|
Truga posted:I tried doing this just now. I flew towards an uplink thing for about 15 minutes, until the game crashed. None of the icons other than the one I was flying towards moved at all, which one would expect. 
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2015 14:33
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 28, 2024 07:18 |
|
|
What are these hardcore SC fans going to do a few months after release when most people have moved on to other games? Mission grind with their $2500 ships for the rest of eternity?
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2015 14:33
|
|
|
Hello friend, welcome to SA forums, and I hope you enjoy posting in the star citizen thread. We have a variety of other threads in games http://forums.somethingawful.com/forumdisplay.php?forumid=44 or other interests like food http://forums.somethingawful.com/forumdisplay.php?forumid=161 or cinema http://forums.somethingawful.com/forumdisplay.php?forumid=151 I notice though that you haven't posted your introduction in FYAD (For your attention, dudes) http://forums.somethingawful.com/forumdisplay.php?forumid=26 which is a tradition here, so if you wouldn't mind that would be fantastic. Enjoy your stay! (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2015 14:34
|
|
|
Chalks posted:What are these hardcore SC fans going to do a few months after release when most people have moved on to other games? Mission grind with their $2500 ships for the rest of eternity? No one will make other games because SC is the last game you'll ever need and evil publishers everywhere will kill themselves when they see the majesty of what crowdfunding produced
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2015 14:38
|
|
|
Wing Commander was very special to me and Chris Roberts was something of a childhood hero of mine.D_Smart posted:...blast from the not so past Never meet your heroes.
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2015 14:43
|
|
|
CoreFire posted:It's just sad at this point.  just to say this.Jesus loving christ you people need help.
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2015 14:49
|
|
|
CoreFire posted:It's just sad at this point. No one asked for your life story, we read the blurb on the back of the book. "This guy still has money in Star Citizen."
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2015 14:50
|
|
|
tooterfish posted:Says the guy who paid I've said it before but shame is shared equally in the club. Unless you joined to talk about anime or to be in a good space guild.
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2015 14:51
|
|
|
Chalks posted:What are these hardcore SC fans going to do a few months after release when most people have moved on to other games? Mission grind with their $2500 ships for the rest of eternity? That's when the game Really Come Into Its Own for them, when the time comes where people who just want a fun game and blow poo poo up / teabag people have moved on and are happy elsewhere the hardcore fans will get to slowly mope around space in their investments and jerk off while dressed as Spock IRL. Like when all the rational people and / or companies got the gently caress out of Second Life and all that remains are dudes dressed as wolves with vibrating dildos for legs, secluded and happy in their plot of land with a million security devices to stop curious people from coming near. That's what future holds for SC, the only real losers are the staff working there who will have to pretend to like what they have created.
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2015 14:52
|
|
|
CoreFire posted:It's just sad at this point.
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2015 14:53
|
|
|
CoreFire posted:-snip- You know, it's OK. Like, honestly, it's fine.
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2015 14:54
|
|
|
CoreFire posted:Just wanted to point out that yeah, you can manually use quantum drive without aiming at a point. You can zip around the map and see the gas giant move past, along with the various destination points via jumping manually. You drop out in empty space. No need to select a destination. Apparently you can jump all the way to the edge of the map, but I haven't tried that yet. Sorry, no, that's not how that works. Seriously, unless you people have 1) built games with massive worlds 2) are bona fide gamedevs with experience in #1, this bullshit you're posting, while pretending to know wtf you're talking about, isn't helping anyone who has a genuine interest in this sort of thing  You can make a map size this big if the sectors are "zoned" (which they are). Justin Tyme posted:Actually please do (seriouspost) I am interested in seeing someone try to break/demonstrate these mechanics. It looks like all the destinations/points of interest are in one or two octets relative to the planet, off the top of my head I would think to try to get behind the gas giant relative to where everything else is, set one of the points as a destination, and try to warp through the planet. Also obviously just warp towards nothing (maybe towards the sun?) and let it run for like ten minutes and see where it takes you and then get out and walk around to check for stuttering. Also try landing on the planets/the moon with the rings. If possible, have a friend jump next to you in a separate ship so you can look at each other vast distances away to also check for stuttering. No, they don't know poo poo. Let me explain as best I can: - Take a piece of paper - Draw a box and imagine each side of that box is 8km. You now have a box that is 64 sq. km - Divide that box into 4 equal sections with each side ends up being 4km. This is a zone within the scene. You now have 4 of them - Put an x anywhere inside each box and call them x1, x2, x3, x4. Do this such that x1 is top-left, x3 is bottom-right quote:NOTE: That's the problem that Star Citizen has. - Now draw a bigger rectangle (not a box) around the larger box such that the left side (h) is 200 km and the bottom side (w) is 5K km You now have a rect (map/scene) that is 1m sq. km. Note that we're disregarding z-depth atm. But even if it were factored in, it would probably be no less than w (5K km) - Put an x anywhere inside each box and call them x5, x6, x7, x8. Do this such that x5 is top-left, x7 is bottom-right So that brings us to this... [IMG]  [/IMG]Regardless of whether or not they use 32-Bit or 64-Bit world positioning, they can't exceed the max map size of the engine without super-extensive modifications. And even if they did that, they still have one massive problem: the physics engine I don't believe that they've done this. It would be absolutely insane and time consuming to do that. Plus, for a space combat game, it would have no benefit. Elite Dangerous did it because right off the bat, they built a game engine from the ground up to do just that. What I believe they've done is what Chris has been hinting at and which most people (if you're not a tech) keep missing. They've zoned it. As in shards it. Because that's the easiest way to do it in any engine, especially CE3 without hassle. You still need 64-Bit positioning because you still need to calculate that accurately in a game whereby you want to keep everything in sync and accurate. From my diagram above since the inner box is within the extents of the engine, you're not going to have position precision issues as long as you don't get too close to the 8km edge. But for a space game, 64 sq. km is woefully inadequate. Unless you're in a close combat shooter like Arena Commander or the mission based SQ42 which can design missions to keep players within these world constraints. For Star Citizen, nah, not gonna work. They don't use jump gates or anything (more on this below) of the sort (like I did in my massive world games) to link these zones. They wanted it all to be seamless and appear as one big open space. So, you are going to need 64-Bit positioning precision to avoid problems with objects outside of the 8km range; especially in an open world game that gives all the interactions that Chris has promised. And if they went with doubles (yikes!) the performance and problems with physics alone, are going to be headaches from start to finish (?). If they didn't, then my post about them cheating with a hack, is probably what they've done; as they would have no choice but to calculate positions of objects in the world based on the player's current camera viewpoint location. Even so, at a 5K km range, they are going to have to use logarithmic Z which gives them a significantly higher level of precision in the Z buffer in order to alleviate visual anomalies which we have been seeing in the PTU 2.0 builds. Again, I do *not* believe that they've made such extensive revisions to CE3 that they can now build *single* scenes of up to 5K km per side, up from 8km. Not only would that be insane (when you can just zone it all), but all the existing regions would need to be redone because re-sizing it in the editor will completely screw up the pre-existing object positions and introduce a whole new set of problems. It would be a lot of work to redo the maps. Then again, considering how many things they've had to do over, they may have done just that. Plus they only had one anyway. So, assuming they've zoned it, the end result is that object x1 moving to the position of x5 is going to seamlessly transition from it's own zone (assume it to be less than 8km on any side) into that zone causing that new zone to be loaded. It's like two mat pieces being stitched together. And since this is space - with not that many objects to handle - the loading times are negligible. Crashes can/will happen at this point btw. Especially since it appears (I monitored it in a test I ran yesterday) that they are in fact streaming in the zones. And transitioning between these streamed zones is what they are referring to as "jump tunnels". In order to even do what I think they've done, they would've had to do something called "world origin rebasing" (look it up). You use this to shift the player's world origin position as closer to the camera as possible when it's too far from the current world origin where precision loss tends to cause problems. A combination of this and zone streaming is what they may be doing as it allows them to build this massive world with the appearance of it being one seamless piece as shown in their starmap. I know that UE4 has it (they don't recommend using it for multiplayer games without writing a custom server solution), but I'm not sure that CE3 does. And I'm not sure why it would. Here is a discussion from earlier this year about large seamless worlds in CE3. Which brings me to the issue of borders. A few people have actually hit a literal brick wall going in one direction that took them to the world extents of the zone. If this were one massive universe that is 1m km sq. that should never happen. In my games, the way I handle this is I have a region called a "null zone". As soon as you breach the boundaries of the world - usually by some fluke - you enter in world the same size as the one you left, but with nothing in it other than a jump anomaly that brings you back to known space. I built it like a Russian doll puzzle. No brick walls. Hope this helps those who are genuinely interested in the complexities of building massive worlds like this and the challenges presented. D_Smart fucked around with this message at 20:38 on Nov 22, 2015 |
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2015 14:55
|
|
|
Molotov Cock Tale posted:Hello friend, welcome to SA forums, and I hope you enjoy posting in the star citizen thread. All good my friend, I intend to be complaining about Fallout in the Fallout 4 thread and telling everyone how much I love Mockingjay Part 2 soon enough.
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2015 14:55
|
|
|
At first when Elite Dangerous launched and I realised there was no massive universe I was a bit disappointed, but you play it and realise it doesn't actually matter. You zone into smallish instances and do your thing, if it's the same in SC then it's really not something I am bothered about tbh.
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2015 14:59
|
|
|
AP posted:
wow. that's what gets you put on probation now?
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2015 14:59
|
|
|
D_Smart posted:wow. that's what gets you put on probation now? They've been handing out forum holiday tix to anyone who's questioning their "Marketing" aka Sandi.
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2015 15:03
|
|
|
starkebn posted:So the flight model I've seen so far in videos posted here is that you can throw even the largest ships around like they're on a gimbal. Is this the final planned model? Is there going to be no momentum implemented? This. I thought they just released a massive reworking of the flight model. It still looks terrible?
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2015 15:21
|
|
|
Mr. Smart, that science post with the boxes impressed the hell out of me. I actually understand what you're talking about now; previously I'd been taking it on faith. But it wouldn't it be faster to just say the game can never be balanced? It's an equally crucial flaw, and much easier to communicate.
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2015 15:32
|
|
|
Dayeeeemmm.
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2015 15:32
|
|
|
So far this is the best video I've found of the 2.0 PTU: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hB1_IXHIIQ8 If the areas are segmented they're still considerably larger than the arena commander ones. I also saw a video where a glitch teleported the player 100 000 kilometers away from his ship so it's possible to be that far away from any point of reference without the game making GBS threads itself. Performance and stability seem to be massive issues thought. Framerates can fall easily below 20 and most of the videos I watched ended because the game or the server crashed.
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2015 15:34
|
|
|
What if.......we use 256 bit precision! Give me my 90 million dollars.
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2015 15:49
|
|
|
Is there a funding timeline somewhere? It looks like funding has actually gone down since the release, but it's hard to tell from the tiny windows their graphs give you. Buggy release dampens citizen opinion, raises goon opinion?
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2015 15:50
|
|
|
happyhippy posted:What if.......we use 256 bit precision! Too many bits for my blood. I fold.
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2015 15:52
|
|
|
Are like any of the people who spent thousands and thousands of dollars on space ships super pissed off if they didn't get an invite to play the 2.0 PTU? How about that guy who spent what was it $55,000.00... did he get an invite? How about Wulge?
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2015 15:53
|
|
|
Top x99 mobo = ~$520 Three Titan X superclocked for 3 way SLI = ~$3,300.00 128 Gigs of DDR3 3200mhz RAM = ~$1,100.00 Top X99 5960 Xtreme CPU = ~$1,100.00 Then SS hard drives, case, cooling, 4K monitor(s) etc.  beep boop computers >mame gorf
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2015 15:58
|
|
|
Fil5000 posted:Too many bits for my blood. I fold. ONE THOUSAND BITS!
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2015 16:00
|
|
|
Maldoror posted:Are like any of the people who spent thousands and thousands of dollars on space ships super pissed off if they didn't get an invite to play the 2.0 PTU? The Wulge will definitely have gotten an invite because giving him an invite would be cheaper than hiring the security guards they'd need if they didn't.
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2015 16:01
|
|
|
There's a Kickstarter for a game called Dropfleet Commander. It's a table top spaceship war game where the ships are models. Can't wait. Anyway, something that dissuaded me at first was that the rules and all scenarios would be based around a planet or moon. I thought this was stupid. Why? The answer changed my mind- given how large space is, combat or interaction of any sort would always be around points of convergence, like planets and such. While I think it's really great being able to fly out in the middle of nowhere, it's not really a big deal, because you'll find nothing but empty space. Elite has helped by having the Frameshift drive but even then outside of an established route, it's mind-boggingly remote.
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2015 16:04
|
|
|
happyhippy posted:What if.......we use 256 bit precision! We can finally precisely model every atom in the gameworld.
