|
TTerrible posted:I don't understand, there is currently no way I know of damaging a player who is piloting a ship. That's not actually what people are theorising is going on though. It's not just that your controls are routed to another game entity which has your human model inside it being transported around - essentially as if you were remote controlling it. The theory is that your player model is replaced with the ship model, as if you're mounting a pet in WoW and with poof of smoke you get when your model transforms is instead an elaborate animation. Still one entity, but now it looks different. It may be incorrect, but it would explain why ship animation rigging gets attached to your player model if the ship "despawns" unexpectedly - which is to say your model swapped back unexpectedly. The player continues to animate as if they were a space ship, which wouldn't make sense if the player model entity has been there the whole time and control simply swapped back. You'd expect them to either remain in a seated animation or to correctly enter EVA mode. The animation skeleton getting mapped to the thruster configuration of the space ship seems like something that would only happen if the model was being swapped out. Chalks fucked around with this message at 21:31 on Jan 10, 2016 |
#
?
Jan 10, 2016 21:27
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 16, 2024 14:43 |
|
|
Oh, Rajafa   https://www.reddit.com/user/Rajafa
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2016 21:28
|
|
|
TTerrible posted:I'm getting hung up on the specifics of how control is transferred because people are criticising them for that. No. You're getting hung up on your misunderstanding of the criticism. No-one is criticising them for the way control is transferred; they're being criticised because they've implied they wouldn't use the same trickery every other game ever has. They're also being criticised for how poorly they've implemented this standard bit of trickery, as shown by how easily it breaks and how silly the effects of these breakdowns are. By the way, you keep saying that it's new and innovative. In what way? Tippis fucked around with this message at 21:34 on Jan 10, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2016 21:28
|
|
|
TTerrible posted:What they're doing is new and innovative though. The rest of the ship stuff with people being able to walk around it like a seperate map is impressive. I... feel like somehow we're agreeing and disagreeing at once? You say it's not possible to make it seamless, but it's seamless, but there's exceptions on how it's seamless? I dunno, other people are probably explaining things better, I've lost the thread of your thinking.
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2016 21:32
|
|
|
SirPhoebos posted:
Yeah, but we don't care about those rear end-clowns anymore. We just make fun of them all day, every day.
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2016 21:32
|
|
"
|
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2016 21:34
|
|
|
who is this slut they are talking about
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2016 21:36
|
|
|
One of the reasons I love this thread is that even when there is disagreement, there is still general agreement. We can all agree that this game is poo poo, so now we're down to "but HOW exactly is this poo poo formed? Is it a loose stool, because if that were the case, I see these corn kernels here..." etc. Star Citizen: What Kind of poo poo is This?!?
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2016 21:36
|
|
|
Scruffpuff posted:Anyone else toy around with the latest PTU patch? I didn't really notice any improvements, seemed to be little nitpicks really that they focused on. Did anyone notice anything substantial? Yes. Still shite. quote:Edit: I mostly ask because I'm still incredulous that they'd claim the PTU constitutes a significant portion of the game. There's almost nothing going on, and usually things aren't working. Either they are bigger scam artists than I thought, or I'm missing something huge. Same
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2016 21:37
|
|
|
Chalks posted:I've not seen this claim, only a claim about the animations which may often be purely for immersion but some of them (airlock doors and ship boarding) certainly seem to be masking. Star Citizen Alpha 2.0 is Live as Game Nears $100 Million in Crowd Funding quote:Quantum travel – travel in ships through the vastness of space at 0.2 the speed of light Quantum travel is a loading screen, it may not look like one but it's pretty obvious the ship loads in the new area and all anyone external to the ship sees is the fake ship model moving between the two points in space. This may not seem like much, but you won't be able to drop out of Quantum travel quickly, if at all, before the destination (as the destination is loading and it would need to reload the new location), nor will you be able to damage a ship starting, mid travel or just before it ends the flight as it's not the real ship. I'm not saying it's not clever what they've done but it's still a loading screen, it's just pretty and has the location range icons moving on it.
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2016 21:37
|
|
|
AP posted:I'm tempted to say yes, but if someone boards your ship, starts shooting at you and you have to wait for an animation to play to get out of your seat before you can reaction, that's going to annoy the hell out of people. Uhhh scuse me, I think we can all agree that would be the BEST thing ever! For us not for them...... 
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2016 21:38
|
|
|
Agrajag posted:who is this slut they are talking about
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2016 21:39
|
|
|
Agrajag posted:who is this slut they are talking about The person that interrupted Derek on that podcast
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2016 21:40
|
|
|
Chalks posted:It's a very typically CIG problem. The rings rotate because it looks good, it has no gameplay reason, but because of "immersion" they need to have a server overhead for the once in a million years when you fly into them. Usually you'd have static rings then if you find yourself with spare server resources (lol) you can add additional network packets and server overhead to cope with them rotating - but no, it's CIG, so we're going to have a fully animated and network synchronised dynamic station structure purely because it looks cool when 90% of the mechanics that will cause actual server overhead haven't even been written yet. I was simply explaining why the animated rings incur a network simulation cost, but yeah, given the fact the rings have no gameplay associated with them whatsoever they could have simply avoided the problem and left the rings off to save their engineers unnecessary headache. For those that might not necessarily know, unlike Elite, SC appears to be set in a universe where we have artificial gravity. In Elite's fiction a station's rotation actually has a purpose (to provide a sense of gravity) and provides a gameplay element (getting through the slot and (if you have rotational correction turned off) landing / navigating in the interior of a station).
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2016 21:43
|
|
|
AP posted:I should have more faith right? Can you link me something where they even discuss this? Of course you should have faith and they are discussing it at the same place where they are discussing the economic model of SC, profession specific game mechanics and news vanning.
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2016 21:44
|
|
|
AP posted:Star Citizen Alpha 2.0 is Live as Game Nears $100 Million in Crowd Funding Well, they say "explore large expanses of space without a loading screen", not the entirety of the game, so the game can easily be made up of multiple large expanses (and that is pretty much how it seems to be designed). It's space after all, so it's lots and lots of nothing. Not a terribly impressive thing to simulate besides the 32/64-bit considerations for location mapping which we've seen mentioned before. Quantum travel seems to be the transition between the large seamless expanses, by my reading of it.
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2016 21:45
|
|
|
Mirificus posted:Two German medical device auditors with PhDs that are married to each other and obsessed with Derek Smart and Sandi Gardiner? I can imagine account sharing with the wife, if you have a laptop in the living room or something, but it's more likely he's just pretending to be his wife as Karl lies a lot for absolutely no reason. Octopode has posted in these threads for years, largely without issue, until recently as he seems to have started trolling or being more dumb than usual. You can post in favour of Star Citizen here, you'll just get a bit of poo poo for it. Karl lying that he didn't have any money in and then posting like a crazy cultist didn't make any sense at all.
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2016 21:45
|
|
|
Iglocska posted:Of course you should have faith and they are discussing it at the same place where they are discussing the economic model of SC, profession specific game mechanics and news vanning. I don't see a link. Why should I have faith? I think it's going to be a trainwreck or they'll go bust and don't really care which. You trying to convince me or yourself?
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2016 21:47
|
|
|
Chalks posted:That's not actually what people are theorising is going on though. It's not just that your controls are routed to another game entity which has your human model inside it being transported around - essentially as if you were remote controlling it. The theory is that your player model is replaced with the ship model, as if you're mounting a pet in WoW and with poof of smoke you get when your model transforms is instead an elaborate animation. Still one entity, but now it looks different. I'd be very, very surprised if this is the case. I've seen videos of people entering the command chair after other people have got into turrets or are walking around inside the ship. I don't see how deleting the ship and respawning a new entity around other players would ever work or be a path a developer would pursue. Do you mean the weird broken wrist stuff? That is weird as gently caress. I wouldn't jump to it validating the swapping theory. They could end up in a weird state where their stuck in ship control mode, trying to map thruster movements to bones that don't exist in the player model after they're dumped back into it when the object they were controlling goes away. Tippis posted:No. You're getting hung up on your misunderstanding of the criticism. No-one is criticising them for the way control is transferred; they're being criticised because they've implied they wouldn't use the same trickery every other game ever has. They're also being criticised for how poorly they've implemented this standard bit of trickery, as showed by how easily it breaks and how silly the effects of these breakdowns are. Ok, but what you're referring to as "trickery" is "the way control is transferred". It isn't trickery, it's a basic, standard game programming technique and I don't think they ever implied they'd do it a different way. Yes, I agree they have implemented it badly on top of their new way of doing multiplayer vehicles but we disagree on it being trickery or them ever promising not to do it. With the exception of not being able to damage people I don't know what else people expected.  Midnight Voyager posted:I... feel like somehow we're agreeing and disagreeing at once? You say it's not possible to make it seamless, but it's seamless, but there's exceptions on how it's seamless? Yeah, sorry - I've done too many effort posts in a row on this, i wasn't very clear. I believe that the multicrew ship setup with people walking around inside while others sit in chairs and do things is seamless as promised. You said: quote:They are doing a coding trick that many other games have done and it is not technically seamless. They are lying to themselves and everyone else. I disagree. I think it is already seamless and the one thing that breaks it is you can't damage people who are plumbed into the ship. I don't understand what you expect from them in the pursuit of seamlessnes. Just to reiterate, Star Citizen is a massive scam and will not ever be released as promised. I just enjoy technical discussion about game dev. Please don't hate me.
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2016 21:48
|
|
|
Scruffpuff posted:Makes me wonder if any companies will find it worth scavenging through CIG's wreckage after the collapse, to see if they can put something of smaller scope together with the pieces. It's hard to tell if it would be easier to just start from scratch. It would be pretty embarrassing if 105 million dollars didn't even produce anything worth reusing. No. They don't have anything - anything - worthy of rescue. Aside from that, as I've said before, any investor or company thinking of taking on a $105M+ liability and over 750K backers should just donate the money to charity. They not only have to finish (which I estimate at this point to be another 2-3 years and approx $100m to do everything Chris promised) the game as promised, but also can't afford to leave anything out. This is not like games such as Hellsgate, APB etc which had a specific scope, design etc and so the parties that bought them were able to stick with that. Plus they didn't have 750K+ people who had already pre-paid for the game. That would be like GameStop buying a prototype game console from a vendor which had pre-sold it with controllers and VR headset; then GameStop goes, nuh-uh, we're only going to finish the console and ship it with no controller or VR headset. In the case of Star Citizen, it would be like GameStop buying the console vendor before they even put the console together.
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2016 21:49
|
|
|
Has anyone been denied refunds since after the holidays? We were getting responses but they stopped after the new year. Curious if they started refunding again or what's up with that. The replies I have are from different countries, and the average time to deny is 48 days. All the emails have been very close to the 48 day mark too, but I'd like more data if anyone has any?
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2016 21:53
|
|
|
Berious posted:Chris tried to play his own game on a live stream. Poked and prodded the computer like an 80 year old lady trying to email her knitting circle, bitched about the UI like it was his first time seeing it, blamed Ben for the whole fiasco then crashed. Thanks. Can't wait to read through the emails. Raged fucked around with this message at 21:56 on Jan 10, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2016 21:54
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2016 21:55
|
|
|
Chalks posted:Well, they say "explore large expanses of space without a loading screen", not the entirety of the game, so the game can easily be made up of multiple large expanses (and that is pretty much how it seems to be designed). Sure. It's semantics and wordplay. The main issue is that they're trying to hold it up as some kind of mark of distinction even though, if the exact same wordplay and semantic shift is applied to the supposed competition, SC doesn't really have those “extremely large expanses” that is supposed to make it special. Compared to the equally seamless EVE and E:D, it's positively tiny. TTerrible posted:Ok, but what you're referring to as "trickery" is "the way control is transferred". It isn't trickery, it's a basic, standard game programming technique and I don't think they ever implied they'd do it a different way. It's trickery the same way as using a matte painting of a mountain rather than a real mountain is a bit of movie trickery. Everyone does it exactly because it's trickery — because moving the whole production to the foot of the mountain would in most cases be very stupid. It's still trickery. Tippis fucked around with this message at 21:58 on Jan 10, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2016 21:55
|
|
|
aleksendr posted:A wise, reasonable decision. WTF are you doing in here, you sane, rational individual ??!? Avoiding the EVE thread as that's been more poo poo the past few months than normal.
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2016 21:55
|
|
|
TTerrible posted:I'd be very, very surprised if this is the case. I've seen videos of people entering the command chair after other people have got into turrets or are walking around inside the ship. I don't see how deleting the ship and respawning a new entity around other players would ever work or be a path a developer would pursue. Yeah, the weird broken wrists stuff - it actually affects the entire player model and the glitched animations seem to map to the ship controls. You've also got things like that video where the guy exiting warp ends up as a dead ship surrounded by ship debris instead of a dead player. Also the behaviour of the immortal player while piloting the ship seems to support this. If you shoot the window of the ship (for example) from the inside while the shield is up, you'll get the shield damage effect play on the outside (presumably all ship damage affects the shields when they are active). If you shoot the player in the face, you'll also see a damage effect play on the shield just as if you'd shot any other component of the ship's model. It might be something else, like bullets passing through everything inside the ship to the shield including player models, I've never seen two players try shooting each other while on board a piloted ship to see if the same thing happens. Just a theory, but it's an interesting one which seems to explain quite a few weird aspects of the game.
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2016 21:56
|
|
|
Tippis posted:Sure. It's semantics and wordplay. The main issue is that they're trying to hold it up as some kind of mark of distinction, when the exact same wordplay and semantic shift is applied to the supposed competition, SC doesn't really have those “extremely large expanses.” Compared to the equally seamless EVE and E:D, it's positively tiny.
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2016 21:58
|
|
|
aleksendr posted:Yuuuup ! And the best par is that, if delivered as sold, the Idris would nearly fill HALF the available player slots in a server instance. Flying a fully staffed Javelin would be like playing a PVE server where you are the only guild. Yes. But they are only going to count the ship as one client. As along as you can get your ship into an instance, they don't give a poo poo of you can't find a crew or if your friends can't join you in the ship, let alone the server. It's a loving mess because Chris dreamed up all this poo poo, before he had an engine to power it. He still doesn't have the engine to power it - and never will.
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2016 21:59
|
|
|
D_Smart posted:(which I estimate at this point to be another 2-3 years and approx $100m to do everything Chris promised)
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2016 21:59
|
|
|
Chalks posted:Well, they say "explore large expanses of space without a loading screen", not the entirety of the game, so the game can easily be made up of multiple large expanses (and that is pretty much how it seems to be designed). I think we'll see a lot of this type of thing in the future for Citizens, studying quoted sentences and trying to make & twist what's been produced into the best knot they can. AP fucked around with this message at 22:05 on Jan 10, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2016 21:59
|
|
|
Look, the game is made with fetal alcohol syndrome coding and nothing works because chris Roberts is a slot badger, a two pin DIN plug, a small bean regarder.
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2016 22:01
|
|
|
Tippis posted:Sure. It's semantics and wordplay. The main issue is that they're trying to hold it up as some kind of mark of distinction, when the exact same wordplay and semantic shift is applied to the supposed competition, SC doesn't really have those “extremely large expanses.” Compared to the equally seamless EVE and E:D, it's positively tiny. Ok but did they ever promise to do the equivalent of simulating arms and legs for ship control? Chalks posted:Yeah, the weird broken wrists stuff - it actually affects the entire player model and the glitched animations map to the ship controls. You've also got things like that video where the guy exiting warp ends up as a dead ship surrounded by ship debris instead of a dead player. It's all janky as hell and breaks down in the most hilarious ways. I'm coming at it from a dev point of view and assuming that no one in CIG would be insane enough to re-write the vehicles to essentially be maps players can play a boarding action in and make that large undertaking as hard as possible for themselves by doing this player swapping. The shield thing could be as dumb as them assuming all damage comes from outside. We already know that they dont differentiate between the player model and the ship once you're in the chair so it all gets the same treatment.
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2016 22:02
|
|
|
TTerrible posted:Ok but did they ever promise to do the equivalent of simulating arms and legs for ship control? For EVE, no. The handwavey explanation is that you're a cyberneticially & genetically enhanced human who can control your ship with your brain while sitting in what is basically an isolation tank filled with goo. The real mechanics is you're just given control of that ship model & have all the attributes etc. associated with it like when you choose a hero in Dota or whatever.
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2016 22:05
|
|
|
wyoak posted:Can you travel between stations at not-warp speed? I dunno why anyone would but wondering if it's possible You certainly can in EVE. In fact, a recent patch made it so that many stations share the same local grid, which makes it very easy to do, even if it's a bit pointless. Even at 8,000m/s, it takes a while to cover the 700km between two close stations. I haven't tried it in E:D, mainly because stations in that game generally are too far apart (and/or ships too slow) to really make it worth trying. TTerrible posted:Ok but did they ever promise to do the equivalent of simulating arms and legs for ship control? It was never clear what they promised. They just kept saying that it wouldn't be what all those other lesser games did. Somehow they wouldn't use such cheap tricks and instead be new and wonderful and fantabulous. At any rate, you misread my point: trickery is trickery, even if it's done for a very sane and sensible reason. That's why I refer to the standard game programming trickery as trickery. Whatever goes on in the fevered dreams of CRobber is a separate matter. Tippis fucked around with this message at 22:16 on Jan 10, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2016 22:05
|
|
|
wyoak posted:Can you travel between stations at not-warp speed? I dunno why anyone would but wondering if it's possible You can do that in EVE, although it'd be pretty pointless.
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2016 22:06
|
|
|
TTerrible posted:I'm coming at it from a dev point of view and assuming that no one in CIG would be insane enough to re-write the vehicles to essentially be maps players can play a boarding action in and make that large undertaking as hard as possible for themselves by doing this player swapping. I like your posts as your perspective is interesting. You'll have been reading everything about the game and passing it through a filter of what's possible based on your experience and ignoring the bullshit. Your expectations are going to be wildly different to someone who dropped $5000 on it and believes absolutely everything he's told.
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2016 22:10
|
|
|
Scruffpuff posted:Great, now Chris will put mirrors in the game. someone should ask him to put mirrors in the game  i want to see that fps go to single digits
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2016 22:11
|
|
|
Dear Lord St. Christ of Roberts, Can you please put mirrors in your shitshow of a game? It's one crucial feature for immersion so that I can watch my space person jack off in space without having to look down. Thank you, please take this money to buy more cocaine and whores. Sincerely, The Brown Sea
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2016 22:12
|
|
|
Gonkish posted:Dear Lord St. Christ of Roberts, And birds.
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2016 22:13
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 16, 2024 14:43 |
|
|
That RoadBeer guy sure gets butthurt when people point out how toxic the SC community/fanboys are. He's latched on to the "yeah but SA has said mean things about SC!  " like that's a valid excuse to harass a chick for doing her job, defend pedophiles, etc.It's adorable.
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2016 22:14
|
|