Game Discussions Star Citizen Discussion Thread v12

[Dooguk]

Dunno what state of the art standard is in videogames but to me looks decent especially comparing with blurry low res console optimize AAA games I had displeasure to play recently. Can it be better - hell yeah!

Cobbler is saving PC gaming though.

 

[Dooguk]

Genuine question...
Are the planets "life size", or 1/6 size, or 1/10 size? I've seen all of these mentioned. Or is it some franken-universe mixture of all three?

Planets 1/10th
Moons 1/6th
Distances 1/6th

 

[[VR] Merkir]

So all I can assume is that when they say, "a vast sandbox of life-size planets, moons ...", what they actually mean is, "a vast sandbox of scaled down planets, moons ..."

 

[Dooguk]

So all I can assume is that when they say, "a vast sandbox of life-size planets, moons ...", what they actually mean is, "a vast sandbox of scaled down planets, moons ..."

And no orbits because fidelity only matters sometimes.

 

[Surefoot]

Dunno what state of the art standard is in videogames

Well, obviously. You've been missing about a decade of progress since this iteration of Cry Engine was re-used to try and build a space game. The most glaring issue is lighting of course, but also draw distance for small details and LOD management. Also when it comes to characters, sub surface scattering, various surface texture issues, and again poor LOD, not to mention the huge progress in inverse kinetics (that are still absent from SC) and skeleton+muscles simulation. And I wont enter into considerations of things moving around as there of course things go really bad in SC...

 

[Asp Explorer]

Also when it comes to characters, sub surface scattering, various surface texture issues, and again poor LOD, not to mention the huge progress in inverse kinetics (that are still absent from SC) and skeleton+muscles simulation.

Have you even seen the exploding toilet?

You obviously just don't understand exploding toilet development!

 

[Christopher Roberto]

Dunno what state of the art standard is in videogames

Hardware raytracing, point cloud geometry, AI upscaling. So... Minecraft.

 

[Agony_Aunt]

Life-Size? What does that mean? Everything on that but "planets and moons" is full size, markers on the other side of any of the 3 rocky planets are never more than 2,000KM away, those are not full size, Hurston is supposed to be earth-size, its 2124KM in diameter, X6 = 12,744, Earth is 12,742.

It literally says life size planets. You can't handwave that away, its what it says.

 

[Agony_Aunt]

I hear that will be fixed in 3.20!

And in 3.21, 3.22, 3.23....

 

[Agony_Aunt]

game

Pre-alpha demo

 

[metatheurgist]

It literally says life size planets. You can't handwave that away, its what it says.

Chris is missing a trick though. They could have dinky little ship races like Micro Machines, that was a popular franchise. Imagine an Idris in a bathtub! Tiny little Commandos crawling all over it! So kawaii!

 

[Agony_Aunt]

 

[Agony_Aunt]

What a thread.

Why is Squadron 42 still missing from the store? - Star Citizen Spectrum

Seriously, what is going on? It's quite an understatement to say it's weird that the project that's taking up the better part of dev-time and resources is missing from the store for so long now....

robertsspaceindustries.com

 

[sovapid]

It literally says life size planets. You can't handwave that away, its what it says.

sure i can. who cares? same with orbiting. dont care. adds nothing meaningful to the game for me.

was able to play tonight and make about a million uec.

 

[Agony_Aunt]

sure i can. who cares? same with orbiting. dont care. adds nothing meaningful to the game for me.

was able to play tonight and make about a million uec.

So, fidelity only counts when its in SC. When its not in SC its not needed.

Got it.

I could play Progress Quest and make money. Does that make it a good game?

Progress Quest

 

[Mole HD]

Pre-alpha demo

Semantics

 

[Agony_Aunt]

Semantics

Roadmap to semantics.

 

[Mole HD]

Roadmap to semantics.

 

[sovapid]

So, fidelity only counts when its in SC. When its not in SC its not needed.

Got it.

nah, have never wanted actual size planet or orbits in NMS either. doesnt add anything.

the planets feel huge in sc when you are playing. thats all that real matters. if i didnt know they were scaled down i probably would not realize it in game.

does it bother you that the star systems themselves in elite dangerous in the galaxy are static? especially the systems right by sag a. they should be zinging around. doesnt bother me a bit that it isnt represented in game.

 

[Agony_Aunt]

nah, have never wanted actual size planet or orbits in NMS either. doesnt add anything.

the planets feel huge in sc when you are playing. thats all that real matters. if i didnt know they were scaled down i probably would not realize it in game.

does it bother you that the star systems themselves in elite dangerous in the galaxy are static? especially the systems right by sag a. they should be zinging around. doesnt bother me a bit that it isnt represented in game.

I'd prefer the systems to move around the galaxy, but understand it would be a huge technical challenge for FD, and ultimately, the speed at which they would move would not really be noticeable. The fun thing with planets orbiting in ED is that over time the systems change configuration, and with some planets, you can even watch them orbit in real time. That adds a level of realism. I once was in a system where several planets were in near perfect alignment, each one eclipsing the next from the sun.

Full size planets shouldn't be a technical challenge for SC, after all, ED has already done it, and CIG have way more resources to implement it than FD.