|
alf_pogs posted:what does shigeru miyamoto know about game development though Disregarding that, the community is so detached from reality and so ignorant to concepts of software development that it hurts. 'I'm just backing the MOST AMBITIOUS GAME EVER' is neither a good idea or relevant defense when the scope of your ambitious game is 'all the stuff'. That talk is cheap, but delivering on that, even for the an experienced and talented studio proves to be really hard. It just stuns me that is a nontrivial number of people can be promised absolutely everything and they don't have the introspection or sense to examine those claims and say, 'maybe I'm being lied to for money...'
|
#
¿
Dec 20, 2016 22:35
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 25, 2024 20:59 |
|
|
Gradis posted:Its thousands. Lets lol at this nubbins. Then dox his family. I'll start the dramatica page.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 21, 2016 00:33
|
|
|
Dongicus posted:maybe you should kill some star citizens with this machine gun That's...not funny.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 21, 2016 08:18
|
|
|
nawledgelambo posted:It's basic safety, man. guns are dangerous in the hands of the uneducated. Simple as that. You're afraid of them because you don't know them. This conversation is just going to run in circles, it's best to leave it at that. Man, I own a half dozen guns, but to claim that a rifle of any kind is 'basic safety' is hilarious at best. Guns are super fun to shoot. Guns are not inherently dangerous. Guns are not 'basic safety' and are much closer to a 'last resort'. Star Citizen is worse than both this post and the post I quoted, if you can even imagine that.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 21, 2016 08:25
|
|
|
Nice netcode boys.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 9, 2017 09:48
|
|
|
ManofManyAliases posted:Backers are not getting early "alpha" test access to SQ42. I don't really have a clue to mission lengths yet. SQ42 is very tight-lipped. "Most Open Development Ever™" Maybe it doesn't apply to SQ42 and only SC. Maybe they don't have poo poo done for SQ42 and are making excuses.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 9, 2017 20:02
|
|
|
quote:He says the universe will have "billions and billions" of NPCs in the economy, not the meager 10 million (I believe) that Chris has talked about simulating prior. This is literally impossible. Even if the only thing your NPCs did was walk in a circle and vomit a line when a player pressed the 'A' button, the amount of resources this would take to simulate, generate, and communicate is astronomical. quote:They started with "a lot of art" that did not have ship docking in mind. Sick PMing there. SDLC tip #1: It's generally wise to not implement until your requirements are nailed down. quote:They don't want to just figure out mining, they want to figure out resource collection overall, from collecting biological data to picking plants to collecting wood because you're freezing on a planet. This kind of system design is something you could not possibly land correctly on without an unbelievable amount of iteration from testing - Not '12 guys are playing it internally' kind of testing either. You'd probably need several thousand people interacting with them for a long time. These kinds of systems are both ripe for extreme boredom and extreme abuse. quote:Players have to be able to do anything the NPCs can do. "This is a 100% living world with all of the stuff being interactable by everyone." quote:You'll have to bring food and water places. If you crash on a planet someone has to come rescue you because you'll start to starve, though you'll have ample opportunity to find stuff to eat or hunt things or steal resources from someone else. The interviewer here recognizes the complexity inherent in the statement and observes, "So it's a totally different game at this point." Trufing replies, "That's Star Citizen." Gameplay loops varying from wandering in the desert to battleship combat. This is impossible. You cannot strand players on planets without some failsafe (NPC comes to rescue you and take you to the nearest 'capital city' for 50% of your cash). That's such an unbelievably bad idea to even suggest that it makes my head hurt. Even with failsafes in place, to make it not feel like a binary, 'I have a backup plan' vs 'guess I'm waiting until that NPC shows up...' is really difficult. There'd have to be an incentive to go rescue players and if there is an incentive, then there's an economy, and if there is an economy, then down the rabbit hole we go... Canine Blues Arooo fucked around with this message at 00:18 on Jan 16, 2017 |
|
#
¿
Jan 16, 2017 00:16
|
|
|
no_recall posted:Yes it is, and its a game mechanic cause its mainly your fault for That's really bizarre. What's the penalty for death in that game?
|
|
#
¿
Jan 16, 2017 05:48
|
|
|
ManofManyAliases posted:Tier 1 devs spend time working on their games instead of shitposting incessantly and using pictures to try and trigger others. Nice twitter usage today - you showed a great deal of effort there pal. You say that, but there are some trainwrecks you can't look away from.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 24, 2017 19:45
|
|
|
ManofManyAliases posted:They used a nebula?! My God. Time to shut down the whole operation. Where do I send in my ticket? Stealing other people's art assets without permission is a real crime. It's called theft! Real developers don't do this. I hope this is an insightful look into the world of actual video game development 
|
|
#
¿
Jan 28, 2017 03:40
|
|
|
I want someone to make a claim that an RTT of 500ms is normal for an Alpha of an FPS. (It's not!)
|
|
#
¿
Mar 1, 2017 01:50
|
|
|
Here's the thing about the ME:A flip flop. The original Mass Effect Trilogy is looked upon fondly. The games were good. The great majority of people agree that these games are model of effective world-building and character development and the game was very strong because of it. There are certainly pieces of the trilogy that maybe aren't *great*, but what it did well was so strong that things like 'meh' combat at time was nothing but a tiny mark against it. It's important to remember that the writing, the world and the characters are what carried this series and on the back of three games were this was the focus of excellence, they have earned this place where people will give them the benefit of the doubt...until proven wrong of course. Well, here we are a week out of release, and we have something tangible to touch and the writing doesn't look so hot. If the writing isn't great, then it puts those other things that rely on good writing in jeopardy. We assumed the writing would be at least good because it was really good in the original trilogy. This is called 'evidence'! There was evidence to suggest that ME:A's writing would be strong because the series had good writing in the past. Well, now there is a lot more evidence to suggest that maybe ME:A's writing is actually quite bad. Because of this new evidence, a lot of people are reconsidering their position on the game. In review: Past evidence says ME:A will probably be good = People think ME:A will be good. New evidence suggests that ME:A might not be good = People think ME:A might not be good. The theme here is Evidence. See, rational people use evidence to help form opinions. So, when people flip-flopped on ME:A, it's because the evidence changed. That's what it means to be rational. With Star Citizen, we actually saw a similar thing. Star Citizen was announced and people were excited for it. They extended the benefit of doubt to Croberts and friends and were willing to hand over some cash because there wasn't yet any really strong evidence to suggest it's going to crash and burn. Then, the crazy started piling on. An insane scope. Ship pricing. A lot of promises and not a lot of content over a long period of time. Hyping of tech that's been figured out 10 years previous and still didn't work quite right. Timelines that seem to get extended into eternity. All these things and more are pieces of evidence that suggest that maybe this isn't the dream project people original hoped it would be. It kinda suggested that it might be a train wreck and as more and more of that kind of evidence got piled on, people started doing a rational thing: They asked for refunds. They stopped supporting the game. They lost faith in the project, because there was now a lot of evidence to suggest that CIG isn't going to deliver. Now, if you aren't a fan of evidence, we have name for you: True Believer. If you think the Earth is flat, or that chemtrails are evil, or that fluoride is a mind-controlling drug planted in our water by the government, or that Star Citizen will deliver on anything resembling the scope that was promised, then you are a True Believer. You have earned such a label because despite overwhelming evidence, you choose to close your ears and eyes and refuse to acknowledge that evidence, or claim it was placed there by an antagonistic third party, or do mental gymnastics of ever-increasing complexity to prevent the shattering the forgone conclusion your brain has submitted as reality despite that evidence. So in this really boring post, I hope there is one important take-away: Reconsidering ME:A's potential is a thing a rational human would do. Supporting Star Citizen in TYooL 2017 is a thing an irrational person would do. most important part of post -- Tax: 
|
|
#
¿
Mar 16, 2017 19:46
|
|
|
Warhawk109 posted:That actually looks cool as gently caress. Devs that worked on the xwing games. Scope looks about right, nothing outlandish. might be worth backing a small amount. Except there is no way they can put together that game for ten times what they are asking for. They seem to have 24 people on that team. To fund that kind of a team for the year they predict will take at least a few million dollars. That $150,000 is going to last a couple weeks at best.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 16, 2017 22:59
|
|
|
trucutru posted:What, the schedule was released and MoMA is not here for a victory lap? It must mean 3.0 is literally a
|
|
#
¿
Apr 15, 2017 08:01
|
|
|
Bubbacub posted:I'm not super familiar with Gantt charts, but why aren't the rows labeled? "Item 2.0: Power Supply / Pipes" is on the same row as "Continuous Serialized Variables," does that mean that the same team is responsible for both tasks? Real Gantt charts don't look like this. It is hilarious that this is what they passed off as a 'real schedule' and then that people ate it up. A game with the scope of Star Citizen would probably have hundreds and hundreds of features all given their own row, organized probably by team and then maybe by sub-team or individual depending on team size. Some studios give them cute names (CoreTech - Team Blue, etc). The entire thing looks literally unbelievably amatuer for a studio with a 9-figure budget. Canine Blues Arooo fucked around with this message at 01:16 on Apr 18, 2017 |
|
#
¿
Apr 18, 2017 01:13
|
|
|
thatguy posted:The Devil opened up Notepad and he said, "I'll start this show." This is fantastic and should be in the OP as required reading. Canine Blues Arooo fucked around with this message at 07:46 on Apr 24, 2017 |
|
#
¿
Apr 24, 2017 07:24
|
|
|
XK posted:They literally stated a month or two ago that they were making their own programming language. Is there a place they say this? If so, this is *hilarious*.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 26, 2017 19:59
|
|
|
The ideal timeline is 3.0 coming out and being completely underwhelming. Then, we get to watch the star citizen subreddit try to defend it and exile those who don't. Shortly after that, we'd see a collapse of CIG. This way, we can enjoy the buildup and payoff of 3.0, and we get the collapse fireworks separately.
|
|
#
¿
May 12, 2017 00:44
|
|
|
no_recall posted:Could someone explain how all this no-clip is possible? Checking for collision during an emote is not the path to maximum fidelity.
|
|
#
¿
May 22, 2017 09:37
|
|
|
Septic Tank Gulag posted:
Wow, putting it on the line already! I like your balls.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 21, 2017 05:13
|
|
|
Septic Tank Gulag posted:When all is said and done, will crobbers and freyermuth do time for this scam? Almost certainly not.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 21, 2017 18:29
|
|
|
Lazrin posted:no, fool. it validates everything cig is doing that you said couldn't be done. Have you gotten a refund yet? Can you tell me more about 3.0?
|
|
#
¿
Jun 22, 2017 23:24
|
|
|
What in the actual gently caress is this 
|
|
#
¿
Jun 23, 2017 05:16
|
|
|
Mirificus posted:PC Gamer: Richard Garriott on why "most game designers really just suck" This is why you, Mr. Garriott, have not been relevant for literally 20 years now. This is also indicative of why Shroud of the Avatar is going to be a massive disappointment. You know that phrase, 'Shoot for the moon. If you miss, you'll land among the stars!' That does not work game development (or any software development for that matter, but especially game development). If you miss, you wiff hard. When you are drafting the design of the features and game systems, these systems generally interact, and often depend on one another to really work. Imagine working on a game like World of Warcraft. Someone says, 'Gathering +Crafting Professions would be neat'. Everyone agrees, but come launch time, your team didn't have the time to implement the auction house. A major piece of your economy is dead. Players can only practically craft things with resources that they can gather. Even if they manage to craft something, they can sell those goods to anyone. The value of money takes a nosedive and one of your major activity loops in completely missing in a game about activity loops. Maybe you could sell stuff in Trade Chat, but the sheer volume of messages makes it a logistical nightmare. The auction house is a single feature in the game, but if you can't quite get to that feature, so many other systems depending on it crumble. A classic example of biting off more than you can chew is Path of Exile. 1.0 was a disaster. The netcode didn't work and you often ended up out of sync with the server. There was no way to trade besides chat channels. You played through two acts four times each and the endgame was pretty poo poo. The early versions of the Passive Tree kinda sucked, but that was probably the least of their worries. An online game where the client didn't accurately represent what was happening on the server was a much bigger concern. The team didn't constrain their scope to something they could manage given their time and budget, and so the game suffered because of it. By some miracle, they fixed the game, added a trading API, fixed the netcode, expanded the content, and made the endgame compelling, all without running out of money and the game is very good today, but that's not the story they got to tell at 1.0. What I'm getting at here is talk is so, so cheap. You know what Garriot, Croberts, Molyenux and Will Wright all have in common? They are notorious for talking about their big game - their big dream and how it's going to be awesome - and then delivering something totally underwhelming, if they deliver anything at all. Garriot's metric of what makes a good game designer seems to be how much you can promise while disregarding what you can deliver. The brilliant game designers of the world understand budgets, and time, and resources, and scope, and can work within those things to create something awesome. Games like Super Meat Boy, Overwatch, Ori and the Blind Forest, Portal, Factorio, FTL - These are games born from the industry's best minds. Defining a realistic, and often narrow scope that's appropriate for your team, and then executing on it as best as you can is what makes for great design and great games. Promising the world and delivering an atlas is a lot easier.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 29, 2017 07:20
|
|
|
I will be stunned if the game 'launches' with even 5 systems. I'm going to say that by 2019, it'll have 3...maybe.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 19, 2017 20:28
|
|
|
My therapist told me I had to do something 'creative and fun', so I made a thing for the thread... A much better quality version is here, but I'm too dumb to figure out how to embed a webm from gyfcat. The (very good) source material (that you should watch anyway, because it's fantastic), if you haven't seen it before.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 27, 2017 06:44
|
|
|
thatguy posted:It kind of sucks that MoMA has become another white noise poster. I honestly don't fault him. MoMA might be in the camp of 'true believer' for Star Citizen, but he isn't an rear end in a top hat, and he's been pretty fair and frank with the forum. Lethality is a dumb rear end in a top hat. Crymelion is a dumbasshole. MoMA is just a dude - A seemingly pretty nice dude! In return, SA hasn't really treated him with the same level of respect that he's given SA. Sure, MoMA's not a perfect dude, but as I said, he's been a decent poster on the other side of the fence. SA gets a hard-on every time something he says is even slightly wrong or untrue and instead of attempting to have a conversation about it - something MoMA seems at least somewhat willing to engage in - the forum just piles on him. I would stick to white noise as well under those circumstances. So I have a request for the Thread: Be nicer to MoMA. Give him the benefit of the doubt by default. I'd argue MoMA seems reasonable, and as such, it's a matter of time before he's Beer 2.0. To that end, I have a question for MoMA: CIG has delivered pretty much nothing that you'd hope they'd deliver by this time. This game isn't going anywhere and I really want to see you get a refund before it's too late. When are you going to get that refund? What's the trigger going to be?
|
|
#
¿
Jul 28, 2017 02:15
|
|
|
Milky Moor posted:what the gently caress is this garbage gently caress, I'm sorry... Um... MoMA sucks and his opinions about Star Citizen suck! Gotcha bitch!
|
|
#
¿
Jul 28, 2017 03:18
|
|
|
Oh come on MoMA, I give you the benefit of the doubt most of the time, but if your defense of TheAgent's report is, 'This is speculation and hasn't been verified by CIG', I can't really help you there. That poo poo is loving weak.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 1, 2017 02:42
|
|
|
Beer4TheBeerGod posted:Who is the modern day game developer rock star? I can't think of anyone who I would consider checking out a game based on their name alone. I can think of a couple I'd throw money at: Jonathan Blow Masahiro Sakurai Jeff Kaplan Moon Studios Maybe Hideaki Itsuno, but Dragon's Dogma was 'eh' when put up against the 'Rockstar' tier. I guess Shigeru Miyamoto before the Wii... If Chris Roberts thinks he is anywhere even close to that list, then lol @ that.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 5, 2017 22:53
|
|
|
XK posted:Jonathon Blow made a game where you walk around on a beautiful island playing mobile phone game line puzzles. I could just play line puzzles on my phone, which I wouldn't because they're bad. The Witness is a good game yo.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 6, 2017 02:05
|
|
|
e: I suck and can't read.
Canine Blues Arooo fucked around with this message at 23:30 on Aug 18, 2017 |
|
#
¿
Aug 18, 2017 23:10
|
|
|
Kephael posted:He is an associate technical designer, not technical director. Whoops! I misread all of that... CIG gets a pass on this one.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 18, 2017 23:30
|
|
|
Hobold posted:I wonder how many idiots over on I mean, we could spin any conspiracy, no matter how absurd, and there is a good chance someone over there will believe it, and then propagate it as the reason that Star Citizen crashed that one time, or why the game development is taking a long time, or whatever. I'm serious when I say you could say whatever you want, no matter how outrageous, and there is a reasonable chance it'll show up on reddit as some kind of excuse or conspiracy.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 21, 2017 03:38
|
|
are going to take this seriously and are all but wetting their diapers over it.
|
ManofManyAliases posted:Why wouldn't he have been anything but silent on SQ's schedule? For the PU, he let his designers and devs talk and took advice from the community and not promise dates he couldn't commit to. On top of that, he moved to a tried and true strategy of offering very early test builds for each iteration to a select and controlled group of people before rolling out a larger test. I suspect he'll announce the release of a working 3.0 while simultaneously whetting backers' lips with an announcement of a near complete Squadron that will likely take at least 1 more quarter to finish, then polish for release. My timelines are all screwy and even my sources have faltered this year. G0rf makes better posts than me, but I'm really rooting for you here. I also want to take this time to remind you, and everyone else, that the proposed scope of SC is literally impossible to fulfill, not necessarily on a content level (although arguably so), but on a technical level. You cannot have multi-crew ships, battling in whole orgs, in real time, with anything close to the level of detail they are marketing. A lot of what people seem to be projecting onto this piece of the project is, 'EVE but better'. EVE is very good at what it does. EVE has probably the most knowledgeable people on the planet working out problems like, 'how do we enable hundreds of space ships to fight in real time?' These extremely talented engineers have come to the conclusion that you simply cannot and that's why there is time dilation. I want to further emphasize that this is on the back of a system with 'only' hundreds of independent objects, no physics, no server-side simulation, and no PCs separate from their ship. It's built on a very clever client that over the last 15 years has been built to minimize traffic to clients and load to a servers so they can actually make something that resembles a massive fight possible, but even with all that care and consideration and engineering time and talent, they still have major, major limitations. I want to further stress that this is not because EVE's engineers are somehow bad at solving this problem -- Quite the contrary: They are extremely good at it. Rather, this is the reality of computer science. Packets can only be so big. Network Sync starts to unravel at some point. Servers can only handle so many simultaneous elements at once and throwing more kilobits or megahertz at it doesn't solve fundamental problems. If part of your dream is to see a hundred-ship, multi-crew fight happen in real time as part of the Star Citizen experience, then I hope to remind you that realizing such a thing is impossible.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 24, 2017 09:45
|
|
|
"So, we really are just killing time now..."
|
|
#
¿
Aug 25, 2017 20:54
|
|
|
Holy poo poo this hurts to watch.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 25, 2017 20:56
|
|
|
Wrong commercial guys... Good try though!
|
|
#
¿
Aug 25, 2017 20:59
|
|
|
I actually kind of liked the 'car commercial' thing. If there was any substance behind the game at all, that'd be kind of a neat way of introducing a new thing. Now it's time for Sandi, ft. some boos and poo poo...
|
|
#
¿
Aug 25, 2017 21:05
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 25, 2024 20:59 |
|
|
Bug fixing numbers are extremely relevant to everyone. People totally give a poo poo about that. I know when Nintendo talks about the new Mario, I'd love to hear about their bug-fixing numbers.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 25, 2017 21:07
|
|