Well, there's a dev course. Star Citizen: the unsolved multiplayer problem
The Star Citizen Thread v5
- Thread starter Brett C
- Start date
- Status
Nope, no can do.
After starting using HOTAS, Pedals and Track-IR i cant play older simulators anymore. It's not the same.
Is the Test Universe still hard capped at 30fps or have they lifted that recently?
Yep, that's called "lying by omission". And them claiming to have an "open development" just add fuel to the fire for those considering they're blatantly lying.
Almighty Bob
Banned
Tuub
I'm not sure if there is cap put in place deliberately. This weekend in Port O on foot FPS was up to 40fps for me. It varied a lot, in flight it could drop to the teens or be in the 30's,I did not keep a record,so I can not say what the average was in each part of the PU but it is not great.
As I said I will wait until 3.0 comes out and have another look, there is no new content so it gets boring pretty quickly just getting blown up every 10 mins.
I'm not sure if there is cap put in place deliberately. This weekend in Port O on foot FPS was up to 40fps for me. It varied a lot, in flight it could drop to the teens or be in the 30's,I did not keep a record,so I can not say what the average was in each part of the PU but it is not great.
As I said I will wait until 3.0 comes out and have another look, there is no new content so it gets boring pretty quickly just getting blown up every 10 mins.
Last edited:
I believe that his whole life is build on a big fat illusion, he was good at making games in the beginning, then it went downhill from there on.
As a businessman he is a failure plain and simple. I don't know how he keeps his projects alive, unless there are some very blind people injecting money into it, or there are something else behind it.
Look at Battlescape, they are more focused, can accomplish more for less, and still they got less funds. We should all fund people like them instead of pumping money into the CIG propaganda machine.
Backed that one early. They seem to have the tech and flight working well and planets are gorgeous. The questions is what gameplay they will add.
Well it's not like he did alone. That's why we have teams. One person can't claim credit for any games. The only reason that happens, is why you have a "face" to a project. Same thing with movies, whereby the actors, producer, director, sometimes either share the accolades, or the director gets to be the frontrunner of that.
Yes, I can also manage to write answers without insulting and belittling people.
It's clear as day in the 3.0 schedule.
EDIT: Whoops, my bad, it's in the Schedule, not the 3.0 schedule. Object Container streaming is in 3.2 as a possible goal.
http://massivelyop.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/04/starcitizen.png
- Object Container Streaming (3.2 goal)
- Object Container Streaming: Server Side Streaming Manager
- Bind Culling
Last edited:
I agree, but his "success" is rooted in the past, and after the few good projects he had, it all went downhill due to management incompetence, or that's how I see it. Could be wrong though.
A nitpick - usually if it's the "possible goal", there's a really small chance to achieve it in time. Notice how you have mentioned bind culling, and CIG unsuccessfully tries to put in the game since 2.6.
The problem with arguing with people on reddit is that a lot of them are angry men or manchildren who dont possess the selfrestraint or mental discipline to have an argument with. They are prone to violent outbursts which translates into verbal offense (no doubt would you have a face to face talk with these people fists would fly) and for many of them, its not about exchanging ideas and discussing opinions but winning this argument, no matter the cost. For this they will lie, deceit, distract, deflect, attack and do whatever is necessary in order to score points. If shooting their own foot by stating that "CiG is effectively stealing money and doesnt have to deliver a game at all" will shut you up or negate any of your arguments then you can be sure it ll be stated. The most basic and simple logical explanations and consequences are not accepted because that would mean granting YOU (the enemy) a point.
I think OldSchoolCmdr talked about this isse a while back already. It doesnt really matter what legal stuff the RSI website states. CiG is selling assets and services for a product and people buying these things are entitled to them eventually under consumer law. The "work in progress" and "alpha" is protecting them against legal actions at the moment (only really gives them time, doesnt change the obligation they have) but would they fail to release these things in the end by releasing an unfunctional/unfinished game or cutting features which would render some of these ships invalid they would face legal consequences.
What, you think CiG desperatly starting to try developing a game that resembles the shadow of the old WC is done because they are "good" guys?
obviously
but as I stated in response to Agony above there are people who simply dont want to see no matter how clear stuff is.
That sounds like a scam tactic
I need to give CiG money first before I can talk about it.Also it doesnt matter if you spent money on SC or not. Many in this thread have and this purchase gave them ZERO authority in regards to their opinion when it comes to the opposition. I am mainly here to make up my mind (well, thats a done deal already). I mean IF 3.0 releases I wont be jumping anywhere high proclaiming that it stinks and should burn based on my previous experience. I d rather wait for people in this thread who have access and credibility (two different things hehe) to report their findings, then take a step back and look at videos and streams. Issues identified by the first group of people will be tested and questioned and from those discussions will eventually surface a truth or high probability.
I ll go with that.
I admit that playing something directly can be different to watching others play the game on a stream. But in Star Citizens case I have listened to both camps and find only one of them to be accurate and in check with my own impression. The other camp is either smoking stuff or lying about things.
There are two very different statements to this quote.
1. We scrapped and dropped features and the result was an absolutely awesome game that has changed the gaming landscape (untrue)
2. by designing a minimalistic approach we came up with a result that is working and inspirational (true)
Ico didnt become the game it is and is praised for because they started to promise everything THEN turn around and cut off features. Instead they made a conscious decision in the CONCEPT stage of development that many features will be missing but core gameplay would be secured. Thats what the video says too btw. Trying to apply this to CiG and Star Citizen is faulty at best and malicious at worst. SC has a clear goal it tries to achieve, theres a ton of admissions and promises made by CiG. Concept stage of the game was done first in 2011 (when work originally started by a small team) and later was resetted with the fabricated "majority poll" changing the whole game. Cutting features NOW is equal to breaking contract and is not a "smart" move by CiG but rather an admission of incompetence.
Thats exactly the issue, you nailed it man. And the most open development company in the history of gaming isnt providing any answers......
Sorry but if fundamental and critical issues are not answered then they are NOT good at telling us stuff. You said it in your own post. CiG FAILS to answer such questions since forever. Of course if you "want" to give them credit you will find reasons.
Because taking money out of the cycle can eventually endanger the completion of the game. I get that. Doesnt change the fact that there are good reasons for a refund but everybody has to make that decision for himself.
Lots of posts I wont go into adressing the definition of a "lie". I think a lie is pretty well defined already and doesnt need more arguing. Chris Roberts stated certain things in 2016 as existing and "coming soon" which in 2017 proved to not even be in the concept stage = he lied. Good enough fact for me. Logic is a wonderful thing.
And what would you consider a "Clear hard evidence" that Roberts lied already on this crowdfunding campaign? Because any judge never would accept a 20-year experienced developer claiming that missed a estimated delivery date so horribly as they did, and then, doing that repeatedly. I mean, there are many ACTUAL PROOF that Roberts lied and tried to deceive the public, many times. You apparently ignore all that, based just in what I guess, its your ignorance about how these matters are faced in terms of law. But even when considered just the missing dates and its standard of repetition, at the same tim that they are making millions of dollars due these "mistakes", considering that such dev have such large experience, and is followed by other devs of very rich resumè, and are not just newbies and/or retards that have no idea how to write ABC in a piece of paper, it becomes OBVIOUS and PROVE ENOUGH that the attitude was in purpose. No judge will require footage, recording or whatever, given all this evidence.
And well... if he needs evidence of Roberts besides all that, ACTUALLY LYING, what a suprise... that proof exists (and I already wasted my time to post that here at these forums). But how basically, it can be proven? By the Roberts contradictory speech along the road, saying something in the past and totally contradicting that later, both by actions and speech. That's how you prove someone a liar. Still, considering how they missed ALL estimates ridiculously, AND how can been shown that by doing such "mistakes" they earn a LOT of money, that would be already prove enough.
What people like you have is just ignorane about how these things are faced. I LOL all the time that I listen guys ssaying "Oh, there is no hard evidence". It's epic naivety. And judges are not that naive.
Last edited:
Wrong again. Those features have nothing to do with any of that. You should read up on them a bit more before jumping to the conclusion that they're automagically going to make 100 clients per instance a possibility (hint: it's not. like ever). If anything, even without network bind culling (LY calls it netbinding, the correct term for it), the best they're going to achieve is better networking performance in their 8-24 client instances. They could possibly push it to 32 if they get the results they're hoping for. But >32? With the current network layer/stack that's based on CryEngine (which even LumberYard shoved AWS into). Nope, not gonna happen. Like at all.
Even Lumberyard never claimed that they had implemented anything different from what CryEngine had as a networking layer. So it's the same horrid network layer, which wasn't built for MMO games. They just abstracted and replaced some parts of it with their own layer (GridMate). The analogy is like upgrading your PC with a high-performance GPU, even though you're still stuck with a subpar CPU. Yeah, you're going to get performance improvements in some areas.
Q. Is Lumberyard based on CryEngine? <-- see what they actually added/revised
Lumberyard Release Notes – Beta 1.0 (February 2016) <-- read about GridMate in the Networking section + GameLift (which I suspect is where SC is going to end up)
There is nothing - absolutely nothing - in LumberYard that even comes close to what CIG are claiming (100 or 1000 player instances) they are going to be doing. And they can't even do what ED is doing because 1) they don't have the talent 2) they don't have the time 3) they don't have the resources. So they're going to gut their StarEngine networking crap, implement what LumberYard gives them for free, then hide them behind fancy names (Object Container Streaming which is basically GridMate in LY)
BONUS READ: CryNetwork Backward Compatibility
Last edited:
I figure CIG will continue as they are for quite some time. Why? Something a Mr. Barnum said concerning the birthrate of gullible people.
This one is absolutely gold! Can't help seeing them silently shifting their broken unmanageable networking code with LY's, crossing all their fingers it'd solve their short terms problems and later fulfill their promises for them, yet still claiming THEY revolutionize the industry.
Last edited:
This would explain why they haven't done the LY switch completely yet; and also why all the networking stuff that they'd been talking about throughout 2016, are no longer in the 3.x schedule.
In order to use any of the LY networking layer, they have to rip out whatever they implemented in StarEngine on top of CryEngine. Because that's what LY did.
But this is all FUD because the switch to LY only took "days"; but six months later, they're still trying to get volumetric fog from LY to work; plus no major networking revisions have been done.
Last edited:
If anything of this is true:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NwgAf3xXN-E
just wow...new low of CIG forums...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NwgAf3xXN-E
just wow...new low of CIG forums...
It is. We've been following that since it happened.
...and so we look to the maker of such original titles as Wing Commander 1, Wing Commander 2, Wing Commander 3, Wing Commander 4, Wing Commander 5,Wing Commander Academy, Wing Commander Prophecy and the BBC port of Match Day to save us from endless franchise sequels ;-)
Last edited:
- Status