The Star Citizen Thread

Status
Thread Closed: Not open for further replies.
Thanks for all your frame rate values everyone. :)

I guess I win for the slowest at 8 FPS with all settings on minimum. :eek::eek:

I found the problem Styggron. One of the mice powering your rig died. I'm sending you a new improved rat to take its place. With the increase in size you should notice a improvement in performance. :D

mouse.gif
 
Basically he says that "There’s no delay to announce" and that Gamestar just put forth their own guesstimate.

Nope, take a look at this. It seems like Ben jumped the gun, the development estimates in the Gamestar article were coming directly from the horses mouth.

(replying to a post in another thread, lest we derail that one)

Dante80's link is interesting - it seems a professional journalist asked good questions and made reasonable extrapolations based on his experience. Wait, a journalist doing proper journalism? No wonder people think something's amiss!

Two particular points I'd draw people's attention to:

Andre (Gamestar) said:
Delays for software-development of this magnitude are absolutely unavoidable.

...

The reason why publishers have very strict control over information of this nature is exactly because they want to make sure that no "unrest" gets stirred up by prematurely releasing information. I would hate if my piece had any part in "proving" that it is indeed wiser to keep a tighter lid on the flow of information.

My comment history shows I'm no Star Citizen apologist, but he makes a very important point. Game developers are flirting with a model that could be better for everyone, but involves trusting the public not to get queasy when they see the sausage being made. CIG in particular are headed down a road that will get very bumpy at times - it'll be a fascinating journey if you can learn and grow with them, but you'll have to get used to a style that's more Twitter than News at Ten.
 
Agreed. I think reading Andres' comments in the thread I linked will give you the whole picture without any applied bias.

SC is a very complex and risky undertaking. Delays are inevitable. Here is a very good quote from the journalist in that thread.

What I think is needed is a healthy awareness within the SC community that the initial schedule provided during Kickstarter as well as even this updated schedule given to me by CR are probably not going to hold up. Things will be delayed. Software-development is a very complex issue. Especially in game-development where good game-mechanics are a big game of trial and error. Even more so when integrating such different mechanics as FPS, space-flight and combat, space trading and so on.

All that based on an FPS engine made for much much smaller maps and done via distributed development over more than half a dozen studios. What CIG is attempting is a very ambitious project and to hold them to every deadline given is unrealistic. To see every little slip or any piece of information given out to the community with a bit of a delay during such a massive undertaking as a betrayal is unfair.

By and large CIG is extremely open and truthful to all the backers and the press. I understand if the idea of delays causes disappointment but the outrage is unjustified, IMO. These guys are building the game many backers dream of. They dare to tackle a challenge instead of going for established models. That will take time. That is what makes SC an exciting project. That is what the focus should be on.

Sadly, some fellow SC backers have attacked him for false estimates, bias and bad journalism.
 
Last edited:
Game developers are flirting with a model that could be better for everyone, but involves trusting the public not to get queasy when they see the sausage being made. CIG in particular are headed down a road that will get very bumpy at times - it'll be a fascinating journey if you can learn and grow with them, but you'll have to get used to a style that's more Twitter than News at Ten.

Whiners are everywhere and has been on the RSI site too since the beginning, only nowadays they are many more than before. It has something to do with immaturity in the observer, combined with inability to understand connections. But they're very vocal and noisy and that's the reason I can't stand the RSI forums anymore and stay away as much as possible.
 

Good God man the Monthly Report makes it sound like the wait for Arena Commander has totally been worth it! Sounds like there might be the option to fly one of four ships. It also sounds like completion in some areas or items is increasing the rate of completion of other areas or items.

"Whilst Production, Operations, and Network Engineering have been planning and executing the above strategy, our visual effects team has been finishing its final passes on effects and hooking them up to all the parts and states of the Aurora, 300i, Scythe, and Hornet and all of their possible item combinations. Our planning on this from Forrest and Casey has panned out quite well. In creating the effects for the Hornet and the Scythe along with all their weapons and items we’ve established a good starting point for an effects library for both UEE and Vanduul craft. Obviously these libraries will grow and change over time but it has us well positioned to rapidly iterate and hook up new ships and items in the future.

Speaking of ships breaking apart… This month has seen the completion of hooking up all of the damage pieces, LODs, particle effect nodes, etc. for the Scythe, 300i, Aurora, and Hornet. Not only do they all now explode, break, and LOD properly but we’ve also got them all flying properly this month. They’ve all been converted to PBR and as mentioned in a previous post the 300i has also undergone a major uprez and detail pass as it was being converted to PBR. All of the ships (which already looked great) are now looking absolutely fantastic. This is another case where our early work both in the way we approached it and focusing on the Hornet first has paid of dividends. By spending the time to R&D ship mechanics with the Hornet and locking down the process and documentation it has allowed us to blaze through the Scythe, Aurora, and 300i much more quickly and each ship has progressed more quickly than the last as we improve our technique, which is great to see.

On the engineering front the team has been focusing on finishing off some changes to the pipe system (framework which manages per ship and per part CPU, power, cooling, and fuel) to allow players to manipulate settings dynamically on a per item basis or on a global level for the ship which will affect all attached parts. This was a stretch goal for us going into the first release so we’re pleased that we’ve been able to fit this in as it will improve the dynamism of ships greatly and we think player’s will really enjoy it.

The pipe system wasn’t the only one to get a bit of an upgrade. Radar/detection system too has undergone an overhaul to expand its functionality both to improve its current features and to create the foundation for future features that designers can play with. It has also undergone an optimization both in parallel to this which has greatly increased its performance per frame. To expand upon the improvements to the radar system, it has been moved into a centralized system hosted by the vehicle that can be shared by multiple items and only get called once. That doesn’t sound very sexy but what it allows is for much more realistic simulation of missiles for example. Where you can feed your ships primary radar data to the missile for acquiring lock and then later switch to the missiles radar only once it has left the ship. It also paves the way for slaving radar from one ship to another or things like centralized command and control which is a feature we know a lot of our community is looking forward to. Lastly, we’ve adjusted the way the signal to noise ratio system works and expanded its functionality quite a bit to allow designers to play with different types of chaff, armor, nebulas, flares, etc. and have them impact the radar/detection system in entirely new ways."

This is freaking awesome! Three weeks can't come fast enough. Good thing I have a whole week off coming the last week of May! :)
 
Lots of juicy info there, excited for more. :smilie:

Btw, here is a gameplay video for the DFM. I think its the build from PAX.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tNaMpdoQt8s

Lastly, a question.

They’ve all been converted to PBR and as mentioned in a previous post the 300i has also undergone a major uprez and detail pass as it was being converted to PBR.

Why does CIG have to "convert" the ships to PBR? Cryengine doesn't support it off the bat, or are they talking about something else?
 
Why does CIG have to "convert" the ships to PBR? Cryengine doesn't support it off the bat, or are they talking about something else?

I'm not sure. Either Cryengine got PBR support after the project was started or CIG changed to PBR as an afterthought. It may also be that they didn't have the expertise on this from the start and had to hire someone first to do it. But it's only speculations, I don't know.

What I do know is that many ships was created first without PBR, and now they're converted to PBR. The ships that are made now are PBR-ed from the start.
 
Crytek is in the process of upgrading the Cryengine to full PBR and it should be implemented fully late this month, CIG started the PBR conversion early since they didn't have time to wait on Crytek - also they would have to redo all of the texturing anyway so there really wasen't any reason to wait on Crytek.
 
We should take a good long look in the mirror before haranging the SC community. There have been more than a few cafuffles here because of delays. And some very heated threads about rights, bad management, bad PR and the like precisely because FD have been playing THEIR cards very close to their chest since the KS finished.

Seems to me you're damned if you do, damned if you don't.
 
Crytek is in the process of upgrading the Cryengine to full PBR and it should be implemented fully late this month, CIG started the PBR conversion early since they didn't have time to wait on Crytek - also they would have to redo all of the texturing anyway so there really wasen't any reason to wait on Crytek.

Thanks for the info, Sagan. I can't wait to see with my own eyes how this looks in the game. I'm especially excited about the Idris Frigate (I have the M variant). It won't be playable in the first release of Arena Commander, but I hope we'll soon get to see it in our hangar. Probably outside the hangar, because it doesn't fit in any current hangars. I'm thinking that one can take the elevator to the top of the mountain above the hangar, to a landing platform there which holds the Idris. It'd be better than making yet another hangar type just to be able to fit this large ship.
 
In case you tried to be ironic (it didn't work so good) then you should know it's not something unique to SC. FD is doing PBR too. A quote from the latest Newsletter #21:

"Each individual aspect of the vast galaxy is also represented with unprecedented visual fidelity, making the most of the latest lighting and ‘physically based rendering’ (PBR) pixel-shader techniques along with procedural algorithms that leverage our talented artists’ efforts."
 
In case you tried to be ironic (it didn't work so good) then you should know it's not something unique to SC. FD is doing PBR too. A quote from the latest Newsletter #21:

"Each individual aspect of the vast galaxy is also represented with unprecedented visual fidelity, making the most of the latest lighting and ‘physically based rendering’ (PBR) pixel-shader techniques along with procedural algorithms that leverage our talented artists’ efforts."

Ahh i guess the mood on this forum will change from "PBR dosen't matter" to "PBR is fantastic and Braben thought of using it way back in 2004 therefore it is originally his idea..somehow". :D
 
In case you tried to be ironic (it didn't work so good) then you should know it's not something unique to SC. FD is doing PBR too. A quote from the latest Newsletter #21:

"Each individual aspect of the vast galaxy is also represented with unprecedented visual fidelity, making the most of the latest lighting and ‘physically based rendering’ (PBR) pixel-shader techniques along with procedural algorithms that leverage our talented artists’ efforts."

I know FD are doing it as well, my point was they are all getting excited about graphics rather than gameplay, unlike here.
 
Sagan Ross, thanks for the info man...C:

Ahh i guess the mood on this forum will change from "PBR dosen't matter" to "PBR is fantastic and Braben thought of using it way back in 2004 therefore it is originally his idea..somehow". :D

:D...that is true, and also reminds me the whole PG debacle in the SC forums, before and after the stretch goal was put out.

ED adopted a physically-based rendering (PBR) model right from the start for its assets, but I think that the whole thing is a little over-hyped right now. It really really makes sense though for SC to adopt the model for its ships too, even if they have to re-do a lot of assets for them. As a development tool, I think it will really pay itself in development costs down the line. ;)
 
Last edited:
:D...that is true, and also reminds me the whole PG debacle in the SC forums, before and after the stretch goal was put out.

ED adopted a physically-based rendering (PBR) model right from the start for its assets, but I think that the whole thing is a little over-hyped right now. It really really makes sense for SC to adopt the model for its ships too, even if they have to re-do a lot of assets for them. As a development tool, I think it will really pay itself in development costs down the line. ;)

Agreed, while for the end user it's making assets appear more 'real'; the payoff is really in common and consistent representation of assets in differing lighting condition for the devs.
 
Yep, pretty much. Also, you are able to develop simulated effects on your assets much quicker (speaking from the production standpoint), because you have a "correct" library of assets to work with.

Think about simulated wear and tear on an Auroras' hull, or producing a lot of variants/models for the same base hull (300,315,325,350). Also decals, paint-jobs, modifications etc.
 
Agreed, while for the end user it's making assets appear more 'real'; the payoff is really in common and consistent representation of assets in differing lighting condition for the devs.

The develop time saved by having one universally applicable lighting system is imense - that alone makes PBR worth the hazzle.
 
I know FD are doing it as well, my point was they are all getting excited about graphics rather than gameplay, unlike here.

Aren't ED backers interested in the fidelity of graphics? I've not had that impression, on the contrary. And I do agree with folks here that ED is looking great.

But I must admit that graphics means a lot to me. Not that I prioritize it before gameplay. I think it's not a question of either or, but both. People always tell me you can't have both. Why not? And since I'm capable of having more than one thought in my head, I want to think we can have both great graphics and great gameplay. No need to just focus on the gameplay.
 
Status
Thread Closed: Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom