It is good to know why stuff is happening and why the algorithm puts out a weird value. I don't even think it is unique to professional developers.
Game Discussions Star Citizen Discussion Thread v12
- Thread starter Yaffle
- Start date
-
- Tags
- star citizen
A lot of big core tech have no cards on the "Release View" tracker.Afterall they've barely touched the Core Tech since 3.10.....or have they and the "cards" were just a front?
Being in (late?) stage of pre-alpha after 10 years & $ 500 million does not indicate a problem. But it does indicate a whole bunch of problems.
Nobody said they were no problem with CIG. They were a lot in the past. But for this one, calling it a problem is false.
If you think that is an acceptable position after 10 years of development and $0.5bil, then clearly you don't understand game development.
First, you ask a question suggesting you have no experience in how it is done in the game industry.
Two posts later, you claim to know when it makes sense to develop this type of tooling in the context of game development.
Learning fast, I can see.
Lol
Never said I have zero knowledge in how it's made in the game industry.
And more generally, everyone can give his opinion about subjects with limited knowledge, free to anybody to correct if the opinion is erronous. If you think I'm wrong on this subject, please correct me
Why not? Why have all those developers working in the upper layers of the product, rather than the core underlying technologies that need to be complete (mostly), stable and performant?
Last edited:
I think you're not only wrong but also wilfully misrepresent how things are.
Thought as much...
A lot of core tech are only in the progres tracker and will never have cards in the release view
The graph you comment is based on the release view only.
So is the "hidden" core technology never going to be released, or does it just not exist?
Have you worked on QA tooling at a major publisher? You mentioned AAA.
The tests suite should grow with the features being implemented (or even before), not after they are "ready". If they are not tested, they are not ready. Whether the suite is manual or automatic, is another manner. Only companies awash with inexpensive cash can postpone aggressive automation.
I don't understand your question. Just look at the progress tracker to see if you find enough guys working on core tech for you. You find for example a "Subsumption Service/Server Mission Logic" task finished that had/will never had a card on the release tracker.
It was a bit silly of you
Regarding this specific test, no idea, because a) its not clear for me how they are doing this. Is this some sort of simulated test in a simulation mode or is it a test checking pass/fail in engine with some sort of script moving an actor around? Its just words without real information as to how they are doing it. Have other companies automated similar testing? No idea, there are a lot of gaming companies out there who make FPS games with interactable objects.
I can't really make a claim as to whether other game devs use manual or automated tests for this, or whether its something unique, and i doubt you can either.
EDIT:
Also, someone who uses automated tests, you know one of their weaknesses is when things change in some way, it can break your automated tests, which is why often you stick with manual testing for a lot of things, because it just makes more sense to use manual over automated. Especially in areas that are not finished, that might be changed a lot... like Tier 0 stuff, like most of what CIG have.
Have CIG jumped the gun trying to automate the testing for something that shouldn't be automated, or at least not yet?
Did someone buy Chris a book on QA Automation for Christmas and he ran into the office... realized it was empty, ran out, got on Skype and told everyone about this great idea he had to automate testing?
Last edited:
Thanks, that's precisely the subject. So what's your opinion about "the creation of an automated test with what appears to be a real map with NPCs/PCs interacting with objects" ?
BTW, this looks fascinating in the context of automated testing:
www.ea.com
Re•Work 2021: Automated Game Testing
Re•Work 2021: Augmenting Automated Game Testing with Deep Reinforcement Learning
www.ea.com
But some people will defend any and all criticism leveled against CIG right?
I have no opinion on it, apart from it being one part of an incredibly padded and useless report. These updates are jargon dumps that communicate no vauable information whatsoever, particualrly when it comes to understanding how far along both games are. For example, if we were to take them at face value, CIG have been finalising the bartender for over three years now:
Star Citizen Monthly Report: September 2018 - Roberts Space Industries | Follow the development of Star Citizen and Squadron 42
Roberts Space Industries is the official go-to website for all news about Star Citizen and Squadron 42. It also hosts the online store for game items and merch, as well as all the community tools used by our fans.
robertsspaceindustries.com
So how many more years until the bartender is ready? Nobody knows. Certainly not CIG.
It's quantum...