Well after a good nights sleep I came up with a few more impressions.
While the surface and base visuals looked indeed very good it seems like CiGs efforts go completely into space legs even tho this is supposed to be a space simulator focusing on ships with space legs enabling you to immerse yourself further into the game world. Now space legs seem to be the primary focus with flight mechanics and ships being the ugly unloved stepchild (but prepared to look nice to visitors). Flight model is as bad as ever, they obviously made no progress at all in this regard making me believe that they either gave up on that part or simply didnt have the manpower to continue working on it because their 400+ crew is used on fluff and demo stuff instead of working on the meaty pieces. In regards to the SPACE PART ED already looks far better then Star Citizen and I dont believe that CiG will catch up anymore. As CRoberts said, their optimal release date was in the past and it all has become more then stale by now.
I dont believe we saw any kind of AI during the demonstration. First we cannot confirm it ourselves and have to take Chris's word for it (lol....yeah). There were a lot of NPCs sure but they were either stationary or moving on rails. I noticed that the players always made way for them and not the other way around. Apart from facing their direction (which might be a hardcoded feature) no NPC acknowledged the players presense. When that technician walked to the console then started repairs he did it because he was scripted to do so not because he had a schedule to work on. I have no doubt that if you blocked the NPCs path it would be stuck in place instead of sidestepping the obstacle but I rather think the NPC would "move" the player avatar instead. All NPCs were walking on the exact same path. Nope....no AI whatsoever.
While the surrounding world looks very nice (not yaw-dropping, sorry CiG that train is gone, its "nice" only compared to what other games produce) the interaction with it is horrible. Ships yank and bounce around, handle like snowflakes in the wind and only look good when stationary. As soon as you have moving objects the illusion of grandeur goes to hell. That counts for player avatars as much as for vehicles and ships. And I cant really give CiG props for the station because its very possible they spent 8+ months on building it by hand and then it would only be a "mediocre" result really.
I was hit by the same thought then some others here have brought up. CiG should ve showed a pre-rendered clip instead of going through the presentation with a live feed. Of course the PURPOSE of that decision was to showcase that the world is integrated and playable and that they are very far along in development. Instead they leave me with the impression that hardly anything works. Things have to be done in a specific order and sequence else it wont work (confirmed by the male actor) which negates the "open world" statement meaning what we saw is not a snippet of the game but a specifically tailored Gamescon demo which currently doesnt exist in a playable form. I dont believe we will see this anytime soon on the PU.
They improved the avatar models a lot as well as introducing cloth modules. The whole system for putting on clothes is far from optimized (yeah alpha I know, not a big issue but its worth mentioning). I wonder why they felt they needed to improve the avatars in such a way? I dont believe for a second that this is an improvement that happened "on the side". This has to be the result of some serious effort while all hands "should be" busy working on the base game and mechanics. Instead this demonstration gave me yet another insight into Chris Roberts priorities and I know its not making the game folks. Neither the NPCs nor the player avatars were female and this after considerable effort went into creating them and progress has been reported on this subject, yet....non-existent which is telling. I dont buy the lame-bum excuse for "wanting to try something different" for one second. Nobody asked for "better" avatar models, nobody asked for the face recognition.
In order to show progress they could demonstrate an improved flight model and flight physics. Watching a dogfight with believable ship behavior would be as much if not more impressive then what they did show. While they are critical and essential to the game CR instead opted to focus and show unnecessary fluff stuff leading me to the conclusion that CiG cannot create and integrate a good flight model and physics else they would ve done so by now. After all its one of their priorities or should be. If all we see is FPS stuff with horrible vehicle combat and mechanics its probably because they are using an FPS engine which does one of these things well and the other only adequately. And even "well" doesnt cut it anymore today. And regarding the FPS stuff NPCs and player avatars look nice while standing still (well NPCs can move too after all they are on rails) but player animation is strapped on at best which shows whenever the player makes a sidestep while going forward. Leg movement is not connected to the ground and doesnt fit the dislocation (full leg movement for inching to the side) resulting in an unnatural impression. Immersion goes out the window.