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2015 16:04
|
|
|
Stanko-Prussian posted:The Wulge will definitely have gotten an invite because giving him an invite would be cheaper than hiring the security guards they'd need if they didn't. hes probably the potential suicide that was posted in a screenshot earlier from a job review website. lol
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2015 16:05
|
|
|
Fatkraken posted:ONE THOUSAND BITS! Ey, you need an extra 24 bits to raise, pal. Unless you want to take this outside.
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2015 16:22
|
|
|
OhDearGodNo posted:While I think it's really great being able to fly out in the middle of nowhere, it's not really a big deal, because you'll find nothing but empty space. Elite has helped by having the Frameshift drive but even then outside of an established route, it's mind-boggingly remote. Yup, same reason KSP uses a massively scaled down analogue of our solar system and time acceleration (and even then, manoeuvres to the outer planets take a lot of time). Space is really, really big and really, really empty
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2015 16:26
|
|
|
Maldoror posted:Top x99 mobo = ~$520 Nice "rig" m8.
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2015 16:27
|
|
|
This game is going to take so long they are going to have to redo it in 2056bit
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2015 16:31
|
|
|
D_Smart posted:^this
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2015 16:34
|
|
|
ShredsYouSay posted:Ey, you need an extra 24 bits to raise, pal. Unless you want to take this outside. Blind is now 128 bits. Spaceships wild.
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2015 16:36
|
|
|
Is this the normal audience for the space genre? Or are crazy Star Citizen fans just a vocal minority? Or has Star Citizen transcended video game genres and offered a vision of a 'place to belong' that has just uncannily attracted all the troubled gamer souls?
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2015 16:41
|
|
|
I think Star Citizen in-particular exploits those who have trouble discerning fantasy from reality, although there's obviously overlap with the nerdy a-social space sim community as a whole.
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2015 16:44
|
|
|
Question: Can't you steal ships? So what happens when the person whose ship you have stolen
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2015 16:54
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 28, 2024 07:18 |
|
|
D_Smart posted:-snip- "they can't exceed the max map size of the engine without super-extensive modifications." "It would be absolutely insane and time consuming to do that." The original CryEngineers including the original designer of CryEngine himself spent over 8 months on it. I think that counts as extensive modification. Are you more qualified to be talking about CryEngine modifications compared to the people that have been working on it for 7 years? Or are they all frauds too? "what Chris has been hinting at and which most people (if you're not a tech) keep missing. They've zoned it. " Chris has never hinted at it and they've never mentioned anything similar to it within the monthly reports. "You still need 64-Bit positioning because you still need to calculate that accurately in a game whereby you want to keep everything in sync and accurate." Despite that sentence barely making any sense, you're saying we need 64-bit positioning on self-contained "zones" that change the origin point on entry and don't exceed CE's size limit & 32-bit precision. Do you even bother reading what you type? "So, you are going to need 64-Bit positioning precision to avoid problems with objects outside of the 8km range" Which is what they figured out a year ago and decided to solve.... "visual anomalies which we have been seeing in the PTU 2.0 builds." Visual anomalies that don't happen consistently, sometimes appear in the small arena commander maps, and don't happen if you launch crusader in single player. I'm pretty sure that's a "bug", derek. "Especially since it appears (I monitored it in a test I ran yesterday) that they are in fact streaming in the zones." Geewizz, it's almost as if this is a multiplayer game. What are the chances they're transferring data over a network when you move around? "In order to even do what I think they've done, they would've had to do something called "world origin rebasing"" That would be a nice explanation if they hadn't already talked about what they did. They moved to a camera-relative system where the camera is always considered the origin point and the world moves around the player. Has been directly mentioned by Chris in interviews along with mentioned a couple times by the germany team in the monthly reports. "A few people have actually hit a literal brick wall going in one direction that took them to the world extents of the zone." Any evidence? Haven't seen this at all. "Hope this helps those who are genuinely interested in the complexities of building massive worlds like this and the challenges presented." These are your outlandish assumptions that go against the evidence available and imply the F42 Germany team are purposely risking their careers by lying to backers about their work on 64-bit maps and precision. Since making assumptions is what you specialize in, it's no surprise. Places like Velga (a moon with a large asteroid belt) would simply not work with a traditional zoning system. The area is clearly much, much bigger than a single AC map. Making that area seamless across multiple zones/maps would take a long time to get right. Being able to drop out of Qdrive anywhere on the map relative to the distance you traveled also harms your argument. They're not storing individual zone data for a billion/trillion KM area just in case someone manually jumps to nowhere, that would be an incredible waste of resources.
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2015 16:54
|
|