Game Discussions Star Citizen Discussion Thread v12

[Firkrayt]

While CIG is only on it's first iteration of the Star Engine

And now, dear sir, you are lying again. Star Engine has nothing to do with Star Citizen.
CI-G are using Lumberyard, which is successor of CryEngine 3.8, which is successor of CryEngine 3 (different engines, from PS3 and XBox360 era), which was actually Crytek's fourth game engine.
So CI-G's are on the sixth iteration of the engine, dating back to the beginning of century.

Still no game for 10 years, unlike for REDEngine.

Here's what CIG has released in that timeframe:

So :

.
..
...
Nope, still nothing.

Honestly, you would look better here using FFXV instead of CP2077 as an example, just like some of your predecessor did. Its development had more in common with CI-G's shipshow.
Problem is - CDPR and Square Enix wasted their own money, and with those they can do whatever they want, it's their money.

Chris Roberts, on the contrary, is wasting the money of the backers. The money he got by promising to deliver in 2015. Same year CDPR had released The Witcher 3.

And isn't CRobber wasting en masse: FFXV cost was circa $140 millions, an CP2077 was mere $121 millions.
CRobber had embezzled $300 millions and counting.


@TheAgent can you repost your 2-year old leak about CI-R requiring $200 millions and 4-8 years more?

 

[WotGTheAgent]

How do you reckon that? By his own statement hes a backer since 2013. I wouldnt call that "recent" as its 2020 today or am I wrong?

Man, I don't know anymore. The Star Citizen defenders all begin to bleed together with the same talking points, the same whataboutisms, the same "well I'll just take my ball and go home, THANK YOU" attitudes and it's getting pretty hard to keep them all straight in my brain.

 

[WotGTheAgent]

@TheAgent can you repost your 2-year old leak about CI-R requiring $200 millions and 4-8 years more?

I'm not going to search through the old SA archive, so have the reddit link:

I am not discussing the ongoing legal battle. I will not and won't ever utter a word about that. What I will talk about is scope and its ongoing reduction; something our backers should know and understand now, and not when it suddenly confronts them.

I want to discuss the often quoted "game development," specifically when I see our backers pair this with "you don't understand." Game development is volatile, undoubtably; the mechanics you most want in are often the the mechanics left on the cutting room floor.

Before I get into why this is dangerous -- especially for our product -- I want to talk about why I am posting this anonymously through a source that has their own complications. I don't think [TheAgent] is the most objective source, nor do I consider them without bias. I admit [they] have an overloaded sense of the dramatic which often borders the absurd. [They] don't, however, post this across the internet. It seems this is something of a Something Awful "exclusive," meant for a certain reader. It can be taken jokingly and dismissed, but still read; which is my intention. By informing some backers slowly of the why of these changes are happening, I hope to prevent shock when the eventual happens.

Let me be clear and plain: mechanics for space flight, ground and space combat, trading and basic professions are 18 to 24 months away. This means out of our pre-alpha testbed and working how we want them to work. Notice that this might clash with how you, the backer, wants them to work.

18 to 24 months. For basic things. What this means, ultimately, is that things we've sold you -- things you have already purchased -- will have drastic changes and reductions. I'm not suggesting you refund; in fact, quite the opposite. In order to fulfil your earlier purchases -- even in reduced form -- we need you to pledge more. By internal estimates, we have another $200 million worth of tech that needs to be created, implemented, tested and released. This can take anywhere from 4 to 8 more years. 4 is best case, expecting no turnovers or unexpected problems -- which their always are.

Creating ground combat on a massive scale hasn't begun prototyping. We dont have any idea how space combat could change ground combat or vice versa. These things are years and years out; just getting to the point where we are now has been a massive undertaking.

What you are expecting -- to be frank, let me use some colorful language -- tone it the **** down. You are not going to have 1,000 player battles by the end of the decade. You are not going to have AI crew on your ships by the end of the decade. You are not going to have an entire universe to explore by the end of the decade.

What you will have -- what we hope you'll have -- is a great, fun and exciting space game that seamlessly blends combat, exploration, trading and socializing.

I want to take a sec to remind each and every one of you how much you mean to us, this project, and even Chris himself. We get painted in a negative light across a lot of different places, but we are not, and never have been, anything but 100% dedicated to this project and it's fans.

I want to personally -- and anonymously -- thank you. Thank you for believing in us. For keeping us working, for keeping us dreaming, and keeping us dedicated to making the greatest space game that's ever been created.

Thank you.

This was in Feb 2018, btw.

 

[LittleAnt]

And now, dear sir, you are lying again. Star Engine has nothing to do with Star Citizen.

