They should at least have the planets orbiting the star, doesn't have to be accurate, just have them going around in a circle maybe at different speeds?
I'm not actually sure if you can see other planets in space from another planet's surface?
Game Discussions Star Citizen Discussion Thread v12
- Thread starter Yaffle
- Start date
-
- Tags
- star citizen
I'm not actually sure if you can see other planets in space from another planet's surface?
They are still playing Kerbal Space Program to figure out what orbits are.
Why should they take 10+ years ? None of them is as complex as SC.
Lol, he knows that's the ships that funds the rest of the game and pay every devs on the game ? And that the ship teams are just a small part of the many teams of CIG ? Stupid argument.
10 years from scratch for the scope of SC is absolutly not abysmally disgraceful.
Some sort of orbiting is planned.
ED with it's orbital mechanics is a nearer representation than SC will ever be.
Planets with full atmospheres aren't in the game yet and you know it.
Kepler-37b is the size it is. Don't even know why you brought it up.
When Earth is introduced into SC sometime in the next 100 years or so, it will only be 1/10th of it's actual size.
It took many tries to convince you of it, but I finally succeeded. My job here is done.
10 years with naff all released is a disgrace LA it's just yours and others sunk cost fallacy that's preventing you seeing it. You are literally arguing - and trying to convince us in the process - that companies taking loads of money for a decade and releasing nothing resembling 1 complete game is fine - IT'S NOT. You and all the other CIG apologists are setting precedent, making this sort of practice 'ok', you are normalising it and standardising it when you should be holding them to account - for every gamers sake.
3.17 is still in PTU so it's not entirely baked yet, but I believe they did add a tiny bit of quanta for refueling, repairs and restock - so prices for these might fluctuate a lot more if that's actually implemented. We'll see when 3.17 is out of PTU
(and also, all the bugs related to that, in addition to the perennial repair refuel & restock bugs..).Viajero
Volunteer Moderator
"Complexity" in SC... That is by and large a very subjective and personal opinion I am afraid. Especially given SC is majorly broken and incomplete at the moment. Others actually think that is just a very handy little lie that may help to cope with the fact SC after 10+ years is precisely just a very buggy, broken and significantly incomplete tech demo.
Promising "complexity", "fidelity" or "industrialisation" is cheap. Anyone can do it. But few can deliver. After 10+ years it seems quite clear in the case of CIG it is not an matter of ambition or complexity, it is rather a matter of incompetence to deliver and release (Early Access or Gold take your pick).
Not really, no. That is a common misconception. Ship development impacts the whole development chain beyond just the actual ship geometry and physics since the mechanics and gameplay loops of SC need to be developed, balanced and made to work properly for them all too and not in the vacuum. The impact of ship design is huge in the rest of the game development work and viceversa).
But if you actually read the post and get past the red herring fallacy you use here, you will realize it is not just about waste in ship development time but that he considers also as waste any work that has not led to "the main features that were promised way back when". He mentions how CIG spends significant effort directed to "flavour and details" in general. Such as clouds etc and which I would imagine allows those who havent released a single product in 10+ years but taken 500 millions for it to dodge their accountability and take the next taxi to Heathrow.
Last edited:
It's for me the best disgrace of a space game I ever played. The fact that I enjoy it so much despite the bugs is also a clear indicator that when (and not if) CIG will correct those bugs, the game will be just fantastic for me.
Half finished and already the only one giving a true "Armstrong moment". Half finished with wipes and bugs and already in direct competition with ED, you should be worried.
Last edited:
Viajero
Volunteer Moderator
You know, there is no conflict in acknowledging a disgraceful state of affaires (CIG not releasing a single product after 10+ years and 500 millions) while also you personally having fun and enjoying the alpha (as broken, buggy and incomplete as it is). I mean, knock your self out.
But you can not wave away the actual factual disgraceful state of affaires with your anecdotal experience. I am pretty sure some people actually benefitted from Enron or Theranos aswell in one way or another, but that does not excuse how disgraceful those cases were.
Last edited:
This isnt the same video I was thinking of, but there are a few like this. The one Im thinking of was another of those "Around the Verses" and the artist they were talking to said they could detail either a planet or a whole system in like 2 days? Couple that with this video, check around 27 minutes onwards, where they say they can make a star system in minutes. So, lets say that means 5 minutes. That means 12 systems per hour x 6 hours in a work day (aside from breaks and meetings, of course
) x 4 days in a work week (5 minus Monday morning and Friday afternoon ;-) ) so they should have 288 systems in a week. 2 planets per week, per artist? so whats CIg's budget? lets say 4 of those so 8 planets per week and probably under 10 planets in a system. I'd say about 41 hand crafted systems per year all ready to go.You had said before you're happy with SC as it is now, so I suppose to folks enjoying it, as is, it is sort of final release. It's just the opinion of a few of us here, that its really in pre-alpha/concept stage, since we're expecting more of the things they promised. Like a second star system, inferring that from the promised 101 or whatever, though I suppose officially they never promised a second star system.
If scale is not a big deal, as shown in that video above, since whatever that software is, it takes into account anything you put into it, then why did they make them 1/7.43 th the scale, or whatever? Isnt it actually easier to do things 1 to 1? There, CR, you can claim CIg has taken the harder way, by having to divide all their stuff by 7.43 or whatever number you chose. Does it effect gravity, or just size of the planet? Why did they make planets smaller? Is it just planet size, or also distance to the planets? It's just another utterly mundane irrelevant thing they chose to do/say to sell more ships and to be discussed, but really, is meaningless. Sort of like how discussing something so unimportant as a release date is now, in regards to SC. Its a joke.
Subjective ? Lol. Can I say also in a subjective way that teleporting you from your seat to the ground is not complex ?
Exactly. In fact it's not 'few' but 'none' in the current game industry. That's why CIG is different and is supported. At least they try in a market where nobody wants to try.
Last edited:
He has to. Admiting anything to the contrary opens up to the potential that there is truth in other complaints. And to someone like LA, who spends so much time evangelising the game, that would be unacceptable.
Viajero
Volunteer Moderator
Indeed. Some actually think that "complexity" in SC is just a very handy little lie that may help you cope with the fact SC after 10+ years is precisely just a very buggy, broken and significantly incomplete tech demo.
Can not be "exactly", no. Few can deliver on a promise of "complexity" or "ambition" indeed. After 10+ years and zero released products (Early Access or Gold, your pick) Chris Roberts and CIG have thoroughly demonstrated they are not it.
We absolutly not consider it as a "final release". We consider it already enjoyable and, for some of us, better than the other space games of the market. But we wait for some more of the promises (more systems, salvage, more players by instances, etc) before seeing in SC a beta game.
Oh, onto the quote pile this goes 
I wonder if it will pan out as well as Chris’s version?
Letter from the Chairman - Oct 2020
I wonder if it will pan out as well as Chris’s version?
Letter from the Chairman - Oct 2020
Would help if you guys could accept that the truth is people have been enjoying playing it as a game for quite a while now.
That, even in it's clear buggy alpha stage it's still has enough qualities to make gamers prefer and jump over it from other space games.
Instead, we have the same wave of jaded ones dismissing everything with the same old tropes after they exhausted the even older ones.
Sadly it reflects more on the dire state of the alternatives to sc than to sc itself.
Like if the ones enjoying it's content or posting and discussing it's constant updates are at fault because other's can't have it too.
It's a strange coping mechanism but it's what it is.