Send News. Want a reply? Read this. More in the FAQ.   News Forum - All Forums - Mobile - PDA - RSS Headlines  RSS Headlines   Twitter  Twitter
Customize
User Settings
Styles:
LAN Parties
Upcoming one-time events:
Germany 08/31
Chicago, IL USA, IL 10/19

Regularly scheduled events

User information for Jonas Taylor

Real Name Jonas Taylor   
Search for:
 
Sort results:   Ascending Descending
Limit results:
 
 
 
Nickname theyarecomingforyou
Email Concealed by request - Send Mail
ICQ None given.
Description
Homepage http://
Signed On Apr 8, 2005, 11:25
Total Comments 6741 (Guru)
User ID 22891
 
User comment history
< Newer [ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 ] Older >


News Comments > More on Crytek's Star Citizen Lawsuit
48. Re: More on Crytek's Star Citizen Lawsuit Jan 21, 2018, 19:09 theyarecomingforyou
 
Kxmode wrote on Jan 21, 2018, 17:47:
Leonard French is a copyright attorney not an intellectual property attorney who would be the authority in the situation. IOW his opinion is about as meaningless as yours and mine. The real truth will be the outcome from a judge after proper lawyers present evidence.
Crytek makes claims of copyright infringement in their lawsuit, making his expertise extremely relevant. Also, just because a lawyer has a speciality doesn't mean they aren't qualified to speak about other aspects of law. You haven't discredited any claim he has made.

Kxmode wrote on Jan 21, 2018, 17:58:
"utter bullshit and detatched from any semblance of reality." It's funny how points tend to delve into this kind of rhetorical nonsense. I know you're a huge supporter of SC, but you shouldn't let your passion for it be reduced to superfluous nonsense.
You made a completely unsubstantiated bullshit claim and I called you out on it.

Kxmode wrote on Jan 21, 2018, 17:58:
I will say, merely based on experience as a professional web programmer, that it is exceedingly difficult to fully convert from one platform to another platform without retaining some of the original code.
Not when the platforms are nearly identical. A simple difference analysis would highlight the code required to be changed/removed. CIG was running an old build of CryEngine, which would have actually helped them.

If you have evidence that CIG has not removed all CryEngine code then you'd be best telling Crytek, given that they haven't mentioned it in their lawsuit. It could come in handy for them. Oh right, you're talking out of your bumhole.
 
Avatar 22891
 
8700K @ 4.9GHz / 32GB DDR4 / GTX 1080 OC
Optane 900P 280G
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > More on Crytek's Star Citizen Lawsuit
44. Re: More on Crytek's Star Citizen Lawsuit Jan 21, 2018, 16:09 theyarecomingforyou
 
Kxmode wrote on Jan 21, 2018, 15:02:
I understand what Lumberyard is. However, that's not what the suit against CIG entails. The original intended purpose for SQ42 would be a game within Star Citizen; stand-alone but equal, if you will. Crytek agreed to a single license for both products. CIG broke the contract by making SQ42 a standalone title outside of Star Citizen.
Squadron 42 has not been released yet and is being developed on Lumberyard, which is NOT CryEngine. Therefore the case is absurd at face value.

Kxmode wrote on Jan 21, 2018, 15:02:
The merit of claim still stands because unless CIG fully converted SQ42 and SC over to Lumberyard, which I highly doubt given the complexity, a lot of the core code is still CryEngine.
Firstly, there is no evidence to support that. CIG claims it has ported the engine over to Lumberyard and the code base is sufficiently similar that that is a plausible claim. Further, Crytek hasn't alleged that CIG has not ported engine - they're claiming CIG wasn't allowed to. Your point is utter bullshit and detatched from any semblance of reality.

TL;DR - If CIG did switch engine there is no infringement; if it didn't switch engine or did not remove parts of CryEngine then Crytek hasn't alleged that.

As for what happens next, the motion to dismiss will likely fail as there is some ambiguity and therefore it will proceed to trial. There will then either be a settlement, like involving CIG making a payment to Crytek as the lawsuit was always an extortion attempt, or it will proceed to trial and most of Crytek's claims will get rejected. There's still a chance Crytek will go bankrupt given the cost of the law firm hired and it's already precarious financial situation.

Crytek may have had a case had Squadron 42 been released and then switched engine to Lumberyard but given the game hasn't been released there can't be any damages awarded because there has been no loss to Crytek. The case is pretty absurd.
 
Avatar 22891
 
8700K @ 4.9GHz / 32GB DDR4 / GTX 1080 OC
Optane 900P 280G
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > More on Crytek's Star Citizen Lawsuit
39. Re: Re: More on Crytek's Star Citizen Lawsuit Jan 21, 2018, 14:07 theyarecomingforyou
 
LurkerLito wrote on Jan 21, 2018, 10:07:
IANAL, but my interpretation is definitely different. That is basically a non-compete clause so while CIG themselves are not "in the business" of making a game engine, they are barred from indirectly engaging in it and promoting a competing one.
There's also a provision in the contract (6.1.4) preventing either party from suing the other unless intentional or through gross negligence. Crytek had to amend the lawsuit to include the word 'intentional' when it was pointed out this was the case.

In fact under contract law there is no consideration to motive, only to damages that have occurred. A lawsuit regarding contract provisions is therefore only applicable where damages have occurred - Crytek hasn't lost anything by CIG opting to terminate the contract, therefore there are no damages applicable. The GLA doesn't specify what amounts to damages and the lawsuit makes no reference to damages. Crytek makes reference to punitive damages but they don't apply to a breach of contract.

There are just so many demonstrably false claims in Crytek's lawsuit that it's hard to take it seriously, especially given the calibre of the law firm hired to represent it.

There's a video here of a legal breakdown of the lawsuit.
 
Avatar 22891
 
8700K @ 4.9GHz / 32GB DDR4 / GTX 1080 OC
Optane 900P 280G
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > More on Crytek's Star Citizen Lawsuit
33. Re: Re: More on Crytek's Star Citizen Lawsuit Jan 21, 2018, 07:40 theyarecomingforyou
 
Jerykk wrote on Jan 21, 2018, 06:55:
Also, it's pretty absurd that Crytek is arguing that CIG is required to use CryEngine. That's not how licenses work. The license only means that CIG is allowed to use the engine, not required to use it. Crytek's entire case relies on this false requirement.

Exactly. Some of the claims Crytek has made are demonstrably false.

Jerykk wrote on Jan 21, 2018, 06:55:
I wouldn't be so sure about that. Crytek has a history of poor business decisions. Ryse was a flop, they repeatedly failed to pay their employees between 2014 and 2017, they closed five of their studios, they bought the Homefront IP, did nothing with it and then sold it, their engine licensing business is a failure and they sold their engine source code to a competitor so that it could be used to create a competing engine. Now they're suing based on an inherently flawed understanding of how licensing works.

It does seem like a desperate move, rather than one based on a legitimate legal grievance.

Jerykk wrote on Jan 21, 2018, 06:55:
The language says "in the business" of doing those things. Engine development is not the business of CIG. If CIG were selling/licensing their version of the engine, they would be violating that clause. But they aren't.

That's my interpretation too but I'm not a lawyer and it could have a different legal meaning.

It's worth pointing out that the Crytek lawyers who designed the contract left the company and now work for CIG. It's clear they will have an extremely good understanding of what is and isn't allowed under the contract. Meanwhile Crytek can't even distinguish between Roberts Space Industries (a fictional company within the Star Citizen universe) and Cloud Imperium Games (the developer of the game).

Let's be clear, even if CIG loses the lawsuit - which at this point looks unlikely - we'd be talking about a settlement figure of many a few million dollars and the project continuing on as before. I get that some people hate CIG and would love to see the game fail but this lawsuit is not going to be what does it.
 
Avatar 22891
 
8700K @ 4.9GHz / 32GB DDR4 / GTX 1080 OC
Optane 900P 280G
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > More on Crytek's Star Citizen Lawsuit
32. Re: More on Crytek's Star Citizen Lawsuit Jan 21, 2018, 07:31 theyarecomingforyou
 
Kosumo wrote on Jan 20, 2018, 16:59:
You are a fool who has given to much money to a conman in whom you still believe in his snake oil.

You have said how even you do not think they delivered on what you expected of them last year yet here you are, full cultist, supporting them when they are clearly wrong.
Personal attacks aside, I stated development wasn't where I would like or expect it to be. That doesn't mean the game won't deliver - it just means, like many games, it will be delayed.

Kosumo wrote on Jan 20, 2018, 16:59:
They have broken a contract - and that is no ones fault but their own.

They will have to pay.
No. Crytek has asserted that the contract was broken; CIG has asserted that it wasn't. It's a legal dispute that will be resolved by the legal system. Some of Crytek's claims are easily dismissed by the GLA released by CIG but there are other claims that may have validity. It will be for a court to determine.

Kosumo wrote on Jan 20, 2018, 16:59:
Crytek made the kickstarter video yet Chris as try to shit on them yet as only shitted on his own feet.
CIG paids $2 million for the licence and then, once the product was more established and better funded, decided Lumberyard was more appropriate. CIG maintains it was legally entitled to make the change; Crytek disputes that.

Flatline wrote on Jan 20, 2018, 18:21:
IANAL but the exact language says that you cannot develop, design, create, support maintain, promote sell, or license any game engine or middleware which compete with CryEngine.

Basically, they entered into a non-compete with CryEngine for the duration of the license and for 2 years afterwards. They could not develop, support, promote, sell, or license any engine or middleware that would compete with CryEngine.

Lumberyard is *based* on CryEngine but is absolutely a competitor. And at the very least, I'd say developing, supporting, maintaining, and promoting Lumberyard has been committed by CIG, and I haven't even been paying super close attention.

The question for the court is going to be if moving to Lumberyard constitutes moving to a competing engine/middleware. I think it will qualify, since Crytek doesn't benefit from someone using Lumberyard.
Of all the issues listed I think that has the most potential to work against CIG but I'm not a lawyer and the opinions of legal experts have favoured CIG. What's interesting is how long this has taken for Crytek to file this lawsuit and how many of the assertions they make are demonstrably false. You'd think if they had good legal counsel that they would base the case around this if it had any credibility yet the lawsuit is all over the place.

It strikes me that Crytek were hoping for CIG to settle rather than challenge the lawsuit in court. Crytek isn't in a position to maintainhefty legal expenses when it's struggling to even pay its own staff.

Kxmode wrote on Jan 20, 2018, 23:22:
Well if there's one thing Chris Roberts does well, it would be "to break their promises."

Personally I think it's really slimy to claim "oh, this is all Lumberyard" when many of the core aspects of the game are still CryEngine. If someone gutted out and replace a Porche with after-market stuff, the core would still be a Porche.
I'm not sure you understand what Lumberyard is. Crytek was desperate for funds to sold the rights to CryEngine to Amazon, allowing it to licence the engine to other developers. Lumberyard was an exact copy of CryEngine at that point, since which they have diverged. CIG was able to change over the code differences in a matter of days when they switched to Lumberyard. So going back to your analogy, it would be like Porsche selling the design of their vehicles to Tesla - it means Porsche could call their vehicle a Porsche yet Tesla could call the same vehicle a Tesla.
 
Avatar 22891
 
8700K @ 4.9GHz / 32GB DDR4 / GTX 1080 OC
Optane 900P 280G
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > More on Crytek's Star Citizen Lawsuit
7. Re: More on Crytek's Star Citizen Lawsuit Jan 20, 2018, 16:49 theyarecomingforyou
 
Renegades Hang wrote on Jan 20, 2018, 15:00:
That video was made before Cryteks devastating response. It's not frivolous as they state because first of all, CIG didn't even attempt to defend themselves against the Bugsmashers & Facewear source code exposure allegations, nor the lack of promised bug fixes allegation, therefore the case cant be dismissed because of that alone.
Crytek's 'devastating' response was to simply restate the original claims, which are easily invalidated by the GLA released by CIG. The Bugsmashers & Faceware claim is without merit due to CIG having moved on to the Lumberyard engine. As for ongoing bug fixes, there was no timeframe specified and CIG has now changed engines to Lumberyard meaning the GLA has no validity.

Renegades Hang wrote on Jan 20, 2018, 15:00:
Crytek quotes the contract stating that the license is only for Star Citizen and Squadron 42 if they are sold together as one game and Squdron 42 is a feature of Star Citizen ("The Game" not "The Games") and isn't for, as the contract states, "any content being sold and marketed separately". Is Squadron 42 now being sold and marketed separately? You bet your ass it is.
CIG released the GLA and it had a specific provision for Squadron 42. Plus if they're no longer using the engine they can't be in breach of the contract.

Renegades Hang wrote on Jan 20, 2018, 15:00:
Finally, even if the court decides that CIG could switch to a different engine, the contract is still in effect. They state that in Section 2.4 CIG isnt allowed to promote any engine other than Cry's and that, "By its terms, Section 2.4 remains in effect for two years after the termination of the GLA (an event that has not yet occurred.)"
No. Section 2.4 states that CIG can't take the engine and license it to other companies - note the term 'in the business of'. It doesn't state that CIG can't license another engine and it's telling that Crytek doesn't list that clause in this response.

The exact language is: During the Term of the License, or any renewals thereof, and for a period of two years thereafter, Licensee, its principals, and Affiliates shall not directly or indirectly engage in the business of designing, developing, creating, supporting, maintaining, promoting, selling or licensing (directly or indirectly) any game engine or middleware which compete with CryEngine.

Crytek's claims do not stand up to scrutiny, something that has been validated by numerous legal experts who have looked in the details. There are basic mistakes, like listing Roberts Space Industries as the developer, and contradictory claims (e.g. that CIG is no longer using the engine yet also claiming CIG is using CryEngine for both Star Citizen and Squadron 42).

There's a reason that Crytek didn't release the GLA when it issued the lawsuit and that's because it easily invalidates most of the claims. Crytek is trying this as a last desperate measure before being declared bankrupt, with the company hemorrhaging employees and being unable to pay those still working there. It already had to sell off Homefront Revolution to Koch Media and do a deal with Amazon to create the Lumberyard spinoff due to its dire finances.
 
Avatar 22891
 
8700K @ 4.9GHz / 32GB DDR4 / GTX 1080 OC
Optane 900P 280G
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Star Citizen Alpha 3.1 in March
47. Re: Star Citizen Alpha 3.1 in March Jan 13, 2018, 14:06 theyarecomingforyou
 
Kosumo wrote on Jan 9, 2018, 14:31:
We're going to be adding content dynamically to the universe. I'm not interested in having yearly updates. We'll have a team of people that are adding content on a weekly, every two weeks basis. So you start in this system and start in this game, and it's got fifty star systems for instance... Two weeks in and a jump point is discovered for another system and someone navigates it, and bam we've got a 51st system... and so on.
- Chris Roberts

Scummy inept liar.
That's post release, not during alpha. And the content could be anything from a new mission or outpost to a new star system - the quote shouldn't be interpretted as CIG adding a new star system every two weeks.

CIG has only just implemented the delta patcher to allow for iterative updates. Clothing and procedurally generated outposts could easily be added weekly or fornightly in micro-patches already.

It's way too early to claim that CIG has failed to live up to a promise that was intended to indicate the level of support post-release. Go back and watch the original Kickstarter pitch video and look at what we have now - one cannot accuse CIG of underdelivering.
 
Avatar 22891
 
8700K @ 4.9GHz / 32GB DDR4 / GTX 1080 OC
Optane 900P 280G
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Morning Consolidation
4. Re: Morning Consolidation Jan 12, 2018, 16:32 theyarecomingforyou
 
Rhialto wrote on Jan 12, 2018, 12:35:
I thought Microsoft was not giving sales numbers anymore... but they are quick to point out if their Xbox outsell competition.
That's because sales of the Xbox have been underwhelming and Microsoft doesn't want to be seen to be weak but is happy to take the praise whenever it can. The reality is that Microsoft released a new Xbox model and Sony didn't realise a new PS4 model. I don't think the sales are going to hold long-term, especially when Microsoft didn't say how many were sold (presumably Microsoft only just beat Sony).

Microsoft really is so childish.
 
Avatar 22891
 
8700K @ 4.9GHz / 32GB DDR4 / GTX 1080 OC
Optane 900P 280G
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Star Citizen Alpha 3.1 in March
38. Re: Star Citizen Alpha 3.1 in March Jan 7, 2018, 04:33 theyarecomingforyou
 
It's a pretty disappointing schedule, to be honest. We'll probably see 3.1 arrive as scheduled because it's just a polish pass for 3.0, which was rushed to Live. As for the June release, that will likely get pushed back due to the addition of multiple gameplay mechanics and AI has always been a difficult area for CIG.

The September release is the big one, as any delays to the Object Container Streaming will basically mean no new content. That's something that could easily end up being pushed back until 2019.

The release of 3.0 and the delta patcher was supposed to signal the release of more frequent content updates. Sure we'll get more releases than 2017 but that's not saying much. I really hope this is a realistic schedule and that CIG has learned lessons from previous unrealistic schedules because if not then it's going to be another content drought.
 
Avatar 22891
 
8700K @ 4.9GHz / 32GB DDR4 / GTX 1080 OC
Optane 900P 280G
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Morning Safety Dance
3. Re: Morning Safety Dance Dec 26, 2017, 17:00 theyarecomingforyou
 
ledhead1969 wrote on Dec 26, 2017, 13:22:
Obama said the same thing.

https://www.politico.com/interactives/2017/obama-hezbollah-drug-trafficking-investigation/

I wonder which giving of love will, or, has, caused the most death?
Obama did that to achieve the denuclearisation of Iran. Trump is doing it because he's beholden to Russian money. There's a MAJOR difference.
 
Avatar 22891
 
8700K @ 4.9GHz / 32GB DDR4 / GTX 1080 OC
Optane 900P 280G
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Free Overwatch Loot Boxes
2. Re: Free Overwatch Loot Boxes Dec 26, 2017, 15:56 theyarecomingforyou
 
Just like drug dealers giving out free samples to get people hooked. Scummy business practices are scummy.  
Avatar 22891
 
8700K @ 4.9GHz / 32GB DDR4 / GTX 1080 OC
Optane 900P 280G
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Star Citizen Squadron 42 Gameplay Video
55. Re: Star Citizen Squadron 42 Gameplay Video Dec 26, 2017, 14:01 theyarecomingforyou
 
Creston wrote on Dec 26, 2017, 11:49:
If I'm reading him right, right now the engine is loading ALL objects into client memory at FULL detail, no matter how far or whether they're even in view?

I mean, I'm not a programmer, but didn't game devs learn to NOT do that like twenty-five years ago?
The issue is that the CryEngine networking code is extremely limited. It's simply not designed for MMOs, let alone one like Star Citizen where millions of entities will have to be tracked. Normally players wouldn't see issues like this because they'd only play the final product but Star Citizen is being developed iteratively. The networking code is all being developed, with the next major release meant to be coming around March.

Creston wrote on Dec 26, 2017, 13:45:
It's funny reading through comments on SC's forum, and a lot of people praising the performance in 3.0, because they get "a steady 20-27 fps".

I wouldn't even want to play Xcom at 27fps, much less try to play a twitchy space / dogfight simulator...
Yeah, some people are just ridiculous. I know previous releases were worse, at around 15-20fps, but that doesn't excuse getting only 30fps currently. When I've had 60fps+ it's like playing an entirely different game and it really is a great experience until the performance inevitably degrades. There are so many people willing to defend anything CIG does.

Alpha 3.0 is no 'magic bullet' release. It's an improvement but there's still a LONG way to go.
 
Avatar 22891
 
8700K @ 4.9GHz / 32GB DDR4 / GTX 1080 OC
Optane 900P 280G
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Star Citizen Squadron 42 Gameplay Video
49. Re: Star Citizen Squadron 42 Gameplay Video Dec 26, 2017, 10:05 theyarecomingforyou
 
Kosumo wrote on Dec 25, 2017, 16:42:
That's just lies.

You show me a video of someone having 50fps+ for five minutes on a live server while actively "playing" the "game" and I'll apologize, other wise you are just a cultist lying because you believe in the faith of Chris Roberts.
I haven't recorded any videos but I took a screenshot using the in-game console command to show framerate: here. That was whilst the game was still in PTU but I've joined a live server and has 75fps whilst exploring Port Olisar and 50fps+ in space. As always it continued to drop throughout the play session until it ended up around 35fps but I had a good twenty minutes of decent performance.

Let's be clear though, my computer spec is way above average. I've got an overclocked 8700K, 32GB RAM and an overclocked GTX 1080. It's in my signature, so it's not something I'm hiding.

My point is that the potential for performance is there. The issues with framerate are related to servers, which is something that Squadron 42 doesn't have to worry about. It's much easier for them to optimise performance for a singleplayer offline game than a networked multiplayer game with 50 players on the server. It's also worth pointing out that CIG has regular free-fly weekends where people can test out performance for themselves.

But if insulting me is what you want to do then go ahead, it really doesn't concern me. You sound like a very bitter individual.
 
Avatar 22891
 
8700K @ 4.9GHz / 32GB DDR4 / GTX 1080 OC
Optane 900P 280G
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Star Citizen Squadron 42 Gameplay Video
44. Re: Star Citizen Squadron 42 Gameplay Video Dec 25, 2017, 16:10 theyarecomingforyou
 
jdreyer wrote on Dec 25, 2017, 15:08:
This was one of my thoughts: SQ4 is a spiritual WC remake, but there's almost no ship to ship combat. I didn't think what they showed was necessarily bad, just not what people are expecting out of this project, perhaps. There was more FPS combat than ship to ship, for example.
It's not designed to be representative of the game, as it doesn't even feature the Vanduul or most of the main cast (Gary Oldman, Gillian Anderson, Andy Serkis, John Rhys-Davies, Rhona Mitra, Mark Strong, etc). It was clearly chosen because it is narrative driven, meaning they didn't have to show off any of the main gameplay mechanics. That's what makes it clear that the game isn't going to be released for another two-to-three years at least.

At the moment so many of the primary gameplay mechanics simply haven't been implemented. The UI is undergoing major reworks, the AI is rudimentary and some of the core engine tech is missing (e.g. Vulkan, etc). They weren't even confident enough to show this live and the initial stream was still delayed by a day despite that.

So don't think for a second that space combat will be virtual nonexistent. It's obviously going to be the primary aspect of the game, it's just a) missing most of the gameplay mechanics, and b) already playable in Star Citizen Alpha 3.0. Fans don't want to see the same space combat they can already play - they want to see what's new and different. Should more have been shown for the casual viewers? Maybe, but the demonstration was already over an hour long as it is.
 
Avatar 22891
 
8700K @ 4.9GHz / 32GB DDR4 / GTX 1080 OC
Optane 900P 280G
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Star Citizen Squadron 42 Gameplay Video
39. Re: Star Citizen Squadron 42 Gameplay Video Dec 25, 2017, 12:55 theyarecomingforyou
 
VaranDragon wrote on Dec 25, 2017, 07:33:
There is like 30 seconds of actual space fights in that entire gameplay video and it looks like shit. A space game needs to get that shit right before any other consideration.

Sure looks pretty but if it has 30 seconds of really crappy spaceflight combat in a mission that lasts an hour, something is seriously fucking wrong with it.
That's because space combat is already playable in Star Citizen Alpha 3.0, so showing it in the Squadron 42 reveal would be redundant.

Creston wrote on Dec 25, 2017, 11:48:
- Half an hour of walking around that stupidly large carrier vessel. Imagine how long it would even take you to learn your way around that fucking thing? It reminded me of that terrible level in Halo where everything was the same room repeated infinitely. it looked nice for immersion sake, but it would get boring so quickly.
They're working on UI to help you navigate the ship but it's a fully playable ship that people can own in the persistent universe. But absolutely, unless considerations are made for casual players it could end up being extremely off-putting. That said there were radio messages telling you where to go and the signs on the floor were pretty well labelled.

Creston wrote on Dec 25, 2017, 11:48:
- Waaay too many cutscenes. I want to play a game, not watch it. It seemed like every 10 seconds there was another waffling face just droning on and on about something. There were interesting scenes in there too, but so many empty boring scenes... Hideo Kojima thinks you have too many cutscenes.

Is this going to be what the whole game is going to be like? Just walking around empty corridors at terminally glacial pace, and watching cutscenes for hours on end, with a few five minute sections of actual gameplay interspersed?
The entire game can be played from first-person perspective to reduce interruptions. It's a stylistic choice. In the full game there will be a lot more combat. Heck, they haven't even shown off the Vanduul and they're the main antagonists. Some of the ships you'll be fighting against are obscenely massive and won't be dispatched in a few seconds like we saw here.

Creston wrote on Dec 25, 2017, 11:48:
- The FPS part looked pretty bog standard, and again, I don't think that's what most people wanted. We wanted another Wing Commander. Not 30 minutes of flying without any action to get to a mediocre FPS part. At least it looked a little more action-filled than the space part, because that was just a snooze fest.
Yeah, the first-person combat is definitely weak and that's especially the case when it comes to the AI. It's no secret that the AI is extremely rudamentary and not up for the task at this point. It also means we're years off a release, as there's no quick fix.

Creston wrote on Dec 25, 2017, 11:48:
- That frame rate. It was awful. It's an alpha, so I'm sure it'll improve, but that is not a promising sight, especially since it's a safe bet they played this on a dragon of a PC.
Optimisation comes later. With a decent rig and fresh server you can already get 80fps+ in Star Citizen Alpha 3.0 and there's a lot more optimisation to come. I'd expect performance to improve substantially and I'm not concerned about that.

Creston wrote on Dec 25, 2017, 11:48:
- The UI. God almighty that's bad. Having to hover your mouse over a precise 0.2cm spot for seconds until the context menu pops up. The giant ass letters floating over everything (why not just have a button READ "Engine on/off" instead of having that stupid hover-over?) The terrible dialogue selection menu. Having to click everywhere, on every single thing, to do anything. Who thinks this is fun??

That map in the spaceflight part, shit, it took like a minute of fucking around just to set a new navpoint. Egosoft looks at this UI and goes "Damn, that's a bad UI."
Yup, the UI is currently extremely weak and I'm not a fan of the direction taken. The buttons where the labels are fixed in space are well done but the rest is pretty poor.

Creston wrote on Dec 25, 2017, 11:48:
- There was one dogfight and it looked just bad. Just the same old boring "turn in circles until you see the enemy ship, fire at him for two seconds with a shitty pea-shooter weapon, then he zooms past you, you turn in a circle and repeat." Ugh.
That's all being worked on for Star Citizen and is already playable. CIG didn't do a good job showing off what is already playable in game. There's also more work to be done with regards to the AI.

Creston wrote on Dec 25, 2017, 11:48:
- That first part of the FPS section. The guy playing it has obviously played this mission dozens of times, if not hundreds, so he knows what he's doing. But imagine you're walking around this empty ass base, which is huge, and you need to "restore the power." and the way to do it is to scavenge a power supply from the bottom of some random-ass vehicle somewhere. I didn't notice any hints or suggestions on where to look, so, I mean, how long would it take you to find that? Hours? How long before you just give up and Google it?
The idea is that there are multiple ways to play through the game. You'll have nav markers telling you where to go, so it's just a case of deciding how to approach it. Hints and suggestions are in Alpha 3.0 and I'd expect a similar solution in Squadron 42.

Creston wrote on Dec 25, 2017, 11:48:
Also, if every mission is that expansive (that FPS base was HUGE), how long does it take to build them? Years per mission, unless they just copy-pasta huge chunks of it?
They're using a procedural generation system whereby they build prefab assets and then use a generation system to produce locations (e.g. they'll pick zones for residential, commercial, etc and then an algorithm will generate the location). It's what's being used for outposts on planets and city planets like ArcCorp. They demoed the technology at CitizenCon. So once the base assets are generated for each type of location it's extremely quick to put it all together, then designers go over the locations to add the human touch. Not all missions will feature planetside locations.

Creston wrote on Dec 25, 2017, 11:48:
However, all that said, I was still very impressed. I didn't really think this even existed in as far a state as this, so to see that they actually HAVE been doing something was cool. And it's pretty much a jaw-dropper. Flying through that asteroid was impressive as hell. (Even if there was nothing else to do.)

And while it's not my cup of tea, I'm sure there are plenty of people who dig the idea of walking around that carrier and flying for hours on end to get somewhere, and then to wander around an empty base looking for that one hover-over spot that lets you advance on. More power to them. I imagine this will lead to a larger round of crowd funding than releasing another .jpg of some pretty space ship.
Yeah, it's definitely not a casual game like Call Of Duty. If you want to wander around the ship then expect to get lost. There won't be random doors closed off for no reason because the developer never intended to design them. And it's worth pointing out that this is on the Idris, which is one of the smaller capital ships. The Javelin is twice the size and the Bengal twice the size again.

If you haven't seen the CitizenCon 2017 presentation that shows of the procedural planets and city technology then you can see that here. You'll have to put up with the horrible YouTube compression. I saw the demonstration live in person and it was extremely impressive.
 
Avatar 22891
 
8700K @ 4.9GHz / 32GB DDR4 / GTX 1080 OC
Optane 900P 280G
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Star Citizen Alpha 3.0 All Backers Test
36. Re: Star Citizen Alpha 3.0 All Backers Test Dec 25, 2017, 10:33 theyarecomingforyou
 
Mr. Tact wrote on Dec 24, 2017, 23:53:
So, TACFY -- are you this optimistic on most/all things, or is SC an exception?
There aren't many games I get excited about. The last games I was really excited about were Unreal Tournament, Half-Life 2, Tribes 2 and the original Bioshock. Games like this don't come along often. That doesn't mean I'm not critical of their flaws and I've been very vocal about the shortcomings of Star Citizen, like selling plots of land.
 
Avatar 22891
 
8700K @ 4.9GHz / 32GB DDR4 / GTX 1080 OC
Optane 900P 280G
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Star Citizen Squadron 42 Gameplay Video
18. Re: Star Citizen Squadron 42 Gameplay Video Dec 24, 2017, 17:14 theyarecomingforyou
 
Cutter wrote on Dec 24, 2017, 14:16:
Man, they're running that on a Cray and it's still janky as shit. Even if this thing ever sees the light of day, which is doubtful, it will be unplayable without a quantum computer.
I've had over 80fps when joining a fresh server in Alpha 3.0 and that's with the server being the bottleneck. And if you watch the presentation with the director's commentary it points out that the optimisation isn't there yet - that comes later in development. The game is going to support Vulkan to considerably improve performance, which hasn't yet been implemented.

It's not going to need a super computer but it will benefit from one.
 
Avatar 22891
 
8700K @ 4.9GHz / 32GB DDR4 / GTX 1080 OC
Optane 900P 280G
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Star Citizen Alpha 3.0 All Backers Test
34. Re: Star Citizen Alpha 3.0 All Backers Test Dec 24, 2017, 16:31 theyarecomingforyou
 
jdreyer wrote on Dec 24, 2017, 13:10:
@TheyAreComingForYou

I'm going to push back that the SQ 42 release is going to generate much extra revenue. They've already sold more than a million preorders. For a niche game on a single platform that's pretty close to max, IMO. Star Citizen isn't Call of Duty.
A lot of people won't touch a game in early access, others wait for the reviews to come out. It's very easy for them to pickup several million more sales. PUBG has sold 20 million copies and right now Star Citizen has just short of two million accounts. For a game that is pushing the boundaries of PC gaming it's not really a stretch to expect at least a few million more sales if it's decent.

jdreyer wrote on Dec 24, 2017, 13:10:
Out of curiosity, have you bought anything lately? I'm constantly amazed at people's continued support for this game, but I can't complain if it works out in the end.
I bought tickets for Gamescom back in August and CitizenCon in October but I won an Intel Optane 900P and the bundled Aegis Sabre Raven, so that more than paid for itself. Aside from that I paid $5 to upgrade from the Drake Herald to the Anvil Hawk and $5 on an event exclusive skin. But some of my friends have spent over $8,000 and I've spoken to people who've spent over $40,000.

I'm not interested in spending any more to support the game until there are regular content releases and significant progress. In fact I'd encourage people to hold off spending more until CIG can demonstrate the ability to deliver regular content updates. The 3.0 release was delayed by a year and it's far from a polished experience. There's also no word of when 3.1 will be released, let alone the other promises features.

The way I look at it is that even if everything goes tits up and collapses it was worth a gamble on. And if it pays off then it will be a game I'll be playing for several years if not the next decade. Space sims have always been my favourite genre, from games like Tie Fighter to Starlancer. But I do look at some of the big spenders in the community and question the amount of money they're putting into the game - it seems bizarre to me.
 
Avatar 22891
 
8700K @ 4.9GHz / 32GB DDR4 / GTX 1080 OC
Optane 900P 280G
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Star Citizen Alpha 3.0 All Backers Test
32. Re: Star Citizen Alpha 3.0 All Backers Test Dec 24, 2017, 11:50 theyarecomingforyou
 
Kelpie wrote on Dec 24, 2017, 06:05:
I'm curious. How long do you think they can continue development before they run out of money?
The funding for the game is consistent at around $35m per year, increasing each year. There's also additional income from tax incentives and promotions with companies like Intel and AMD. Expenditure is based around that income, meaning it is completely sustainable. Should funding decrease then CIG will scale back. Whilst Star Citizen may be pushed back quite substantial due to the technical challenges we'll likely see Squadron 42 released in the next three years, which will bring in substantial funding.

There's always the potential for something dramatic to happen to derail the project but for now it can continue indefinitely. If progress remains slow over the next couple of years then we will likely see funding reduce and CIG change its approach.

Kelpie wrote on Dec 24, 2017, 06:05:
Progress this year has been slower than expected. With 3 studios and almost 400 staff their overheads will be pretty high (millions per month). There's no way that the current pledge take is enough to offset these costs.
Progress has been slow due to the integration of planetary tech, new networking code, the delta patcher and Item 2.0, which changes the way that all items within the game are handled. You're right that development has been extremely slow but CIG has pledged to change from a content-based release schedule to a periodic release, meaning that any features not ready will simply be pushed back to later releases. Whether that amounts to anything is anyone's guess, as they've made a similar claim before with the promise of monthly patches (which was always unrealistic).

Kelpie wrote on Dec 24, 2017, 06:05:
The recent Coutts loan (an advance on their UK tax credits) would seem to indicate they're already struggling.
There's no financial difficulty. The loan is just to release the UK tax rebate early rather than transferring money between currencies. You have to bear in mind that Foundry 42, the UK studio based in Wilmslow, is by far the largest studio yet most of the funding is gathered in dollars and euros rather than pounds. The advance allows CIG to avoid costly currency transfers. As I pointed out, the game is generating around $35m a year and that's without other promotions and tax incentivew which CIG doesn't disclose. There was a statement released by CIG's lawyer to address speculation about financial difficulty.
 
Avatar 22891
 
8700K @ 4.9GHz / 32GB DDR4 / GTX 1080 OC
Optane 900P 280G
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Star Citizen Alpha 3.0 All Backers Test
26. Re: Star Citizen Alpha 3.0 All Backers Test Dec 23, 2017, 17:32 theyarecomingforyou
 
Prez wrote on Dec 23, 2017, 16:06:
Sure the graphics look amazing now. But will they still hold up in 10 years when it ships?
Consider that this is how the game looked two years ago and this is how it looks now then absolutely. There has never been an issue with the graphics looking dated and I don't expect that to change. The issue is simply when it will ship.
 
Avatar 22891
 
8700K @ 4.9GHz / 32GB DDR4 / GTX 1080 OC
Optane 900P 280G
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
6741 Comments. 338 pages. Viewing page 3.
< Newer [ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 ] Older >


footer

Blue's News logo