Game Discussions Star Citizen Discussion Thread v12

[Arcondes]

Alpha, not finished, not all mechanics in game, etc, etc..., everyone's sticking to their guns.


The famous "zero gameplay".
I will describe precisely one old mission of SC and you will say me if you does not see at least one once of gameplay in it. The mission is the Covalex one.
I wake in my bed, got to my ship, call it, open my mission tab and chose the Covalex mission.
The mission giver describe by audio+text the mission, I must find why her husband is dead in a station because the insurance company doesn't want to pay her.
I go to the station, find a broken bay and EVA through it. I check all computers to find infos and audio logs.To find all computers, you must go in EVA in a simple maze with floating objects. There is a closed door in the station, if you find the good computer, you will get the code to unlock the door. The main audio log with evidence is behind this closed door. At the end of this little maze, you will find a one way door which permit to exit the maze by a shortcut. If you find all evidences, the widow give you 8000 aUEC.

This mission in video, the guy know it well you can easily get a little lost the first time you do it.

If you want more action, you can do the Claimjumper mission, a bounty one, etc. If you want to trade you can buy and sell with cargo run. You can investigate a cave to find missing persons, etc.

I played the covalex mission 100x times ( „backer“ since 2012 had to sold my account because of shady business Practice from Cig ( shell company game play) plus ex evocati (first wave of evos)) please stop telling me where the gameplay in SC is.
Look there is some gameplay in SC it’s shallow boring. It ages very fast. Sc can not add gameplay or gameplay loops fast enough. It is really annoying doing evertime the same steps maybe I train my dog for this? Getting to your pad to the ship fly to some point 5+mins do some boring missions. I get it some people are ok with that kind of flat gameplay. I‘m not. You could praise SC into heaven but I’m a sinner sry bro.

 

[Surefoot]

This mission in video, the guy know it well you can easily get a little lost the first time you do it.

That's literally the first mission that was ever completed back in 2.x. It's still the same today, it's not proc gen, so one would have to repeat it ad nauseam.

If you want more action, you can do the Claimjumper mission, a bounty one, etc. If you want to trade you can buy and sell with cargo run. You can investigate a cave to find missing persons, etc.

These missions can be counted on one hand, since they are all entirely hand crafted by CiG. Again, no proc gen here. You can do all of them in a relatively small time frame, and see the whole of it in maybe a couple hours given the servers will not 30K every 10 minutes or so. And that's it, it's static, shared with the 50 other players on the server, the FPS mission has respawning NPC-zombies for that reason. They are globally poorly implemented and riddled with glitches and crashes.
So what do we have here, a handful of "early stage" missions, cargo runs with a completely static economy, and bounty hunting that's also very limited. Sorry, that doesnt scream "BDSSE" or $300 million to me...

 

[LittleAnt]

This guy has no problem with CIG still trying to figure out core design principles eight years into development. Hilarious.

I haven't said their are good at this. FDev is certainly better than CIG at it. But comparing principles in an alpha testing phase to principles in a released game is of no use.
And SC is a lot more complex than ED, the scope isn't the same (FLIGHT atmo/space + EVA + FPS). The EVA + FPS part doesn't help to fix those principles.

 

[VR Golgot]

This guy has no problem with CIG still trying to figure out core design principles eight years into development. Hilarious.

Early days man

As someone that was taking Physics at Manchester University before I dropped out to make games full time I can assure everyone that the physics model is COMPLETELY accurate and it’s a full rigid body simulation. I know because I wrote the code. (Chris Roberts, June 2013)

 

[LittleAnt]

I played the covalex mission 100x times ( „backer“ since 2012 had to sold my account because of shady business Practice from Cig ( shell company game play) plus ex evocati (first wave of evos)) please stop telling me where the gameplay in SC is.

You had said "time wasted with zero gameplay".
I just show with my post and facts that it's not true. If you find the gameplay boring, use the words "boring gameplay" instead of "zero gameplay" because everyone here will think that you give facts...

 

[LittleAnt]

For SC, how many changes have they made to the flying mechanics again? Remember the different flight modes? Remember that quantum travel used to be free flying to anywhere you wanted? Compare that to ED where all of that are still the SAME today as it was in alpha.
What's the excuse next, Commando?

That FDev doesn't had to push in their model atmo flight, winds, 64bits position and mass of other stuff in netcode, an internal physic grid in ships, EVA, etc when they had developed it.
Simpler model, easier task to achieve.
And CIG is testing different fly model. They can't ? It's forbidden ?

 

[Arcondes]

You had said "time wasted with zero gameplay".
I just show with my post and facts that it's not true. If you find the gameplay boring, use the words "boring gameplay" instead of "zero gameplay" because everyone here will think that you give facts...

I apologizes for the zero gameplay but I think I given a bit more facts than you in your theories and dreamcrafting

 

[Esvandiary]

So given you're aware of some of their technical struggles, and how far off they are from having this as an operating system, it's interesting that you assume they can / will get it done

Don't give them ideas... "Windows just isn't good enough for our grand vision! Presenting..."

CIBoot v0.3.9f starting...
DRAM: 32768 MiB
Setting up zImage...
Transferring control to CIOS...

[0.000000] Starting...
[0.000055] Hardware detection in progress
[0.000210] - 8 CPUs @ 3400 MHz
[0.000405] - RAM: 32768 MiB
[0.000406] WARNING: memory is below minimum recommended, you may crash to d- uh, to somewhere
[0.000427] - GPU: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1060
[0.000428] LOL: good luck
[0.000502] - NIC: Intel e1000 10/100/1000
[0.008605] - Network connectivity established

No Idris detected.
Abort, Rebuy, Fail?

 

[Esvandiary]

That FDev doesn't had to push in their model atmo flight, winds, 64bits position and mass of other stuff in netcode, an internal physic grid in ships, EVA, etc when they had developed it.
Simpler model, easier task to achieve.
And CIG is testing different fly model. They can't ? It's forbidden ?

I think the facepalming is because they're still struggling to figure it out, after eight years, in something that is meant to be a space game. The SC flight model doesn't bear any relation to 64-bit precision (which ED has used for positions since the start, by the way), and it only depends on atmospheres and winds since CI decided to add those of their own volition.
It also doesn't explain why the flight model in space is still all over the place. Again, they have had eight years to get this right. Unlike most other parts of the game, there really are very few things that would have blocked them making this better.

 

[Sanya V. Juutilainen]

Let me guess at which moment FDev had developed and tested those principles. During their alpha.
Let me guess at which moment CIG is developing and testing those principles. During their alpha. Once in beta, CIG, like FDev, will stand behind them.

So around 2157? ;+)

(Also pretty sure in alpha this was all complete already, but I'd need an alpha tester to confirm this.)

 

[Sanya V. Juutilainen]

I haven't said their are good at this. FDev is certainly better than CIG at it. But comparing principles in an alpha testing phase to principles in a released game is of no use.
And SC is a lot more complex than ED, the scope isn't the same (FLIGHT atmo/space + EVA + FPS). The EVA + FPS part doesn't help to fix those principles.

A really, really important question, then.

Why not sit down and think it through properly and then refactor to a solid model instead of wasting backers' money with useless hotfixes?

Like, I can understand a failed attempt or two, but after certain time and amount of money wasted, you start asking these kinds of questions.

 

[Skizomeuh]

CIG may claim they're at alpha stage, from what I can see and experience they're for many thing still at pre-alpha, and for some even not out of prototyping yet.

 

[Theodrid]

I just popped onto Spectrum to watch all the concierge pointlessly fighting about whatever the topic for today was and add my tuppence worth to keep the fight going...discovered I had been banned for 48 hours 4 days ago...didn't even notice

You were clearly banned for being a fake NPC elevator and walkway troll Mole....own it brother!

 

[Rørik Þrumsålr]

I just popped onto Spectrum to watch all the concierge pointlessly fighting about whatever the topic for today was and add my tuppence worth to keep the fight going...discovered I had been banned for 48 hours 4 days ago...didn't even notice

Yeah...they have a tendency to give out vacations for critical thinking. I just got back from one for merely correcting someone about Freelancer's development. I was given a several month trip a few years ago for posting this beauty, despite having never had any disciplinary action taken against me before.

 

[Ed02349]

That FDev doesn't had to push in their model atmo flight, winds, 64bits position and mass of other stuff in netcode, an internal physic grid in ships, EVA, etc when they had developed it.
Simpler model, easier task to achieve.
And CIG is testing different fly model. They can't ? It's forbidden ?

I've never touched SC, can someone confirm SC has wind and a legit atmospheric flight model? I'm pretty sure it doesn't have an internal physics grid, from all the stories of falling through ships, implying at least gravity in ships still sues global setting. Someone could test by putting a box in a ship and then fly it in atmosphere upside down and see if the box moved.

Considering CIG had been lying for a while now about the flight model. At first it was going to be newtonian, etc, then it got more and more arcady until they fired or moved the guy in charge of the complex flight model. We found out it wasn't used and what they used were basically a set of numbers for devs to tweak. They put a less quallified guy in charge of flight models, and we're expecting CIG to test even more flight models after 8 years?

This is why I don't think CR is a perfectionist. The most likely thing is he had no idea what he wanted the flight model to be. The man tried to play a PC game with an XBox controller. Can we even expect a non arcady flight model from him?

Why do you (LittleAnt) think that CIG can achieve what you would consider a good flight model if after 8 years they couldn't even decide on one? If CR had been working on the game for a year prior to the kickstarter like he said, then there should have already been a base for the flight model they could work from, rather than drifting along like they've been doing.

 

[Tippis]

Orbiting does add to the gameplay and I don't really understand how one can miss that. You have varying distances between planets for space gameplay. For synchronous orbiting stations - which in Elite are majority, I believe - it changes the angle of approach coming from the central star. It creates seasons for surface play. And without proper orbiting you wouldn't get lunar and solar eclipses.

If anyone can't grasp the gameplay implications of orbits, they haven't played Outer Wilds and have robbed themselves of one of the best space sim experiences currently on the market.

You are right. SC is not a real space simulation because they don't attend to respect all newtonians rules. They will modify them if the technical gain is important, to limit the complexity of the code or when they though something is more cool made differently.

Lolno. They do the exact opposite of that, and in the most mindbogglingly stupid way possible.

They have deliberately slapped together an overly complex code that modifies physics, not for technical gain or it created something cool, but because they were unable to actually design with Newtonian physics in mind. They respect none of the rules because that is the entire purpose of the physics engine evasion layer they've put in there: to make sure that at no point will the Newtonian-based physics engine built into CE have any say in the final result. It must be overwritten at all times.

I use "space simulation" because SC only wants to "feel" realistic. If you have a better term, I don't have one...
"Arcade game" don't fit in too.

SC has no intent of feeling realistic and it succeeds fully in achieving that anti-goal. It also seemingly has no intent on delivering anything resembling space. This is why they implemented so many pointlessly over-engineered, stupidly complex systems to cancel out any realism that would have been in the engine by default.

The only reason “arcade game” doesn't fit is because arcade games generally rely on or at least strive towards crisp, reliable, and consistent controls delivered at a minimum of fuss (because you want the computing oomph to go to something useful rather than the control scheme). “Amateurish tech demo” would be a good term for it. Walking sim would work if it weren't for the “sim” part, so… “walking fumble” is probably the most descriptive label available.

And CIG is testing different fly model. They can't ? It's forbidden ?

They really aren't. They've long since given up on that, and the flight model they implemented was just a laughably roundabout way to make the built-in physics modelling appear as if you had typed “fly” into the console. That's not a different flight model — that's the same flight model you had in Quake, done incompetently. It's not forbidden — just a pointless and a waste of everyone's time and money.

I've never touched SC, can someone confirm SC has wind and a legit atmospheric flight model?

Lolno. It has trigger zones in which the flight control system get different manoeuver target parameters and where specific visual effects play if conditions are met. It's a visual simulacrum of atmospheric effects without any actual modelling (much less any simulation) underpinning it.

Ships don't even behave as if they're in a gravity well. Atmo? Getouttahere.

 

[Virgile]

I've never touched SC, can someone confirm SC has wind and a legit atmospheric flight model? I'm pretty sure it doesn't have an internal physics grid, from all the stories of falling through ships, implying at least gravity in ships still sues global setting. Someone could test by putting a box in a ship and then fly it in atmosphere upside down and see if the box moved.

Considering CIG had been lying for a while now about the flight model. At first it was going to be newtonian, etc, then it got more and more arcady until they fired or moved the guy in charge of the complex flight model. We found out it wasn't used and what they used were basically a set of numbers for devs to tweak. They put a less quallified guy in charge of flight models, and we're expecting CIG to test even more flight models after 8 years?

This is why I don't think CR is a perfectionist. The most likely thing is he had no idea what he wanted the flight model to be. The man tried to play a PC game with an XBox controller. Can we even expect a non arcady flight model from him?

Why do you (LittleAnt) think that CIG can achieve what you would consider a good flight model if after 8 years they couldn't even decide on one? If CR had been working on the game for a year prior to the kickstarter like he said, then there should have already been a base for the flight model they could work from, rather than drifting along like they've been doing.

 

[alexzk]

K.S.P. Has proper flight model. CPU burns when I undock ship from asteroid and it blows some particles of dust. Less then 10 fps And that is not atmo.
In atmo it can be even harder with 100+ parts used.

 

[Sanya V. Juutilainen]

They have deliberately slapped together an overly complex code that modifies physics, not for technical gain or it created something cool, but because they were unable to actually design with Newtonian physics in mind. They respect none of the rules because that is the entire purpose of the physics engine evasion layer they've put in there: to make sure that at no point will the Newtonian-based physics engine built into CE have any say in the final result. It must be overwritten at all times.

I'll correct this a bit. As far as I know, once upon a time CI (back then still G) had very clever minds on the team. One of them was John Pritchett, very solid mind who majored in engineering physics and had been in game development for close to 15 years before CIG work.
He supposedly wrote a fairly solid physics and flight engine for Star Citizen, called IFCS, which - again, supposedly - works very nicely.

The problem came when this mode was applied on already existing ships, which - as you'd expect from looking at some of them - don't like flying by physics. Stuff like having the engine in the axis while the ship is asymetrical, meaning it would always yaw to the side. Inability to fly in most atmospheres. And so on.

So John was asked to fix his engine. The people from ships will give him numbers about how the ship should fly and the engine will calculate it for them to "fit".

But of course, this throws the whole IFCS engine out of the window. If the engine says you can't turn this hard because of physics, and you allow backdoors which say: "Just do it somehow, we don't care", you could as well have no engine in the first place, just assign arbitrary numbers.

The legend has it that after implementing this backdoor that allows for any value to destroy the physics engine's quality, John Pritchett left CI in 2018. The official reason given was: "He couldn't relocate to finish IFCS" - which of course didn't matter the five years before and it's eerily similar to an excuse used to dump few other big names in the CI's past.

The Glassdoor review from him is likely fake, though - but his post on FB in which he says this is standard corporate speak "as to not get sued by ex-employer".

 

[Surefoot]

That FDev doesn't had to push in their model atmo flight, winds, 64bits position and mass of other stuff in netcode, an internal physic grid in ships, EVA, etc when they had developed it.
Simpler model, easier task to achieve.
And CIG is testing different fly model. They can't ? It's forbidden ?

A few pages ago you said you were not trying to shift the blame to another game in order to defend CiG, but here you are doing just that. I wont comment on the "simpler" whatever (it's wrong, btw) but i tend to try and experience games for their own merits.
You are just white knighting exactly as predicted by our questions a few pages ago...

I've never touched SC, can someone confirm SC has wind and a legit atmospheric flight model? I'm pretty sure it doesn't have an internal physics grid, from all the stories of falling through ships, implying at least gravity in ships still sues global setting.

It doesnt (as of 3.9.x), and it kinda does, in order, and in a weird way.
It's still running a FPS engine, which has small, limited, 2D maps to run on (with a "sea level" even..). Ships are just "moving maps" if that makes sense. There are multiple issues arising from this approach: first, micro gravity cannot be simulated in any way. That's why people standing in a ship will never experience any G effect. Second, the meeting point between these "maps" shift everything from the reference frame for movement to the horizontal position (as these are ground based maps like in normal fps games, there's an "up" and a "down"..). That's why doors, lifts.. are such problematic, have been for the good part of 8 years now, and will ever be that way. Physics grid is indeed localized for one map instance, crossing the boundaries make a lot of weird, unpredictable things happen. The best way to experience that is try and load a Nox (hover bike) into whatever ship, or even funnier, try and go within Port Olisar with one (*). Landing into a ship from EVA is another way to experience it...
As for the atmo flight model, currently is limited to "artificial max speed goes down in atmo" and that's it. Next patch (3.10) is supposed to address that, i'll certainly connect in and have a look at that.

(*) if you cannot do that or know someone who can show you: it will shake around furiously, rotate at incredible speeds, cling to everything but the floor, and probably get ejected to orbit at relativistic speeds. Doing this in PO breaks everything even more by moving the camera "out of the map" as you can see the culled objects etc. and the place you are from the "outside".