Its Committed.Why would you jinx it like that?!
Yeah but I bet v4 will look better. Plus whatever replaces Power Management v2
I know what you're saying about endlessly reworking stuff but the HUD needed it.
Game Discussions Star Citizen Discussion Thread v12
- Thread starter Yaffle
- Start date
-
- Tags
- star citizen
I know what you're saying about endlessly reworking stuff but the HUD needed it.
What isn’t?Its Committed.
I know what you're saying about endlessly reworking stuff but the HUD needed it.
Anything with "Tentative" at the top of the slide.
There was no EDO roadmap "debacle". It's exactly what they said it would be, and accurately describes the various UI updates that they have prioritized. There are tons of whiny complainers, though.
Meanwhile, from the May 15th, 2020 Star Citizen release notes:
Has anyone here ever criticized CIG for not explicitly listing every bug fix in each patch, weeks ahead of time? Of course not. This is how it works. Detailed release notes are made right at the end since it is not known which bug fixes will make it through QA.
Meanwhile, from the May 15th, 2020 Star Citizen release notes:
This is incorrect. Only CIG has sold capital ships for thousands of dollars years before having any idea of how to support them in game.
The majority of software companies properly attempt to architect out their solutions before layering in the rest of the application details that are dependent on the architecture. In this sense FDev is nothing special. Just standard. Software engineering of complex programs is difficult. It takes hard work and talent. Unlike posting ******* dumbass Paint pictures in a forum.
From the same thread, another poster
ED bad, so SC good!
And he talks about fanboyism and mental gymnastics?
That guy is something else...
"Scope creep is a derogatory word for ambition..."
Ay, I don't see parity between the two ultimately, despite absurdly grandiose aims by both camps. For reasons such as the ones you mention.
But there have still been more than enough fuzzy false-turns along the way for ED, in their bobble towards resplendent fields of glorious space carrots, that the image felt perfectly fitting to me
Ultimately, architecting what you might be building in 10 years time is always going to involve a lot of poorly placed walls, misplaced plumbing, and arguments about where the alien toilet facilities go... No real surprises in that sense
Also involves a lot of technical debt... (AM I DOING IT RIGHT VAPE?
)There's nothing from FDev's path that stands out as abnormal. It's just software development. The equivalent for CIG's behavior would be for Microsoft to sell Windows 1.0 with the promise of network file sharing only to announce, seven years later, that they just tried getting two servers to communicate with each other.
How dare you!!!
That was drawn by Roberts himself. There's a video of him warming himself up to produce this epic art piece somewhere...Oh come on E. Adding fundamental technical features in chunks is definitely abnormal. (Planetary landings added to your existing clockwork orrery. Character scale gameplay added to your flight simulator. Etc.). And not necessarily the ideal way to go about it either
How many titles have done something comparable? WoW's flying beast transit over zones?
As always though, anything FDev have done eccentrically or poorly, CIG have outdone many times over. You won't get any argument from the me there
(In this case that would be by: Running an 'early alpha' as game as service, iterating on designs with full AAA art at each stage, and failing repeatedly to actually get their new transformative feature tech over the line
)
Last edited:
FDev's path is normal. FDev clearly planned for planetary landings. That's an odd comment. The FDev architecture is instanced. So they can add FPS battles to those instances later without affecting, say, how an instance handles a space station.
Meanwhile CIG has almost 100 flyable ships and will have to rework all of them as they attempt to implement Chris' absurd vision of fidelity.
lol.But to stay on topic: Yes, CIG's plan is mad, haphazard, predicated on ship sales first and foremost, and doomed to never fulfil on its largest promises.
Also it can't even do partial VR support, so it's clearly poop.
Happy?
Last edited:
Good for sales of SSD drives though, amirite? Also something Vulkan, if/when they get it working and it fixes everything like all the other magic tech that fixed everything before it.
Company says: "We will lay out our near term plans for dealing with feedback about the release."
Then company lays out the near term plans for dealing with feedback about the release, including three specific UI passes and when they will happen. Including when shared on foot missions will be added. Including news that monthly reports will now be done. It's completely standard and non-controversial.
Meanwhile CIG's salvage feature is...... LOL.
Armstrong moment for sure, for me for on foot planet landings that is a given, even if it was only provided in one ship. Elite and ED were what I imagined growing up dreaming of being an astronaut of what it would be like and the transition grates from seated pilot to SRV and on foot. Made worse by the fact I play in VR.
I'm not playing SC very much bar an hour here and there between other games (Odyssey included)...Waiting for 3.14 PTU or for @Intrepid3D to spill da beans on the ETF buildsSince it's the SC thread, I try to include SC content in each post
Hopefully an evocati build happens today so we get some info.
Mrs Mole was airlifted to the local hospital day before yesterday too so I went in on the ferry to see her... since there's no limits on visiting times or duration up here...spent a lovely couple of hours hugging my wife, did the both of us the world of good since we haven't seen eachother for 6 weeks or so
Last edited: