|
Avalanche posted:
I do know a thing or two about programming (allegedly) and I was discussing this with a co-worker today. It 'should' just be a post processing pixel shader effect, that's how this is normally done (though older games used lots of little polygons projected into screen space). So at best you just bypass that shader effect. Its a 10 minute(ish) job. I'm baffled as to why its not been removed.
|
#
¿
Oct 11, 2016 11:24
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 23, 2024 21:19 |
|
|
zcrow posted:Knowing CIG, they probably did remove it. Then replaced it with a custom fish-inspired water-on-lens-fluid-solver to accurately portray the water droplets with as much fidelity as you'd expect from a RobberSpace Industry product. I'm waiting for it to be claimed that its the drops of water from the players breath forming as condensation on the inside of the visor...
|
|
#
¿
Oct 11, 2016 11:35
|
|
|
starkebn posted:and why are the animation transitions so poo poo? why is there always a jerk when you enter or exit a seat for example? At a guess? Camera is jerking from the player controlled position to the pre-canned animations position. Even if you IK the skeleton, and the camera is bound to a node in the IK skeleton (which I strongly suspect is the case) then if the positions of the player position, and the animations start position in world space are too far apart then there might be acceleration issues, especially if you are trying to keep the interpolation from player to animation control as short as possible. Frankly I was far more concerned about the weird glitching on the landscape (not pop up) where parts of the landscape kept going dark/black, that suggests they have a problem with their shadow casting code.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 11, 2016 12:10
|
|
|
Sandweed posted:Like CIG would let their employees talk to other gamedevs. There's more truth in that than you might think... Just all rumors though. In that I've heard tell that F42 game devs are generally not seen when game devs from various companies have a meet up. Codezombie fucked around with this message at 14:54 on Oct 11, 2016 |
|
#
¿
Oct 11, 2016 14:52
|
|
|
Pelican Dunderhead posted:Wouldn't you still need to define boundary contours or is that a easy thing to do with some coding that defines them ending at what would be considered 'ground'? Can't speak for the OP, but speaking for myself, I would'nt bother defining boundaries between land and water. Let the water clip under the land. Pixel overdraw is fairly cheap these days, and defining the shoreline for an entire planet of which 99% of it probably only exists in the compute shader is expensive. Its what I do, and it works... mostly... as long as the waves are not so high as to clip back through the land, but there are alpha tricks you can do to hide that...  I am a games programmer, and I can tell you, real game development is all smoke and mirrors, and very very messy. :p
|
|
#
¿
Oct 11, 2016 16:03
|
|
|
Pelican Dunderhead posted:Yeah I thought about that but they you can potentially have a shitload of spheres of water planes all beneath the ground. Unless (much more likely) its a projected square plane that bounds the largest dimensions. For sea level you can go for a hack that renders a mesh that covers the camera frustrum and is orientated to the planets surface and the height of the sea, then interpolate the mesh on the pixel / vertex shader to draw your waves. I would'nt personally try and render an entire sphere for the sea, not for something that's a few thousand kilometers wide. That way lies odd bugs, even with 64bit positioning. Lakes are a different kettle of fish, as they only exist in specific areas, and clipping through landscapes becomes a bigger issue. The usual method is to define them (and rivers) is as vector data, though on a planetary scale I can see that getting a wee bit expensive. I'd possibly try and bake them into a texture instead, and have the shaders create geometry for them on the fly. Not something I've tried to be honest.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 11, 2016 16:18
|
|
|
Skellybones posted:So you're saying that creating an entire planet is tricky. Only if you are not Slartibardfast.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 11, 2016 16:34
|
|
|
DogonCrook posted:I can’t think of a more consistently successful game developer in the history of game development. I can. Bioware, Black Isle, Ion Storm, Projekt Red, Rockstar. In the space game arena, I'd say the most influential studio was arguably Lucasarts. All faaaaar more successful than any Dev Studio led by Chris Roberts...
|
|
#
¿
Oct 11, 2016 17:14
|
|
|
trucutru posted:
Poster in this image (Wendigo?) knows nothing. The average time frame for a AAA game is around 18 months... Sometimes if your lucky you get 24 months. If you hit the jackpot you get three years. Anything longer than that and the project is usually in trouble, people get fired for f'king things up, and other people get parachuted in to fix things and get something out of the door.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 12, 2016 09:50
|
|
|
Pilz posted:To be COMPLETELY fair to the backers, Star Citizen has a lot of money. I'm not personally convinced that given 120 million dollars and a few years, a few experienced devs couldn't put together a team and pop out a game that fulfills all of Star Citizen's most meaningful promises. Stuff like tons of planets with really good procgen + hand polishing, a bunch of ships, a bunch of economic management minigames (let players manage a corp for farming, mining, etc, rather than having to run out and do the grunt stuff themselves, also cuts down on overhead since its' basically a series of spreadsheet games), rudimentary base building (space station building could be the easiest thing ever, you buy a chassis that is a different map and just place rooms on the map and decorate them like in Warframe), random global events and a few different mission paths that could be expanded on as the game gets bigger. gently caress true seamless transitions, gently caress actual earth-sized planets, gently caress MUH FIDELITY. You'd have a drat fine game. The issue has always been misuse of the money, the scope creep is almost secondary to that. Chatting to someone in the canteen today who worked on APB today. He said that one of the reasons that project got into so much trouble was, ironically, because they had too much money, in their words, it just meant people wasted a lot of time messing with ideas and by the time the money ran out, they were all "Ah poo poo what do we do now!" Having lots of money is nice, but its not what gets games made, deadlines are what gets games made... horrible horrible deadlines, and the words that strikes terror into a teams heart. "No, the schedule will not slip any further, as we are already booked for submission testing at SCEA and Microsoft" Codezombie fucked around with this message at 10:06 on Oct 12, 2016 |
|
#
¿
Oct 12, 2016 09:57
|
|
|
Tijuana Bibliophile posted:You got a lot of nerve coming here and claiming to know more about game development than whoever that is To be fair you don't know if I am actually chatting poo either... So I'll link to my Moby profile. You can decide if I am just linking to a random moby profile or not. http://www.mobygames.com/developer/sheet/view/developerId,86162/ (I really need to update it, Dirt Rally is missing off that profile, and I did'nt do enough work on F1 2015 to really deserve the credit either. ) (Edit: I also apologise for Simon the Sorcerer 3D... I was young... and needed the money... )
|
|
#
¿
Oct 12, 2016 09:59
|
|
|
Tijuana Bibliophile posted:The escape from the "hotel" is the last time I was genuinely scared by a game. Fuckin' jeebies actually, it's a drat disturbing experience Glad you enjoyed that part, it was my favourite too, I won't bore you with what parts I worked on (though I'm still very proud of the dynamic glass shattering algorithum). However I remain convinced that giving the player weapons was not the best idea we had. At least not effective weapons. CoC was another example of a game that went through development hell... Oh the hellish stories I can tell about working on that game... Still one of my favourite projects. I was laid off right after it went gold, as the money had run out. About a month before that, we knew lay offs were coming - as I quote : "Waiting for Cthulhu to come out, was like turkeys waiting for christmas" Horrorgame-tax 
Codezombie fucked around with this message at 10:55 on Oct 12, 2016 |
|
#
¿
Oct 12, 2016 10:49
|
|
|
Daztek posted:Planets V2: Just a bit of R&D work Aka "We nicked the source for Proland and mucked about with it a bit..." Okay, CIG might not have actually used the Proland code base, but there is so much public domain info on how to do realtime procgen planets that its really not that hard to put a system together. The only reason you don't see a lot of procgen planets in games is not because they are hard to do, its simply because most of the time they are not needed. Codezombie fucked around with this message at 10:59 on Oct 12, 2016 |
|
#
¿
Oct 12, 2016 10:56
|
|
|
Tarquinn posted:Why do many people read "indefinitely" as forever or cancelled? Thanks. As a developer on that game, I have to say, I totally agree with you about the action part... 
|
|
#
¿
Oct 12, 2016 11:50
|
|
|
Talking of public domain info on procgen planets, may I present what maybe CIG's planetary proc gen bible... http://www.virtualglobebook.com/ This is actually a good book, even the Outerra developers recommend it.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 12, 2016 12:04
|
|
|
neonbregna posted:This is video game development The same sort of mentality that drives micro-transactions in mobile games and the whole free to play moral swamp... Its pretty depressing. Super fans scare me too.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 12, 2016 13:50
|
|
|
Skellybones posted:Yeah I was sort of wondering, since Cryengine runs on a heightmap image to generate the terrain, how the gently caress do you even do a spherical planet or proc-gen that. There is a trick where you take six heightfields, rotate each height field so it forms a cube, and then take each point on the heightfield, normalise the point, then times the normalised value by the radius of the sphere you want to create. Its a fairly common way to generate a sphere from a mesh, you get a wee bit of distortion at the points where corners of each heightfield meet, however not as bad as polar based spheres. Your actual mesh data is split over a number of increasingly complex meshes, and the height data is then applied to the meshes you have visible. There are other ways to generate planet spheres, but the above system plays very nicely with quad tree systems used to simplify the mesh to reduce poly count at long distances from the camera position, so its a really popular way to draw very large planets. This page kinda goes into some of the basics https://acko.net/blog/making-worlds-1-of-spheres-and-cubes/
|
|
#
¿
Oct 12, 2016 15:45
|
|
|
orcinus posted:I honestly doubt there's anything real time about their terrain generation. Granted, I suspect that is the case, I would however be interested to know thy are fractally infilling between the points on the height map. Personally in my own little projects at home, I use heightmaps to provide the first couple of octaves of heightdata, and let the algorithums fill the rest in. That allows you to avoid having huge amounts of terrain data clogging up ram.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 12, 2016 15:56
|
|
|
Samizdata posted:I "loved" discovering you would kill yourself if you went too mad, like I did on the ship fighting Father Dagon. I'm totally not sorry we put that in... :p I am sorry for that drat ship cannon though, that was my fault. It was a whirling son of a bitch to code and get right, and it never did work properly... Codezombie fucked around with this message at 17:05 on Oct 12, 2016 |
|
#
¿
Oct 12, 2016 17:01
|
|
|
TheLightPurges posted:Serious question is it actually important that an A list actor actually do the mocap? I always thought it was just a publicity thing. Not hugely, but it is very very important to be able to get them back in to do pick up lines... So its unwise to upset your voice actors. The Question to be asked, has CIG done anything to upset the A list actors they hired?
|
|
#
¿
Oct 12, 2016 19:45
|
|
|
AP posted:https://twitter.com/SandiGardiner/status/786593655205208064 This is stunningly unprofessional... Not getting in early, thats cool, but basically passively aggressively shaming the rest of the team by taking these sort of pictures. Codezombie fucked around with this message at 17:08 on Oct 13, 2016 |
|
#
¿
Oct 13, 2016 17:04
|
|
|
AP posted:https://twitter.com/George_CIG/status/789056173055979520 Snub Fighter?! That's a Star wars expression... Oh well, once you've started plagiarizing, why stop.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 20, 2016 13:48
|
|
|
Deloria posted:Well.. I kind of forget to be honest.. But I remembe rthat feeling that everything was going to be so groundbreaking. Its not at all impossible, it's called cartesian / vector mathematics. Any game dev would have it figured out in a hour or two, tops. :p That why a number of we (for the record I'm a game dev) game devs also cast a critical eye over Star Citizen and thought "that's odd, why are people saying its impossible, or never down before, its just a bit overly complicated..." The problem with the game is the scope, the level of complexity is rather high, all the interacting systems will up the tech debt with integration issues alone, and even worse they are developing it across multiple studios (which right there that alone gives me the shivers) I was kinda hopeful they might pull it off, I love space games myself. Though to be honest, my faith plummeted when I got the first hanger module, and realised the frame rate was so bloody awful. I honestly thought at first someone goofed, and sent out the debug build rather than a release build... Nothing since then has really impressed me much, it's a second rate space game, which is clearly in the sort of development hell that I've personally been involved with on other projects.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 15, 2016 16:08
|
|
|
Deloria posted:But I remember when we hit like a few million he asked the backers "Shall we go bigger?" I always felt that was like a double or quits thing... And we were all mad keen for it. Chris Roberts is a bit like Peter Molyneux like that...
