Rule Number One of Fan Remakes: Don't announce the remake until it's done! Otherwise, you're just going to get C&Ded and all your hard work will go for naught.

RedEye9 wrote on Dec 25, 2016, 15:59:
favorite comment from phobos512

Here's the thing. Back in the day we'd have heard about this game as a sentence in a magazine article/interview ("working on something really neat," etc.). There would've been rumors for months to years and eventually a full page ad buy and then an article. And then it would've come out. Instead we follow the entire process every step of the way and we are enabled to know and criticize everything. It's a complete paradigm shift and it's hard because people are so damned impatient.

One other minor difference: you wouldn't have paid a cent before it came out either.

The publishers who funded the game would have been all up in CR's grill, with timed milestones, preview builds, constant updates, etc. But, CR already has your money, and he could declare tomorrow that the game was done as it is and you couldn't do a thing about it. There are fewer checks on CR now than there ever have been. Some people celebrate that. Some are terrified by it.

theyarecomingforyou wrote on Dec 20, 2016, 15:02:
Nonsense. Look at the unified first-and-third person animations, for instance - the only game that tried that is Arma and that's a horrible game. CIG has managed to incorporate vision stabilisation into the mix to create a viewspace that is exactly as others see it, which is important for multiplayer. Then there's the multi-crew ships with independent physics grids, something that hasn't been seen in any other game. There's the scope of the universe, with 64bit precision being used to render at incredible distances with incredible accuracy. If you really think the game isn't cutting edge and groudbreaking then you're not being reasonable.

And every one of those things has been tried or achieved in other games (you even admit it with ARMA!). 64-bit precision is unique to SC? Seriously? You haven't addressed my question at all. Why is CR the guy who will be able to put all of these together for the first time?

theyarecomingforyou wrote on Dec 20, 2016, 15:02:
Nobody does. It's never been done before. It's like criticising JFK for trying to put a man on the moon by claiming nobody has ever done it before and nobody has been able to combine all the elements needed. No shit. Is your argument that developers should always play it safe and not bother to innovate?

Uhhh, ever heard of Blizzard? They've made careers out of combining the features of disparate games into a beautiful working whole. No one may have combined these particular features... and I wonder why?

No, my argument is that those who achieve generally have the skills or records that predict they will achieve. When you want someone to circumnavigate the Earth, you'll look for someone that has a history of managing long expeditions. If you're looking for someone to run a marathon, you look for someone that has run long races. NASA had a history of getting stuff done, which they built on. JFK didn't call up a model rocket club and put them in charge.

theyarecomingforyou wrote on Dec 20, 2016, 15:02:
Look, if you don't like the game then don't buy it. Chris Roberts isn't going to murder your first born if you don't. If you want to wait for it to be completed before deciding whether it's worth it then great - again, nobody is forcing you to buy it. What I don't understand is why so many people have an agenda to see the game fail.

So now we've finally got to the rhetorical dodges. You can't give me a reason why CR is the guy to make this advance, so you impugn my motives (in addition to hyperbolic strawmen). I'd love a game that brought space adventure/combat back into the mainstream. But every indication is that this isn't it. No matter what you say about me, it doesn't mean that you have established a single thing about CR capabilities and SC's feasibility...

This comment was edited on Dec 20, 2016, 20:56.

RedEye9 wrote on Dec 20, 2016, 11:28:

Peeeling wrote on Dec 20, 2016, 11:10:
I don't think those who were sold on the hype deserve abuse. For the most part it's been very good hype. However I think apologists who try to gloss over the failure to deliver on promises, and who try to claim - AFAIK with zero industry experience - that this is typical AAA development are doing everyone a disservice at this point.

In the history of gaming there has never been an undertaking as large as this with such a big all encompassing scope.

Not to mention it has fairly open development with the community and is crowd funded.

Some. if not most, of this is uncharted territory.

Nope. Not one iota of it is "uncharted territory." Every single thing CR is promising has been done before. What he is promising is to do them all together at once. That's what makes him (and his defenders) fools. Because his entire argument is that he can do what no one else has been able to do because... reasons. And that's it! No "because" is forthcoming. No explanation how he is going to accomplish what everyone else in the history of gaming couldn't manage. What is the new technology? What is the new coding practice or development structure? What is the track record and evidence that he can do it? If John Carmack tells me he has come up with a method of rendering scenes with half the overhead I might believe him (if I don't think about "megatextures" too hard). He's got a track record.

But CR has no track record of technological innovation on this scale. He's got no track record of finding a way to combine all of the disparate features of different games into a seamless whole (*cough* Freelancer *cough*). He has no "magic bullet" to make any of his promises more possible than they were for any other developers. Hell, he doesn't even have EA/COD money (yet) to throw at the game. All he has is "trust me." All he has is "have faith."

This isn't a game. It's a damn cult...

Agent-Zero wrote on Dec 20, 2016, 06:35:

jdreyer wrote on Dec 20, 2016, 01:39:
Also, I thought we got our modern-day Bladerunner. It's called "Westworld."

the original Westworld is from the early 70s

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LcL3eP0Hfy4

QFT!

This video is everything wrong with SC development.

Notice how long it takes to actually get to "gameplay"? Sure, I want to walk through a long series of corridors (which they clipped out part of... look for the cuts) in order to equip in order to set my ship layout in order to take off to fly to get to the mission. Or not. Half the time is spent NOT playing the combat part.

Now, some people get into hyper-realism. There's room for the DCS Warthogs and Falcon 5.0s of the world. But how many popular sim games give "jump to action" or time acceleration features, precisely because they understand what the fun part of the game is? Honestly, this is my knock on Elite as well. But at least I don't have to check each virtual pocket for my virtual wallet and peel off virtual bills individually in order to pay for my fuel in Elite. That seems to be Chris Roberts' dream for SC.

Also, look at the combat (especially the space marine part). Are they using Nerf guns? It took 200 hits to drop a single enemy. That's a definite sign of gameplay issues there. Either the hit boxes or networking is crap, or CR realizes the intense frustration of 10 minutes of prep, only to get killed in 2 seconds. Probably a combination of both.

This game is even more borked than I feared it was. Hope the folks who backed it had the money to burn, because this game won't be played for more than five minutes by the average gamer before it goes in the garbage bin...

And the video is gone...

The term "ephemeral" should be the subtitle for this game...

heroin wrote on Nov 20, 2016, 10:45:
I still don't understand why people flap their gums up and down like a bunch of drool slobbering camels over SC's development. From a business perspective on revenue & production what they did is pretty genius. The game will push boundaries once it's finally released compared to whatever is coming out down the line. For a new team taking on something with such scope, 4 years in development isn't terrible. I honestly hope they are ignoring the negative shmucks and work their asses off, taking as long as possible to make it as good as they are able; massive & loaded with detail.

Poster's name: "heroin"

Name checks out.

El Pit wrote on Nov 13, 2016, 13:47:
Maybe Trumperica will do just what democratic countries like Russia and Turkey did: imprison all critical journalists, close every newspaper or tv station that will not follow the government's guidelines, and suddenly there is only one truth and that is forged by the regime government. After all, Putin and The Donald are best friends forever, right? Why not do what his friend did?

So, you're worried that the government will start behaving like the average left-wing college administration and silence anyone who says anything they don't like? Cool story, brah...

Bundy wrote on Nov 9, 2016, 14:03:
One does not simply move to Canada:
http://www.ctvnews.ca/canada/americans-it-s-not-as-easy-as-just-moving-to-canada-1.3150096

That said, I feel good being Canadian today, I honestly have no idea what my neighbors to the south think Trump is going to do for you. But it's probably not what you think. We'll just have to wait and see.

The fact that someone from a country that elected Justin Trudeau has the lack of self-awareness to post this just adds to the humor.

Pro-tip: Short Morton's stock. After yesterday's election, salt will no longer be in short supply...

Mordecai Walfish wrote on Oct 27, 2016, 13:16:

nin wrote on Oct 27, 2016, 11:53:

Ozmodan wrote on Oct 27, 2016, 11:48:
The Nintendo Switch is dead before they even release it. They should just fold up shop and do something else.

Ima bookmark this for later...

"Osmodamus' Prophecies"

Nah. Everyone thinks they're a Nostradumbass... and they're right!

Malvok wrote on Oct 23, 2016, 22:13:

ShakaUVM wrote on Oct 23, 2016, 21:50:
I'm really liking it.

I'm enjoying it as well. I like almost every aspect of the game. I'm not so sure about what looks like the ability to spam cities without any penalty but the rest of the changes I like.

The only real bug I've found is when it switches to the wrong unit for a second before continuing to the right one. I've ordered units to the wrong location a few times because I clicked too soon.

I'd like to comment, but I've lost a weekend somewhere. Just a few more turns and I'll be at a stopping point...

Devinoch wrote on Oct 21, 2016, 14:10:
The original copyright exclusivity was also based on the life expectancy of people being in their mid to late 60s, not, as it stands now, their mid to late 80s.

80s - 60s = ~20 years

100 years - 14 years = 86 years

So copyright length has gone up four times as fast as life expectancy.

No wonder you support this stupidity. Your math skills suck...

CJ_Parker wrote on Oct 10, 2016, 19:22:

The Half Elf wrote on Oct 10, 2016, 19:15:
That last link is bullshit. pro. generaterated planet my fucking ass. Lets see, a sand planet with a big snake/worm on it (obvious shot at No Man's SKy)

NMS? It was a 100% Dune rip or maybe 98% Dune and 2% Sarlacc from Star Wars RotJ. Just like those sand people were a 100% rip off of Tatooine Tusken raiders.

Star Wars/Dune clone = CIG creativity department.

Sign number 1,768 that you're backing a scam: Appeals to other people's IP to generate nostalgia...

descender wrote on Oct 10, 2016, 18:37:
That "limited government" you pretend to seek is not a thing that can either be achieved or that you would actually accept at any level. It's a bullshit argument put forth by people with no solutions to any particular issue. Just having "less" isn't an answer. That's a hatchet job with no possibility of effective change.

The days of small limited government control are basically over and they have been since a few hundred million people inhabited it. This isn't the wild west anymore, we are ("the good guys") trying to push forward as a society and that means everyone hunkering down and paying their fair share to be part of what is easily still the greatest country in the world to live in for any random individual. That doesn't mean allowing greed to run rampant in the economy and shitting on those less fortunate than you. That means using our collective power to raise up those less fortunate than us.

You are judged on how you treat the weakest people in your society. Hanging them out to dry because you don't want to buy into the system basically just makes you a selfish asshole with zero foresight.

Right. You and your ilk are the progressives on the "right side of history." Collective power (wielded by the likeminded few, of course) has always turned out so well, especially when used by the forces of righteousness. So we'll replace "Deus vult!" with "For the people!" and that will make our crusade turn out properly. I don't know what is most amusing, your ignorance of history, or your self-righteous belief that it doesn't apply to you...

Mordecai Walfish wrote on Oct 10, 2016, 18:05:

Eirikrautha wrote on Oct 10, 2016, 16:44:
There is no part of your life that isn't regulated by the government, down to the size of toilet you use or the kind of light bulbs you can buy. And all of this with the threat of lethal force behind it.

Who has ever been threatened with lethal force over the size of their toilet or light bulb purchasing choices in this country?

Attempt to import a non-regulation toilet into this country. Then refuse to pay the fine. Then refuse to cooperate with the officers that come to arrest you. Every act of government is based on the concept that the government can and will force your compliance, up to and including deadly force. You will pay or you will go to jail, or you will be shot where you stand. Or is your contention that you can ignore government regulations and their enforcement without consequences, including violence against you if you persist in your defiance?

I find it highly ironic that the same folks likely to support the BLM buffoons, are the same folks who want to increase the power of government and police, and also assert that the police can be trusted to use that power wisely (at least when they are enforcing the laws that you like)...

descender wrote on Oct 10, 2016, 18:00:
I only wish I could be on the side of the whiners and complainers that only posit problems and never solutions. What do you even suggest to resolve the actual issues of this government (which you seem to barely comprehend through your fog of conservatism) short of violent revolution?

Why do you think there is a "resolution"? Every cancer patient desperately wants a cure... but few get one. The answer is not political; it's cultural. Only when an overwhelming majority of people want limited government will you be able to elect enough congressmen who, out of their own self-interested desire to remain in office, will vote to shrink the powers of government. But no one in politics is even making this argument, much less building a critical mass. Our culture is perfectly fine with overbearing government, so long as we have Twitter and skittles.

Small progress can be made locally (California just put huge restrictions on civil forfeiture). But the average citizen should just keep their head down, avoid interaction with government as much as possible, and ride the rubble down. Outside of raising your children with the values that you support and hoping that the culture you are opposing (which has the power of the government and the media behind it) dies out, there is no quick fix. It's the quick fix of thrashing around harder that just makes the quicksand pull you down faster...

This comment was edited on Oct 10, 2016, 18:25.

descender wrote on Oct 10, 2016, 13:44:
The government is just people. It is not naturally corrupt, inefficient or incompetent. If you want better government then elect better people.

No. This is why your (and her) policies will never work. There are no better people. The government will always be as corrupt, inefficient, and incompetent as the most corrupt, inefficient, and incompetent member of our society. It has to be, because that is who government is: the people.

The entire construction of the U.S. government was founded on the concept that good government was dependent on the rules and systems of government, not on the people who ran it. In fact, the idea that the "good" people will create good government was the exact idea that the colonists were rebelling against (since the British defined "good" people as the hereditary nobility). The US was founded as a nation of laws, not men.

In some ways, the nation has failed, in that the slow subversion of the basic tenets of limited government bound by strict powers has occurred over the last 250 years. But you are a fool of gigantic proportions if you believe that any person (be it Hillary or Trump) will be able to reverse the corruption of the US system of government. It has grown too large, with too many people making themselves rich by abusing it (see the money paid to Bill Clinton for speeches while Hillary was determining foreign policy as SoS). The only way to reform government is to shrink it, which no one is willing to do.

Advocating "good" government is the height of stupidity, and it certainly shows a colossal ignorance of the actual theory of government expounded by its founders. Argue, if you will, that the US government should be restructured according to new guiding principles if that is your aim, but electing "good" people to fix the government is an idea that the creators of the system would scoff at as a safeguard. They all knew that no one could be trusted with power.

Government is the ability to force (by all means up to and including fatal) others to do what you want. A just society recognizes that the power of government should be used seldom and sparingly, as every command of government is done at gunpoint (both figuratively, and sometimes literally). Modern western society (including the US) has abandoned any pretense of just or sparing use of force. There is no part of your life that isn't regulated by the government, down to the size of toilet you use or the kind of light bulbs you can buy. And all of this with the threat of lethal force behind it. And some of you idiots want more of it...

So what's the skinny on Fig? Is it an "Indegogo" type where they keep the money whether or not they make their goal, or is it more like kickstarter?

Slick wrote on Sep 23, 2016, 21:09:
I'll defend your right to be an idiot, but I don't have to even see you as a human being if you "just want to see it burn" by voting in Trump.

You need a term for that. How about "lebensunwerten lebens"? It's kind of catchy.

I'd quote Nietzsche about monsters, but the same sort of pretentious, non-selfaware psuedo-intellectuals who I'd be addressing with the quote already know it... they just think they understand it better than those that would apply it to them (and are above it)...