|
Games > Star Citizen: A broken game for broken people.
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2016 20:30
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 12, 2024 20:34 |
|
|
it's all faked hackery just like everything else they've done from day one this is going to be quite an epic failure and the journey towards that has been hilarious so far
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2016 20:32
|
|
|
Mirificus posted:
It's almost like every single game studio except CIG is full of bumbling morons that have no clue how to make video games, since Crobby is making the BDSSE (MMO), BDSSE (single player), BDFPSE, plus the best economic simulation ever, plus planetary landings and PG birds, etc. and doing It all for less than the price of developing GTA5.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2016 20:34
|
|
|
Star Citizen : Development less open than the Wulge's fly
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2016 20:35
|
|
|
G0RF posted:In other news... