The Star Citizen Thread V10

Status
Thread Closed: Not open for further replies.
Why so cynical? At least his zero G space bulldozer concept in this movie was truly original.

Perhaps even unique. History doesn't appear to recall any other director in the film industry who sought to copy this bit of avant garde ingenuity to date :geek:

Unprecedented zero G space bulldozers, to non Newtonian fluid mechanics driven space swimming pools, toilets, and sinks. CR may be a horrifically flawed Homo Sapiens. But you have to admit he has no peer where the school of hand wavium physics are concerned. :giggle:
Also no quasars just outside our solar system (and this is the guy doing the BDSSE).
 
Re legal shenanigans latest, the Gard Freq guys got you covered:

https://www.twitch.tv/videos/436024882?sr=a&t=3231s
This is getting juicy again.

Their postscript chat about discovery made me think: If Cry really are out for blood more than money, as they claim, and they were to find a smoking gun during discovery... It's possible they won't just settle and keep it all behind closed doors.

Drama. That's what I'm saying. There's been an uptick in drama potential ;)

---

Long way to go though. Much unseemly wrestling required in the middle. Was expecting it all to collapse in a tedious choke hold as it was. Nice to see a new challenger bound into the ring and smack someone with a metal chair ;)
 
Last edited:
Can we get a TL;DL? A bit busy cooking a curry.
  • Ortwin seems to have forgotten some key punctuation. Purely by accident. Developing & selling SQ42 as a separate game may still be an issue. (Previously CIG claimed only at the point of launching the game from a non-SC launcher would they be culpable of the above. Seems they are separate clauses though).
  • CIG's own lawyer's lang seems to have been used against them, saying Cryengine code is in the game (?)
  • The new lawyers are cheaper, so that throws the bond valuation off. (Plus something about 2mil being a suspiciously made-up valuation).
  • Crytek say they're out for justice more than money.
  • They claim the 'score' is kinda 1:1 now, because they got CIG to give them the code fixes post-litigation. So the case isn't a landslide for CIG as claimed, making the grounds for bond shakier still.
  • GuardFreq guy suspects Crytek & Skadden parted ways because Crytek really do want blood, won't have wanted to agree on a target settlement figure, annoying Skadden who'll just want the cash pot at the end of the rainbow.
  • GuardFreq guy is impressed with the new plucky little lawyers. Thinks they landed blows, although glossed over Crytek's financial stability regarding the bond.
  • Says ultimately in the judge's hands now though. She may still push for bond, but there seems to be claims that require discovery now. (If bond required will be a test of Crytek's thirst for blood).


And some other stuff.

BUM

(But Understand MyfriendthatIamnotalawyer).
 
Last edited:
Good geek-out with pull quotes on SA:


Re: coming out swinging;
quote:
While CIG may yearn to stop using the CryEngine in order to avoid the requirements of the GLA, it did not do so. In fact, CIG’s bond motion is inextricably entwined with its contention that it “switched” from the CryEngine to the Lumberyard Engine. Yet, CIG’s own nuanced statements indicate that CIG did not actually replace the CryEngine code embedded in the game with the Lumberyard Engine code. Instead, the “switch” suggested by CIG was nothing more than CIG electing to enter anew license agreement with Amazon whereby CIG apparently licensed the CryEngine—for a second time.

CIG’s apparent decision to take a second license does not render its agreement with Crytek null and void. At least as long as CIG is using the CryEngine code, it is bound by the terms of the GLA whether it calls the code the CryEngine or the Lumberyard Engine. This thread that underlies many of CIG’s arguments, once pulled, will unravel CIG’s premature claims of victory and will lead to Crytek meeting many if not all of its objectives in this litigation.
And, regarding the bond;

quote:
California Code of Civil Procedure § 1030provides that a defendant may move to require the plaintiff to post a bond where “the plaintiff resides out of the state or is a foreign corporation and [] there is a reasonable possibility that the moving defendant will obtain judgment in the action or special proceeding.” Cal. Civ. Proc. Code § 1030. Here, CIG posits that it will be entitled, under paragraph 10.8 of the GLA,to an award (i.e., judgment) of attorneys’ fees and costs. Paragraph 10.8 limits such awards only to a prevailing party. CIG suggests that if it prevails on some claims or if Crytek is not awarded a large monetary award, then CIG is a prevailing party. This is not how a prevailing party is defined in cases such as this, and CIG has done virtually none of the analysis that would be required to show even a reasonable possibility of who willbe a prevailing party in this action, if anyone.
[...]

