The Star Citizen Thread v5

Status
Thread Closed: Not open for further replies.
Someone makes a prediction of what's going to happen and then it doesn't happen, doubt their ability to predict.
Someone claims in-depth knowledge of a subject and can't get basic info right about it without checking, doubt their in-depth knowledge.
Apply it to whomever you like.

So how do you explain 3.0 for the end of this year - I know you'll say it wasn't a promise, it was target/slated/internal date/an estimate/a goal.

But seriously - knowing what we know now about the switch to Lumberyard and 2.6 release and all the other crap behind the scenes how could anyone even hint at that with a straight face?
 
Someone makes a prediction of what's going to happen and then it doesn't happen, doubt their ability to predict.
Someone claims in-depth knowledge of a subject and can't get basic info right about it without checking, doubt their in-depth knowledge.
Apply it to whomever you like.

It's only 7PM. Shouldn't you be doing graphics or something? ;)
 
'Star Engine' is basically a modified CE3.x. There are two kinds of CE3.8, Crytek's and Amazon's. Star Engine switched from one to the other. They didn't abandon Star Engine as such, so I think ben assumed you were expecting them to drop CryEngine3.x all together in the future, which will never happen.

Ohh pls. we all know that LY is basically CE 3.8 with improved networking,the stock netcode is gone and replaced with something better...so let´s stop pretending OK.....maybe I didn express perfectly(Eng. is not not my native) when I said "totally abandon"sure they could "scavenge"some of their work I guess...but my point is clear CIG FAILED to improve their engine and there is evidence all over the place,I said before and will repeat again I think that engine-switch is step in good direction but that suddenly not going to amnesty all CR&CIG bad decisions..
 
Last edited:
So how do you explain 3.0 for the end of this year - I know you'll say it wasn't a promise, it was target/slated/internal date/an estimate/a goal.

But seriously - knowing what we know now about the switch to Lumberyard and 2.6 release and all the other crap behind the scenes how could anyone even hint at that with a straight face?
I'm not here to convince you that CIG makes all the right calls, like I said, I get why many people in this thread are disillusioned with the company. I just don't like watching the conversation circle on technically inaccurate reasons for disliking the company (or actually for liking, though that's more a problem on r/starcitizen than here). You want to do the "buy a Polaris" joke another three hundred pages, knock yourself out, I think it's a bit weak but there's no technical flaws so I'm not really interested.

- - - Updated - - -

It's only 7PM. Shouldn't you be doing graphics or something? ;)
Derek's not the only one who gets to go on vacation, y'know.
 
I'm not here to convince you that CIG makes all the right calls, like I said, I get why many people in this thread are disillusioned with the company. I just don't like watching the conversation circle on technically inaccurate reasons for disliking the company (or actually for liking, though that's more a problem on r/starcitizen than here). You want to do the "buy a Polaris" joke another three hundred pages, knock yourself out, I think it's a bit weak but there's no technical flaws so I'm not really interested.

I found the technical stuff in Derek's blog interesting - I've never really understood that side of it.

Which is why I commented on your initial reply which didn't go into any detail - from that pov I need something that appears to come from a background of knowledge and can rationally, clearly point out any flaws in it. I have no frame of reference so I'm completely dependent on other people's comments on the tecchie stuff.

I get why people get the hump with Derek - he's very good at getting under people's skin.

But I am genuinely trying to understand what the tecchie stuff is about.

My area of expertise is - I've been working in and around various scenarios in various capacities for nearly 40 years. I know it when I see it.

I'll agree with you on the Polaris thing - and the lulzbuckets thing (sorry Asp :) ) - one might argue they are somewhat overused..

ETA - various spelling corrections
 
Last edited:
Someone makes a prediction of what's going to happen and then it doesn't happen, doubt their ability to predict.
Someone claims in-depth knowledge of a subject and can't get basic info right about it without checking, doubt their in-depth knowledge.
Apply it to whomever you like.

Want to source your quote of DS claiming in-depth knowledge of Cryengine.
 
I read that as he has too look into Lumberyard and so we wait for the blog.

Do you have a quote of him saying he has in-depth knowledge of cryengine?
Do you have a quote of me saying that he said he had in-depth knowledge of cryengine?
Let's stop this.
 
Do you have a quote of me saying that he said he had in-depth knowledge of cryengine?
Let's stop this.
Yes actually I do.

Someone makes a prediction of what's going to happen and then it doesn't happen, doubt their ability to predict.
Someone claims in-depth knowledge of a subject and can't get basic info right about it without checking, doubt their in-depth knowledge.
Apply it to whomever you like.
But if you don't actually have a source, then sure we can drop it.
 
Last edited:
Yes actually I do.
No you don't, I was talking about Lumberyard. But OK, any post where he expounds on the technical challenges, possibility/impossibility of the 64-bit (sigh, double-precision-floating-point) conversion, I would class as "claiming in-depth knowledge" given the degree of certainty he expresses in his conclusions.
I mean I think we agree on some level, Derek knows bloody nothing about CryEngine and his "sources" only serve to muddle him further. Perhaps we're not so different after all.

- - - Updated - - -

I could work for The Sun with these mad skills!!!! ��

Anyway, hope something good comes out of star citizen this coming year!
What sorcery is this
 
I found the technical stuff in Derek's blog interesting - I've never really understood that side of it.

Which is why I commented on your initial reply which didn't go into any detail - from that pov I need something that appears to come from a background of knowledge and can rationally, clearly point out any flaws in it. I have no frame of reference so I'm completely dependent on other people's comments on the tecchie stuff.

I get why people get the hump with Derek - he's very good at getting under people's skin.

But I am genuinely trying to understand what the tecchie stuff is about.

My area of expertise is - I've been working in and around various scenarios in various capacities for nearly 40 years. I know it when I see it.

I'll agree with you on the Polaris thing - and the lulzbuckets thing (sorry Asp :) ) - one might argue they are somewhat overused..

ETA - various spelling corrections

The problem with game engine (or any framework) stuff is that it is very technical. The usual laws of layman's common sense do not always apply, some terminology and thinking can seem like nonsense or , even though it is not.

Currently, I am wondering about 1500's interest in Ben's comments, and wondering if he knows the difference between a virtual override function and an interface implementation (in programming terms)..... (it does have relevance :D)
 
Last edited:
No you don't, I was talking about Lumberyard. But OK, any post where he expounds on the technical challenges, possibility/impossibility of the 64-bit (sigh, double-precision-floating-point) conversion, I would class as "claiming in-depth knowledge" given the degree of certainty he expresses in his conclusions.
I mean I think we agree on some level, Derek knows bloody nothing about CryEngine and his "sources" only serve to muddle him further. Perhaps we're not so different after all.

- - - Updated - - -


What sorcery is this

Lumberyard is Cryengine ;)

Yes, we agree, I don't think DS has much knowledge of LY/CE. He does have general knowledge of game engines (by making his own), and probability knows more about many aspects of that then you do. Only because he has had to work on all aspects of a games code by making an engine, while you have not (as far as my knowledge goes). And you have even claimed to not have that kind of knowledge.

Throwing stones because of a version number seems odd, its not like you have gotten that kind of info wrong right? :)

eyJ1cmwiOiJodHRwczovL2kuaW1ndXIuY29tL1hxV3FnbncucG5nIn0.KU8KtAlrveMjwFBh-G1Rw1-cv3o
 
Last edited:
Well getting off of the topic of DS and onto the engine change. So Ben what changed your mind from a year ago?

Sept 2015
AEeQ5cI.png
 
I don't think he changed his mind. If you read that post from Sep 2015 and take a look at what CIG has done with the switch to Lumberyard, it clearly fits into "before i re-invent the wheel I'm going to go through their version of the feature, and see if those features make sense" or "short-cutting the R&D and complex-inner-workings time by having the "new" feature come from the engine".

Basically what CIG has done.
 
Last edited:
Gotta admit, that last screen from dear ben seems pretty contradictory from what he has been saying recently.

going from CE 3.7 ( star engine ) to 3.8 is a nono from your own words shown up there, but going from star engine ( modified 3.7 CE ) to lumberyard, ( modified 3.8 CE ) is easy peacy.

care to explain ?
 
Last edited:
Lumberyard is Cryengine ;)

Yes, we agree, I don't think DS has much knowledge of LY/CE. He does have general knowledge of game engines (by making his own), and probability knows more about many aspects of that then you do. Only because he has had to work on all aspects of a games code by making an engine, while you have not (as far as my knowledge goes). And you have even claimed to not have that kind of knowledge.

Throwing stones because of a version number seems odd, its not like you have had that kind of info wrong right? :)

https://images-ext-2.discordapp.net...hxV3FnbncucG5nIn0.KU8KtAlrveMjwFBh-G1Rw1-cv3o
Is this meant to be... some kind of gotcha? I will 100% cop to not knowing whether a version is still in test or whether it's released. But if I'd said the PU was launched in version SC 1.6, then said a bunch of other authoritative stuff about, I dunno, some of the ships... maybe you'd wonder if I knew as much as I thought I did.
Well getting off of the topic of DS and onto the engine change. So Ben what changed your mind from a year ago?

Sept 2015
https://i.imgur.com/AEeQ5cI.png
Ok, so here's me a year ago saying we'd want to move away from full point updates applied to the whole engine, and in favour of a kind of rewriting-by-copypaste. In the last few pages of this thread, I'm talking about the engine switch in terms of a large buffet of features that we can take what we want from. The trick with quote-mining is you're meant to find conflicting quotes ;).
 
I don't think he changed his mind. If you read that post from Sep 2015 and take a look at what CIG has done with the switch to Lumberyard, it clearly fits into "before i re-invent the wheel I'm going to go through their version of the feature, and see if those features make sense" or "short-cutting the R&D and complex-inner-workings time by having the "new" feature come from the engine".

Basically what CIG has done.

And what about You?What makes you and rest of the CIG"GUARDIANS"to accept LY as way better choice?When Rilzi open this thread a year ago https://forums.robertsspaceindustries.com/discussion/318617/should-cig-move-to-lumberyard-game-engine/p1 I bet that You&Orlando and the rest of the "faithful"citizens vote agains LY em I correct?
 
Last edited:
Status
Thread Closed: Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom