Khanstant posted:

Considering that No Man's sky, a game exclusively about simulated worlds/landscapes for exploration, can't even make that seem interesting or worthwhile, there's no way this game will.

Also, what am I missing about Wing Commander? It looks like an old lovely space game where 75% of the screen is retarded pointless cockpit view. Is Chris Roberts Ullillillia's secret older brother and he is just trying to make Star Citizen match up to his "mind game" where you imagines himself as a camera stuck where someone's head might be inside of some dorky imaginary cockpit?

Tippis posted:

There was also the matter of (relative) mass appeal.

There were other games that had dynamic campaigns, but they tended to be obscure and far too complicated for most gamers. F-16 Combat Pilot came out in 1988 and had some pretty swanky graphics for its time, and what (and how) you did mattered a lot for the overall outcome of a campaign. Even in the sim genre, though. it was overshadowed by Falcon AT and completely out of the picture when Falcon 3.0 caught up on the campaign side three years later. So what it did — and how early it did it — is a bit lost in the noise of the era.

It really was that marrying of having some meaning to your actions (which mainly existed in sims), with a simple gameplay (that the sims definitely did not offer), and the cinematic storytelling of the Cinemaware and early Lucasart games that made the WCs such a catchy experience.

Smorgasbord posted:

My brother is sucked deep into this ponzi scheme of a 'game', last I heard it was dead in the water but he insists that was just some malcontents stirring up trouble and everything is on track and he's making megabux selling jpgs of spaceships.... He's going to end up a homeless shell of a man clutching pictures of fake spaceships, right?

Toops posted:

Dude ima be honest... I like Disco Lando. He's infinity less of an awkward cringe-cultist than Ben. He trolled CR in a Santa outfit during the holiday failstream, and that massive RtV eyeroll at the wulge, followed by "Dude, it's not all about buying ships..." was A+ in my book.

Yeah he's a part of a giant money laundering scheme but he just seems like he doesn't give much of a gently caress, and is just happy to have a job in gaming. I bet money he's alright to hang out with.

Ben would be a horrorshow to roll with. I mean, aside from enduring hours of frothing adulation about a poo poo FMV game from behind a spit-shield, you would literally have to roll him to the bathroom and wipe his rear end for him.

Sandi would be uttterly insufferable. She'd just sit there texting Gillian "hey is your cellphone off? Haven't heard from you since the shoot, miss you! lol" and reply to any/all conversational efforts with "HUH?" and a laser bitch-glare that could melt glass.

But you gotta admit: Chris would be a loving blast. You'd just get completely geeked on Kinison levels of coke, drop old-school 70's blotter acid, and everything he said would make perfect loving sense, culminating in the beatific vision that we are all perfect manifestations of love on an endless wave of infinite possibilities right before your heart exploded.

Tippis posted:

There was also the matter of (relative) mass appeal.

There were other games that had dynamic campaigns, but they tended to be obscure and far too complicated for most gamers. F-16 Combat Pilot came out in 1988 and had some pretty swanky graphics for its time, and what (and how) you did mattered a lot for the overall outcome of a campaign. Even in the sim genre, though. it was overshadowed by Falcon AT and completely out of the picture when Falcon 3.0 caught up on the campaign side three years later. So what it did — and how early it did it — is a bit lost in the noise of the era.

It really was that marrying of having some meaning to your actions (which mainly existed in sims), with a simple gameplay (that the sims definitely did not offer), and the cinematic storytelling of the Cinemaware and early Lucasart games that made the WCs such a catchy experience.

Berious posted:

I just remembered Red Baron and sure enough it's 1990 with a dynamic campaign and career mode. It was a sim too but there was no clicking a million buttons to program your radar poo poo. Just energy management and shoot mans. Wikipedia says it had multiplayer too. Now that's a game that was ahead of it's time.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_Baron_%281990_video_game%29

I wish someone would make another cool WWI flightsim. Biplanes are much cooler than monoplanes and modern aircraft just suck for pick up and play fun.

EminusSleepus posted:

Squadron 42: The Movie

Berious posted:

I'm fairly sure we've seen more footage of those pajama suits than we've seen gameplay footage from CIG. Every stream Chris brings that poo poo out even when cultists keep pestering him about some nerd game he clearly doesn't give a gently caress about.

Blazing Ownager posted:

Given that supporting VR isn't all that hard makes this statement utterly ridiculous, unless you mean it in a "there will be no game, so of course it won't have VR."

Seriously the headset devs are making it so any idiot coder that is capable of drooling on the keyboard can hack it in, it just might suck. Hell most engines are just having built-in support at this point.

Haskell9 posted:

Congratulations on your tremendous accomplishment.

He's like in his 40's or 50's now though so he's tremendously tougher than he was as a young man I retract my sarcasm

Xaerael posted:

All of it is, if you count Dust 514 as part of eve.


e. I suppose "planet landing" isn't, but who gives a poo poo? SC won't have four digit player battles or staff who can make fun of themselves/their game.

Scruffpuff posted:

This makes me think even more about how Chris doesn't understand how people think, or gaming in general. To be immersed in an experience like a game, has nothing to do with seeing the same things on your monitor that you would see in real life.

When you drive a car, and it starts to rain, and drops form on your windshield, unless it's a heavy rain, you just look through the drops. Your brain edits them out.

If you ride a motorcycle, the first time you wear the helmet, your view is restricted. But after you've been riding a while, you subconsciously compensate for the limited visibility by turning your head farther and more often than usual. You don't know you're doing it - you just do it.

When you first start to wear glasses, you can't stop seeing the rims. And there again, after some time, your brain edits out the frames and you don't see them any more.

In a game, it's different. If you draw drops on the windshield, you can't focus past them - they're in the way. If you limit view from wearing a helmet, it's always harder to see. If you play a character who wears glasses, and they design the rims around the edge of your screen, they're always there and always in the way. You're not "seeing what a guy wearing glasses sees" because in real life the guy wearing glasses can't see the frames unless he looks for them.

In a video game, immersion comes from several factors - lighting, movement, and sound, to name a few. Get the mood right, and you feel like you're there. And the irony of all this is that the "climbing the ladder" into your ship, for example, actually pulls you out of the game. It takes control away from your character (which does not happen in real life, I hope) and reminds you "oh yeah, this is a video game, I can't move until this scripted animation is done playing."

Whereas in games where you get in a car or something instantly, THAT is the part your brain edits out, keeping you in the flow of being in character. Nobody says "How did I get in this car?" They know how they got in, they hit the USE key, and now they're in it and ready for action. Your brain skips over the mundane details and you enjoy a contiguous experience.

It never fails to amaze me how many people in the world miss a target specifically because they were aiming for it.

EminusSleepus posted:

I bet that Ben's reply would be different if the result of the poll is in favor of YES I want monetization in Star Citizen

EminusSleepus posted:

I bet that Ben's reply would be different if the result of the poll is in favor of YES I want monetization in Star Citizen

EminusSleepus posted:

Squadron 42: The Movie

Chalks posted:

104 million dollars and they could only afford 2 mocap helmets. The rest have to make do with sticking rubber rings on their heads.

EminusSleepus posted:

errrmm you have mistaken a life preserver for a helmet.

EminusSleepus posted:

Rudager posted:

It makes me angry because it shouldn't even be a conversation, you can't do anything they list in Star Citizen because it isn't even a loving game yet

Fargin Icehole posted:

This. What the gently caress is this, and who thought this poo poo made sense.

15,000 loving dollars for this poo poo?! And it's not even ALL of the ships, and buying this UNLOCKS the potential to BUY another ship? How can Star Citizen cultist idiots, you loving morons, can possibly defend this? With all you have seen of the alpha, how it's still completely behind schedule and being handled like a bunch C- high schoolers working on a project?


This is legit making me angry.

Unfunny Poster posted:

Just to follow this up, my post full of the links proving a claim wrong is at -14 reddit points, lmao.

They really don't want their world view proven to be wrong.

Fargin Icehole posted:

This. What the gently caress is this, and who thought this poo poo made sense.

15,000 loving dollars for this poo poo?! And it's not even ALL of the ships, and buying this UNLOCKS the potential to BUY another ship? How can Star Citizen cultist idiots, you loving morons, can possibly defend this? With all you have seen of the alpha, how it's still completely behind schedule and being handled like a bunch C- high schoolers working on a project?


This is legit making me angry.

Renegret posted:

how much does the javelin even cost?

because lol I'm not going to their website to check myself

EminusSleepus posted:

I bet that Ben's reply would be different if the result of the poll is in favor of YES I want monetization in Star Citizen