Game Discussions Star Citizen Discussion Thread v12
- Thread starter Yaffle
- Start date
-
- Tags
- star citizen
Viajero
Volunteer Moderator
Ah ok, yeah, no. We are back to:
Game Discussions - Star Citizen Discussion Thread v12
We need more vodka fuelled leaks! I mentioned this offsite, but I shut the leak email down and will only be discussing Star Citizen with former colleagues or game devs in person. Which might be tough because I'm no longer in California and far away from a lot of major dev houses (except...
forums.frontier.co.uk
Correct. 150 devs, 40 middle managers, 10 senior managers, and more than 1500 in jpeg marketing.
Aaand...straight into 3.15.1 PTU. Perhaps they should just have skipped straight to 3.16 instead 
robertsspaceindustries.com
Star Citizen Alpha 3.15.1 PTU.7868138 Patch Notes - Star Citizen Spectrum
Star Citizen Patch 3.15.1 Alpha Patch 3.15.1 has been released to the PTU, and is now available to test! Patch should now show: VERSION 3.15.1-PTU.7868138. It is strongly recommended that...
robertsspaceindustries.com
Last edited:
At this point, I can't imagine capital ships being designed to require more than 4 or 5 players to operate, as otherwise you wouldn't be able to have enough capitals in a battle to make it feel epic. Maybe you have one helmsman flying the capital, and then you have a player acting as a gunner commander telling the AI gunners what to target, and then maybe you have a player acting as a chief engineer that tells NPCs what fires to put out, etc.
With this setup, you could theoretically have like 4 Javelins manned by a total of 20 players, and then that leaves about 30 other players flying around in smaller ships for a space battle.
With this setup, you could theoretically have like 4 Javelins manned by a total of 20 players, and then that leaves about 30 other players flying around in smaller ships for a space battle.
This came up on SA once again. Always a good read if you want insight into CR's brain. (click to expand)
Yes, where CR compares making this...
With this...
He talks about the challenges of making a game that would be so power hungry it would exploit the next generation of processors, the 486. Just one problem, by the time it released, the "next gen" 486 was already current gen and the first pentiums were being released.
He talks about how with hindsight he'd have done things different, not shot so high and tried to do so much. "we were in way over our heads, but we knew there was no way back".
Freelancer wasn't the first time CR over promised, over sold, under delivered, was late and over budget.
Strike Commander, Freelancer, and Star Citizen, all following the same script.
Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me. Fool me thrice, i absolve myself.
Yes, where CR compares making this...
With this...
He talks about the challenges of making a game that would be so power hungry it would exploit the next generation of processors, the 486. Just one problem, by the time it released, the "next gen" 486 was already current gen and the first pentiums were being released.
He talks about how with hindsight he'd have done things different, not shot so high and tried to do so much. "we were in way over our heads, but we knew there was no way back".
Freelancer wasn't the first time CR over promised, over sold, under delivered, was late and over budget.
Strike Commander, Freelancer, and Star Citizen, all following the same script.
Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me. Fool me thrice, i absolve myself.
Viajero
Volunteer Moderator
Couldnt be bothered digging through the Q&A but I remember CIG stating that players will be assigned to shards based on the friends list, does anyone know if CIG explained how will it (eventually) work for the 50 players assigned to a shard to change to another shard if they wanted to play with different players?
Viajero
Volunteer Moderator
So basically no change from how it is done today when server hopping. Same thing. Is there really anything new in this Q&A other than "maybe we get to 100"?
That means no smooth transition in game if you want to change shard. So if you want to meet friends that are in a different shard, you essentially need to log off from your shard, go back to main menu and try to chose a different server/region/shard and then log in again. Just as it is done today when changing servers. And always subject to the 50 shard cap anyways as it may be also possible that the shard you are trying to join is already full and you simply can not meet with your friends at all.
As far as I understand Elite at least allows you to meet any players you like for example simply by joining a different wing, in game. Elite trades off practical cap limit (although in Elite you can get to 100+ given the right circumstances) for a more immersive transition in game. Elite´s solution also allows for a much more smooth gaming experience with much less desynch and the like.
That means no smooth transition in game if you want to change shard. So if you want to meet friends that are in a different shard, you essentially need to log off from your shard, go back to main menu and try to chose a different server/region/shard and then log in again. Just as it is done today when changing servers. And always subject to the 50 shard cap anyways as it may be also possible that the shard you are trying to join is already full and you simply can not meet with your friends at all.
As far as I understand Elite at least allows you to meet any players you like for example simply by joining a different wing, in game. Elite trades off practical cap limit (although in Elite you can get to 100+ given the right circumstances) for a more immersive transition in game. Elite´s solution also allows for a much more smooth gaming experience with much less desynch and the like.
Last edited:
But what about all the other players across the solar system? Or in other solar systems, if they add Pyro etc. They'd all come under the 50 player cap too...
And what about the 80 crew complement that the Javelin has been advertised as having? NPCs have a performance & networking load too (as seen by the current woeful state of NPC AI etc). Crewman X can't run to turret Y and see no crew activity etc. And AI will have to work turrets etc. (Which have their own AI load, as the terrible performance of the Xeno Threat capital ships demonstrated). Any culling they do to address some of this will also have its own costs etc.
If the 'Tier 0' version, with a 50 player cap, was all they ever achieved, then you can imagine comedy scenarios where Orgs pack a shard just to organise a fight in one location with their big beasts. But organic fights would seem to be unlikely. And performance still doesn't look destined to be great.
But then the improved versions they're mooting seem kind of comical too. If they boost the player cap per server to 100, and boost the number of players per shard to many more than that, they still can't allow those shard players to congregate in groups larger than 100. So that means instancing most likely. (Because how do you 'deny access' to a planet with 100+ players on it? Jump Gates, fine, but not seamless locations. Unless you just got dumped to an out-of-game queue. Or suddenly had your engines cut off with a 'restricted area' message etc, and sat queueing in space. Pretty poor.)
They've got a helluva long way to claw themselves before even a Javelin vs Javelin battle, with half decent performance, seems even vaguely likely.
Viajero
Volunteer Moderator
Even jump gates seems iffy. Denying a player access to content he/she has paid for especially when the developer has an actual technical solution available to offer the content (instances) is going to be very difficult to sale if someone complains. Also just imagine all the kinds of player shenanigans that could be done exploiting that cap player lock: What if my newly built base is in a planet behind that jump gate? CIG are you really telling me that I can not even get to it just because you are goddamn awful at server meshing?
Last edited:
Viajero
Volunteer Moderator
Relevant (and entertaining to boot):
Source: https://youtu.be/IkcR1y-chYg
SC hasn't been able to figure out a basic working scalable MP network structure over 10 years. They'd never be able to implement something like ED did.
CIG is probably taking inspiration from EVE…
You get stuck into the jump tunnel (load screen) while servers negotiate your transfer from one system to another… and yes, on large scale battles you can and will be denied access to a particular system with the excuse that the destination jumpgate is overloaded (or target system’s beacon I can’t remember)
This has caused issues in EVE like ships, like ghost ships being spawn at the destination system (without modules and pilot) which then would be spawn again like if they never did the jump even though they were obliterated by opposing capsuleers at the destination system.
It has also been used to deny/hamper attacking group’s ability to get significant ships into a system to break that system’s defense! Pretty much the only thing that defending side had to do is get log in as many people as they can into the system and keep them in until the attackers give up
edit: I just realized that I probably don’t have to tell you this since there is a good chance you are an EVE’s player
Last edited:
Viajero
Volunteer Moderator
I was indeed, looooong time ago tho. I think the main difference there is just also sheer scale and likelihood of the event. We are talking thousands of players blockading a zone compared to just a few tens. Even a 2000 concurrent figure could simply collapse the game already and that assumes that you had at least 40 zones and everyone was uniformly distributed. EVE had never had such constraints.
Last edited:
Guy says its either going to be the biggest game ever or the biggest scam ever.
... but with crypto.
Yeah, definite scam.
However, it does raise the possibility that someone is going to do a Star Citizen before CIG.
Not really useful video.
He doesn't talked about the fact that CIG is mainly making a game engine and all the tools needed to create games easily, which is not the case of the others companies of his video.
Like Betsheda is now making a space game with their engine or CDPR had made a Cyberpunk game with the same engine used for Witcher, CIG have already an engine able to make games in a lot of genres.
My guess for the big studio in UK in the next 5 years is this studio will not be solely dedicated to SC/SQ42 but can also work on a new license. You don't plan a 1700 employees company just for SC/SQ42.
Viajero
Volunteer Moderator
You suggesting CIG is going to fund other projects with SC backers money?