Again and again you saying I'm lying where there is no lies.
Star engine is the internal name used by CIG to describe the heavily modified LY (ex CY) + all tools/API developped specificaly for SC/SQ42.
Didn't know another engine used the same name. I was not refering the engine you talked about.

 

[Tippis]

Again and again you saying I'm lying where there is no lies.

…but the fact remains: the engine they're using is Cryengine, nothing else.

 

[LittleAnt]

Man, I don't know anymore.

I'm a follower since the kickstarter but recent player (haven't had a decent computer till early 2019 when I've been able to test the alpha for the first time).

 

[LittleAnt]

…but the fact remains: the engine they're using is Cryengine, nothing else.

Heavily modified CY. Native CY is not able to run the actual alpha.

 

[Tippis]

Heavily modified CY.

Same as all engines then, outside of the one game used as their main sales pitch/tech demo.

It's still Cryengine.

 

[WotGTheAgent]

I'm a follower since the kickstarter but recent player (haven't had a decent computer till early 2019 when I've been able to test the alpha for the first time).

Ah, that makes sense. If you enjoy Star Citizen, faults and all, that's fine. I enjoy plenty of terrible games myself.

I guess the real issue is - and probably why posters get lumped into one camp or the other - the game Star Citizen has barely started development, and most of the talk and praise is about how much money they've raised, so most of the fun comes from talking about the business side of things. If the game was released, we could argue about mechanics of travel times or UIs or the in-game price of fuel or whatever, but since those constantly change (and rightfully so for a pre-alpha) we're left with dreams and hopes and rumors and conjecture and how much income they have coming in or out.

 

[Asp Explorer]

Heavily modified CY. Native CY is not able to run the actual alpha.

It doesn't matter how much you modify something if it's still unable to deliver the functionality required of it after those modifications.

How many times now have we heard Technology X implementation will enable Gameplay functionality Y?

And there is still no game.

 

[Fishy]

Just forget about this whole argument, LittleAnt. Even if Cyberpunk was in full production since 2011, here's what CDPR has released in that timeframe:

The Witcher 2: Assassins of Kings (2011) (PC & Console)
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt (2015) (PC & Console)
The Witcher 3: Hearts of Stone (2015) (PC & Console)
The Witcher 3: Blood & Wine (2016) (PC & Console)
Gwent: The Witcher Card Game & Expansions (2018) (PC & Console)

Here's what CIG has released in that timeframe:


And really, the delay of Cyberpunk 2077 comes down to the awful, terrible things they are having to do to support old consoles. The PC and next-gen stuff were ready to go in November (according to CDPR devs), but they would lose out on anywhere between 6 million to 8 million of retail unit sales over the next 18 months if they scrubbed the console launches for the PS4 and XBone.

When they announced the move to November 19th half a year ago, I was surprised they didn't just make it a next-gen title only. I guess losing out of earning hundreds of millions of dollars probably had something to do with that not happening.

And you forgot Thronebreaker in there.

 

[Agony_Aunt]

Even if you add 100 employees for the 2 games (SC+SQ42) at the start of the project, it doesn't change the fact that in this forum, 9 years CDPR = totally acceptable and 10 years CIG (if SQ42 is released next year) = totally unacceptable.

Here's a reason (and igoning the fact that CDPR have been getting death threats over the game being a month late), in that CDPR have spent their own money on it, its their money on the line, their risk, so they can take as long as they want.

CIG (especially in the form of CR) has taken money from backers since kickstarter (so backer's money, backers take the risk) all the time lying about how long to release and the real state of the game, while at the same time proclaiming to be the most open development.

That is why CIG's behaviour and delays are unacceptable.

And if you want to point to the vote for increased scope (which a minority of backers voted on) then i'll point to the sentences where CR claimed that increasing the scope would not significantly delay the release of features. Lies compounded with lies, all the while taking in money from backers.

 

[Agony_Aunt]

Illfonic were experienced developers with CryEngine too, that's why CIG trumpeted hiring them for the FPS portion of the games. Unfortunately they were poorly managed by CIG, resulting in most of the work being scrapped or redone, the details of which only became public thanks to a Kotaku UK investigation.

http://archive.is/EBlD5

In 2013 CIG contracted Illfonic, a third-party studio based in Denver, to build the Star Marine module and the first-person systems needed for Star Citizen.​

​

So, in 2013, Roberts had two studios, multiple contractors, and three third-party studios working on an already ambitious game that was only growing more complex ​

​

Illfonic worked on Star Marine for nearly two years, but production issues like the one above have meant that nothing it worked on has been released, and much of what it did create has been rewritten by CIG.​

​

https://archive.is/GNh8o

The worst example of wasted effort was discovered towards the end of Illfonic’s time on Star Marine: CIG found that the entire map was built to the wrong scale. ​

​

Unfortunately, the assets that Illfonic had created for the Gold Horizon level did not fit into the levels that CIG had built. CIG asked lllfonic’s artists to remake the lot.​

“I'm always very perplexed by this,” Roberts told me when I asked how this happened. “We got everyone together and had a whole art summit in Austin in 2013. I thought we were all on the same page but I guess at some point we weren't.”​

​

It all seems to come down to a lack of producers on an already-stretched team. There was no one person in a position to spot these problems. Months of work had to be redone to fix the scale problem. ​

​

Meanwhile at Illfonic, the work to get the Star Marine it had created to work with the ever-changing Star Citizen was becoming a real burden for the studio. Star Marine was delayed, and delayed again. One source told me that eventually Chris Roberts asked Illfonic if it could reconcile the problems in the FPS module, and the company instead ended its partnership with CIG. “Illfonic sent the email,” a source tells me. “It was a mutual thing but Illfonic sent the email.”​

Its even funnier if you look at the wider picture around this time, with CR's attempt to deflect the problem with illfonic by saying that Star Marine wasn't needed as a separate module anyway, as it was effectively already part of the PU... and then CIG later released Star Marine as a separate module.

Its lies all the way down.

 

[sovapid]

Molly is leaving....

One of you should apply!

 

[Zieman]

Molly is leaving....

One of you should apply!

Why not you?

 

[amigacooke]

Molly is leaving....

One of you should apply!

Would it be too cynical of me to suggest that all community managers will say this kind of thing, whether it's true or not.

 

[StuartGT]

Molly is leaving....

One of you should apply!

Why not you?

Seconded! Sovapid you should definitely apply, imagine the salt from a section of backers when it emerges that one of the CMs is a meanie ganker

 

[Agony_Aunt]

Molly is leaving....

One of you should apply!

Well, i don't know how long she has been there, but might have been time for a change for her. Or maybe personal circumstances.

We don't have to presume she's jumping a sinking ship.

 

[Agony_Aunt]

A discussion about the no-fly zone.

Please Cig no more Hand Holding ...please let’s not go down that rabbit hole. - Star Citizen Spectrum

You hit a building ...give us a fine...you fly bellow the required altitude...fine...you do anything illegal ..fine it ! this way you can get rid of the autopilot, spline ..magical wall , etc etc.....

robertsspaceindustries.com

OP i think has it wrong, it has nothing to do with handholding. One person suggest that CIG might not be happy with the quality of the rest of the planet. I can see this being the reason. But that is quite amusing considering all the PR and hype they made over having a fully proc gen city planet, only to stop people getting close up.

You simply can't demand everything - Star Citizen Spectrum

I love this game, i love the concepts that has been shown and the progresses been made in the develpoment, and i can't wait to play a "complete" version with every feature in it. But guys the game...

robertsspaceindustries.com

What would you chose between having a slower development and generally more playable game and a buggy ALPHA (don't forget that) with more frequent updates.

CIG can do better than that! They can do slower updates and a less playable game! Never been done before!

Do you prefer to keep writing here on the forum about stuff that is not working or have a great adventure in another game instead?

Frankly, no other game interests me

Mindset of some citizen. They are not gamers. They just want their Second Life in Space.

Even Cyberpunk 2077 is difficult to get interested in as long as it's singleplayer.

I understand that not everyone is interested in singleplayer games, but CP2077 is meant to be getting like a GTA online version in a couple of years.

Another "just come back in a year" thread.

Or decade

 

[Firkrayt]

Again and again you saying I'm lying where there is no lies.
Star engine is the internal name used by CIG to describe the heavily modified LY (ex CY) + all tools/API developped specificaly for SC/SQ42.
Didn't know another engine used the same name. I was not refering the engine you talked about.

Providing a link that confirms that you lied? Hilarious, dear sir.

On 2016-12-23, CIG announced with the release of Star Citizen Alpha 2.6.0 its move to Amazon Lumberyard game-engine (which is also based on CryEngine 3.8)

Exactly what I said. Contrary to your lie, they ditched their previous engine and now are using Lumberyard.

"Heavily modified"? Moot point. REDEngine was heavily modified to be able to run CP2077 too.

And about their internal unofficial name? They can call it Susan if it makes them happy. Outside the house? Star Engine name is already taken. Ignorance is not an excuse.