The Star Citizen Thread V10

Status
Thread Closed: Not open for further replies.

Mole HD

Mole HD
Agony_Aunt said:
OA is obviously just a hater trying to make SC look bad. Its AAAALLLPHHHAAAA!!!!
Click to expand...
OA didn't have to try particularly hard to make it look bad...it was absolutely horrendous. Strange thing was...it played fine in the PTU before going live.

Ci¬G released a quick fix patch to fix the server slow down (and other bugs) last night which did the job nicely though...didn't even stutter as much as it usually does.

OA hasn't played SC in quite a while...some of the control options have changed a bit since he last played as well as the bugs associated with them. There seemed to be some folks in the stream chat that were offering strange info and advice...pity I hadn't watched it live and joined in the chat...I could have saved him a few trips back to the menu and helped him find the ship doors and lifts at the least :)
 
Last edited:

McGlashan

McGlashan
LanceLord said:
The thing is since this feature is going to be so challenging to implement, there is a workaround. Space legs doesn't have to function literally the immersive way it does in SC or X4 Frontier. It can be subtle/suggestively implied like the way Rebel Galaxy handles space leg mobility in space stations.
Click to expand...

What I'd love to see in Elite's handling of space legs would be for them to make good on having no handwavium magic artifical gravity, so that you'd have to float around your ship Lone Echo style unless it was parked on a planet or rotating station. They could really up the fidels over SC's "we didn't even turn CryEngine's underwater functionality off, let alone gravity, but it's all canon, honest" approach with its horrifically janky grid transitions if they went full hard sci-fi. Not saying I have any idea at all how they might pull it off, of course, and I'm sure they'd just use magnetic boots as an excuse for regular first-person locomotion instead.
 
Last edited:

Agony_Aunt

Agony_Aunt
Mole HD said:
OA didn't have to try particularly hard to make it look bad...it was absolutely horrendous. Strange thing was...it played fine in the PTU before going live.
Click to expand...

More people hammering the servers probably was a factor. They still need to get that netcode improved.
 

Zetta

Zetta
In the video I used a press account, which CIG gave to me over three years ago. The purpose of these accounts is to enable the media to review the game and write articles, and to allow content creators to produce videos. The ships on the account are not mine. They do not appear in the hangar on the RSI website. They cannot be melted / traded-in. They cannot be refunded. They have no value beyond providing the ability for the user to create reviews / videos / livestreams.
Click to expand...

So these press accounts are really just advertising accounts.
 

Mole HD

Mole HD
Agony_Aunt said:
More people hammering the servers probably was a factor. They still need to get that netcode improved.
Click to expand...
After they applied the quick fix patch last night it was a night and day change from the 3.5.1 live release, they got rid of most of the silly ambient fog inside the ships and around landing areas as well as planetary atmospheres (it was like descending through thick fog)...to which I give a hearty thumbs up. It made the overall graphics look grainy and added absolutely nothing...

Now the graphics look tight and clear...plus it's certainly improved the overall performance of SC on the server side. I played for over 7 hours after the mini-patch..even touching base briefly with our Sovapid in the chat just before I logged off. I did a bit of everything. Cargo hauling, bounty hunting, mining, mission runs... Not one server crash during that time and relatively smooth with a few less bugs (there are still plenty)...which is a definite improvement over recent offerings.

Ambient fog and mist is fine and all that...when it actually just adds an ambience to certain areas...but the damned stuff was everywhere it shouldn't really be present, thick as soup for the most part which is really disconcerting inside yer ship and added nothing except to make the graphical quality look poorer than it actually is and slowed everything down to a stuttering crawl besides. FPS performance was reasonable by SC standards...but the game stuttered along with micro-pauses consistently so it wasn't really a client issue but more server related nonsense.

I noticed it immediately after launching with the new patch applied, not just graphically but also in the lack of stuttering and hitching SC has suffered from since it was added a few patches ago. Big improvement.
 
