially what Agony said. Don't put future tense as a given fact and we are fine. "I think SC will fail" and "I think SC will succeed" are both acceptable, but "SC will succeed" is not.

Cairton said:
So perhaps we simultaneously lose and don't lose most of our body heat through our heads?
Click to expand...
One don't loose most of heat through his head while he isn't thinking it through ;)
Heat loss is caused by brain activity. I've once seen a Ph.D., bald Head (pun intended) of Theoretical Department, starting thinking in cold environment - the amount of steam that began to rise from his head was staggering.

Hydrino said:
I know this thread moves fast
Click to expand...
With 8 consecutive posts from the same person it sure does :D

LanceLord said:
R.I.P. SC
Click to expand...
Meh, Odyssey has neither Sandi nor Sandurmies, therefore it isn't up to CI-G standards.
 

dayrth

Volunteer Moderator
dayrth
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom