Game Discussions Star Citizen Discussion Thread v12

[Agony_Aunt]

Fidelity to what ?
I still don't understand the fidelity argument when we talk about imaginary planets...
Stanton can be bigger than Jupiter or smaller than Mercury. Knowing that the scale used in SC is 1/6 doesn't change the fact this planet can be any size bigger than a dwarf planet as explained here.

Ah, so you're saying when CIG and backers bang on about fidelity they don't actually know what it is in relation to? You might have a point. Sometimes it seems like the confuse fidelity with high resolution textures and greebles.

So, you're saying when CIG have talked about the fidelity of planets, of course, they didn't mean exactness, they didn't mean being faithful to what we know about planets!

Thing is, its not just Stanton. Sure, planets can be different sizes, but they are all smaller than they should be. Gas Giants need to be a certain size to be gas giants. 1g terrestial planets need to have a certain size to produce 1g, unless CIG is claiming that Stanton has a core made of solid Iridium or something.

And funny you should bring up Sol's planets, because Sol system is in SC and in theory, one day, they will implement it. Will we see 1/10th sized Earth? Not very fidelitious. But if they do full sized Earth (and the rest of the Sol system) that's going to mean some really insane travel QT times, and i'm not sure how well the game engine will handle it. Having said that, i'm not sure how the devs are going to handle CRs insane demands for detail on Earth either.

But anyway, sure Stanton can be a dwarf planet, if it has a lot less gravity. People should be flying around Stanton by launching themselves off the ground! Also, not sure whether it would actually be able to hold an atmosphere at that size. Probably has a pretty weak belt as well, meaning loads of radiation. Oh, and the surface should be full of craters.

I know a lot of backer use the term fidelity but I struggle to find relevant reference where CIG talked about fidelity as a "must follow" vision. I find some talks about specific topics but I can't find the general claim about CGI's fidelity in every aspect of the game as you reference it...

Not just backers, CIG. And the amount of times CIG use the word fidelity, its a mantra to them, they don't have to say its a "must follow" vision. They talk about it constantly.

But CIG talk about a lot of things....

By the way, did you watch the video i posted about CoE? Do you see the parallels between SC and CoE? To me, the only difference is the funding. CoE got almost 10x the funding they said they needed and ran out. CIG to date have received close to 100x the funding they said they needed and are still getting more money.

 

[Agony_Aunt]

There is docking in those games ? I only landed...
For what I know, the docking we talk about is physically connecting two structures to be able to walk from one to another without going outside.

So... because you dock inside rather than outside, that makes the difference? Passing between some doors is a special feature?

Well, i think NMS has it. Pretty sure i've seen it when someone docks inside a carrier and gets out of their ship.

Yes, in ED you dock inside large stations. At outposts outside. In both cases the lift then takes you into the bay. In Odyssey we can get out of the ship into the bay. I guess X4 has this. Dual Universe? Maybe? Evochron? I think you dock inside carriers as well.

 

[LittleAnt]

So... because you dock inside rather than outside, that makes the difference? Passing between some doors is a special feature?

Well, i think NMS has it. Pretty sure i've seen it when someone docks inside a carrier and gets out of their ship.

Yes, in ED you dock inside large stations. At outposts outside. In both cases the lift then takes you into the bay. In Odyssey we can get out of the ship into the bay. I guess X4 has this. Dual Universe? Maybe? Evochron? I think you dock inside carriers as well.

Docking like when a module attach itself to the ISS and a guy fly from the module directly inside the station. That's what everyone think about when we talk about docking.

What you describe is just landing a ship in another structure. You know, when you have to press the landing gear key...

 

[Dooguk]

Fidelity to what ?
I still don't understand the fidelity argument when we talk about imaginary planets...
Stanton can be bigger than Jupiter or smaller than Mercury. Knowing that the scale used in SC is 1/6 doesn't change the fact this planet can be any size bigger than a dwarf planet as explained here.

I know a lot of backer use the term fidelity but I struggle to find relevant reference where CIG talked about fidelity as a "must follow" vision. I find some talks about specific topics but I can't find the general claim about CGI's fidelity in every aspect of the game as you reference it...

The planets in SC are 1/10 scale. The moons are 1/6 scale.

 

[Agony_Aunt]

Docking like when a module attach itself to the ISS and a guy fly from the module directly inside the station. That's what everyone think about when we talk about docking.

What you describe is just landing a ship in another structure. You know, when you have to press the landing gear key...

Sorry, i'm not getting your description. Do you have a video of it?

 

[Darkfyre99]

So... because you dock inside rather than outside, that makes the difference? Passing between some doors is a special feature?

Well, i think NMS has it. Pretty sure i've seen it when someone docks inside a carrier and gets out of their ship.

Yes, in ED you dock inside large stations. At outposts outside. In both cases the lift then takes you into the bay. In Odyssey we can get out of the ship into the bay. I guess X4 has this. Dual Universe? Maybe? Evochron? I think you dock inside carriers as well.

Space Engineers and Empyrion: Galactic Survival as well. SE can even do the "docking collar" style ship-to-ship docking... assuming you design your ships that way. More trouble than it's worth IMO. Still, it's possible in a released game.

EGS also has "physicalized" ship components, complete with retractable access panels. And the great thing is, you can design your own ships to your heart's content! And it's possible in a released game as well.

 

[Agony_Aunt]

The planets in SC are 1/10 scale. The moons are 1/6 scale.

Yup, Stanton should have a surface gravity of about 0.15g

 

[Agony_Aunt]

Space Engineers and Empyrion: Galactic Survival as well. SE can even do the "docking collar" style ship-to-ship docking... assuming you design your ships that way. More trouble than it's worth IMO. Still, it's possible in a released game.