Last edited:

Frank

Frank
Mole HD said:
It was awful indeed, I gave up after an hour when it got worse instead of settling...latest quick fix patch to hit the PU from the PTU last night seems to work better. Nice seeing you on there tonight slumming it on the EU servers ;)
Click to expand...
I gave up watching after Ant just about made it to the city spaceport but crashed just just before he got there. That is a pretty looking planet tho. If the game ever gets more stable I might drop money on it just to land a craft on the top of skyscraper... with a bit of Vangelis playing in the background of course <grin>
 

Navigare Necesse Est

Navigare Necesse Est
LanceLord said:
This has been the case throughout the industry regardless of what gaming genre it happens to. On the prolific RPG/Simulation front Maxis (owned the simulation niche via groundbreaking titles like The Sims, Spore, SimCity), Mythic (Dark Age Camelot, Warhammer), Bioware (now apparently on its last legs with dud MVP of the year Anthem) are proof of that. This was almost the fate of Bungie had they not managed to survive/escape Activision cannibalism. And lucked out with literally walking away with full ownership of their IP and intellectual property rights intact.

I'm praying this is not going to be the case for Obsidian after they release The Outer Worlds. Or Rebel Galaxy Outlaw for that matter..... :cautious:

Disney continuing to permit EA exclusive developer rights/control of its Star War franchise will never cease to dumbfound me. Them allowing EA to defile the SW franchise has been a taboo crime against humanity.
Click to expand...
Now, now, Disney's been atrocious to the franchise via the movies just as well.
 

Zyll Goliat

Zyll Goliat
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.....
 

VR Golgot

VR Golgot
Mole HD said:
After they applied the quick fix patch last night it was a night and day change from the 3.5.1 live release, they got rid of most of the silly ambient fog inside the ships and around landing areas as well as planetary atmospheres (it was like descending through thick fog)...to which I give a hearty thumbs up. It made the overall graphics look grainy and added absolutely nothing...
Click to expand...

Won't somebody please think of Ben Parry...
 
Last edited:

chuchu_starship

chuchu_starship
Merkir said:
Continuing to play Devil's advocate, what is illegal about such a business model? If they have no legal obligation to deliver within a certain time frame (someone tell us all if there is, please), then why not continue this business model indefinitely, until such time as they are forced to eventually release the game (in whatever state) when the funds finally do dry up?
Click to expand...

It might not be illegal in the "judicial" sense, but CIG's actions definitely have elements of fraud due to Robert's decision to knowingly misrepresent the status of his product in order to secure revenue (e.g. him lying during CitCon 2016 that they were trargeting a Dec 2016 release date for 3.0).

In CIG's defense, pretty much all companies engage in similar fraud as well as multi-billion corruption schemes, tax scams, bribery and god knows what else. Lying and dishonesty is generally just the tip of the iceberg. And it's not like Roberts bribed some politician to make sure a copy of SC was purchased by every school in the US...
 
Last edited:

ECity

ECity
Merkir said:
Continuing to play Devil's advocate, what is illegal about such a business model? If they have no legal obligation to deliver within a certain time frame (someone tell us all if there is, please), then why not continue this business model indefinitely, until such time as they are forced to eventually release the game (in whatever state) when the funds finally do dry up?
Click to expand...
There are reasons why agencies like the SEC needed to be invented. Because of the widespread disastrous results of an unregulated market. This space needs to be regulated.
 

Viajero

Volunteer Moderator
Viajero
chuchu_starship said:
In CIG's defense, pretty much all companies engage in similar fraud as well multi-billion corruption schemes, tax scams, bribery and god knows what else. Lying and dishonesty is generally just the tip of the iceberg. And it's not like Roberts bribed some politician to make sure a copy of SC was purchased by every school in the US...
Click to expand...

The fact cases like Enron, Theranos or Lehman Brothers existed does not exempt CIG.

The scale of misleading or false advertising and misrepresentation (gap between sold and actuals) in the case of CIG is several orders of magnitude larger than your usual regular marketing “exaggerations”. If you can find examples of similar scale that went on unopposed for over 8 years I am all ears.
 
Last edited:

chuchu_starship

chuchu_starship
Viajero said:
The fact cases like Enron, Theranos or Lehman Brothers existed does not exempt CIG.
Click to expand...

I not in any way supporting or justifying CIG's behavior. I am just saying that at least Roberts isn't bribing government agencies for personal benefit. However, he did commit what to me looks like fraud by misrepresenting his offering.

Some of apple's marketing is in some ways comparable to CIG's approach. Something like "what happens on your iPhone stays on your iPhone" is a pre-meditated, malicious statement with direct intent of lying to consumers. Many other companies too...
 
Status
Thread Closed: Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom