Personally I don't really care if he is disappointed, he is entitled to be. My issue is with nonsense hyperbole uttered by somebody that seemingly should know better.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Star Citizen Alpha 2.0 | The 'Verse Awakens
- Thread starter Raticus79
- Start date
Personally I don't really care if he is disappointed, he is entitled to be. My issue is with nonsense hyperbole uttered by somebody that seemingly should know better.
I am prepared for Star Citizen to need yearS to get to beta state, and tbh, I don't mind. It's SQ42 the one that I believe needs to be released, get some extra cash, recognition for actually releasing it and show the game's engine to people that still don't care about the game.
Spuck-uk
Banned
Good news, Roberts just said in an interview today that they won't be showing off SQ42 at Gamescom at all.
The way that ship became a collision-free attachment of the other ship reminded me of how there are often physically disconnected pieces (e.g. different parts of the frame) left over when ships explode, spinning as if they were still part of the same object. I'd like to see a Bugsmashers on why that happens, even if they don't necessarily fix it. Seeing that happen for a previously disconnected object was a new level of weird.
Dictator93
Member
I think critique is great! As long as it does not use analogies and points of comparison that are not exactly germane.
Sigh...
I wouldn't see under-delivering at Gamescom a bad thing per say.
I don't think showing something they might be unable to get into our hand by Gamescom 2018 would be better. "Don't promise the moon..." and all that, well in CiG case it would be "don't promise a planet if you can only deliver a moon". ( yeah I know using the word promise might trigger some people )
Imho they made their bed when they decided against the SQ42 vertical slice last year, now they should stay true to the idea and avoid those "faked"/vertical slice presentation for Star Citizen too. Just show where they are at, not where they hope to be at some unknow time in the future.
UpDownLeftRight
Banned
All you're here for is the shit posting it's clear as day. When finally one of the shit posters leaves another decided to take up the mantle. It's pretty hard to discuss anything relating to the game when you're going out of your way to fill page after page with low level YouTube quality comments masked as discussion.
like expected, no surprise here.
Not at gamescom but at citizencon.
Release not in 2017 but 2018.
And if they delay it because of polish and subsumption ai (every npc with his own daily routine etc.) then it is not a bad thing and i'll wait with pleasure.
I don't know about shoddy (the Homestead demo was pretty great, if overshadowed by the general disappointment following the absence of SQ42), but 3.0 is clearly what they'll be showing on Friday. Hopefully they'll throw a couple surprises in there for that extra wow factor. Chris confirmed there'll be no SQ42 at Gamescom. In any form. And from what and how he said it, I'd keep the SQ42 hype for CitizenCon at bay. We'll definitely get something Squadron related, but it might not be a full mission / demo.
I like demos as much as the next guy, but I'd be perfectly happy if they went with an extended AtV-like format at CitizenCon, with lots of different segments showing and talking about the various features, tech and behind the scenes stuff.
But yeah, they could certainly use a strong showing.
Camp Freddie
Member
Some of the demo stuff looks great, particularly the cockpits.
I'm still not convinced about the flight model though. I wish they'd try to improve that as a top priority. Everything seems too lightweight. I occasionally fire up the beta but while I love the graphics, the flight model quickly puts me off. I'll nudge a controller a bit too far and go whizzing off sideways into the space station.
I would expect that they can strengthen the effect of inertia/momentum without turning it into space-jousting.
I'm still not convinced about the flight model though. I wish they'd try to improve that as a top priority. Everything seems too lightweight. I occasionally fire up the beta but while I love the graphics, the flight model quickly puts me off. I'll nudge a controller a bit too far and go whizzing off sideways into the space station.
I would expect that they can strengthen the effect of inertia/momentum without turning it into space-jousting.
MasterOfPastures
Banned
No SQ42 tomorrow? That's a bit of a bummer. I was expecting at least some teaser or short scene.
My hopes now lie with whatever future tech they are working on, like cloud volumes, gas giants, water, etc.
Still primed to see it all tomorrow after the hour delay at the start.
My hopes now lie with whatever future tech they are working on, like cloud volumes, gas giants, water, etc.
Still primed to see it all tomorrow after the hour delay at the start.
In the 2.6 ptu they lowered the acceleration rates. Loud people complained and they raised them again.
staticneuron
Member
Vanduul.... Vanduul Everywhere!!!!!!!!!!!
Dictator93
Member
Yeah that is not a coincidence. Are we going to see Vanduul at the presentation in some capacity tomorrow? HrmmM!
aww shiiiiet
TheVoidDragon
Member
Comparing games at a superficial level in terms of what they are without taking into account what they're trying to be and how they're doing it isn't really a fair comparison, though. Sure, Star Citizen and Elite are both space games that have ships with mixed flight/vehicles/foot gameplay...that's about where the similarities end.
That comparison misses out that Star Citizen is aiming to be a game with a very high immersion focus that pushes the limits of PC games in terms of graphics and player freedom, with it's intent being a large, living-universe that feels realistic and overall not like a video game. Elite Dangerous is a game that's got pretty shallow core gameplay which they're sticking things like vehicles ontop of, whereas Star Citzen is building the foundations of the game with those elements in place at the start.
There's also things like the Studio being pretty small at first and progress only picking up after the first year or so, the modifications to the engine they've had to make, the problems with other studios etc.
There's a big difference in what the games are trying to be.
Almost didn't notice the Vanduul in the second pic. I love the atmosphere.
Seems more like Microtech, Yela doesn't seem like it would have the atmosphere for blizzards.
Eolz
Member
I wonder what your mate is telling you, because the second part of your paragraph is a bit contradictory.
For the first part (Battlefront 2 comparison), of course a comparison is fair on some level (3C for example), it's a bit less fair once you start implying that this is the same gameplay focus, and a similar tech aim. Both games have space battles indeed, but it's like doing a comparison between ARMA and COD.
Don't read too much into it, this is not a coincidence but also unrelated to the conference
Cabbagehead
Member
Miscalculation is more like it and a gross misunderstanding of. What could and could not be down in a particular top frame. Never the less CIG handled themselves fairly well and explained their situation. But at the same time they did screw up by hyping it far too much.
At least now they've learned. Given their lack of hyping compared to last year. But at the same time people are going to have to let last year go. Because it ain't going to change shit about the results prior, so what gets shown or not shown this year. Given their progress.
GamesCom for CIG has never been about Sq42. So have no real idea, why you are disappointed. But I get the sentiment.
There's nothing "faked" about what they present. This isn't E3 related bunk, they play it live and mess up live.
Like what do you think Conventions are for? any real con? it's about the present and the future. For you to say that it can't be about it. Is just a contradiction and double standards at worse.
Because we've still no idea when it's coming out or seen any gameplay (so transparent!). But why don't you attack him some more for daring to voice a negative emotion, that'll show him.
That must be why when their planet-salvage stage demo crashed and they had to rerun it, gameplay replayed beat-for-beat, sand worm and all.
Cabbagehead
Member
What are talking about? did you not understand. What I just said? Games Com has never been about SQ42 and CIG has shown us Sq42 more then a few times. Plus it's still in development and five years not not a long time, relative to their accumulative studio growth.
Stop acting like you know something, that you clearly don't.
I don't want to have to look for it all for you.
staticneuron
Member
Oh ho ho, Quit attacking them. And by attack I mean point out historical trend about CiGs behavior in response to flawed expectation. Can't people express their negative emotions about this game without being called on it and being subjected to facts?
It is as if post history and obvious tone is not a thing to be proud of.
Cabbagehead
Member
It's another reason why. It's funny that Spuck-Uk seems to think he knows about CIG or the game. Yet he clearly doesn't know jack either. Even with his "mate".
Harilous sad really...dude acting like CIG his working his supposed friend to death or something. But he continues to talk shit about how the game looks. Even when he knows that the game is in early development still. Then he claims that he's a developer aswell? lol must be the most jaded and unreasonable one at that.
Because showing that SQ42 is actually on track (only 5 years, what's the rush!) is slightly more pressing than maintaining some arbitrary compartmentalisation between conferences. duh.
Even PCGamesN has pressed for SQ42 at Gamescom.
I'm sure your countless studio tours gave you totes insider knowledge instead of sandblasting away the few remnants of your objectivity.
Its not that they wouldn't show SQ42 (it was a snowballs chance in hell anyways), its that they HAD to. Seriously, they showcased a 3.0 "demo" that was more complex last year than what they have live to test this week.
Its been an entire year of full production (nearing or at over 400 people) and in many cases they have regressed from what they showed last year. Why? Do you guys seriously buy the whole marketing "That was old 3.0 this is new 3.0!".
I said it a few weeks ago, showcasing just 3.0 when they've failed spectacularly to produce it 8+ months past the due date is bad form. Agnostic people will look at it and go "Why are they showing this again? Why should we trust them now?" Zealots will perform Olympic level mental gymnastics to say that everything is normal, not a sign of bad management and YOU DONT KNOW ABOUT GAME DEVELOPMENT
Thought game/experiment: if they are only showcasing 3.0 on their big smoke and mirrors presentation later on, what do they have to show for you to be legitimately impressed? What sort of things will they have to show (or not show) for you to be disappointed? Dont let SC narrative machine make you change your goalposts. Set them in stone now.
For me, they'd have to show and promise to implement even a partial economy when 3.0 hits that lets you work yourself up to better ships. Finally implement something that will be basically the primary threadmill loop of the game. Sense of actual progress in the game that doesn't involve your credit card. Not only will it give you a reason to actually play, but it shows that they are confident enough on their financials that they dont need to heavily depend on milking people through constant sales.
I'd be disappointed with anything else, but would be particularly disappointed if the primary showcase is just showing off things that they've done to hell and back on the ATVs except this time being sold off as nearly complete by presenting them on yet another extremely controlled demo thats not at all indicative of the current state of the development. Basically Gamescom 2016 electric boogaloo. Deduct even more points if they decide to show off an alien threat out of nowhere as coming in 3.0 since it'll just prove that they are following Elites lead on everything. (2015, change to focus on planetary landing after Elite did it. 2017, adding aliens when Elite is doing it)
Its been an entire year of full production (nearing or at over 400 people) and in many cases they have regressed from what they showed last year. Why? Do you guys seriously buy the whole marketing "That was old 3.0 this is new 3.0!".
I said it a few weeks ago, showcasing just 3.0 when they've failed spectacularly to produce it 8+ months past the due date is bad form. Agnostic people will look at it and go "Why are they showing this again? Why should we trust them now?" Zealots will perform Olympic level mental gymnastics to say that everything is normal, not a sign of bad management and YOU DONT KNOW ABOUT GAME DEVELOPMENT
Thought game/experiment: if they are only showcasing 3.0 on their big smoke and mirrors presentation later on, what do they have to show for you to be legitimately impressed? What sort of things will they have to show (or not show) for you to be disappointed? Dont let SC narrative machine make you change your goalposts. Set them in stone now.
For me, they'd have to show and promise to implement even a partial economy when 3.0 hits that lets you work yourself up to better ships. Finally implement something that will be basically the primary threadmill loop of the game. Sense of actual progress in the game that doesn't involve your credit card. Not only will it give you a reason to actually play, but it shows that they are confident enough on their financials that they dont need to heavily depend on milking people through constant sales.
I'd be disappointed with anything else, but would be particularly disappointed if the primary showcase is just showing off things that they've done to hell and back on the ATVs except this time being sold off as nearly complete by presenting them on yet another extremely controlled demo thats not at all indicative of the current state of the development. Basically Gamescom 2016 electric boogaloo. Deduct even more points if they decide to show off an alien threat out of nowhere as coming in 3.0 since it'll just prove that they are following Elites lead on everything. (2015, change to focus on planetary landing after Elite did it. 2017, adding aliens when Elite is doing it)
You are already bound to be disappointed : Erin Roberts Q&A Overview
edit : there is many things they can show that would "impress" me, new biomes, city sized landing zone etc would be impressive to see.
But for the project itself ? the one thing I badly want to see happen, is something as 'simple' as a release of 3.1 - 3.2 - 3.3 with "2 to 3 month" (©Citizencon 2016) between each release. I want to stop hearing about how things willbe done faster and finaly seeing it actually happen.
Cabbagehead
Member
Why would CIG promise anything anymore. lol
3.0 is not about the real soild economy workings. All backers knew that. At the very least it will set the heavy ground work for it.
3.0 is not about the real soild economy workings. All backers knew that. At the very least it will set the heavy ground work for it.
iHaunter
Member
Holy god can you please stop shit-posting lol.
anothertech
Member
Disappointing turn out for gamescom for sure.
The new burndown episode is up: https://youtu.be/_ik9FwfKaNM
Cabbagehead
Member
How is that a fact? what were you expecting?
Faked in the same sense that the SQ42 vertical slice would have been "fake". It would have been actual ingame gameplay, which only look the way it does because of temporary fix specificely made for the sake of the vertical slice.
I don't see why it's so crazy to want them to have the same standards about SC presentations as what they choose to have for SQ42.
22 Bugs fixed and only 3 new ones.
Space is still big I think, I've heard long QT jump times being pointed out so the space between planets is still there.
Flying from one side of solar system to another takes around 30 minutes in Quantum Travel, so space is still really big.
It should take more, but they are trying to condense things to not be ridiculous as QT is only 0.2c.
Some math.
Quatum Travel speed is around 0.2c
Stanton System is around 5 AU.
Flying through 1 AU with 0.2c takes 41,5 minutes
, so 207 minutes to flythrough all space, in straight line on one plane, of condensed system.Thats why they will be condensing systems even more.
Don't forget about the Twitch channel, everyone.
LOL.
RSI Aurora
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1gdTg6vQT7k
Drake Dragonfly
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-fqVdqOrCYU
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1gdTg6vQT7k
Drake Dragonfly
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-fqVdqOrCYU
Spuck-uk
Banned
You can address me directly y'know. I'm an EX games developer(Eidos/SCi/Glu), in part because of the crazy crunch time that goes on (60 hour weeks take their toll), and the lousy pay compared to what you can earn outside the industry. You don't have to take my word for the working conditions at CIG Manchester, it's all there in testaments from people who left, and current employees CIGs own videos.
How the game /looks/ isn't even the main issue here. It's glitchy as hell, but I'd be far more concerned at 5 years deep and no gameplay of any substance on display. Unless driving in circles on a small crysis map with no missions, no AI, no NPCs, shoddy collision detection etc is your idea of a good presentation.
Spuck-uk
Banned
It's becoming clearer and clearer that Chris Roberts is wildly out of his depth. It's been stated numerous times that he goes through approval for every single art asset, sometimes months after completion, and asks for changes. This sort of single person top-down development might have worked in the early 90s (though his games were wildly delayed even then), but it's really unworkable with 400 staff spread across multiple countries.
Spuck-uk
Banned
Don't forget the ship sales! In stock now, for a limited time only!
this is normal for an alpha phase though and not a roberts "problem"
Thanks for the warning. If it weren't for you Chris Roberts would have personally robbed me blind and then laugh about it behind my back.
Cabbagehead
Member
No that's not what happened. Things will just be a bit more relative.
TheVoidDragon
Member
Since when is an entire moon/planet, including the ability to fly into space and go elsewhere without loading screens "a small crysis map"?
Cabbagehead
Member
Void just ignore that troll. He's clueless and he's doing it on purpose at this point.
Similar threads
- Locked