Game Discussions Star Citizen Discussion Thread v12
- Thread starter Yaffle
- Start date
-
- Tags
- star citizen
Sure...but I agree with the defenders here. Watching videos about space games...or any computer game with young children shows a lack of awareness as a parent, it's not watch with mother or SpongeBob squarepants fer goodness sake. A simple and easy solution is to wear headphones or keep your personal video game interests to such a time as your children are in bed. The swearing and adult references in video game content are completely irrelevant. Doesn't SC have an ESRB rating or something?
Swearing on stream now a meme - Star Citizen Spectrum
Has Star Citizen Live has moved from the occasional swear word as a slip up to having 1 mandatory swear word per person? Jared I watch these with my kids, while I understand the odd slip by...robertsspaceindustries.com
I wasn't even aware this was a thing. But one thing the backers who are defending it and CIG themselves is there is a simple reason to not swear on streams. Because you don't have to! And it doesn't sound professional.
Yeah, i know, CIG and professional don't really go together, but they are a decent sized company and should know better.
When talking about the progress or whatever, you don't need swear words to describe it. Sure, i can understand the devs wanting to swear when talking about the tech, but they can do that off-camera.
So 3.12.1
My frame rate seem to have smoothed out a bit in and around built up areas.
There are far less nugget NPC 's standing on chairs. (did they remove the chairs)?
The lifts seem to be a wee bit faster.
The 1 system map is still pish.
No irretrievable ships...so far...
My ammo loads stay with me.
Got 30k'd twice in 1 hour.
Generally still much the same but I like the improved smoothability.
Not tried the new missions yet as it takes me a while to get into a game, basically me getting the basics right.
Pug
My frame rate seem to have smoothed out a bit in and around built up areas.
There are far less nugget NPC 's standing on chairs. (did they remove the chairs)?
The lifts seem to be a wee bit faster.
The 1 system map is still pish.
No irretrievable ships...so far...
My ammo loads stay with me.
Got 30k'd twice in 1 hour.
Generally still much the same but I like the improved smoothability.
Not tried the new missions yet as it takes me a while to get into a game, basically me getting the basics right.
Pug
Yes, you are.
And the problem is exactly that tendency. Because it “tends to be” used illegally, ICRC must pursue those misuses pretty heavy-handedly so as to stamp out that tendency. There's a reason why plasters and bandages often have a cross on them, but with a distinctly different colour scheme. It is utterly trivial to evoke the same meaning without diluting the real symbol, and not doing that with the full awareness of what you're doing, as CI¬G seems to be saying they are, is horrid.
Incorrect.
Being used in “just a game” is what makes it life-threatening, in real life: because it's casually thrown in there without a care in the world, thereby diluting its meaning and making it seem like any weak excuse is good enough to get away with an act that can be prosecuted as a war crime. I'm not even exaggerating here. Let those two words sink in and think about whether “its just a game” is a good enough an excuse for a wholly needless misuse of a very important symbol.
It will cease to be if it keeps being misused in contravention of international accords and treaties. That is the whole problem. That is why illegal usage must be stamped out, aggressively. Because otherwise, it loses the very meaning you think makes it universally applicable and instead just becomes a bulls-eye.
Last edited:
I always took the Red Cross to stand for something good and pure. I'm not sure words like, Stamped out, Horrid, war crime, without a care in the world, Aggressive, really does it any justice as I feel that their ethos is exactly the polar opposite of these words.
It has indeed been used as a bulls eye in multiple wars, that would be an excellent use of the word Horrid and also Aggressive, also anti humanitarian and should be and is considered a War Crime.
It will Cease to be, No it won't. Inter Arma Caritas
It's a Game.
Pug
Last edited:
Good thing they weren't used that way, then, but rather used in a very clear and specific context.
You know, the context of the symbol being misused and diluted to the point where it loses its meaning and value.
…and as such, there is absolutely no reason to wantonly abuse very important symbols and contribute to making them generic and lose their meaning.
“It's a game” is not a valid excuse for wilfully ignoring international laws in place to protect humanitarian relief.
The Red Cross will Never lose it's meaning due to small minded people demeaning or even misusing it's use heretofore in games. Especially not in a fantasy world set many years in the future.
It feels like your point is just being used to slate/slander a company that you don't like and also seems to be disingenuous.
I will still contribute to the Red Cross as I have done for many years.
Please, please get a grip. Or don't. I don't care.
Pug
Last edited:
Are you deliberately trying to miss the point?
The Red Cross will lose its meaning if it keeps being used thoughtlessly by all and sundry because it becomes a vicious circle: those guys use it as they like, so these guys will think they can use it as they like, so that other guy will join the pile. The instant anyone uses it for just whatever, it has lost its clear meaning — a clear meaning that is vital (in a very literal sense) for it to maintain its usage and value in a conflict zone.
It is exactly why ICRC goes after people who misuse the symbol, even in what in your opinion might be trivial use cases: because they can't afford that scenario to develop, and the only way to keep it from happening is to pursue even minor offences. Even if it's just a symbolic act (pun intended) it needs to be done.
My point is that this is simply yet another instance of CI¬G not giving a [bleep] about the legalities of the art they use in their game. They've done it on multiple occasions before; they've done it again; they most likely will keep doing it.
This particular instance is just unusually grievous because, by their own account, they knew that this was a protected symbol and they did it anyway. And with this particular symbol, the misuse is already pretty awful even without the wilfulness of it all. It is not slander if it's true, and according to CI¬G themselves, it is.
If you don't care, then fine, don't comment. But especially don't try to dictate what I say about a company that knowingly chooses to misuse a symbol that protects people I care about.
Last edited:
Some backers are extreme Ayn Rand types who think there should be no rules, regulations, etc. and corporations should do what they want.
In the US, Patricia Derges earned almost $200,000 by claiming to provide a COVID cure, which was obviously fake. The Ayn Rand types say, "so what?"
I'm heartily bored and becoming more than a little angry concerning the discussion of an organisation I not only hugely respect but I've also actively supported, not only through donations but by putting my desert boots on the ground as a volunteer in central Africa, Lybia and Syria protecting the aid convoys carrying the very symbol of the international red cross you lot are pointlessly bickering over in a forum supposedly about a space game.
When any of you are prepared to do the same instead of using the symbol in some form of protracted forum one-upmanship, have at it...until then, enough already.
When any of you are prepared to do the same instead of using the symbol in some form of protracted forum one-upmanship, have at it...until then, enough already.
Last edited:
And it will be given an “Online Interactions Not Rated” label anyway, so it wouldn't change much even if it were.Too easy Mole. Only released games need a rating.
I don't want to participate in a form of gatekeeping in order level criticism, but for what's it's worth I wasn't a RC volunteer, and my time as a paratrooper in the aughts gave me experience and a perspective to see how vital and frankly heroic the Red Cross/Crescent are.
Which is why it's my opinion that what CIG did was a bad move, and frankly the pithy hand-wave of "Oh we knew but it wouldn't have been on the released objects" (ignoring the fact they're more than happy to show off that concept art as marketing material) is the type of self-absolvement we've come to expect from CIG. And it just surprises me that something so seemingly simple, can be argued as a non-fault of CIG's.
Red Cross made Prison Architect devs to remove it from their game
How the Prison Architect developers broke the Geneva Conventions
And a tiny, five-pixel wide red cross is to blame.
This was the point i was going for. I disagree with Tipps extreme end of the world for the red cross stance if they let people use it. But the fact is, they don't. And CIG basically said, yeah, the artists knew, but we went ahead and did it anyway, but we will change it anyway. That's what blew my mind.
I'm not arguing the fault of Ci¬G or anyone else...since they're by no means the first or the last to have used the red cross logo without due care to it's copyright or trademark. But in this case, the discussion has mostly turned to petty accusations as to the wrongdoings of Ci¬G, rather than protecting or supporting the red cross either as a symbol or an organisation. I'm certainly not defending Ci¬G since they have blatantly plagiarised or stolen ideas, models and images from the entire science fiction genre since the beginning of the project. The image of the red cross is one out of many hundreds of misrepresented images used by Ci¬G...so I fail to see why this image...despite it's real world context...should be targeted more than any of the others.
I'm also a former paratrooper with extensive BG experience...which is why my contacts with former SF colleagues now in private contract work have asked me for help on a volunteer basis from time to time as an on the ground coordinator for teams of operators protecting the aid convoys from both the Red Cross/Red Crescent... as well as doctors and nurses from Medicines Sans Frontiers who are prime targets for local militia. The job also entails liaison with UN forces and local military assets so prior service and experience is an essential requirement.
They're desperate for experienced operators to work as armed escorts...and who could possibly defuse confrontational situations without violence should they occur, rather than relying on local security muppets waving guns around and shooting people. However, armed BG work is the job...and enforcement, should that situation arise too. There's no pay, but expenses like flights, hotels, food and medical are covered by the contractors.
Nice to meet a fellow paratrooper though, even if you're from the other side of the pond. Which was it... 'Sky Dragons', 'All the way', 'Go Texans, go' or 'Rendezvous with Destiny'?
Last edited:
Lol.
First it's not an "american" thing, the ICRC was created in, and is still based in Geneva, Switzerland.
Then there's a good reason why so many games which feature a medical-kind-of-corporation/entity do NOT use the actual Red Cross symbol but a derivative.
For example
works perfectly fine, serves its purpose without infringing on anything (as the ICRC would certainly not endorse the brutal M.O. of Trauma Team, or even having their symbol painted on vehicles belonging to a private corporation...).
Again, i wont even bother quoting your strawman here, using the symbol for your own personal purpose has nothing to do with publishing a widely sold work that will portray medical support with the actual Red Cross.
And i would add they are quite open to endorsement if the usage of their symbol is not abusive. What they want to enforce is the portrayal of a completely neutral, non-private, non-governmental organization, that's protected by international treaties, so that where they actually are deployed, people would think twice before shooting at them. Letting go of anything there will (and did) endanger lives.