|
Truga posted:e: It's probably worth noting that the distance to my destination is counting down at the correct pace for my speed, so I am apparently making good progress even after >1000km. I think a system actually is one contiguous space. E:D does this too, but if you fly in normal space to where your destination would be there’s nothing there
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2015 14:20
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 29, 2024 01:57 |
|
|
Ursine Catastrophe posted:E:D does this too, but if you fly in normal space to where your destination would be there’s nothing there
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2015 14:25
|
|
|
Need more cat
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2015 14:26
|
|
|
MeLKoR posted:Holy poo poo, he actually did it. I admit that I thought all the talk about "we can't do anything before December because that's when the original TOS delivery date runs out" was so much bollocks and that he'd quietly let the issue die but Derek Smart actually filled the lawsuit.  I haven't had my coffee yet. Is this a real thing that really happened?
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2015 14:26
|
|
|
Beet Wagon posted:
Uh-oh, 
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2015 14:28
|
|
|
I wouldn't get my hopes up....don't see anything posted on Derek's usual spots.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2015 14:29
|
|
|
Octopode posted:You can, actually, render further objects--but they have to be brought into the 32-bit space first. The crudest method is to simply scale them down to give a false perspective and move them closer to the camera. I don't think CIG will actually do this, because they're desperate to reduce their number of draw calls already and will be culling at every opportunity, but it's not like it isn't an option if they really wanted to do it. LOL! Wat?!? There is NO reason to draw anything that's not visible. At all. For the purposes of radar detection, you only need the position of the entity in order to know how to calculate those target boxes (which show where it is), the shots (to ensure they know where the target can be hit or not). And there is a reason why the target representation in the HUD is not the image of the actual target, but a silhouette (stored image) rendered from a dB. In my games (go to 0:40 in the video below), I do the real thing. No matter how far a target is, the missile/radar camera renders it, even though the pov camera (player), does not (since it can't be seen). And when a battle is going on *at* the location of the target, everything local to that target, sees it, knows about it etc. And so the action continues regardless of whether or not you can see it from great distances away. Which is why when you select a target, you can press F10 to put a *different* camera at *that* location in order to be able to see what's going on *there*; even though you are at great distances away. ps: I don't believe you're trolling. I firmly believe that you're a fool who has no clue wtf he's talking about but are perfectly comfortable doing copy and paste from the Internet - without context or basis of fact - to make it appear as if you know wtf you're talking about. * https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=teR46d0hsk8
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2015 14:31
|
|
|
It did seem weird that there wasn't a huge announcement on every page of the internet this morning detailing exactly how amazing the lawsuit, Derek's dick, and this new game called Line of Defense are, but I figured maybe his net-wide announcement hadn't cleared Legal yet.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2015 14:32
|
|
|
Octopode is a Markov chain bot
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2015 14:34
|
|
|
Tokamak posted:You are right that there are uses for it, but that is not how it has been sold to the citizens. The idea is that its all 64-bit and not hacked together for a handful of use cases. It can't be a ground breaking innovation if other people are doing it. For an openly transparent game, they don't like to go into a lot of detail and leave a lot of it up to the citizen's imagination. Yes. Simply because, well, they never planned for me to be making noise about every loving thing croberts has blatantly lied about. They just do what they do, post poo poo for Shiticizens to lap up without question. Unfortunately for them, most of the citizens aren't complete idiots. Which is why, each time I post something they feel is important, rest assured it shows up either on Reddit or RSI forums. In the case of the latter, the end result is locked threads, bannings etc.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2015 14:39
|
|
|
D_Smart posted:This game, as has been pitched, will never see the light of day
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2015 14:41
|
|
|
Ursine Catastrophe posted:E:D does this too, but if you fly in normal space to where your destination would be there’s nothing there Isn't that only system to system travel though? Thought you can fly in normal space to planets and objects within the same system, if you are a tedious sperg with time to burn, but trying to fly to another system doesn't work and you need to utilise friendship drive so it'll load.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2015 14:44
|
|
|
I just popped in to say what is sad about this is that the lawsuit is going to push them to fund the release of a minimum viable product. If you had $100MM and you could pay 10 to get Derek Smart to shut up, wouldn't you take that deal? Since they are trying and paying for some pretty audacious poo poo, elements of that release will look impressive. Since they have acquired people like Peter Capaldi it will probably be entertaining. So they release. Roberts uses the lawsuit to excuse any flaws and to distract the rank and file from the amount of money poured into dev pain and cocaine. D_Smart is a recognizable and easily demonizable figure. He allows CR to appear persecuted, an innocent game developer who just wanted to make the best doggawned jpeg shooter ever. CR will say something about how unfortunate it is they were unable to give their wonderful backers the game they deserved due to the pressure. This will keep the money coming in (THE JPEGS MUST FLOW) and lump anyone who dares dissent in with D_Smart. Then enjoy the next six months of crobelievers crowing about how space jesus CR suffered and nearly died for their sins at the hands of all you judases and was STILL able to get them sparkle clearcoat on the USS Second Mortgage.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2015 14:44
|
|
|
alphabettitouretti posted:Isn't that only system to system travel though? Thought you can fly in normal space to planets and objects within the same system, if you are a tedious sperg with time to burn, but trying to fly to another system doesn't work and you need to utilise friendship drive so it'll load. While distances in E:D are realistic, top speed is so low there's no way you'll get anywhere without friendship drive. What does happen, however, is that friendship drive can be used to travel to another star. Point at it, engage friendship drive, wait a couple hours (if it's close enough). But when you get there, there's no system until you use hyperspace (even though there's zero distance to jump), because yeah, hyperspace seems to be the system loading screen. You do save a bit of fuel this way, though. Hyperspace drinks fuel like nothing, but friendship drive is barely more fuel/second than normal flight, with a max speed of 2000c Truga fucked around with this message at 14:51 on Dec 3, 2015 |
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2015 14:47
|
|
|
not sure if in ed you can fly in normal space between stations. 300 ms-1 is very slow, I'm sure apollo went a lot faster, and that took days just to get to the Moon.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2015 14:54
|
|
|
Araganzar posted:I just popped in to say what is sad about this is that the lawsuit is going to push them to fund the release of a minimum viable product. If you had $100MM and you could pay 10 to get Derek Smart to shut up, wouldn't you take that deal? So there's a hilarious lawsuit, I get a lovely space game to play, autists go full retard, AND even though he's been completely vindicated Derek Smart still gets made fun of at the end for loving up his own "burn everything down" plan? I'm not gonna lie, that sounds like a win/win for me.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2015 14:54
|
|
|
Say that again? You spent thirty two thousand united states dollars on *what*? An internet picture? Get out of my courtroom.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2015 15:09
|
|
|
Truga posted:
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2015 15:10
|
|
|
Video games law will become a distinct body of law thanks to Star Citizen.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2015 15:12
|
|
|
Iglocska posted:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PPNCgX2FYnM&feature=youtu.be&t=7m47s That looked fun to you? *2 days later* -You guys wanna go q-drive around shooting at randos in our space turrets? -Nah. They just q-drive to a random point in space now. Sux. -IDK man, been having more fun grabby handsing in the Million Mile High club. -Maybe in like 1hr, I'm on a sick ArcCorps buggy run right now, 148 killstreak -Sorry dude, looking for jobs on craigslist. I gotta start making minimum monthly payments on all these credit cards. Wife is pissed lol.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2015 15:13
|
|
|
So wait, the lawsuit has been filed? Is there somewhere I can read the complaint?
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2015 15:22
|
|
|
revmoo posted:So wait, the lawsuit has been filed? Is there somewhere I can read the complaint? The lawsuit is filed and Derek Smart is judge, jury, and executioner.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2015 15:23
|
|
|
Toops posted:That looked fun to you? See? The possibilities are endless!
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2015 15:25
|
|
|
alphabettitouretti posted:People have been talking about how to handle griefing on here, but recently I have seen it show up more and more. So I figured I would take a moment to describe how this kind of problem is solved in real-world applications with something called Data Science. This is a field of study I have decided to dedicate my career to, and I have been formally trained on it. This field is so new there doesn't exist a degree for it yet (expect it to show up next year or so). This is how Google identifies spam, how military identifies targets, how insurance companies identify fraud, how the ISS determines where on its frame a leak is occurring, how banks flag odd spending behavior, how Amazon determines if your complaint is worth looking at, how Uber determines if it's "boost hour", how Comcast determines if you are likely to Churn or not and keep you on hold longer - you name it - it's everywhere now. Thankfully machine learning algorithms are trivial to implement, and the experts in the field are willing to work for CIG for 60 hour work weeks and a 80% pay cut. quote:Now at first you need a human. The human tackles each griefing incident one at a time and determines fault. oops, never mind. Your whole theory falls apart because griefing is subjective.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2015 15:39
|
|
|
Eldragon posted:oops, never mind. Your whole theory falls apart because griefing is subjective. Is the person being griefed a pro backer? Have they "invested" more money than the person griefing them? If yes then ban that fucker who is messing with their cash cow.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2015 15:45
|
|
|
Truga posted:I'm playing around a bit now, and unfortunately the shortest distance between two stations I found is 60Mm and some change. I don't have the faith that this game will not crash while trying to go there without warp so I'm not bothering until it's a bit more stable. The issues you're experiencing are a result of the internal physics going awry. And if the system (in this case Stanton) is indeed 1m sq km x 200K km high, then that's probably the size of that "zone". Especially if you are saying you were able to calculate a distance of 60K km between two stations. Also, - where were you when you made that calculation? - how did you know the distance to the other station? - is that 60Mm as in 60 million meters? (60K km)? Note that in this presentation, croberts doesn't indicate if this "playable" area of the "Large World Technology" is just the Stanton/Crusader zone or the entire game world. Again, obfuscation to keep people guessing. Someone should ask Ben. 
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2015 15:48
|
|
|
I want to get a refund on my $200,001 investment but I still believe the game will come out and it will be worth holding onto these ships.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2015 15:50
|
|
|
The Saddest Robot posted:Is the person being griefed a pro backer? Have they "invested" more money than the person griefing them? Exactly. Or "is the person being griefed a member of the moderator's org?" Because SURPRISE cig lets forum moderators join orgs. What will be really hilarious is if they roll out a voting system where you upvote/downvote player behavior. Because that won't have unexpected (well, to CIG anyway) side effects or anything.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2015 15:50
|
|
|
If a tree falls in the woods and nobody's around... Is it 32bit or 64bit?
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2015 15:53
|
|
|
MilesK posted:If a tree falls in the woods and nobody's around... Is it 32bit or 64bit? If you ask a marketing guy it was 128bit.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2015 15:55
|
|
|
D_Smart posted:The issues you're experiencing are a result of the internal physics going awry. The issues I was experiencing was "use" not lighting up on the chair after entering/exiting it a couple times because some pubbie shitlord kept clicking on poo poo on my ship until said chair bugged out. Next time I went alone and it worked fine for about an hour, and then I had to quit because it was time to go to work. - Distance is displayed in the game. - Yes, 60 megametres. Max distance I got from a station was like 5Mm and then went back and it worked fine, don't see why 60Mm would be different. I won't test it until the game is more stable thou.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2015 15:56
|
|
|
D_Smart posted:
I thought they said for sure at some point or another that the only area they were releasing was Stanton, but I'll be damned if I'm going to go back and dig through all their communications to find out where. Anecdotally, I don't think I ever saw anyone expecting more than Stanton.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2015 15:56
|
|
|
8 Ball posted:
Yeah, I watched that and was left wondering where the "fun" part was. To be fair, the premise is awesome; but how exactly is it different from any other multiplayer game with squads? I'm missing something, right? Iglocska posted:No, until now whenever I tuned into a twitch chat it was people trying to glitch into their ships and crashing, so it's definitely not what people have been doing. Seriously, seeing several people do something together and not immediately crash is a massive improvement. Good points 
D_Smart fucked around with this message at 16:01 on Dec 3, 2015 |
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2015 15:58
|
|
|
The Saddest Robot posted:Is the person being griefed a pro backer? Have they "invested" more money than the person griefing them? We'll form a <Whaling Fleet>
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2015 15:59
|
|
|
A Neurotic Jew posted:this guy spawned into the middle of a salvia trip. That's nuthin'. ps: That's symptomatic of the sort of problems their hack/kludge is having on the game world.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2015 16:00
|
|
|
ShredsYouSay posted:not sure if in ed you can fly in normal space between stations. 300 ms-1 is very slow, I'm sure apollo went a lot faster, and that took days just to get to the Moon. An object in LEO is travelling at 8km/s, Apollo 10 was clocked at 11.08km/s while re-entering Earth's atmosphere 300m/s is not really space travel speed, it's a concession to gameplay and a way to disguise how your game segments the playable area into something that's reasonable e: it'd take 14 days to travel from Earth to the Moon at 300m/s, if you ignore pesky things like gravity, orbits, etc; Apollo 11 took ~3.5 days to go from launch to orbiting the Moon Edmund Honda fucked around with this message at 16:05 on Dec 3, 2015 |
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2015 16:00
|
|
|
D_Smart posted:What makes this look like fun? It's exactly the same thing people have been doing since 2.0 was released onto the PTU: travel to location, shoot ship(s), travel somewhere else. If there wasn't any voice chat there would be no way of knowing it's a 'squad' because you can't see poo poo, the other players might as well be NPCs. Yeah, I watched that and was left wondering where the "fun" part was. To be fair, the premise is awesome; but how exactly is it different from any other multiplayer game with squads? I'm missing something, right? [/quote] It had cool looking spesh ships blasting away at each other in it first of all. I was also impressed that they've played long enough to fly around as a group and hunt after a connie without half of them crashing, so yay I guess? At this point providing dogfighting fun that is around the same level as ED is surprising and impressive all things considered.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2015 16:00
|
|
|
TL;DR – When removed from face-to-face interaction, it is a psychological fact that greater aggression and less consideration ensues. When anonymity is also promoted within the same environment, you can expect a system primarily devoted to human-on-human involuntary conflict. Background I am a behavior analyst for the US federal government with a Master’s Degree in Psychology. Like many of you, I am excited about this project (Star Citizen) and I have backed it on the premise it will live up to the designer’s intent. Over time I have had concerns about specific facets of the game, but thankfully they have each been addressed in a positive manner. At this point, the only remaining concern is involuntary, game-wide PvP. This has been discussed before, but not within the real-life context of player psychology and the effect it has on the game environment. Several recent changes to the game as well as community discussions have prompted me to share some applicable research and conclusions that may affect the community attitude on the subject. Anonymous Aggression Tendencies Problem: As we all know, the internet is an anonymous environment for the purposes of face-to-face interaction. Even if you know the identity and location of the other party, you are physically disconnected by distance. Within a game, players are always hidden behind an alias. As a result, we all operate under the subconscious (often conscious) knowledge that we can do whatever we want and the consequences are nill. CIG has attempted to reduce these fears by diluting player-to-NPC ratios and instituting some measure of perma-death (at a point) as a consequence to unhindered aggression. The recent revelation that they may include the ability for players to hide their alias identity only fuels anonymity, which is the basis for thoughtless aggression. As most of us have experienced, involuntary PvP results in full PvP. Look no further than EVE Online. There are dozens, if not hundreds, of additional examples in the gaming industry. When you allow players to prey on each other, they will no matter what loss they may experience. There will always be large numbers of people who derive pleasure from destroying others or hindering their progress and will suicide themselves to do it, if necessary. Analysis: None of the measures CIG has currently stated will effectively hinder game-wide PvP. If aggressive players lose their character after 6-7 “deaths”, player economy will shift away from any real tie to that that characters longevity. In other words, aggressive players won’t care and will simply develop a pipeline to replace their characters with new ones and continue. As long as they can start over, even if from scratch, they will continue to do so. Lack of any skill progression makes this scenario even more likely. Diluting player-to-NPC ratios is a step in the right direction as it makes it less likely a player will come across another player. However, players will likely follow similar routes and missions as NPCs and aggressive players need only camp areas or routes and wait for a human player. A friend of mine in the gaming community was recently describing his intent to pirate other human players, and when I suggested he stick to NPCs, he scoffed. “That’s no fun,” he said, adding that fighting a human player added an element of satisfaction that he was affecting a real person, not some binary-code AI. This perfectly illustrates the problem. Some will hunt humans just because they exist, and it does not take many to ruin the gameplay for a lot. A stealth gameplay mechanic is one thing, but allowing players the ability to hide their personal identification (I assume their in-game alias) will only lead to a massive increase in involuntary PvP that will also increase overall player frustration with the game. For example, if a player is killed by another player involuntarily, they should be able to at least identify who it was (and their organization). Perhaps they could retaliate, issue a bounty, enter into diplomacy with the organization, etc. But if that person was a total unknown…no possible recourse can be had. That type of freedom for the aggressor and loss of justice for the victim will destroy the in-game environment. The responses to a recent Reddit post illustrate this as well. All seemed to be generally happy with this option and willing to use it for exactly the purpose I expected. Lastly, I will cite the Milgram Experiment as a classic (even pre-internet) example of how far people will go when they are disconnected from the personhood of their victims. History is replete with examples, and the internet is only the latest. Possible Solutions: Allow me to caveat by saying I do not support disabling all PvP game-wide. It makes perfect sense there would be areas of space where there could not possibly be full security assurances (frontier systems, for example). And I am aware some people greatly enjoy this type of gameplay. I am looking at solutions that incorporate as many intentions as possible. First, CIG needs to create the game world (the 100+ systems said to be in the universe) in such a way that economy, business, production, and other non-combat related careers can fully function without the need to hit involuntary PvP. This means safe routes and systems would need to comprise enough of the universe as to not “force” those players to have to enter lawless systems in order to conduct their business. This is what EVE gets very wrong. To really get anywhere in business or non-combat roles (mining, for example) you must enter lawless systems. Star Citizen does not have to move every single such opportunity to a full security system, but a majority should be. Second, DO NOT ALLOW players to hide their in-game identity, and if possible their organization affiliation. At least allow victims to pursue some level of justice as I mentioned previously. I personally believe this will add a better PvP system as bounty hunting will take on a larger role, organization relations will fluctuate, and so on. Third, understand that there is no difference between security settings in systems beyond “yes” and “no”. Partial security means no security. We already know there will be varying degrees of security in the Star Citizen systems, but this misses the point. Anything less than 100% (a “yes”, is secure) will be exploited by aggressors. Knowing this, CIG needs to provide a simple majority of the universe as fully secure systems whereby aggressors are not able to even suicide attack other players. Coding in NPC security forces that arrive instantaneously or a coded signal from authorities that disables ship weapons upon entering the system. These are just concepts to illustrate the issue. Conclusion Space combat can be fun for all, but when given their proverbial inch, human players will take a light year in their pursuit of other players that they know don’t want to be pursued. Given the semi-permadeath mechanic apparently being built into the game, these aggressors will value their own characters’ lives less and derive greater twisted satisfaction out of knowing that trader they just killed was far more attached to their character than they were. I strongly suggest CIG design gameplay in such a manner as to place more restrictions on involuntary PvP than would be immediately expected, and then roll them back if necessary in the future.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2015 16:03
|
|
|
MeLKoR posted:Holy poo poo, he actually did it. I admit that I thought all the talk about "we can't do anything before December because that's when the original TOS delivery date runs out" was so much bollocks and that he'd quietly let the issue die but Derek Smart actually filled the lawsuit. LOL!! That's some epic trolling right there
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2015 16:03
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 29, 2024 01:57 |
|
|
Truga posted:Massive wall of text crits you for over 9000 WTF is that.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2015 16:04
|
|