Game Discussions Star Citizen Discussion Thread v12

A rather damning review of Staggered DevelopmentTM and the last two years…


2018 was by far the best year for Star Citizen, with moons landing, cargo, mining, OCS which drastically improved performance, Rest Stops, the release of the first planet and major landing zone, with two mission givers and their associated missions.

2019 started off pretty well with the release of ArcCorp, its mission giver, the new flight model or ingame ship purchase,

But then came the major postponement of the majority of features most expected by backers, with the "staggered development" as justification.

Staggered development

According to CIG this should slow down development on the first patches, but then accelerate it, limited postponement, bring more complete features, and above all improve the player experience, quality of life, reduce the number of bugs etc...

The problem is that the development indeed slowed down, but then never accelerated.

Updates have been more and more late, postponements were more and more important, patches buggy as ever, and the quality of life has even deteriorated with a server framerate which has come down constantly since 3.8, making any fps combat, interaction with NPC, or party with other players barely playable because of the desync.

Useless, broken and abandoned new features

Some priorities have been questionable like Prison, or just incomprehensible such as the extension of Grim Hex and the Cargo Decks, of which we are still awaiting the associated "missions" described on the roadmap, and which have not been used for nothing since their implementation.

The last two landing zones were introduced without their mission giver, and with zero associated missions, while these missions had been teased at CitizenCon 2019 for New Babbage and in different ISC for Orison, nothing on the roadmap.

Most of the new features come out in a broken tier 0 and seem to be totally dropped right after their introduction :

Ships naming for example, only possible with 6-7 ships, not functioning properly, absent from new ships sold, no news since.

Docking, only available for 2 ships that less than 1% of players own, no news about round docking collar, nothing on the roadmap.

Wear and tear, which 15 ships were excluded at the time of the release, no news.

New caves teased as being able to be crossed by ship, or to mine with a ROC, which are finally just new entrance which does not bring anything new in terms of gameplay.

wheeled cart which is useless, and will probably be replaced by a hover model.

UI

Over a year to convert the elevator panels to Buidling block, another year to convert the ship hud to building block, the last ships released still have place holder for the majority of their UI panels, while Buidling block was supposed to drastically accelerate artists work.

I can't imagine how many years it will take to convert all ship HUDs to their respective manufacturer.

The Star Map has been waiting to be reworked for years, like the shopping kiosks which are an eyesore to navigate.

It looks like anything related to UI takes years.

Ships

Ships, which must now all be updated to Gold Standard (without physical armor, internal pipeline, depresurization, fire, escape pod, engineer station, probs etc...), it took ONE year to make the Gladius, the Retaliator and the Saber which was on the roadmap for this year has been delayed, how long will it take to upgrade the fifty or so ships left ?

We are at the tenth iteration of the flight model but still no control surfaces in atmosphere.

Ship customization like the 300i ? gone, ingame customization ? nope.

Number of ships released in the past years (not counting ground vehicules and variants) :

In 2018 we had 15 ships,
In 2019 we had 10 ships,
In 2020 we had 7 ships
In 2020 we should have 6 ships (C2, 400i, Ares, Reedemer, RAFT, Hull C)

CoreTech

Gen 12 renderer, which was due to arrive in 2020, then mid 2021, which is now partially implemented but whose work will continue in 2022 and probably 2023

iCache and full peristance, planned for mid 2020, then mid 2021, then end 2021 without the physical inventory which must now arrive mid 2022, and what about full persistence ? the famous coffee cup which remains on a moon, no date anymore.

They just delayed a Q&A about Server Meshing, wich has been delayed since 2018.

2022

Here we are, when you read the monthly reports or look at the progress tracker it seems that a lot of things have progressed, but what ends up in the hands of players in the PU is rickety.

2022 is supposed to be extraordinary with most people waiting for full persistence + server meshing, jumps point, Pyro, maybe Nyx, homesteads, several new gameplay, floodgates finally opening and development starting at a new pace.

Unfortunately with the new delays, empty roadmap, and announcement of the prioritization of SQ42, I have the impression of reliving a new "staggered development", I am more and more afraid that we are witnessing a new year in line with the previous two.

Lots of fine snark and detail buried in there on partial features that have never been rolled out beyond their proof of concept.

I particularly liked his point about even the few 'gold standard' ships still needing further bespoke work and features regarding "physical armor, internal pipeline, depresurization, fire, escape pod, engineer station, probes" etc ;)

Still, at least the thread isn’t locked…

 
Still, at least the thread isn’t locked…


Its now locked

Kalypso-CIG@Kalypso-CIG
Yesterday at 8:23 pm


https://robertsspaceindustries.com/...read/salvage-a-saga-from-2016-to-2022/4516753
Seeing the direction this thread has taken, including the unfavorable and disingenuous narrative towards the project and unhealthy jabs towards staff, we're opting to end this here.

As for staggered development, that was shown to be a lie the first time that a feature under active development moved back 1 patch instead of 2. Under staggered development that shouldn't be possible.
 