EGS also has "physicalized" ship components, complete with retractable access panels. And the great thing is, you can design your own ships to your heart's content! And it's possible in a released game as well.

Oooh, Helion also had physicalized components as well!

 

[Dooguk]

Yup, Stanton should have a surface gravity of about 0.15g

Would planets that size be able to hold onto any life sustaining atmospheres?

 

[VR Golgot]

?

Oh thought you were having a dig at ECity for making the joke. Not at the citizen for the strange comparison. I retract

 

[Navigare Necesse Est]

but planets doesn't revolve around the sun and the sun doesn't even exist. Stations are stationary even if they are too close to the planet to have synchronous orbit and so on...

There is no simulation and there will be no simulation.

 

[Vetinari]

Joking aside now...the 3.13.0 patch has now been dumped on to wave 1 PTU. A whole 11Gb of bugs all in one patch

Patch notes ...read it and weep

Known Issues

• Customized loadouts are reset to default when the ship's name is changed
• 100 Series is missing ptich/yaw/roll
• ATC at New Babbage Space Port is not allowing the exit or arrival of ships or vehicles to hangars and garages
• A Players Ship can enter a state where it cannot be Retrieved
• An elevator in Lorville Spaceport has invisible collision blocking the entrance
• Claiming any Constellation variant that's on a pad causes station turrets to blow it up with no crimestat
• The Quantum Sensitive Cargo can become stuck to the players hand, while lacking all functionality*
• On landing pads, trolleys are unable to be pushed / pulled up the entryway / cargo ramp, or elevator ramps.
• Docking with a moving ship lags behind, causing a large snap into the docked position
• Docked merlin enter interactions don't show when constellation is moving
• Mounting weapon while holding a grenade will cause the player to enter a broken state upon exiting via interaction mode during low FPS
• Wallace Klim can spawn away from his table, facing the wrong way and floating
• When accepting a mission or when speaking to Clovus his animations are not fluid and appears to jump around
• Hammerhead is missing form New Deal
• The outline for the save changes button is off

They cant even manage to do their brilliant April Fools joke on time.

*Don't they mean Star Citizen can become stuck to the players while lacking all functionality?

"Its a chance to have a game like no other, without publishers making it bad!"

They still havent realised they are the publishers.

Yeah, the CIG not faking things is another of the Church of Chris approved lines.

What do they even mean?

Theres another post in one of the 5 in Other Games mentioned earlier that may explain it. Basically ED Galaxy was easy to do because all the data was already there, all Frontier had to do was import it, while CIG is making their own galaxy of 100 systems which is much harder.

 

[Agony_Aunt]

Would planets that size be able to hold onto any life sustaining atmospheres?

Tenuous atmosphere probably only. whether that is enough to sustain some form of life I doubt it. At least not beyond bacteria.

 

[VR Golgot]

There is ship to station docking also in the v1 that has mechanisms similar to ship to ship docking as you describe it.

It hasn’t actually made it into the 3.13 patches yet though has it.

CIG’s current use of "v1" is to mean their "Tier 0" implementation. IE in the game, but half broken, and lacking its more exciting functionalities. And/or only applied to one ship, as with ship-to-ship docking.

Given the reliability with which they cut features from patches, I wouldn’t call it v1 just yet

 

[ECity]

What i'm particularly enjoying is CIG's april's fool...

This is funny because they don't have server meshing yet, get it?

 

[LittleAnt]

Sorry, i'm not getting your description. Do you have a video of it?

 

[LittleAnt]

Sorry, i'm not getting your description. Do you have a video of it?

A better one

 

[MTBFritz]

It's a valid point, but it's irrelevant to what Little Ant said. You can spend just $45. Then you can pretty much rely on others being so far in they just can't let it falter or collapse.

I thank them, because I'm not putting in another brass cent.

If everybody would only ve spent the bare minimum on SC it would probably be in the exact same state it is today (its hard to imagine it could be worse). The only thing that varies with backer funding is the money flow to the oversea shell companies and money traffic between companies around the world.

Would planets that size be able to hold onto any life sustaining atmospheres?

Depends on the atmosphere and the life involved. Smaller stellar bodies require a higher density in order to hold an atmospheric aura. Which means gravitational pull is the deciding factor but if gravity becomes too strong it affects chemical reactions to a point where life adjusts to the chemicals involved possibly resulting in some truly bizzar lifeforms...but than....just take a look at our planet earth deep sea creatures...it hardly gets more alien than that. Bacteria and microbes have a fantastic range of conditions they can survive in and count as "life"

They still havent realised they are the publishers.

Tho impotent ones...or divided. Nah I ll stay with impotent. Even without fanatics and apologists running interference (aka united front) the backers would have no say whatsoever.

 

[MTBFritz]

This is funny because they don't have server meshing yet, get it?

View attachment 216684

I was wondering if CiG would have the balls to make an aprils joke. Looks like they dont give a crap. Making funnies like this with the project being in THIS kind of state is just sad

 

[VR Golgot]

Physicalized components incoming !

https://www.reddit.com/r/starcitizen/comments/mi9evo

As cool as this absolutely looks, it really is the dumbest thing to add to a game that’s aiming to be massively multiplayer. Each of those door panels are now a state the server needs to track (open/closed), each of the items inside is intended to be a physics object.

All so they can be fixed with a magic engineering gun most likely, going by the last fidelity tour of 'roles and their magic beam game mechanics' . (Which is in itself fine, but an immediate contradiction to the 'maximum simulation' blather put out by fans and CIG alike )

It’s just another example of 'everything game' game design. And already transmits all the ways it’s going to conflict technically with other parts of the 'everything'.

It’s daft :/