Kxmode wrote on Oct 10, 2016, 21:57:
Mass Effect 1 kind of had procedural worlds that quickly angered players; especially the M35 Mako (what a nightmare of a vehicle!). BioWare learned from that mistake and made planet missions in ME2 and ME3 much more focused.
Am I wrong in this conclusion? If I am please let me know.

Hm. Remembering Mass Effect the opposite to the audience if what you say is true. I actually liked the Mako missions as they gave the impression of an expansive universe, even if it were all smoke and mirrors. It was enough to feel like it was bigger 'world' than it actually was. As opposed to the probing missions which felt like a total gimmick in the sequels.

In GTA you can't access every building or shop but nobody cares. The fact that all that content is there gives an expansiveness. If there are missions/objectives people don't bother with the filler, but the filler is still important for immersion.

I don't know. I wish them the best, as much of a cluster of a development it is.

Impressive tech.

Rabbit trail: If they get their game systems solid but eventually run out of money, this would be a very easy pitch to take to Disney and retrofit to do something in the Star Wars universe. Since everything they've done so far is already paid for I'm sure Disney would unload buckets of cash to make that happen, especially since the franchise is currently making it's own comeback.

While not so cool on the side of the initial investor, it would be similar to how Lucky sold Oculus, even though it raised loads of cash via crowdfunding. A dick move, but what major business move isn't?

On a side note, it's crazy to think Disney paid 4 billion for Lucasfilm while someone else Notched up 2.5 billion for Minecraft alone. Score!

theyarecomingforyou wrote on Oct 11, 2016, 16:11:
I don't know how anyone can watch the latest presentation and question the direction of the game.

Maybe because people have previously watched presentations like the Star Marine reveal in 2014 and absolutely none of what was shown in that demo is in the game today even though Roberts said it would be out in early 2015? (yeah, I know, it's all Illfonic's fault, of course )

And you are crazy to claim that what was shown at CitCon last year is in the game now (hint: A huge chunk of CitCon last year was the S42 reveal and S42 won't be out this year and most likely not even anywhere early 2017 either... if 2017 at all). It isn't. Or at least not nearly at the quality (FIDELITEEEEHHHH!!!!11 ) and stability they have shown in all of their fabricated, fake, scripted demos.

Virtually everything they have shown off at shows and conventions these past four years is either a total no-show like Star Marine or has never arrived in the game at the quality (FIDELITEEEEHHHH!!!!11 ) they have presented and advertised. Not even close.

Everything has been released spit&glue half-assed (after many delays) just to sort of deliver on the promises and then it's been abandoned to rot for the next big thing to create MOAR HYPE and extract more money from gullible fools.

But, sure, keep lying for them. No problem. You make a good cultist. Chris is proud of you.

The Pyro wrote on Oct 11, 2016, 14:30:

Not sure I buy the 64 bit precision for seeing the spacestation from the planet.

Seems reasonable to me. I've encountered the same issue at work when trying to render small deviations in well boreholes within an oil field that might be spread over several square kilometers. You gotta use 64-bit precision coordinates or you'll get all sorts of strange jittering and artifacts.

Especially since that station exists in the game world a couple hundred KM from the player, you need 64 bit to render accurately at that kind of scale.

Peeeling wrote on Oct 11, 2016, 09:01:
"They've completely retooled it"

They do that a lot. And whenever it happens it's for one of two reasons:

1. They've just spent a whole bunch of time and money doing something wrong.

2. Chris has been to an expo and seen something cool.

1) The original Kickstarter target was $500,000 and so far it's raised over $127,000,000. That inevitably has meant that the scope of the game has expanded. Procedural planets were a stretch goal from the $41,000,000 mark and their implementation has been much quicker than expected, making them a sensible addition to the game. Expanding the scope of the game isn't 'doing something wrong'.

2) CIG shows off the content it has been working on. The content they revealed at CitizenCon last year is now playable and it won't be long until we'll be able to play what was shown off the other day. If you'd been following the game at all you'd know that CIG regularly shows off new content in their weekly Around The Verse series - for instance, they showed off damage states and planetary wrecks.

I don't know how anyone can watch the latest presentation and question the direction of the game. Procedural planets absolutely should be in Squadron 42 and will make it a better game - unfortunately that's going to mean it will take longer to come out. In the mean time we'll have 3.0 and subsequent releases to enjoy and the community will get to influence the development and balancing of new features. Unlike other games the community has a huge influence over the development of the game and CIG responds.

Not sure I buy the 64 bit precision for seeing the spacestation from the planet.

Seems reasonable to me. I've encountered the same issue at work when trying to render small deviations in well boreholes within an oil field that might be spread over several square kilometers. You gotta use 64-bit precision coordinates or you'll get all sorts of strange jittering and artifacts.

Hopefully that single chapter they want to take to full quality will be something they can share by bathe end of the year.

Just finished uncharted 4 which was fantastic. With all the mo cap CIG did I'm excited to see some of the FPS stuff in game. Hopefully it will be awesome.

As long as funding keeps coming I guess they can do what they like. Would be nice to see something get finished but if it's not done and people will put more money in then so be it.

theyarecomingforyou wrote on Oct 11, 2016, 04:46:
RE: Former CIG workers
There are no infidels at CIG. Never!
My feelings - as usual - we will slaughter them all
God will roast their stomachs in hell at the hands of believers.

RE: Doubters
Be assured. this game is safe, protected.
No I am not scared, and neither should you be!

RE: Stories about delays or cut features after the end of the feature creep
I blame Blue's News - they are marketing for the doubters!

Sorry, I really could not resist.

Source: http://www.welovetheiraqiinformationminister.com/

"They've completely retooled it"

They do that a lot. And whenever it happens it's for one of two reasons:

1. They've just spent a whole bunch of time and money doing something wrong.

2. Chris has been to an expo and seen something cool.

The Half Elf wrote on Oct 11, 2016, 07:31:
Klingon Academy! *sniffles* Reinstalled Bridge Commander last night.

Why isn't KA on gog yet?

ViRGE wrote on Oct 11, 2016, 02:08:

Satoru wrote on Oct 10, 2016, 23:50:
Falcon 4.0 came with a manual the size of an encyclopedia. And no one was complaining then about that. Maybe you're too young but there was a time where actually reading a manual was actually not just important but required. RTFM didn't come out of no where. Certain games expected things from its purchasers, like actually reading stuff. If you bought a Jane's simulator (the old ones) it also expected you to read the manual and understand it.

In fact ET one of the most 'infamous' games was actually 100% playable and made total sense IF you read the manual. Which at the time was basically accepted common knowledge to do. Today streamers love shitting on the game like "oh this game is so bad! What am I supposed to do!!" Yeah what you're supposed to do is RTFM.

Ahh, the good ole days. I still have the Klingon Academy manual. It is somewhere around 200 pages and spiral-bound. But by-god, it contained virtually everything you could want to know about the game.

Klingon Academy! *sniffles* Reinstalled Bridge Commander last night.

Kosumo wrote on Oct 10, 2016, 15:11:
Where is Star Marine? Now hard can it be to make that?

It's due in the next release, which is expected imminently. CIG was working on 3.0 for the end of the year, with 2.6 (which includes Star Marine) appearing beforehand. They've completely retooled it and it should include the vision stabilisation they recently showed off, which is crucial for first-person.

Kosumo wrote on Oct 10, 2016, 15:11:
Where is the Hangars that you can invite your friends into to show off the stuff you have brought form CIG (Ships, Hangar flair)? How hard could that be to make?

