boviscopophobic posted:

Why would new citizen traffic shoot up in the 5 days prior to the start of the referral contest, when the citizenry at large didn't have any information on the contest?

radd posted:

Sandi tweeted about the revamped referral contest on 5 April:

https://mobile.twitter.com/sandigardiner/status/849383149238878212?lang=en

boviscopophobic posted:

OK, so then why the uptick on April 15 specifically rather than, say, April 6?

VictorianQueerLit posted:

Other than buying ships, spending time to create new citizen accounts is one of the only ways a delusional backer with too much emotional investment can directly "Help the game." Slapfighting on forums and stuff doesn't really count. Creating new accounts raises a number that is good for the game and all it takes is the time of the person who wants to do it.

The number of citizen accounts is a huge weapon used by the faithful to prove they aren't alone in their stupidity and that "The People" want Star Citizen.

I bet there are people who have created thousands of accounts each. Or more.

XK posted:

Bootcha's gagged.

boviscopophobic posted:

Why would new citizen traffic shoot up in the 5 days prior to the start of the referral contest, when the citizenry at large didn't have any information on the contest?

Awesome Fidelity posted:

Toops posted:

Doesn't really matter imo, since CryTek is entitled to it as bug fixes and enhancements as a part of their GLA. So showing it to the public still violates the licensing agreement which, above all else, is designed to protect proprietary intellectual property.

Kosumo posted:

Also, did not sperglords get told that if they had more than one account the other ones would act as a NPC of which you could control while playing your main? (if I remember correctly, this was long ago on 10 for the Fools? Along with poo poo like managing battles from the deck of your capital ships RTS like.)

I mean, they still don't even have it so you can invite other players into your hanger to show off all the poo poo that you have paid real money to a talentless idiot to have, which was put out there ages ago, and to which I'm sure people started decorating there hangars for. (i.e. spending money on a still as yet non present feature.)

AP posted:

Yes

https://robertsspaceindustries.com/comm-link/transmission/13288-Multiple-Package-Clarification

Also inviting other players to your hangar was promised for ~9 weeks after the 1st hangar release in August 2013, according to Chris Roberts during a live stream at around this time. Obviously they didn't do it because A, it involves networking, computer shite, of which they have little interest or ability & B, you might not buy a ship if you can visit it for free in your friends hangar.

AP posted:

Yes

https://robertsspaceindustries.com/comm-link/transmission/13288-Multiple-Package-Clarification

Also inviting other players to your hangar was promised for ~9 weeks after the 1st hangar release in August 2013, according to Chris Roberts during a live stream at around this time. Obviously they didn't do it because A, it involves networking, computer shite, of which they have little interest or ability & B, you might not buy a ship if you can visit it for free in your friends hangar.

XK posted:

I know I'm the only one pushing the angle of Russian or whatever troll farms for hire being in play, but I'm convinced there is something to it. Even if it's just a small time op with a tiny handful of actors, something is going on. I can just smell it.

If I'm correct, I wonder what they are being told to say, and what direction they are being given.

XK posted:

Well back, Derek said there was some complication with CryEngine that prevented being able to have other players in your private hangar. I was never really clear on the whats or whys, but I don't know specific details of the engine's internals, so I had no choice but to take the statement at face value.

AP posted:

I believe the hangar is just a local cryengine map, that's how videos of the $10,000 only space bar got out, people found the space bar map and renamed it to the hangar map. So for anyone to visit someone else's hangar, you'd need an instance server, or some other way of connecting directly to your friend's pc so he was host.

I forget what the space bar was called, but paying $10,000 so you can virtually drink by yourself seems like a good deal to me.

RubberJohnny posted:

This piracy news has really upset some backers, I'm seeing account names who were always the aggressive defenders now attacking the project and calling it Pay2Win.

AP posted:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VwCvDUcglrY&t=49s

Toops posted:

This is classic cargo cult nonsense. Lando, in his obvious inexperience, doesn't understand what iteration means. He doesn't know what planning looks like. He's never been a part of the design process. He's repeating words he's heard and/or read a blog about, and the way he mis-uses them belies his absolute rookie status in game development.

Agile development doesn't mean "don't plan." It means plan to the best of your ability given the information you have now, but understand the plan will change as new information becomes available and plan for that too.

I mean holy poo poo, in design terms, the difference between 45, 50, and 100 star systems is absolutely zero. For every gameplay feature, you MUST take into account how it will play in 100 star systems with 1000's of players using them. But Lando doesn't understand the nature of the question, at all, because he's an absolute novice at this. Expert game developers rely on knowledge and experience, and can foresee both challenges and opportunities for fun, which informs the design. And when asked that question, they would have an answer, because they know to think about it.

Once you can scale to 45 systems, and your gameplay holds fast and proves itself fun, without exploits or tech issues at scale, the design is effectively done. It works. Now just keep adding systems which at most requires artwork and environment design (read: time).

But if you don't know what the gently caress you're doing, you spend all your development time in the weeds working on something that doesn't have a snowball's chance in hell of working at scale, let alone being fun, and is guaranteed to have game-breaking exploits, and when that becomes apparent when your half-cooked prototype falls down in production, you scrap it and start over, re-doing it just like the last time.

CIG is stuck in a Sisyphean hell of incompetence. Case in point, I know of a guy who was working on the ship's damage states. He spent the better part of a year working and re-working the same problem because Chris kept changing the poo poo up. He worked diligently on this single feature for nearly a year before quitting, as there was no end to the re-works in sight.

Hobold posted:

Wonder how much more, workable, things would be if they hadn't run off Eric/Rob and the Austin crew, in the power struggle to feed Sandi's ego and base everything out of LA.

Dark Off posted:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cDEYHlN0qUM&t=2218s why backers believe in star citizen. and then lando starts talking about educating skeptics with ATV episodes. Skeptics exist because they just haventh heard about word of chris.
the whole video is just rewriting star citizens history for backers, re-educating em about what has happened/promised in past. Its kinda amazing
Also https://youtu.be/cDEYHlN0qUM?t=4725 they rewrote the lando leak part, it didnt happen. Leak source was elite hacker
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cDEYHlN0qUM&t=5308s

Sarsapariller posted:

I know I'm arguing with a brick wall, but: nobody who's reading a blog about Star Citizen legal proceedings at this stage in the game is unfamiliar with the drama to date. A dramatic and wide-ranging summary is great if you are a media outlet bringing the story to ten thousand fresh new sets of eyes, but at this point the thread and your blog are basically the hardest of the hardcore special-interest demo's and you are only going to get a few dozen people at most. At that point it's better to do fun, interesting "Hot takes" on the latest stuff, followed by a really insightful and conversation-altering long-form post once every couple months, if you have a lot of new dirt to cover.

You don't know whether or not I'm a warlord. You don't know my life.

XK posted:

I've seen things you people wouldn't believe. Sandi acting in C grade movies with fake tattoos. I watched Chris Roberts wave his hands around while talking about boarding mechanics. All those moments will be lost in time, like tears in rain.

RubberJohnny posted:

We should create a list of "most delayed features" that aren't in the game yet - the character creator was originally supposed to be done by the end of 2016, (mentioned in the 2.4 roundtable), "Organisations 2.0" was scheduled for Winter 2014, then the Starmap was given priority over it, which released in Oct 2015, and then a short update at Xmas 2015 saying we should see things soon, then they said we should see it with the updated website, but the website has come and gone in 2018 with no redone organisations.

Dementropy posted:

G0RF posted:

Please correct me if I’m wrong anyone (especially lawgoons) but it seems to me like discovery itself would be an annihilating fire that consumed what remains of Chris Roberts’ tarnished reputation and denied him safe harbor even in the “at least they tried” respite for posterity. Even assuming Roberts felt CIG might only be at risk of minor damages for contract breaches, that seems secondary to his potential reputational damage if things excavated via discovery entered the public record, for the reason recently mentioned by nnnotime:


Kotaku UK’s journalistic ‘discovery’ destroyed the false narrative propping up a Star Marine fiction and had Roberts looking flustered, foolish and more than a little fraudulent as it also put his past record of backer guidance into the harshest light possible. The same is true of Derek forcing Roberts public acknowledgement of his formerly hidden marriage to Sandi, a lie that told via constant acts of omission and one employees were coerced to support that looked sleazy, suspicious and ridiculous after exposure.

I may be operating under simplistic assumptions. I assume the case clears the motion to dismiss and goes to court, and then the big question is simply “will Crytek settle or not?” The unnecessarily provocative testiness in CIG’s replies may serve short term PR benefits with backers but doesn’t seem like it does them any favors at all if the MTD fails and they’re facing an antagonized Crytek in court. What possible confidence might Chris and Ortwin have in being vindication by due process if the cost of justice requires them to endure a discovery process that could unearth so very much that they’ve done while assuming “the backers will never know”?

Again, please correct if I’m misunderstanding the process side of this. The PR side seems pretty clear, and from that sense, “The backers must never know.”