S42 Primary Tech Hurdles
Content
Most of our base technology is now complete
Still in Progress:
Subsumption
- Pathfinding Logic
- Full Animation Integration
- Improved Combat Logic
- Mission System Integration
- Enhanced Fight AI
Object Container Streaming
CPU and GPU Optimizations
S42 Status Update
Content
- All chapters and gameplay features at grey-box or better
- Taking one chapter to final ship quality - flushes out any technical, integration and polish issues.
- Building Technology & Systems for the long term and the whole SC universe - no short cuts!
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.
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.
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.
Peeeling wrote on Oct 11, 2016, 09:01:1) 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'.
"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.
Not sure I buy the 64 bit precision for seeing the spacestation from the planet.
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!
The Half Elf wrote on Oct 11, 2016, 07:31:
Klingon Academy! *sniffles* Reinstalled Bridge Commander last night.
ViRGE wrote on Oct 11, 2016, 02:08:Satoru wrote on Oct 10, 2016, 23:50: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.
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.
Kosumo wrote on Oct 10, 2016, 15:11: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.
Where is Star Marine? Now hard can it be to make that?
Kosumo wrote on Oct 10, 2016, 15:11: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?
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?
thecakeisalie wrote on Oct 10, 2016, 18:56: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.
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.
Kxmode wrote on Oct 10, 2016, 21:57: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.
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.
Vall Forran wrote on Oct 11, 2016, 03:15: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'?
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.
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".
Satoru wrote on Oct 10, 2016, 23:50: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.
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.
BIGtrouble77 wrote on Oct 10, 2016, 14:43:Dacron wrote on Oct 10, 2016, 14:34: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.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.
Kxmode wrote on Oct 10, 2016, 21:57:
I have a question. How important is a procedural planet to Squadron 42?
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.
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.![]()