Originally that was going to come before the social module but CIG decided to shift the priority to the PU, which was released with 2.0. Hangars will be implemented in the PU but the delay was caused by the implementation of other technology, like procedural planets, Item System 2.0 and StarNetwork. Are you suggesting allowing people to walk around your hangar is more important than the persistent universe that they've already released?

thecakeisalie wrote on Oct 10, 2016, 18:56:
This is what all of the Derek Smart haters forget. Derek Smart might be an arrogant tool when he wants to be, but he's actually shipped games and has a better track record of delivering on what he's promised. For that much, he deserves some degree of respect.

You think DS deserves respect for releasing this but CR doesn't deserve any for putting out this (that's footage of the current playable release)? Please. Your trolling isn't even slightly subtle.

Kxmode wrote on Oct 10, 2016, 21:57:
I have a question. How important is a procedural planet to Squadron 42?

Mass Effect 1 kind of had procedural worlds that quickly angered players; especially the M35 Mako (what a nightmare of a vehicle!). BioWare learned from that mistake and made planet missions in ME2 and ME3 much more focused. They did away with quasi-procedural planets. I'd imagine that change alone saved them a lot of money and time.

The simple answer is that we don't know. They've revealed that there will be atmospheric dogfighting in Squadron 42 and I wouldn't be surprised if we see a mission like the one shown off, where players have to land on a planet to collect data from a crashed ship. It's not the bulk of the game but given they've developed the technology for Star Citizen it makes sense to use it, especially given how ground breaking it is fidelity wise.

Vall Forran wrote on Oct 11, 2016, 03:15:
Not sure I buy the 64 bit precision for seeing the spacestation from the planet. Wouldn't they have to calculate orbits, then locations of the spacestation? To just get to a point, look up, and see the station...I'm gonna go with a big Nope.

A station is geosynchronous orbit would always appear in the same location, making it easy for them to create a demo where you look up and see it at a particular point. What about the 64-bit precision for you 'not buy'?

Vall Forran wrote on Oct 11, 2016, 02:58:
Meh, never expected it to come out this year anyway. The stuff they are demo-ing shows progress. Derek Smart would've released a broken game by now and spend all his time arguing that you're just playing it wrong and it works on his computer and he's god and he's the best developer and he has the best judgement and "Gina".

Don't forget too that if you have any problems with the game, you're probably using German drivers. They're so tough to develop for!

Not sure I buy the 64 bit precision for seeing the spacestation from the planet. Wouldn't they have to calculate orbits, then locations of the spacestation? To just get to a point, look up, and see the station...I'm gonna go with a big Nope.

Meh, never expected it to come out this year anyway. The stuff they are demo-ing shows progress. Derek Smart would've released a broken game by now and spend all his time arguing that you're just playing it wrong and it works on his computer and he's god and he's the best developer and he has the best judgement and "Gina".

This comment was edited on Oct 11, 2016, 03:11.

Satoru wrote on Oct 10, 2016, 23:50:
Falcon 4.0 came with a manual the size of an encyclopedia. And no one was complaining then about that. Maybe you're too young but there was a time where actually reading a manual was actually not just important but required. RTFM didn't come out of no where. Certain games expected things from its purchasers, like actually reading stuff. If you bought a Jane's simulator (the old ones) it also expected you to read the manual and understand it.

In fact ET one of the most 'infamous' games was actually 100% playable and made total sense IF you read the manual. Which at the time was basically accepted common knowledge to do. Today streamers love shitting on the game like "oh this game is so bad! What am I supposed to do!!" Yeah what you're supposed to do is RTFM.

Ahh, the good ole days. I still have the Klingon Academy manual. It is somewhere around 200 pages and spiral-bound. But by-god, it contained virtually everything you could want to know about the game.

Are you me? I was just about to post this very thought-line, after glancing at my Falcon 4.0 3-ring binder'd manual next to my Art of the Kill video and booklet. I 'LOVE' games with a depth greater than spilled milk on the floor that required the keyboard shortcut cards we 'used' to get in games back in the day that covered the bajillion combinations needed to get our birds in the air; mechs out of the bay, or help our Avatars thread their way through Britannia.

Getting old and remembering things that actually 'were' better back in the day isn't the way it's supposed to work, is it?

P.S.: Screw .pdf manuals with a red hot poker.

EDIT: Was meant as reply to Satoru's comment.



~Finis~

BIGtrouble77 wrote on Oct 10, 2016, 14:43:

Dacron wrote on Oct 10, 2016, 14:34:

BIGtrouble77 wrote on Oct 10, 2016, 13:49:
The delays don't bother me. I've stopped updating my client months ago since it goes against my DL caps (I just love canada) and I usually only play for a few minutes.

If you're on the westcoast, check out shaws new 150. 1TB limit, 150mbps, $5 more than their 30 for the first 2 years.

Thanks for the heads up, I am on the West Coast. I currently have the Telus dual DSL which is pretty fast (75down/50up), but very expensive. Definitely going to look into this.

How much do you pay for it?

Nothing will beat Battlecruiser 3000AD. Nothing!

This comment was edited on Oct 11, 2016, 00:26.

Kxmode wrote on Oct 10, 2016, 21:57:
I have a question. How important is a procedural planet to Squadron 42?

Who the heck knows. You'd think, in theory, its not required for a story driven game. But Roberts really has no idea what he's doing.

I feel like Chris isn't making a game, he's building an engine, and he wants to license the engine back to CryEngine and others eventually. If that's the case, that is not what backers asked for. Supporters just want a game, not engine development.

That would be incredibly stupid of them to do. Firstly the engine even if it reached its magical state of being a Minimum Viable Product at some future date, would be so convoluted as to be unsellable. It would be so geared to what Star Citizen wanted but not what anyone else needs. Any studio that actually needed something that complex would simply just build their own engine at that point. Think of it this way. SC has already spent 4 years essentially modding the hell out of Crytek. They'd have been better off just building something from scratch rather than be constantly hampered by Cryteks FPS roots limitations at every turn.

Secondly it also ignores how the engine market is now. Even UE4 is basically free. Which means you coudln't sell the engine to anyone. Crytek doesn't need this frankenstien engine either. Heck Star Citizen is using a version of Crytek that's 2 major revisions behind already which is why they can't incorporate VR. Unity and UE4 are already solid products with wider userbase and community support. Who would buy Star Citizens' custom engine? This is even assuming they can given that it's basically a Crytek mod they probably don't even hvae the rights to sell the engine as a separate component. They'd be sued out of existence for trying

Kxmode wrote on Oct 10, 2016, 21:42:

Timmeh wrote on Oct 10, 2016, 11:16:

BitWraith wrote on Oct 10, 2016, 10:41:

The Half Elf wrote on Oct 10, 2016, 10:35:

Angrius Maximis wrote on Oct 10, 2016, 10:15:
This game is going to be on a Derek Smart level of FAILURE

At least Smart has shipped a game

I would rather wait for one than spend money on a broken one.

I have some of the universal combat games... they are pretty cool. Not the best graphics but you can do a lot of stuff.

None of them are "broken".

I'm sure they are, but they have the absolute worse UI. Part of making a game fun to play is the UI has to be intuitive. It's not the gamer's job to remember a 96-page manual on how to play. For Derek's games only a few ever got to the point where they could remember the dizzying array of menus/submenus and hotkeys. I believe those customers continue to support Derek and his many projects. However, IIRC I remember Derek berated one customer for not remembering the manual.

Falcon 4.0 came with a manual the size of an encyclopedia. And no one was complaining then about that. Maybe you're too young but there was a time where actually reading a manual was actually not just important but required. RTFM didn't come out of no where. Certain games expected things from its purchasers, like actually reading stuff. If you bought a Jane's simulator (the old ones) it also expected you to read the manual and understand it.

In fact ET one of the most 'infamous' games was actually 100% playable and made total sense IF you read the manual. Which at the time was basically accepted common knowledge to do. Today streamers love shitting on the game like "oh this game is so bad! What am I supposed to do!!" Yeah what you're supposed to do is RTFM.