Viajero

Volunteer Moderator
A rather damning review of Staggered DevelopmentTM and the last two years…




Lots of fine snark and detail buried in there on partial features that have never been rolled out beyond their proof of concept.

I particularly liked his point about even the few 'gold standard' ships still needing further bespoke work and features regarding "physical armor, internal pipeline, depresurization, fire, escape pod, engineer station, probes" etc ;)

Still, at least the thread isn’t locked…


This is all obviously progress! Measurable, quantifiable, undeniable progress!
 
That's not how client-server games work. The client has the authority on loading static assets, the server just validates and confirms position set by client.
Of course, given that we are discussing Never Been Done Before In An Obviously Stupid Way, I am not surprised.
This is what it looked like to me based on the description. If it works the way you are saying, there is something wrong with the client that cannot load assets, tries to report player's position that is nonsensical and the server decides to kill him off, detecting some kind of deadly collision.
 
Is it me or does this all look like it’s rendered in a different engine?

Source: https://youtu.be/_gibGORnVi8


Looks much 'softer' than the standard Cry look etc.

(I’m not really suggesting any 'starting from scratch' conspiracy here, but could believe they render demos in UE because it’s easier to work with etc)

Oh also apparently the Starfarer will be able to refine everything now. So if you bought it for quantum fuel scooping… nope. And if you bought an Orion… Oh dear? ;)
 
I must admit to being cynical about any game where:
  • It's supporters burst into applause because it's finally managed to do what it was supposed to do in the first place
  • It's supporters burst into applause at virtually any progress that is made
Normalising a process of taking money, delivering something, but not everything, a decade later is not good (no, I'm not just talking about SC here).

I've only just realised (yes, not the sharpest tool in the box), that having to constantly deliver a 'playable game' must have slowed development down tremendously.
 
Last edited:
Is it me or does this all look like it’s rendered in a different engine?

Source: https://youtu.be/_gibGORnVi8


Looks much 'softer' than the standard Cry look etc.

(I’m not really suggesting any 'starting from scratch' conspiracy here, but could believe they render demos in UE because it’s easier to work with etc)

Oh also apparently the Starfarer will be able to refine everything now. So if you bought it for quantum fuel scooping… nope. And if you bought an Orion… Oh dear? ;)

Hmm.. perhaps @Intrepid3D could comment on this.

Anyway, where is he? Hasn't posted in a while.

Gasp! Maybe he's seen the light and is already making videos entitled "A Star Citizen Commando Plays Elite Dangerous" :D
 
A couple weeks ago I stumbled across a subsim project and loaded its demo. It was just a showroom with whitebox model of type VII U-Boot, a diesel engine simulator and stuff for exposition. Lots of YT vids about plans and concepts. Stuff that makes a subsim nerd's heart beat a bit faster. Then again - it was really not very presentable and just concepts. The janky flak simulation demo didn't impress at all. So I layed it to rest.
There is the game U-Boat in early access, which isn't perfect, but it is pretty much what I always wanted since Silent Service: A walkable boat with stations to interact with, dynamic world and kablooie physics and a bit of campaign feeling.
That other demo reeked of pulling subsim nerd's strings a bit too much. And you'd need a much better prototype to convince me it doesnt get stuck in dev hell.
 
It's positional desync...some patches, it's not as bad or as obvious when playing, others... like the current PTU build...it's ridiculous bordering on unplayable. It's so bad in the latest patch that you can get out of the bed in the hab, exit into the corridor and be halfway to the elevator then be be magically snapped back to lying in bed again.
I've been away for a while and thought I'd pop back in and see how things are going....

So. Erm. All's well in the 'verse then. No wonder they've been paying dividends to their investors.
 
I think it is just you, looks like CryEngine to me. Especially that blinking light effect from the module lighting up the Asteroid like that, it screams CryEngine.

Fair play. That whole mining section looks distinct from the live build to me though. From the 'swimming' animation section, to the rock texture, to that general 'softness' throughout.

Could easily be some changes in the dev build. But equally could be it’s all just dev assets in a demo render.
 
Blinky lights is all a faithful needs to fortify their belief.
So it is unreasonable to assume that an engine CIG has been using since their inception, do all of their live gamedev sessions with and bought a perpetual license for just to not use it because their whole engine team they hired to make it more usable and convenient for what they do is apparently incompetent at their job? Seems a little outlandish to me, lol.
 
Fair play. That whole mining section looks distinct from the live build to me though. From the 'swimming' animation section, to the rock texture, to that general 'softness' throughout.

Could easily be some changes in the dev build. But equally could be it’s all just dev assets in a demo render.
That "swimming" animation has been in the game for years, when you exit to zero g. Its just that many times it doesnt work correctly and kinda jolts your character midway through.

Rock texture also doesnt look odd to me. Softness like that could either be achieved by in engine render settings to make it look as clean as possible or post processing. I've dabbled in SFM a bit and you can make your shots look quite soft with a few tweaks.

Also, the LIVE Build has a Film Grain setting that's turned on by default so a lot of videos are probably filmed with it enabled. They probably disable it to get this look.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom