Cheerio E@gleEye, welcome to the discussion
Is that really the case? Some of the game elements are 32 bit and some are 64 bit? Can you pls elaborate? I only can see a 64 bit Star Citizen executive ?
We had this topic some time ago. Cryengine is a 32bit engine. Thats the foundation. Because a 32bit base provides numeric limits regarding size it was rather restricting for a space game with a suggested "massive" gameworld. CIG eventually "hacked" the positioning and increased the numeric values to 64bit. Of course CIGs official statement was so vague and cryptic that the community took it as a "we changed our engine from 32 to 64 bit...horray" which is simply not what happened. We even had a SC dfeveloper in here arguing against the "SC is still 32bit" posts but he made it abundandly clear that
even tho SC is indeed still 32 bit, the positioning is in a 64bit format so its a hybrid. The problem is that the rest of the game still calculates with 32bit which is a problem when you provide it with coordinates that are hundreds or thousands of times smaller then the previous minimum.
You fall out of the cockpit and suddenly you are several lightminutes away from where your ship is...is just an example of the consequences you are looking at.
In fact the 64bit coding in the engine has the only task to increase the world size but we can see at the moment that it comes at a price. The engine being unable to track and render everything, attempts to throttle data traffic to prevent server crashing and of course the official acknowledgment that CIG is unable to add new stuff (bascially because the 32bit engine is stretched to its limit already). To be honest, adding a 64bit positioning probably has created more issues then it was worth. But Chris wanted to compete with ED in regards to galaxy-spanning game world. Its not a 64bit engine. And regardless what the launcher exe says (devs could easily name it SC_better_then_64bit.exe but I bet the 64bit is a marker for the windows system) you just need to take a look at the code engine SC is using to see what kind of a bit system it is.Its Cryengine 3.
People like to call it "Star Engine" but we have no knowledge about the modifications CIG managed to work in or what their original deal with Cryengine was, enabling them to do that in the first place. Amazon purchased Cryengine root rights in 2015 for 50-70 million dollars which allows them to change the source code or add all kinds of modifications. Obviously Amazon has more skill in this regard and managed to produce a stable engine with its Lumberyard, which probably is the reason why CIG switched to Lumberyard (without telling its community about it). When people found out the official statement was that it was an easy switch, didnt take much work but also that they talked to Amazon for some time about this already....most transparent project?
Lumberyard also is based on cryengine 3 which explains why the switch was possible in the first place. Instead of "meshing" both engines I do believe that CIG dumped most of its star engine in the process and simply loaded all the assets into lumberyard instead...but again, this is guesswork. Some other folks in here with actual hands-on experience have theorized about what really happened because "simply switching engines" doesnt work or at least is very work-intensive. If CIG indeed managed the switch within 3 days then it must be something else.
In regards to SCs 64bit capabilities look up terms like "world space coordinates" and "edge blending". The operating system underneath is still 32bit.
And thats exactly what I like the most about it.
You and a whole lot of other people. I get it. But just as I said (and what other companies have adressed as well by now) why is this making SC unique? How is NMS different? Doesnt X4 provide everything SC still tries to do? Theres a host of other games which mesh FPS, space legs and space flying together. What makes Star Citizen stand out among the competition except for the drama? Its a great immersion tool, too bad VR is a no-show but again performance-issues and inherent design flaws which are probably created by all the high-polycount and polished assets and of course not having a clear directive and end goal. Star Citizen is basically what I would call a "Blender" in german (Dazzler is the english term I believe). Its
created to impress by looks alone and it heavily monetizes that quality by hinting and suggesting that even this early is looks amazing and there is so much more to come. But there really isnt all that much underneath the shiny skin. Or at least nothing that would be extraordinary, groundbreaking or even impressive.
When you say you dont know another company that even attempts this then I would like you to take a look at the games I listed and explain why they dont count?
From my standpoint Star Citizen is running on fumes or better....an illusion. People often admit that they are waiting for all the incredible things to come while they entertain themselves with the current mediocre and tedious gameplay. And I m sure you can convince yourself to overlook certain problems when you are constantly staring at the carrot dangling in front of you. But various red flags indicate that Star Citizen very well might run at 100% capacity already and what we have right now is the absolute best it can provide outside critical changes (like a true engine switch to 64bit for example which would basically "reset" the development).
Other games also come close or even pass SC in various areas. SC fans try to defend their chosen game by bashing other games shortcomings or point out how SC is going "to do everything at once" but they usually word it so that it comes across like it has accomplished that already when in reality Star Citizen is still trying to get there.
Star Citizen exists as this grand idea or "vision" that is very likely years away and people who enjoy it at this very moment probably have a perverted perception of the current PU simply because they look forward so much. So many people who are rooting for SC comtinue to think that it has crushed so many problems already when the best CIG was able to do was to push it ahead or come up with a temporary solution to satisfy fans. The flight model "should" be an absolute critical factor in this game yet in its third iteration its still lacking, doesnt really have any unique attributes and looks more like copy-pasted content from other games. Sure, you can still walk through your ship or go EVA but these are two seperate things and the flight mdoel still isnt any "better" just because you can walk around.
So it seems you are more a guy who can only have fun with a finished game? .
Pretty much yep. I have tried to get into early access or alpha/beta games and I also was highly motivated back then. Finally a chance to bring myself in and maybe shape the game into something I can be proud of. I imagined all the hard work I would be putting in, meticuslously testing stuff for bugs and problems and providing the devs with much needed data to enhance and improve the game. In reality tho being in EA, alpha or beta you pretty much are reduced to being a tester. An unpaid one when you provide the second-most valuable thing you can for free....your time. Your payoff is seeing new advances before anybody else does and occasionally (this is very different from company to company) being able to influence design decisions through a poll or by feedback. The developers "can" provide a lot of info if its a transparent project but thats not Star Citizen (the propaganda videos are not transparency). So you are provided with a new build, run past the problems, glitches and bugs and endure the unrefined state that these games in that stage usually represent. Placeholder graphics, limited world size, disabled mechanics etc. Of course whatever you "achieve" is wiped on the next build. This routine is
extremely frustrating for me and I burned out very fast so yeah.....early access or alpha/beta isnt for me.
Star Citizen is a wolf hiding among the sheep in full sight in this regard. Where other alphas/betas usually look like crap or rudimentary Star Citizen looks fantastic. And people pick this up thinking "wow....its only an alpha and it already looks this amazing, imagine how great the end product will be" failing to realize that SCs asset polishing and advertisement is
designed that way to invoke this kind of thinking. Its manipulative and its counterproductive to the projects progress rate because so many of the employees are busy adding the shine and gloss instead of creating critical (but boring) foundations. And this line of reasoning and thinking has been demonstrated by CIG since 2013....which makes me think if they ever really tried to do as they say....or if it was simple ego promising the stars and once they realized they cant they just keep going in order to secure the money.
When you say "its intersting to try new features" you should realize that its new features in SC only, its not new features in games overall. But that means that your view on the industry is pretty narrow and tunnelvision like because you fail to realize how much other games are advancing at the same time. Apart from Star Citizens space legs.....what else is that that is "groundbreaking" or even "new"?
Going through stations
Performing pick-up quests
Cave walking
Planetary surfaces
Dogfighting
Multiplayer gameplay
theres a ton of things I could list but they all have one thing in common. They are tried and tested options available in other games already. Often with deeper complexity, more variety and fitting into the game design. Star Citizen resembles a bowl of things thrown together and the "Chris Roberts probably watched the latest game x trailer" is a known meme exactly for that reason. New announcements usually come as a surprise, are often implemented without prior warning or announcement even tho the devs must ve been working on it for some time already (again...transparency)
Star Citizens current state suggests one priority. One constant.
It looks good and thats really its only task as well. To generate interest, to generate that "hope" and start people "dreaming". Regardless what happens...it has to look good. Thats pretty much it. And obviously it works on the current gaming generation too.
Yeah, the flight model isnt too great but it LOOKS so fantastic.
Have you see SC in 4K?
Gameplay is often jerky, stuttering, freezing or suffers from a pretty long list of issues. And what happens? People learn to navigate around those issues, they learn procedures to minimize bugs and glitches. Any kind of negative impression is immediately disregarded or sideline with the internal justification "yeah, its an alpha" or "man, this LOOKS great". And people do this because the issues dont vanish. Bugs and glitches persist through whole versions of the game. People integrate detours into their testing because the game hardly changes or advances anymore and even tho bugs are acknowledged many seem to be ignored seeing as they keep popping up as if nobody adresses them.
For me it is an interesting journey
Me as well
Its just mostly a constant reminder how to NOT do it for the most part. Star Citizen is known to do things differently and companies trying to pick a new path or untested water isnt uncommon. but usually the results justify the different approach. Some kind of benefit or advantage that negates the risk and additional effort mounted by the company.
Star Citizens track record is 8 years of development, burning through 350+ millions of dollars and its still in alpha. Worse...the unique opportunity in 2012 is already gone as a lot of games try to create what SC tries as well or have even completed their work only to realize the market isnt as big as SCs interest suggested (X4 sales). I havent seen the development "speeding up" or even recognize the foundational quality that would justify that kind of progress history. CIGs first attempts at something are usually lacking, break the existing alpha and cost time and more money so eventually copy mechanics and features from established games just trying to give em a SC spin. It tells me that CIG is pretty clueless for the most part and they are scrambling to come up with new things they can advertise to keep interest and monetary funding. Listening to developers gives me the impression that they dont even know what they are talking about for the most part or people talking about completely different things.
Of course, I dont keep the last awesome 4K resolution screenshot in my mind overlaying all the time which could give this performance or cringe a positive spin.
And of course, regardless how little hope and trust I have in SC and CIG....they still can at any time prove me wrong. But SCs quality comes down to the users patience and understanding, not to the products qualilties which could be tested and evaluated in an indisputable way. It resembles religion by now. Believers resist reality and outside hostility on pure faith, preach their rules to each other to fortify and enforce the gospel and when it gets rough they always summon the endgame, paradise or judgement that will reward the people sticking with it through hardship.
I ve been playing games for a long time now. And I have NEVER seen the level of patience, forgiveness or dedication that is directed at Star Citizen. Its still "only" a video game but obviously many people have lost this distinction and gone full-in making it very much a personal matter which is a mistake....because for CIG its all about the money.
