Star Citizen Discussion Thread v12

Genuinely, this should have been done in research before setting the company up or asking for money. Should have been Q1, 'Is it viable?', 'Q2 Is there a market?'
At the start of the project, Scaleform was a perfectly accepted and proven tech for a lot of really big projects. GTA5 use it everywhere for instance. Knowing how an engine will react in particular stress situations simply cannot be researched effectively before being able to get those stress situation for real (in later stage of development). And when you discover the bottlenecks of an API, you just have 2 solutions : change your plans to stay below the limitation of this API or change/modify the API. For a lot of companies, the first solution is the only viable solution (because no money or time to change API). CIG take the second solution and, as Scaleform is discontinued since mid 2018, it was a good choice.

The time needed to google "lumberyard scaleform"? https://forums.awsgametech.com/t/i-want-to-use-autodesk-scaleform-how-to-use-it-on-lumberyard/2787
Because I could bet it's less a suitability issue than a contractual one actually.
Sorry but I don't understand your point. Scaleform is the native UI tech for CE3. The switch to LY for CIG was just a relabel of CE3 by the same version owned by Amazon. The link you point is for the newer API of LY which was not available to CIG at the time they choose CE and started to code starmap/HUD/etc. I don't know when this new UI was made available in LY but they are big chance that when CIG was able and acquired the right to use it, it was too late for CIG (already started to code Building Blocks). And there is no evidence that this new UI is better than Scaleform for CIG or don't have also limitations that disqualified it for SC.
 
Last edited:
Why have CIG bought a license for Cryengine if they are using Lumberyard?
You talk about the recent purchase or the initial one ? For the most recent, the reasons can be numerous.

One of them can be that if CIG want to license their Star engine to other companies, with the version of CE/LY they are using they had to own all rights on it = mandatory step should be to buy the full license to Crytek. I know the initial contract between CIG/Crytek was denying CIG the right for CIG to license the Star engine to others companies.

Or to be sure to never again have to deal with Crytek.
 
Last edited:
You talk about the recent purchase or the initial one ? For the recent one, there can be numerous reason.

One of them can be that if CIG want to license their Star engine to other companies, with the version of CE/LY they are using they had to own all rights on it = mandatory step should be to buy the full license to Crytek. I know the initial contract between CIG/Crytek was denying CIG the right for CIG to license the Star engine to others companies.

Or to be sure to never again have to deal with Crytek.
Are you serious! Who the hell would want to license Star engine?

Edit: I love the way you portray Crytek as the bad guy :ROFLMAO:
 
Last edited:
Genuine question : how much time can it get to a newly built company to discover that Scaleform will not match the project, decide to replace it with a better tool internally done and deliver it ?

Genuine questions:

  • Do you really think a company which was first founded in 2012 is a 'newly built company'? Or worth describing as such in 2016? Or 2018? Or 2021?
  • Do you think that it's particularly wasteful for CIG to roll out UI to all areas of the game, in final art form, before realising that they need to rework it all?
  • Do you find it strange that so much discussion is lavished on such a relatively minor internal tool, by both CIG and fans, in the year 2021?
 
Last edited:
One of them can be that if CIG want to license their Star engine to other companies

Ahh, such dreams ;)

I'm pretty sure that having the rights to use a game engine doesn't allow you to market derivatives of that same engine.

EDIT: Here's what we know about the recent acquisition: "During 2020, the Company further strengthed its position as a AAA game developer by acquiring a perpetual licence for CryEngine from game development platform provider Crytek GmbH"
 
Last edited:
Sorry but I don't understand your point. Scaleform is the native UI tech for CE3. The switch to LY for CIG was just a relabel of CE3 by the same version owned by Amazon. The link you point is for the newer API of LY which was not available to CIG at the time they choose CE and started to code starmap/HUD/etc. I don't know when this new UI was made available in LY but they are big chance that when CIG was able and acquired the right to use it, it was too late for CIG (already started to code Building Blocks). And there is no evidence that this new UI is better than Scaleform for CIG or don't have also limitations that disqualified it for SC.
Wrong. SF wasn't a native UI tech, it's a middleware that was included in CE2 & 3 suites thanks to a partnership between Crytek and Autodesk.
The thing is SF never was included with LY license, so during the switch CIG had to either buy a license to Autodesk or get rid of it.

They didn't get rid of it (and somewhat still haven't finished with it) and now they're reinventing the wheel by making their own middleware. Allegedly.

Now why did they realized they couldn't use SF forever? Because of licensing? Because it's not fit for the Dream? Because Autodesk discontinued the product on july 2018?
 
Last edited:
I'm pretty sure that having the rights to use a game engine doesn't allow you to market derivatives of that same engine.
This.
And for CIG to monetize their engine implies liabilities (customer service, stability, documentation) CIG look like having hard times fulfilling for themselves, given the tier-0 status of everything, constant rework/refactor (probably because of employees turnovers)
 
@ECity come, quick! We have a backer among us who speaks for CI-G as if he knows stuff about their inner workings. I'm sure he will be glad to answer your questions about the Roadmap, unlike the previous backer we had here.

On a side note about Lumberyard: "Lumberyard is killing this company.” Now don't cry "FUDster" before visiting the link, it's about Amazon. I'm totally sure that Roberts Holy Industries are immune to that.
 
Last edited:
The thing is SF never was included with LY license, so during the switch CIG had to either buy a license to Autodesk or get rid of it.
Are you sure that SF was not included in the LY license tied to CE 3.6.4 ?

Now why did they realized they couldn't use SF forever? Because of licensing? Because it's not fit for the Dream? Because Autodesk discontinued the product on july 2018?
3 perfect reasons to code an internal tool like Building Block indeed...
 
if CIG want to license their Star engine to other companies
:ROFLMAO::ROFLMAO::ROFLMAO::ROFLMAO:

by the way, I don't think it works like this. If I own a license to use a sofware I can't sell the same modded software to someone else.
And second, why on Earth a company should buy the Fantabulous Star Engine if there are other software that do the same properly without the bug the star engine has?
For example Unigine 2 have the same features of SE and much more, look and be worried:
ah, it seems that even the new unreal engine 5 will have 64 bit precision.
 
Last edited:
Are you sure that SF was not included in the LY license tied to CE 3.6.4 ?


3 perfect reasons to code an internal tool like Building Block indeed...
Nollocks. Building Blocks is just as wishywashy as the rest of their lies. Every idiot thinks they will be building dreamcastles but when they get the blocks it's really blocky and doesn't look like imagined in the fantasy dreams. It also lacks automation so "quarkargh" is the next tosh they pull from their nether regions and is regurgitated in threads like these.
 
If I own a license to use a sofware I can't sell the same modded software to someone else.
Depend of your agreement with this company. That's exactly what Crytek have done with Amazon. We don't know the scope of the last agreement between Crytek and CIG. CIG had already the right to use CE so what's the difference between the first and the last agreement ?

And second, why on Earth a company should buy the Fantabulous Star Engine if there are other software that do the same properly without the bug the star engine has?
CIG willing to licence Star Engine is plausible. Nobody buying it is plausible too 😅
 
Top Bottom