Once outside the handcrafted station things became very bland and very ugly fast. The moons surface from orbit looked nice but of course it would be too small to generate gravity or hold an atmosphere under correct physics so we can determine that Star Citizen isnt using any. The jump only showcased that its NOT a seamless world but levels they jump into and the third players game crashed when trying to load the new location. Also a complete fail regarding persistence which CRoberts touted and promoted only minutes before it happened and demonstrated that he lied on stage again. The third player was just an addition to the mission and not really needed because the mission was held by another player. So all it would take in a working environment as promoted by CR would be for the third player to load back in. Instead they had to repeat everything in every little detail. Because its not working as described. Instead the description given is how CR envisions it to work. This probably counts for the rest of Star Citizen as well. Which would fit the "impossible" bill nicely.
The landing on the new moon was horrible but yeah, terrible flight model and physics will do that to your game. Lemme run you through the mission given in basic form.
walk to the mission giver then exit the station
make a jump to new location (pretty much directly, no going through the "open game world")
land near the crash site (not directly there nor further away)
short buggy trip showcasing the subpar surface textures and the absolutely disappointing PG tech to the wreckage
wreckage is obviously placed and handcrafted, doesnt resemble any ship I would recognize nor does the interior match any ship I know
go in, pick up a box get out
Going back to the ship by buggy instead of being picked up by the ship
Opposition "spawns" in with no radar warning they are "just there"
Kill them with handguns even tho you have heavy weaponry available (buggy and ships turrets)
Does this really hit you like a "good and enjoyable" mission to run? Where is the complexity. Where is the surprise factor, where is anything that would make me go "whoa"? instead they show a run-of-the-mill mission and its boring gameplay.....really? Is this the best script CRoberts can come up with? How bland and boring will the campaign be? Really the future looks grim for Star Citizen.
I laughed out loud when the ship got destroyed after a few hits, this is supposed to be a "big" ship already? But this brings me directly to the next issue. Damage models. The buggy showed loaded damage models. You never saw how damage was inflicted, it was simply there on the next exterior footage. We had really awesome explosions showcased in editor and ATVs years ago(?) yet none of these things made it into this demonstration. Big ball of light and vehicles as well as ships disassemble like legos upon destruction. So explosions we saw back then are either an illusion or too complex to integrate. Both explanations dont really calm me when it comes to this project.
Same as a bad movies script will offer no surprises and fails to hide an obvious outcome from the start this demonstration gave me a LOL moment when the Idriss appeared. The only "surprise" I had was that it was only an Idriss and not a Bengal carrier. Obviously the Idriss "spawned in" instead of approaching the moon and it looked "okay" when it hung there in higher altitude but became more and more ugly the closer it came. Seriously....one of the ugliest ships I saw so far in Star Citizen. Its a little strange that such a massive ship would have such "high heels" (landing gear) making it rest like a mile above the surface. Was the Idriss even supposed to be landable? Many capital ships are built and operate in space only because they cannot handle gravity after a certain size. Never mind. Of course this requires a ramp that seems to make up for 30% of the ships size and is absolutely MASSIVE compared to the rest of the ship giving it a comical appearance and no feeling of grandeur whatsoever. If I would ve paid 2500 dollars for this piece of junk I would melt it or go for a refund now.
BTW, CRoberts comment about the Gladius being "from the Idriss of course" I dont believe for a second. The interior didnt strike me as big instead I was wondering how a Gladius would fit in there never mention starting and landing on that thing, the openings were tiny. The landing fields atmospherics shield was a nice touch tho. Going to the captain doesnt show the ships massive interior, its a small flight deck (not very high either regarding the lift sequence) then going through a corridor directly to the bridge was was again tiny for a ship that size. I dont have the Idriss's specs nor do I feel like looking them up but do whatever we saw match the supposed scale of this thing?
Yesterday I was a little torn about the presentation. Lots of cringe moment and obvious flaws countered by eye candy and at least something like a game loop. Today after I had the time to go through my impressions again and think about what everything means I come up with the conclusion that 2017 was as bad as 2016 because both presentations are probably non-existent as of now (2016 never was, 2017 I dont believe exists but we ll see) and even tho polished with an insane effort trying to show off progression and successfull development leave me with the impression that they didnt have any break-throughs of any kind and if THIS is what we have after 5 years and 150+ million dollars I ll never go to see the finished and released Star Citizen (and I m past 40). Instead the previously shown in-editor footage about supposed "raw" ideas and first attempts looked far better and more developed then what I witnessed yesterday.
edit: of course CRoberts remark of "oh this isnt 3.0 this is 3.1 and beyond" at the end leaves me with my mouth wide open and tempts me to use language not fit for children or this forum