quote:
CIG provides none of this analysis. It has not considered or discussed the actual relief sought by Crytek. It has not even attempted to identify or discuss Crytek’s litigation objectives and Crytek’s chances of achieving those objectives.It has not considered the impact of other relevant facts, such as the fact that Crytek has already secured CIG’s delivery of its bug fixes as a result of this lawsuit.
That last line is actually quite telling, but part of the 'repair of injuries' attempt that's intended to sway the court in making it an honest mistake that they didn't actually do it before the lawsuit. This is actually quite weak, IMO.

quote:
As an initial matter, there appears to be a significant disconnect between the declaration evidence CIG submitted in support of its motion, and the arguments made in the motion itself. As CIG acknowledges, it developed Star Citizen and Squadron 42 using Crytek’s CryEngine video game development platform. Dkt. 57-2 (Freyermuth Declaration), at ¶ 7-8. It did so under the terms of the GLA dated November 20, 2012. Id. On April 30, 2016, CIG obtained another license to the CryEngine embedded in Star Citizen from Amazon in addition to rights to an Amazon game engine known as Lumberyard.

Id.at 9.In its brief, CIG describes taking this second license as a“switch” to the Lumberyard engine. Dkt. 57-1, at 3. CIG further argues in its brief that “Crytek’s code will no longer be in use.” Id. at 13.In contrast, Mr. Freyermuth’s actual declaration statements do not say any such thing: “Amazon granted CIG a license to use in Star Citizen and Squadron 42 not only Lumberyard, but also the version of CryEngine that was then embedded in the games’ source code. Following execution of the Amazon license, CIG began developing the games under the Amazon license. When CIG releases Squadron 42 to the public, the game engine source code will be licensed under this Amazon agreement, not the GLA.” Dkt. 57-2, at ¶ 9
(Their emphasis)

quote:
Mr.Freyermuth did not testify that the CryEngine code already embedded in Star Citizen and Squadron 42 was removed from those games, and, on information and belief, to do so would be a technical impossibility absent starting development over from scratch. Rather, Mr. Freyermuth is suggesting that CIG “switched” licenses from the GLA to the Amazon license.Two points follow from this. First, CIG’s arguments in its brief that “Crytek’s code will no longer be in use” appear to either be inaccurate or avery loose characterization of the facts. Second, while CIG is no doubt free to take a second license to the CryEngine from Amazon, CIG cannot unilaterally revoke the GLA by doing so. So long as the CryEngine remains embedded in CIG’s games, CIG must abide by the GLA and is currently in breach of multiple terms of the GLA.
This actually feels like a really weak point to me, unless they have actual code, the submitted bug fixes reference CryEngine code and are dated post-GLA, or they can make the determination between Lumberyard and CryEngine. This could actually force Amazon into the fight, but only in the Amicus Curae or letter format clarifying the difference between CryEngine and Lumberyard according to the contract Amazon signed.

Source code and the source code history would be the holy grail here.

quote:
Because CIG remains bound by the GLA
This actually made me laugh. it's a bold strategy based on the lack of termination clause in the GLA.

Under this, they're going after;

  • 'Credits'
  • 'Bug Fixes'
quote:
CIG does not explain how the term “annually” does not constitute a fixed time. Nor do the cases relied on by CIG suggest that the requirement for annual delivery is not “fixed.” Indeed, there are only two possible, reasonable understandings of “annually” under the GLA: once every year on the anniversary of the GLA’s execution or December 31 of every year. CIG’s attempts to impose a duty on Crytek,who was not in a position to know when CIG implemented bug fixes,to request bug fixes is facially absurd. If CIG implemented bug fixes, it was required to provide them annually.
This is actually solid, given that the bug fixes have apparently been supplied on presentation of the lawsuit. CIG have now demonstrated that they had them, and also curiously don't explain why they hadn't handed them over before.

(I'm 100% certain that Ortwin telegraphed their feeling in terms that they believed that CryTek would have gone bust and released them from obligations to that Company. 110% sure, even, because it's the main thrust of their opposing argument)

* Bugsmashers

quote:
At the outset, CIG does not dispute that it published portions of Crytek’s confidential CryEngine source code without permission. Instead, CIG sets forth a number of reasons why its publishing of the CryEngine code in breach of the GLA should be excused.
[...]

quote:
CIG’s “breach is acceptable as long as Crytek can’t prove monetary harm” attitude is cavalier and disturbing.
This is all red meat and makes Skaddens look a bit weak.

* Squadron 42

quote:
CIG’s primary argument—that there can be no breach until Squadron 42 is released—lacks merit.
quote:
CIG had no right to use CryEngine in development of a stand-alone game such as Squadron 42. Because that development has already occurred and continues to occur, CIG is wrong that the “time for performance” has not yet arrived. Dkt. 57-1 at 12.CIG premises its argument on the description of the Game provided in Exhibit 2 of the GLA. In relevant part, that description provides:For the avoidance of doubt, the Game does not include any content being sold and marketed separately,and not being accessed through the Star Citizen Game client, e.g. a fleet battle RTS sold and marketed as a separate,standalone PC game that does not interact with the main Star Citizen game (as opposed to an add-on / DLC to the Game).
* Faceware
quote:
CIG asserts Crytek’s information with respect to this claim is simply wrong. While Crytek has good reason to believe this disclosure occurred, it would be happy to learn it is wrong. Discovery will quickly resolve the question. Crytek’s objective here, as with the BugSmasher claim,is simply to insure that CIG has not and does not wrongfully disclose the CryEngine source code for its own benefit.
Now this is interesting, because it's one of the first hints that they might have some details from someone else, or they're bluffing hard.

quote:
In addition, CIG has requested an excessive bond in the amount of $2,193,298.45 to secure CIG’s putative award of costs and attorneys’ fees. Here CIG asserts that the claims are unusually complex while simultaneously asserting that Crytek’s remaining claims are “meritless” and “only a rump set of quibbles.”
They have a point.

The rest of the document points out that 'expert witness fees' are not covered under 1033.5, they appear to have pulled their number out of their because they've barely started discovery, and some of the points to be answered - like exposing code in Bugsmashers - are fairly cut and dried.

Eric Buresh has revived my interest in the case because he's hit on some neat aspects to this.
 
Hello,

SC probably postponed for 10 years more if The Visionnaire is watching E3:


Bye.
I was all set to go "Hurry up and take my money!"

... then I realized it was an XBox exclusive, which not only meant I wouldn't be able to play it on the PC, but more importantly, I wouldn't be able to play it in VR. :(😭😢

edit:

It's on PC. The whole announcement revolves around how Game Pass is coming to PC as an extension of the existing XBox store integration — a lot of what they presented was there to give the game pass a wide lineup on launch.
:):D:)😍
 
Last edited:
CIG’s “breach is acceptable as long as Crytek can’t prove monetary harm” attitude is cavalier and disturbing.
This is all red meat and makes Skaddens look a bit weak.
The problem is there is no definition of what constitutes a termination or a breach of contract in the GLA. Both parties here are guilty of having signed off that weak agreement that opens the door to everything... CT will have to prove actual damages just to start having a leg to stand on, that's why CiG can afford to be that cavalier at the moment.
 
Its not really my thing, but SQ42 and SC have insane amount of lore.
Agreed. They do have a lot of lore, but to me it seems somewhat derivative (although I am biased). What is unique about SC's universe? It feels like a weird fusion of Star Trek, Star Wars, a bunch of other scifi universes (Bladerunner?) and 21st century capitalism/consumerism.

Compare that to Asimov's Foundation series or better yet Frank Herbert's Dune. Herbet's world is mind blowing; the lack of computers, the role of spice, mentants, the feudal/imperial political structure, the Spacing Guild. Granted all these elements are based on existing tropes and historical events, but the way Herbert combined them, made them more than the sum of their parts.

I don't expect video games to attain a similar level of world building (although Troika/Black Isle games come close), but CIG could have at least tried to create something distinctive. Instead we get Star Trek style aliens, Star Wars inspired space combat, Bladerunner aesthetics and Starship Troopers derived "citizenship" mechanics. And a bunch of their ships/vehicles are almost 1:1 clones of other famous spaceship/properties. Motorbike DLC with "Sons of Anarchy" marketing? Come on!

I could have come up with SC's lore in a few weeks of dedicated work.

It's not going to be the whole thing without robots finding loopholes in the three laws, though. :)
That's far beyond Robert's imagination. Wing Commander (the movie) is the best he can do. ;)
 
Agreed. They do have a lot of lore, but to me it seems somewhat derivative (although I am biased).
In a way its hard not to be derivative in some way these days, with so much sci-fi out there. Try thinking of some sort of sci-fi setting/feature that hasn't already been done... its not easy.

On the other hand, CR makes it a bit easy to compare. The sandworm was the most flagrant example. I mean, why a worm? Why not a beatle? Or some other desert creature? If nothing else, surely Ortwin should have said "Nice Chris, except, if we go with this, we might run into IP problems with the Herbert estate, why not a different creature just to be on the safe side?" Then there was the sudden refocusing on delivering Arccorp after the cyberpunk 2077 demo was shown off. Sure, they were already working on it, and had been for a while, but it seems like it was suddenly all hands on deck to get that shipped.

There is a reason there is a meme "Looks like Chris recently watched...."
 
The problem is there is no definition of what constitutes a termination or a breach of contract in the GLA. Both parties here are guilty of having signed off that weak agreement that opens the door to everything... CT will have to prove actual damages just to start having a leg to stand on, that's why CiG can afford to be that cavalier at the moment.
Yep. That's why CIG's most important asset is Ortwin.
 
Well I played a bit 3.5.1 patch.....and seems pretty meh,all in all didn't notice ANY significant changes or improvements worth to mention except that cash-grab do a paint-job thing......oh yeah stability seems worst then before because I experience few crashes but then again that could be also server issue and lame netcode as usual when servers get flooded and nothing to do particularly with this latest patch.....
Well, 3.5.1 seems to be mainly a lot of minor bugfixes so if there is any new things and improvements it will most likely not show up until 3.6

https://robertsspaceindustries.com/spectrum/community/SC/forum/4/thread/star-citizen-alpha-3-5-1-live-1798586-patch-notes
 
Hello,

SC probably postponed for 10 years more if The Visionnaire is watching E3:


Bye.
While it looks amazing they do have a slightly simpler task ahead of them there.

Using already existing maps and "bumping" the height of flat objects to make them 3d is giving us a damn nice visual from up on high, even low altitude flight will be pleaseant.

It's basically google maps with some refinement on the 3d part.
That said i have a feeling that if you would land anywhere close to some of those buildings and trees it would not look as pleasant.
Looks a damn sight better than older flight sims though - but why the hell they sell a SIM to Xbox is beyond my understanding.

Here's an example of close up graphics of the ground so they are cheating a bit.

 
Agreed. They do have a lot of lore, but to me it seems somewhat derivative (although I am biased). What is unique about SC's universe? It feels like a weird fusion of Star Trek, Star Wars, a bunch of other scifi universes (Bladerunner?) and 21st century capitalism/consumerism.

Compare that to Asimov's Foundation series or better yet Frank Herbert's Dune. Herbet's world is mind blowing; the lack of computers, the role of spice, mentants, the feudal/imperial political structure, the Spacing Guild. Granted all these elements are based on existing tropes and historical events, but the way Herbert combined them, made them more than the sum of their parts.

snip

I could have come up with SC's lore in a few weeks of dedicated work.
As an avid Sci-Fi fan reading a LOT of books on this topic I m going to say that the lore, even tho maybe plentiful (I dont know...is it?) I am not impressed with SCs story, history or characters. The graphics help a lot to trigger your own fantasy but the world/game itself offers very little to support any big picture. When I take on a new book these days its almost always 2 things that hook me.

  • plot/story
  • characters

And of course the best ones combine these 2 elements to create something special in my mind that I yearn for. I also demand a high level of technology, be it fictional or not...as long as it is detailed.
At my age I dont simply accept fairy tales anymore but demand a certain degree of realism. As I know a lot more about the topic since my 20s my expectations also grew. Today I m unable to enjoy most cincema movies due to their limits and focus (action, eye candy, 90-120 mins). Character conflict and development can be incredibly fascinating to me and this is an area only experienced and well.....good authors excell in. Earlier in my life I thought books were boring and of course my limited attention span didnt work. Today I value the level of tension, realism and story building that a book can provide which a movie simply cannot.

I prefer high-level sci-fi topics but I gotta say that there are books from the 50s which also hook me even tho their described technology is laughably primitive and simple compared to todays standards.

Star Citizen shows a remarkable lack of background story or realism to the uninvolved which I clearly am. I understand and accept todays games focus and limitations but if you advertise "fidelity" then you should at least attempt to provide some IMO. Maybe SQ42 will drive the character focus a bit more but I dont have any hopes after watching the extremely cheesy and simple dialogues so far. There is nothing complex or mysterious about Star Citizen to me. Nothing of the company complexities like in shadowrun or the level of technology that permeates into every humans life down to the lowest caste and changes humanity after it cracks FTL travel, artificial gravity or tolerance to the void. In this regard Cyberpunk has a high bar to crack for me. Graphics are just a secondary thing and nothing exceptional anymore today.

Star Citizen instead has only one strength....its visuals. And that strength already isnt anything special anymore. The characters are either forgettable or non-existing (because tech-demo). The tech demonstrated in the game is primitive or old-school and usually handwavium rather then believable mechanic. Some games try to go after the 80s flair specifically and intentionally while providing a high-tech environment but in SCs case I d dare to say the result is because of incompetence and lack of skill rather then intent.

Maybe Star Citizen will become more appealing once they start with NPC story-lines allowing players to experience a certain NPCs past and development due to your own performance but I really doubt that. By this I mean starting small and depending on your results in each mission giving observers the impression of how capabilities and options increase. Maybe even friendships which allow you to delve into a NPCs past and inner thoughts....creating an empathic link rather then a simple "hey I need money, better talk to Miles" train of thought.

SC missions I know of are extremely simple, shallow and have no impact on the world. This is something CIG needs to work on in order to reach a level of quality that matches todays games. The thing is that these things are hardly dependant on "blockers" except maybe if the "blocker" (how convinient that this vague term is simply accepted by the community and can mean anything) in question is the lack of skill or talent. But then SC never will become what I expect of it.

If we stay with the terms of "shallow" and "simple" pretty much every aspect of Star Citizen today matches these descriptions. The game world is simple, the planets...while looking good enough...have next to no content and are pretty shallow when it comes to diversity. Character development right now is simple...there is only one goal ingame....aquiring the next ship and more credits aka monetary increase of value (both of which can be paid for with RL money). If you deny this explanation then the only alternative is that Star Citizen is a sandbox with no goal. Some games provide this but at least they challenge the player with ingame mechanics and features. Star Citizens only challenge right now are its bugs which you fight and battle from the first minute. If you indeed dont encounter any the gameplay consists of bliss and pacification rather then engaging gamepplay. NPCs are simple and shallow. Companies providing all the ships are non-entities meaning you know of them because of the ship you fly or the armor/weapon you use but otherwise they have no impact on your playstyle or experience. The gameplay I m able to witness is bland, boring and not engaging at all tho I will admit that watching isnt the same as playing. There simply is no complexity that would entice me to try it out or play for myself tho that depends on an individuals preferences.

The flight model is unfinished, buggy, unrealistic and arcadey
The mining is simplistic and would drive me nuts due to its lack of complexity
The planets/moons are looking simple to me, due to the level or repetition in tiles and if people are praising the level of detail on the ground I can only say....its a barren landscape....how hard is it to look good?
Map navigation, ship travel, character movement, level of technology demonstrated on stations, atmosphere.....all these things are extremely simple or shallow in Star Citizen.


And people have the nerve to call ED "shallow"? I mean thats your right of course but its when these people praise SC for qualities that they deny ED that they instantly lose any credibility with me.

For example my wife also would consider ED shallow and boring. But she would at least stay consistent and simply disregard Star Citizen because its so much worse then ED is in these terms. And yet this is a behavior that you encounter often whenever you get into contact with the SC community. I asked myself about the reasons for this disparity in perception and because people in question usually are not forthcoming with info or truthful have to explain the reasons to myself instead.

You are a dreamer.
You put most of your focus on eye candy.
You are invested.
You have an ulterior motive
You are a troll

Now some of these points are not necessarily negative in nature. But they all usually are perceived as such. The term "newbie" is a descriptor that I used a lot in my past....often on myself. Today its a label of shame and ridicule. Pay to win also is a descriptor that isnt negative at first. Instead it gives you a hint of what to expect. But when it comes to fairness or equality (something that the west clearly values more then the east) these games usually fail. Being a dreamer today has the same taboo like "being a gamer" 30 years ago. Its an immediate title of shame and wastefulness. Dreaming is only "good" if you translate this quality into monetary success. Otherwise its a waste and something to be laughed about.

I have the luxury of time available today. And while only a few years ago I filled that void of activity with games I since have changed my perspective on life and how to use my time on this world. And whenever I have free time on my hands I dont switch to "braindead" mode or bombard myself with noise and eye explosions but rather "think" about things. You could say I dream just that today many of my "dreams" examine various lacks I observe in the world. A war, another humans situation, my own relationship etc etc. I dream up different states/conditions then think about how realistic they are, or how they came together and of course how I can influence them. Coming to conclusions or understanding isnt something that happens in a flash (mostly, for somesituations they do). You absolutely require time doing nothing but think in order to progress. You either do it consciously or subconsciously but its a requirement you cannot jump.

Star Citizen has very early lost my interest as a game and gained my fascination with the human psychy. Its because listening to SC fans describing the game as something its clearly not that peaks my interest as to why these people perceive SC so different to me or why they lie in the first place. Often enough its simply pushing back. You think you are under attack so you defend yourself. And because this is the Frontier forum most defend by lashing out against Elite Dangerous.

I was about to write a whole lot more but I think it would side-track even more then it already does and it would result in an absolute massive wall of text :)

We do have a wide range of SC fans in this thread (most people are skeptics by now, only a few keep an optimistic view) but the above is the reason why I value the insight of some and simply disregard others. I dont know any of these people and while some provide insight into their lifes its not necessary or a requirement (in addition its a description given by a stranger on the internet so.....). Just the quality of their posts is responsible for how I perceive these individuals.

Now the number of adults or "grown ups" is already pretty scarce on the internet but I feel that the SC community collected an unhealthy amount of qualities that are responsible for its perception of being "toxic".
 
While it looks amazing they do have a slightly simpler task ahead of them there.

Using already existing maps and "bumping" the height of flat objects to make them 3d is giving us a damn nice visual from up on high, even low altitude flight will be pleaseant.

It's basically google maps with some refinement on the 3d part.
That said i have a feeling that if you would land anywhere close to some of those buildings and trees it would not look as pleasant.
Looks a damn sight better than older flight sims though - but why the hell they sell a SIM to Xbox is beyond my understanding.
It's on PC. The whole announcement revolves around how Game Pass is coming to PC as an extension of the existing XBox store integration — a lot of what they presented was there to give the game pass a wide lineup on launch.

Here's an example of close up graphics of the ground so they are cheating a bit.
Because of course CIG don't cheat at all...
 
Because of course CIG don't cheat at all...
Did i say that? They all cheat in one way or another depending on the purpose of the game they are designing.

Im just saying that their graphics are used in a completely different manner. One is designed to look pretty from above and the other are designed to try and look pretty from every angle...not that they succeed.
 
Status
Thread Closed: Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom