|
Tijuana Bibliophile posted:PC Gamer article about S42 Also lol at the idea of using kits or props to build the world like it's some revolutionary secret of game design.
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2015 17:34
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 26, 2024 08:53 |
|
|
Rotten Red Rod posted:This is kind of a good allegory for all of the Star Citizen development. Yes, you could accurately model the inside of a ship so that your character can sit inside it and actually exist in the same space as the ship and the others around it, and model artificial gravity that turns with the ship, etc. etc. etc... But... Why? It's neat as a demo, but not fun or important in a game. And all that processor-intensive physics modeling won't go over well with tons of players in the same game - there's a reason MMOs usually skip having a physics system. My theory on this is based on the state of mind of the person in charge. How do they self-identify? Chris Roberts self-identifies as a gaming wunderkind - in his mind, he's a success. Ironically enough, if he'd stopped with Wing Commander, this would be closer to the truth. Since he's a success, and successful companies have several offices in multiple countries, filled with IP-themed bric-a-brac, he built that first. Teams, "cons", mo-cap studios - the works. Compare/contrast with Blizzard, who started with nothing, made a small number of moderately successful console titles, then hit on the Warcraft IP, and grew from there. All the Blizzcon stuff you see, offices filled with paraphernalia, etc. - all that grew from the success. They didn't start with it. It's gotta bug Chris that a Warcraft movie is coming out - that wasn't even something that was on their radar for a long time - it became something of a "we have all this money, wouldn't it be cool if..." moment. Again, success and money first, then side-projects and experimentation. Chris spent 100 million dollars creating the outward appearance of a successful company, without even having a revenue model to sustain it. Because he's a success, and that's what successful people have. Like people who win the lottery and go bankrupt in months with extravagant purchases - their self-identification conflicts with the reality of who they truly are. It's unsustainable at best. Curt Schilling did the same thing, but he was man enough to admit it. The interviews with him are excellent - the event humbled him and hopefully he experienced some personal growth as a result. Chris is far, far beyond that kind of help or self-actualization. I'm sure he already has at least 10 excuses for when this goes tits-up, and Derek will be 9 of them. Scruffpuff fucked around with this message at 01:18 on Dec 31, 2015 |
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2015 17:35
|
|
|
peter gabriel posted:To me it doesn't matter what is going on in the background, the only thing that matters is the ships fly like loving shiiiiiiitttt I mean goddamn what the gently caress are they thinking? Yeah the last time I played SC the ships felt like massless floaty pieces of poo poo and when I found out that was by design that pretty much killed my interest in the game.
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2015 17:38
|
|
|
pun pundit posted:No, SC wants to have space combat feel like ww2 air combat, but it wants to simulate everything with physics... So it puts in thrusters that are orders of magnitude more powerful than is plausible. And doesn't put in any tanks for reaction mass. And has manouvers induce g forces on the pilot, but not the passengers. So it simulates reality where CR thinks he knows how things work, and ignores it everywhere else. It's schizo as hell. Yes, I should have worded that better. It's what if feels like for me, because "WW2 Air Combat in Space" is the stupidest poo poo ever to me, I have to rationalize that away or playing won't be fun. My point is, Chris says he wants that asinine poo poo, but he wants it like he is the boss of NASA and one day just walks into office demanding all future NASA-space ships should feel like space aero planes from WW2, which is an impossibility. So NASA tries their best, but you get Star Citizen bullshit in the end, because Chris Robert's wishes are simply unworkable. ED on the other hand, feels more like future tech with all the details smoothed over. You can play it like a space opera, but you also just switch off your space opera controls and fly it like a real space ship. Both feels fun and smooth, because Braben realized you can't actually make a acurate simulation of space ships build with future tech, so he went the "nearest approximation" route instead. Just enough realism combined with cheating to make for a fun, but still realistic simulation. Chris Roberts has everything backwards. David Braben: Space magic + realism = fun Chris Robert: Realism + Fidelity + WW2 - (limitations of technology - bad management)² = a giant unfun mess Libluini fucked around with this message at 17:44 on Dec 28, 2015 |
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2015 17:41
|
|
|
Nostalgia4Infinity posted:Yeah the last time I played SC the ships felt like massless floaty pieces of poo poo and when I found out that was by design that pretty much killed my interest in the game. Agreed, to me they still do which suggests they may be happy with that 
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2015 17:43
|
|
|
Scruffpuff posted:Has anyone seen the Triple-A blockbuster hit Kung Fury? Kung fury is on steam: http://store.steampowered.com/app/374570/
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2015 17:44
|
|
|
I just want I-war 2 with a FPS component. Why is this so hard? 
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2015 17:45
|
|
|
peter gabriel posted:Agreed, to me they still do which suggests they may be happy with that This is actually something i like about it, you have to spend couple hours into the ships to somewhat fly them in a meaningfull way, so spacecombat to me seems about mastering your ship, and not p2w in the end.
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2015 17:45
|
|
|
Paradigmata posted:This is actually something i like about it, you have to spend couple hours into the ships to somewhat fly them in a meaningfull way, so spacecombat to me seems about mastering your ship, and not p2w in the end. Well if you like it that's cool
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2015 17:48
|
|
|
Paradigmata posted:This is actually something i like about it, you have to spend couple hours into the ships to somewhat fly them in a meaningfull way, so spacecombat to me seems about mastering your ship, and not p2w in the end. Considering even in ED people need to do that (newbies are constantly crashing into space station walls), I highly doubt that. If a game makes you feel lovely, you shouldn't spend time "mastering" it. Just don't play it. In fact, you should avoid it like the Antonine Plague.
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2015 17:48
|
|
|
I've done it I've figured out what Star Citizen Reminds me of. It reminds me of every group programming assignment I had when in school. Each assignment started the same way, were were really excited about the project and had all these crazy ideas about all the cool things that we were going to do. Then slowly, as realization and time frames settled in, we started cutting those cool features. Then, as crunch time approached and we started to run out of time, we started cutting core features too, making a calculated risk over weather or not the professor would notice, and trying to figure out we would lose the fewest points on. In fact, we probably spent more time discussing the credit to effort ratio for each part than actually working on the project. By the time we finished the project, it was a janky buggy mess that only technically met the minimum requirements but WE SWEAR if we had more time it would've been good (no it wouldn't) ...come to think of it, this is how most software development works and is the reason I never got into the industry.
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2015 17:54
|
|
|
Paradigmata posted:This is actually something i like about it, you have to spend couple hours into the ships to somewhat fly them in a meaningfull way, so spacecombat to me seems about mastering your ship, and not p2w in the end. I think lowtax bought that domain with all the money people have given him just to come post in this thread Get a fancy desk next time lowtax, croberts is making you look like a scrub
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2015 17:54
|
|
|
Paradigmata posted:This is actually something i like about it, you have to spend couple hours into the ships to somewhat fly them in a meaningfull way, so spacecombat to me seems about mastering your ship, and not p2w in the end. Hang on I just read all your post and I disagree now
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2015 17:59
|
|
|
So, how's the "pay per hour" pool going on the RSI forums? The $3/$4 per hour still ahead with 60%?
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2015 18:00
|
|
|
Here is a graphical representation of how I read posts, green is what goes in my brain, the rest is what I see before I then zone out completely
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2015 18:03
|
|
|
Paradigmata posted:This is actually something i like about it, you have to spend couple hours into the ships to somewhat fly them in a meaningfull way, so spacecombat to me seems about mastering your ship, and not p2w in the end. I take it you bought that skull jpeg for yourself?
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2015 18:06
|
|
|
peter gabriel posted:Here is a graphical representation of how I read posts, green is what goes in my brain, the rest is what I see before I then zone out completely poo poo, I need to make shorter sentences.
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2015 18:06
|
|
|
Libluini posted:poo poo, I need to make shorter sentences. This I read
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2015 18:07
|
|
|
peter gabriel posted:To me it doesn't matter what is going on in the background, the only thing that matters is the ships fly like loving shiiiiiiitttt I mean goddamn what the gently caress are they thinking? They're thinking that their boss has made a fully simulated rigid body physics simulation part of what makes the game special, and they're sure as gently caress not going to go against his vision. Scruffpuff posted:It's unsustainable at best. Curt Schilling did the same thing, but he was man enough to admit it. The interviews with him are excellent - the event humbled him and hopefully he experienced some personal growth as a result. There's a reason I continue to use 38 Studios as a portent for what could happen to Cloud Imperium Games. quote:As a baseball player, Schilling refused to ever consider the notion of defeat until the final out, even down three games to none to the Yankees. By his own admission, he carried that same attitude into business. One former employee describes it as “rampant and destructive optimism.”
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2015 18:07
|
|
|
peter gabriel posted:Here is a graphical representation of how I read posts, green is what goes in my brain, the rest is what I see before I then zone out completely Holy poo poo with what I write you must barely make it past the first sen
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2015 18:09
|
|
|
Beer4TheBeerGod posted:It's possible because Squadron 42 is a single player game and CIG never actually promised any multiplayer elements outside of limited co-op at an unspecified date. If I had to guess then I would say that in 2016 you'll get ten missions out of the SEVENTY that are supposed to compose Episode 1. Of course that doesn't include Episode 2 (which anyone who pledged before the $6 million mark will get), or Episode 3 (which everyone will have to pay for). Or the co-op multiplayer missions that players will supposedly be able to do (just not drop-in drop-out co-op like the original plan, this will be separate missions). Or Star Citizen itself, which does not have a release date. Star Citizen: Welcome to the RMS Carpathia
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2015 18:10
|
|
|
peter gabriel posted:Hang on I just read all your post and I disagree now My argument was that you can screw people over in an aurora that spend couple hundert into their dedicated combat ships.
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2015 18:12
|
|
|
Why are you guys buying the fact that thrusters actually produce thrust? Is there something I am missing here, because last time I looked a ship was flying around without its main engine which had fallen off like a LEGO.
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2015 18:13
|
|
|
Beer4TheBeerGod posted:Star Citizen was planned from the beginning. There's a reason people pledged for Star Citizen and not just Squadron 42 and why every package includes both Star Citizen and Squadron 42. Now it's reasonable to say that the original plan was to release Squadron 42 and then follow up with Star Citizen later on, but the game was never promised to be single player only. What did change was the scope. Original discussions made it sound closer to Freelancer with limited instance sizes and heavy matchmaking to deal with the scale. Now it's a full blown MMO, which is fascinating since the original FAQ says the opposite. Actually I was just discussing this. Chris Rober 2013/11/08 posted:The colossal claims have been growing like avalanches, but Roberts said he plans to deliver on them sooner rather than later. Already, Star Citizen’s hangar module is letting sci-fi hotrod enthusiasts fulfill their dream of owning a space garage, and dogfighting is still in the pipeline for the end of the year. After that comes planet-level trading around March/April or so, then first-person shooter ship boarding toward the middle of 2014,
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2015 18:17
|
|
and Squadron 42 closer to the end
|
Paradigmata posted:Is Star Citizen an MMO? They say it's an MMO now: http://www.twitch.tv/cigcommunity/v/29395055?t=78m05s
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2015 18:17
|
|
|
This reminds me of a memorable gently caress-up I made as a junior developer a long time ago. I was tasked with creating a promotional game for a client; nothing fancy, just a basic little 'one more go' time-waster that would carry the brand with a mild viral element (Tell your friends! Beat their scores!) of the sort that sprouted on the interwebs like genital warts in the heady days between AOL and Web 2.0 - Web Harder. This particular flavour was a ski-jump sort of thing. My background was in industrial automation and applications - engineering stuff. So I figured the best possible way to go about it was to implement a basic physics engine and play with masses and surfaces rather than do anything ridiculous like simply calculating arcs for x/y offsets. And being honest I wanted to faff around with physics. At first it was wonderful - I was able to do all sorts of cool visual effects with debris, the simulation was super fluid, and I was adding lots of nice little touches like a limited aftertouch system, a hidden 'boost' that rewarded hitting the go key at a certain point, that sort of thing. However, before long the mammaries went vertical. The character would randomly flip over upon landing. The run up to the jump would behave erratically at certain speeds on certain machines. Sometimes the character would land so harshly it would spin wildly out of control. Since marketing types are all giant babies, watching their precious corporate identity faceplant before being whisked into orbit was a No No. I found myself spending hours tweaking the masses of individual parts of the character, modelling and re-modelling the slope and launch points so as not to look janky or affect the flight, and it finally sunk into my thick skull that I was spending a massive amount of time (and therefore money - my money!) attempting to essentially solve an engineering problem of my own making in real world terms rather than just chucking a sprite along a curve. But I was invested! I had already put so much detail into my fundamentally flawed approach that I grimly stuck to it and made it work. And it did! Sort of. When it worked it looked cracking. Particles would fly. Characters would soar gracefully through the air. It was glorious! However, it needed - well, a fair bit more horsepower than strictly necessary to run properly. And there was a bit of a judder sometimes (if you were looking for it) while on approach. And certain speeds and would occasionally snag the character on the ramp, killing a lot of forward momentum and causing a graceful bellyflop into the dirt. And ever-so-rarely, the character would whirl wildly out of control and ricochet off-screen like a tazmanian devil on PCP. And after hours of my thumb on the scales, I couldn't always guarantee an upright touchdown. So an over-engineered, janky mess based on a fundamentally short-sighted technical decision motivated more by whimsy and inexperience than proper research that somehow managed to scrape by the client. Sorry, lost track of this story, just remembered it for some reason.
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2015 18:18
|
|
|
Decrepus posted:Why are you guys buying the fact that thrusters actually produce thrust? Is there something I am missing here, because last time I looked a ship was flying around without its main engine which had fallen off like a LEGO. I think the thrusters that are visible and modeled on the ship are fake, and they have a second set of hidden thrusters that produce the actual force to move the ship. This is done because some of the ships have poo poo thruster placement or center of mass issues.
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2015 18:18
|
|
|
Decrepus posted:Why are you guys buying the fact that thrusters actually produce thrust? Is there something I am missing here, because last time I looked a ship was flying around without its main engine which had fallen off like a LEGO. People have opened up the XML files and checked things out. Sure enough the thrusters do actually provide thrust. It's just that the maneuvering thrusters produce an absurdly high amount given their size relative to the main engine. That's why you can fly a Hornet even with the main engine missing (and in some cases it flies better). The simulation is accurate, it's just accurately simulating something ridiculous.
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2015 18:18
|
|
|
Tried Star Citizen again and was reminded how in the space future of amazing technology and amazing ships you still black out and red out all the time because no technology has been created to deal with turning
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2015 18:21
|
|
|
Xaerael posted:I really don't get the whole "Upgrade your PC so you can play this new game!" thing. That makes bullshit no sense. It was dumb back in the early 2000s, and it's still dumb now. Anyone who makes a game that won't run well on every reasonable PC that was bought/made in the last 1-2 years, and run ok on anything 2-4 years old should literally be banned from making games. Someone once said that architects should be forced to live in the houses they design and programmers should be forced to hold their breath until their game fully loads. RIP croberts
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2015 18:21
|
|
|
D_Smart posted:They say it's an MMO now: Just realised I made the mistake there to think of "Star citizen" = SQ42 + Star Citizen. I wouldnt claim somethign else than Star Citizen being tried to sell as an fullblown MMO The names gently caress me over sometimes, for example when they sell SC + SQ42 on a homepage called RSI, while RSI is a fantasy manufacturer of spehsships.
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2015 18:26
|
|
|
Beer4TheBeerGod posted:Holy poo poo with what I write you must barely make it past the first sen I enjoy your posts and concentrate hard on them
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2015 18:27
|
|
|
What is it specifically about space games that make them impossible to not be complete garbage?
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2015 18:29
|
|
|
Beer4TheBeerGod posted:There's a reason I continue to use 38 Studios as a portent for what could happen to Cloud Imperium Games. And Schilling's goal of getting even more rich so he could become a Bill Gates level philanthropist is kind of noble.
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2015 18:30
|
|
|
peter gabriel posted:I enjoy your posts and concentrate hard on them This is the nicest thing anyone has ever said to me on the Internet.
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2015 18:30
|
|
|
Pgabz
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2015 18:32
|
|
|
Paradigmata posted:My argument was that you can screw people over in an aurora that spend couple hundert into their dedicated combat ships. Oh I wasn't aware that we were in the presence of a Citizen o7
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2015 18:34
|
|
|
Beer4TheBeerGod posted:This is the nicest thing anyone has ever said to me on the Internet. 
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2015 18:34
|
|
|
Eonwe posted:Pgabz Understood friend
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2015 18:34
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 26, 2024 08:53 |
|
|
imperialparadox posted:This is exactly the problem with Star Citizen. They wanted to have "realistic" thrusters and physics, but they designed the ships first while only being concerned with how they look and not giving a thought about the actual engineering choices that would go behind why and how a ship's thrusters are laid out, so CIG basically ended up with a complex mess of a flight model that they still have to cheat by adding "ghost thrusters" and arbitrarily deciding the values for the outputs of the ship's thrusters. On a long list of stupid ideas this was one of the dumbest. When you start going into "realistically model ship mass and thrusters" and have stuff like cargo and damage affect that it's when you commit yourself to having a group of no poo poo honest to god rocket scientists on payroll or things will inevitably end up like this 
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2015 18:34
|
|