|
|
#
¿
Nov 15, 2016 16:11
|
|
|
Sandweed posted:Chris can't fail Preacher: "...I'm asking for hands to be uplifted in just a moment. Chris the Holy Chairman is calling out to embrace you. I want you to reach deep into your hearts and your pocketbooks and take his hand. Deloria: "Bless me father for I have sinned." Preacher: "Some of you are in a state of rebellion right now, you're saying..." *BLAM* ... (Careful Deloria, by coming here and talking to Goons, you might be committing mind crime) Codezombie fucked around with this message at 16:22 on Nov 15, 2016 |
|
#
¿
Nov 15, 2016 16:17
|
|
|
Maw posted:$630k+? No way. That can't be a thing. Is that a thing? I'd not be surprised. I once had a CEO who was getting about $1.3 mil.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 15, 2016 16:49
|
|
|
TheLightPurges posted:Typical for regular companies its fine. Yeah, I should have pointed out as well that the CEO in my example was heading up a company that's been around since computer games came on cassette tapes.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 15, 2016 16:52
|
|
|
TheAgent posted:as we all know, being given a huge sum of cash without any oversight is always a good thing As Deloria has ably demonstrated...
|
|
#
¿
Nov 15, 2016 17:03
|
|
|
Spermanent Record posted:Yeah seriously. I'm a teacher irl and the thought of this happening to one of my students just makes me feel really sad and angry. Congratulations SC. I'm not enjoying it anymore. Welcome to (one of) the reason(s) why there are some sectors of my industry I refuse to work in...
|
|
#
¿
Nov 15, 2016 17:16
|
|
|
Deloria posted:
This... For example I suspect Artemis Bridge Simulator will continue to have better multi-crewed ships than SC will ever manage to have...
|
|
#
¿
Nov 15, 2016 18:40
|
|
|
Phi230 posted:If you are really 15 then its really gross that youre on tinder She says she's 18
|
|
#
¿
Nov 15, 2016 18:41
|
|
|
peter gabriel posted:*fuzzy modem has stopped being your friend* Dude... I'm 42, Fuzzy Modem stopped being my friend a *looong* time ago. Apparently...
|
|
#
¿
Nov 15, 2016 18:44
|
|
|
Deloria posted:I think some people struggled harder to invest 50 dollars than I did to put in 6000. It was just stupid money for doing my confirmation: play acting in a religious ceremony i didnt believe in. As I suspect you live in the UK (given your post about the British Heart Foundation earlier) then GET. A. REFUND IF for no other reason, that due to the collapse of the pound, you'll get more back than you pledged. HOWEVER The US dollar may yet tank, and you'll lose that edge. GET YOUR MONEY OUT NOW. And you'll have made a tidy profit on what effectively was a bit of currency speculation. Sod your dreams. You have the opportunity to sort out a good sized chunk on a house deposit. Thats worth way more than poxy dreams, which are worthless, plus you'll come up with better, and more exciting dreams anyway. GET A REFUND, its the smart thing to do in the current economic climate.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 15, 2016 19:07
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 23, 2024 21:19 |
|
|
Deloria posted:I live in Norway. Am from the UK - hence grotty grammar. Ah well, screw it then, $6k will barely buy a burger and a coke in Norway anyway.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 15, 2016 19:11
|
|