Star Citizen Discussions v7

[Tippis]

Roberts actually mentioned during the demo that the station was in "geosynchronous orbit", and that the gravity was properly simulated, depending on the distance from the planet. That's why I was commenting on it. He claims it's all about realism, but doesn't even know how orbits and gravity work.

It's all nonsense, obviously. The moons we saw in Star Citizen are all extremely small, you can tell whenever they do some sort of zoom in or out, you can see the mountain ranges basically stick up into space, with almost no atmosphere above them. You would have extremely low gravity on these planetoids, but I doubt any of this is actually discernible in "game".

Yes, it's holograms all over again. The last time, he went on about some Hollywood conception of what a “hologram” is (that he was the first one to do and no-one had done before (except everyone since the 1990s (again))) and was getting annoyed when people questioned both his understanding of what they were and of how they were doing it. This time it's gravity and orbits. Before that, it has been fidelity and realism and physics and instancing and could technology and procedural generation and … the lists is endless, really.

He keeps latching on to these fair common and mundane concepts and keeps referencing them, while at the same time very obviously not understanding what they are or how they work. Also often while trying to suggest that this is something new and fancy that we should be awed over for no discernible reason.

 

[Zetta]

CitizenCon 2014

Skip to 1 hour 39 minutes 10 seconds

[video=youtube;TiVODuGFCMg]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TiVODuGFCMg#t=5950s[/video]

 

[Red Anders]

CitizenCon 2014

Skip to 1 hour 39 minutes 10 seconds

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TiVODuGFCMg#t=5950s

Protip - if you pause the video at the appropriate moment and right-click, you have an option to grab the url including the timestamp, meaning that you can link it to play from the point you want, rather than needing to say when to watch it from.

(Sorry if you already knew this)

 

[Ian Skippy]

Roberts actually mentioned during the demo that the station was in "geosynchronous orbit", and that the gravity was properly simulated, depending on the distance from the planet. That's why I was commenting on it. He claims it's all about realism, but doesn't even know how orbits and gravity work.

It's all nonsense, obviously. The moons we saw in Star Citizen are all extremely small, you can tell whenever they do some sort of zoom in or out, you can see the mountain ranges basically stick up into space, with almost no atmosphere above them. You would have extremely low gravity on these planetoids, but I doubt any of this is actually discernible in "game".

Okay, didnt know that he said that. Yeah, thats stupid. Thats CR. [haha]

 

[Knightshark]

Roberts actually mentioned during the demo that the station was in "geosynchronous orbit", and that the gravity was properly simulated, depending on the distance from the planet. That's why I was commenting on it. He claims it's all about realism, but doesn't even know how orbits and gravity work.

It's all nonsense, obviously. The moons we saw in Star Citizen are all extremely small, you can tell whenever they do some sort of zoom in or out, you can see the mountain ranges basically stick up into space, with almost no atmosphere above them. You would have extremely low gravity on these planetoids, but I doubt any of this is actually discernible in "game".

It hurts so much that the messiah of space sims doesn't even understand the very basics of Newtonian physics. He doesn't even have the slightest ambition be competent. He does not care!

 

[Der Zeitgeist]

This whole thing about gravity and orbits wouldn't even be a problem if they didn't constantly make claims about fidelity and realism.

No one would complain about stuff like that if they just said "Well, we don't want to build an astronomy simulator but a fun space game. So we scaled down our star systems and planets, because we found that gameplay is more fun that way!"

Here's the actual quote about gravity from the keynote (at exactly 28 minutes):
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mGcG0g7GsOI&feature=youtu.be&t=27m59s
[video=youtube;mGcG0g7GsOI]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mGcG0g7GsOI&feature=youtu.be&t=27m59s[/video]

 

[Cmdr Eagleboy]

Wait...did they really took city designs from Blade Runner and Star Wars? I mean it is nice at all but there's zero connection for me with SC universe there.

Difference between handcrafted territory and rest of planet is too much at the moment.

Ok, it is getting really boring after some time despite good looks. Obviously on rails so it does not disturb LOD and background loading systems but that I don't really care, every game trying to do this faces same issues. Also it was so painfully obvious when they raised to the sky that their city system is early prototype, there's lack of variety, same type buildings repeat too much. I will make a guess that's why FD starts with smaller settlements - you just have to figure this out step by step.

Well and there's no gameplay - like completely nothing. No gameplay loops, or missions what was so hot last year.

I guess I will return to "one inch shallow" ED with actual gameplay.

 

[Ian Skippy]

Wait...did they really took city designs from Blade Runner and Star Wars? I mean it is nice at all but there's zero connection for me with SC universe there.

Difference between handcrafted territory and rest of planet is too much at the moment.

Ok, it is getting really boring after some time despite good looks. Obviously on rails so it does not disturb LOD and background loading systems but that I don't really care, every game trying to do this faces same issues. Also it was so painfully obvious when they raised to the sky that their city system is early prototype, there's lack of variety, same type buildings repeat too much. I will make a guess that's why FD starts with smaller settlements - you just have to figure this out step by step.

Well and there's no gameplay - like completely nothing. No gameplay loops, or missions what was so hot last year.

I guess I will return to "one inch shallow" ED with actual gameplay.

And the planetary bases in ed eont repeat too much?

 

[ZeeWolf]

I'm not sure I will give two hoots about how much the buildings repeat if there is nothing to do but fly around aimlessly for eight minutes before landing and admiring some floating jelly fish

 

[Cmdr Eagleboy]

And the planetary bases in ed eont repeat too much?

They aren't in same place though? I know it is all smoke and mirrors but lack of different buildings where a bit too obvious - especially for demo for Citizencon.

 

[DukeIronHand]

And the planetary bases in ed eont repeat too much?

Since their bases, outposts, and installations on moons and airless planets, the "rough equivalency" of all in looks never bothered me a bit in a similar vein to the space stations.
A city filled with civilians on atmospheric planets is another matter but I guess that's not a concern for us right now.

 

[ianw]

I honestly find this false criticism. It looks cool, its a computer game, whats your point?

It's entirely justified criticism based on Chris very early on that the physics was right because he studied physics at uni and dropped out.

Just like all his other that the passage of time has exposed this has come home to roost.

It has nothing to do with rule of cool it's just him being called out again and again...

 

[Asp Explorer]

It's entirely justified criticism based on Chris very early on that the physics was right because he studied physics at uni and dropped out..

You just don't understand dropping out.

Making a physics grid for a game engine and then not implementing it in that engine the new rule of cool. By knowing "something" about physics you are deliberately impeding game development.

Buy an Idris!

 

[Zetta]

Nice thread on the SC sub https://www.reddit.com/r/starcitizen/comments/799ju0/well/

Spoiler

 

[Ian Skippy]

It's entirely justified criticism based on Chris very early on that the physics was right because he studied physics at uni and dropped out.

Just like all his other that the passage of time has exposed this has come home to roost.

It has nothing to do with rule of cool it's just him being called out again and again...

Yeah sorry, I didnt watch citizencon, didnt know he made those claims. Yeah, he is a buffoon.

They aren't in same place though? I know it is all smoke and mirrors but lack of different buildings where a bit too obvious - especially for demo for Citizencon.

Since their bases, outposts, and installations on moons and airless planets, the "rough equivalency" of all in looks never bothered me a bit in a similar vein to the space stations.
A city filled with civilians on atmospheric planets is another matter but I guess that's not a concern for us right now.

Let me put it another way: if ED gets cities like that on atmo planets any time soon, I'll be more than happy. The problem is that what they showed isn't in the game, not that it isnt nice enough. The problem with ED is that beyond 'Beyond' (which is cool but nothing 'earth shattering') we have no clue what they are working on, or how far along they are.

 

[Ian Skippy]

Nice thread on the SC sub https://www.reddit.com/r/starcitizen/comments/799ju0/well/

Spoiler

https://i.redd.it/82i1pf9dzjuz.jpg

Its a good thread, with mostly respectful comments by the SC community. The primary difference between the two is basically the atmo lightning fwiw, one of the reasons why I want them in ED asap.

 

[MTBFritz]

CitizenCon 2014

Skip to 1 hour 39 minutes 10 seconds

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TiVODuGFCMg#t=5950s

....not seamless is what I noticed, cut-scene into atmospheric entry "puts" the ship into the planets atmosphere.

It's entirely justified criticism based on Chris very early on that the physics was right because he studied physics at uni and dropped out.

Just like all his other that the passage of time has exposed this has come home to roost.

It has nothing to do with rule of cool it's just him being called out again and again...

Agree here, people are getting called "haters" because they hold CR to what he promised in the past...really? Not my problem that CR put the bar so ridiculously high that not even he cant match it but instead of correcting it he simply tries to shift the goalposts unnoticed and so many people have some kind of amnesia when it comes to what he stated in the past. He is getting the criticism he deserves IMO.

Its a good thread, with mostly respectful comments by the SC community. The primary difference between the two is basically the atmo lightning fwiw, one of the reasons why I want them in ED asap.

And....of course....one exists the other does not.

 

[Mengy]

Its a good thread, with mostly respectful comments by the SC community. The primary difference between the two is basically the atmo lightning fwiw, one of the reasons why I want them in ED asap.

Nope, the primary difference is that I can play Elite right now while SC is still just a tech demo in it's alpha stages. Once SC releases and we can actually fly the ships down to the atmospheric planet surface cities like that, then the comparison will be apt.

 

[Ian Skippy]

Nope, the primary difference is that I can play Elite right now while SC is still just a tech demo in it's alpha stages. Once SC releases and we can actually fly the ships down to the atmospheric planet surface cities like that, then the comparison will be apt.

Its what I said in the post above, so I agree.

 

[Han Zulu]

yes you can be salty about SC and that they not will deliver, I have invested in Elite that have also not deliver their promise with the RNG and repeating gameplay of CG,
Then I have invested in SC both with disposable income, when the day comes SC will deliver it wil be more immersed then Frontier does because the problem of Elite is not the skills of the devs, but because lack of engaging gameplay immersion wat the management have.
SC presented a keynote mechanic that they can use in their game much better then scroll down Galnet pages
SC show it is possible with the hardware so Frontier could have give us already planetary atmospheric landings with cities but they do not?

By the time SC comes out, yes, it might be a lot better than ED is today, but by then, ED has evolved as well and will be better than it is today. To compare SC and ED by the time SC comes out, we have to think of where and what will happen to ED as well. In one year, we are very likely to have much more content to ED than we have today, and SC will most likely at best be still in beta. It's not fair to compare SC version 9.0 in 2025 with ED version 2.4 2017. ED might be a lot more immersive and have better missions and much more, and perhaps even cities, by the time SC finally comes out.