|
D_Smart posted:You know that a bunch of games, including mine, did that, like over a decade ago, right? Oh totally! This game is still mad hosed. But I honestly thought we were months away from any of this stuff being anywhere close to playable.
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2015 00:45
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 26, 2024 06:32 |
|
|
D_Smart posted:As I tweeted this morning, this is done by going the (32-bit * 2) route, whereby you use a 32-Bit positional reference for that fixed object, then treat the player position as a 32-Bit value by using that fixed object as a reference. So if I'm understanding nothing is stored as an actual thing that exists in a particular place? You just work out if a) thing is here and b) player is this far away from thing then a) and b) means c) then render c). And that's why bits of geometry jitter around? Sounds massively complicated and hacky if I'm right.
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2015 00:45
|
|
|
its hilarious because what they delivered for 2.0 wasn't anywhere near what they promise for 2.0 its like saying on your birthday you are going to get lots of presents to unwrap and on your birthday there are like 30 wrapped presents, but only 2 of them actually have anything in them thats what they just did with 2.0 they said 2.0 will be X, then the gave you X minus 5, and said that was actually X and the citizens are loving it
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2015 00:46
|
|
|
D_Smart posted:You know that a bunch of games, including mine, did that, like over a decade ago, right? That's not the point. SC has gone from having nothing to having something; something that even looks like it has potential. They're still a far cry from having realistic prospects of making it a success, or even just digging themselves out of the feature obligation hole they're in, but because the expectation bar for this release was so low, it really is impressive.
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2015 00:46
|
|
Eonwe posted:its hilarious because what they delivered for 2.0 wasn't anywhere near what they promise for 2.0 What did they promise that isn't there, exactly?
|
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2015 00:46
|
|
|
Octopode posted:What did they promise that isn't there, exactly? shut up octopode
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2015 00:47
|
|
|
Any reports of multicrew actually working yet?
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2015 00:47
|
|
|
CI "nobody will call us out when we move the goal posts because we are a cult" G
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2015 00:47
|
|
|
Eonwe posted:please dont start being positive about this game again because all thats going to happen is you are going to have to get another loving refund Zero chance of me putting money back in, but this has been so entertaining, just watching the drama I certainly don't mind it going on longer. I might get to see that SQ42 movie someday.
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2015 00:48
|
|
|
I bet when they go 64 bit it's all incompatible and they have to start from scratch. Chris will have to hire a random studio for the making GBS threads module to have someone to blame/fire.
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2015 00:49
|
|
|
that glitchy laggy piece of poo poo looks so good im glad I spent $1000 plus on it
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2015 00:49
|
|
|
Eonwe posted:its hilarious because what they delivered for 2.0 wasn't anywhere near what they promise for 2.0 It's also less lovely than I was expecting. It's unstable as hell and there's nothing to do but the core concepts of get missions, fly to places, blow poo poo up, land ship, shoot people are there. I don't see how it's going to be any more interesting than E:D space trucking simulator, but I'm more confident about an actual game getting released in the next 12-18 months.
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2015 00:49
|
|
|
Eonwe posted:that glitchy laggy piece of poo poo looks so good im glad I spent $1000 plus on it said a star citizen, lovingly caressing his concierge card that cost him $10
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2015 00:49
|
|
Berious posted:I bet when they go 64 bit it's all incompatible and they have to start from scratch. Chris will have to hire a random studio for the making GBS threads module to have someone to blame/fire. They're already 64-bit, killer.
|
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2015 00:50
|
|
|
Chalks posted:It's also less lovely than I was expecting. It's unstable as hell and there's nothing to do but the core concepts of get missions, fly to places, blow poo poo up, land ship, shoot people are there. it is slightly less lovely than I was expecting, but at the same time, its not persistent in any way and the actual "go fly out in space" isn't there its more like, fly around near a space station that spazzes out really badly imagine what it would be like if it were anything near as big as any space sim pretty much ever, it would be a loving abortion has anyone actually even seen an FPS gameplay yet, have they managed to make crosshairs work in an engine that supports them literally right out of the box have they made it so that any of those modules can truly talk to each other in any meaningful way
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2015 00:51
|
|
|
Octopode posted:They're already 64-bit, killer. shut up octopode
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2015 00:52
|
|
|
Eonwe posted:CI "nobody will call us out when we move the goal posts because we are a cult" G All I want is a game that's just barely playable enough so I can use the myriad of exploits to grief RP tards until they mess themselves. What I'm seeing gives hope that my expectations will be met.
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2015 00:52
|
|
|
i guess im asking, have they done any of the actual hard work, or have they just spent $90 million making a less compelling and glitchier version of Elite dangerous without the scale of Elite Dangerous
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2015 00:52
|
|
|
TheShazbot posted:shut up octopode
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2015 00:52
|
|
|
Eonwe posted:i guess im asking, have they done any of the actual hard work, or have they just spent $90 million making a less compelling and glitchier version of Elite dangerous without the scale of Elite Dangerous also it costs way more than elite dangerous too and it doesn't even really look better
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2015 00:53
|
|
|
Eonwe posted:i guess im asking, have they done any of the actual hard work, or have they just spent $90 million making a less compelling and glitchier version of Elite dangerous without the scale of Elite Dangerous yes
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2015 00:53
|
|
|
Daztek posted:yes
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2015 00:53
|
|
|
i liked the thread better when you guys poo poo the thread up yourselves dont make me have to poo poo the thread up about how obviously bad this turd is don't loving convince some idiot goon to drop a penny on this please
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2015 00:54
|
|
|
Eonwe posted:that glitchy laggy piece of poo poo looks so good im glad I spent $1000 plus on it Just because it appears there is some content and if the crashing issue has been solved that doesn't mean the thread is going to switch to going all super positive. Being pissed they did something right is as bad as refusing to see them do anything wrong.
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2015 00:54
|
|
|
AP posted:Just because it appears there is some content and if the crashing issue has been solved that doesn't mean the thread is going to switch to going all super positive. Being pissed they did something right is as bad as refusing to see them do anything wrong. what did they do right
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2015 00:55
|
|
|
also who is mad about them doing anything
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2015 00:55
|
|
|
Danknificent posted:That's not the point. SC has gone from having nothing to having something; something that even looks like it has potential. OK yeah, point made. And I agree.
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2015 00:55
|
|
|
Eonwe posted:i liked the thread better when you guys poo poo the thread up yourselves too late, already spent my paycheck on cocaine
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2015 00:55
|
|
Eonwe posted:it is slightly less lovely than I was expecting, but at the same time, its not persistent in any way and the actual "go fly out in space" isn't there If you had actually watched the stream posted earlier, you would have seen a non-spazzing space station, flying around in a few million km of space, FPS gameplay, seamless transition from space shooter to EVA to ground, etc. Basically, your narrative isn't holding up in the face of actual evidence.
|
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2015 00:55
|
|
|
Chalks posted:It's also less lovely than I was expecting. It's unstable as hell and there's nothing to do but the core concepts of get missions, fly to places, blow poo poo up, land ship, shoot people are there. ED has the unfortunate handicap of existing so people can judge it on it's actual gameplay. Whereas SC will always be perfect
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2015 00:56
|
|
|
Octopode posted:If you had actually watched the stream posted earlier, you would have seen a non-spazzing space station, flying around in a few million km of space, FPS gameplay, seamless transition from space shooter to EVA to ground, etc. shut up octopode
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2015 00:56
|
|
|
Octopode posted:They're already 64-bit, killer. No. That's actually up for debate now actually.
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2015 00:56
|
|
|
Eonwe posted:i guess im asking, have they done any of the actual hard work, or have they just spent $90 million making a less compelling and glitchier version of Elite dangerous without the scale of Elite Dangerous No, they haven't.
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2015 00:57
|
|
|
D_Smart posted:No. That's actually up for debate now actually. the correct response to octopode is never not shut up octopode
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2015 00:57
|
|
|
Looks like a fun game.
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2015 00:57
|
|
|
Eonwe posted:what did they do right I'm going to start making fun of you Eonwe. Are you seriously getting mad because it looks like they stopped it crashing? We haven't seen the player cap limit or any of a thousand other hurdles they have to jump.
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2015 00:57
|
|
|
AP posted:I'm going to start making fun of you Eonwe. 1. i dont care who you make fun of 2. what part of any of my posts implies im mad about anything
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2015 00:58
|
|
|
AP posted:I'm going to start making fun of you Eonwe.
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2015 00:58
|
|
|
Eonwe posted:shut up octopode 
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2015 00:58
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 26, 2024 06:32 |
|
|
Eonwe posted:it is slightly less lovely than I was expecting, but at the same time, its not persistent in any way and the actual "go fly out in space" isn't there It's all janky as gently caress, but when you say "go fly out in space" - their loving universe is like 100 stars in size. There's not a whole lot of space to go fly in. Seems like flying between stars is a fancy looking loading screen as your ship jumps between dogfighting instances. I've seen some FPS footage. it looks pretty bland but not as bad as some shooters due to the high quality of the models everywhere. If only they could get everything to stop glitching the gently caress out when ever anything happens it would be a mid quality shooter I guess. In terms of persistence, you have missions and they seem to keep track of themselves despite crashes so that seems like some persistence. I'm not sure if character levelling is a thing or if you just get money as rewards or what, but I imagine that persists too. I honestly don't think the persistence side of things will be anything more than that. Buy some ships and items and I assume they'll persist too. It's really nothing ground breaking, but it can certainly be described as functional at this point I think. I'm interested in knowing how long before enough of the shine has worn off that people who have invested $35,000 to play Elite Dangerous and a 2nd rate CoD might start to doubt their decision though.
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2015 00:58
|
|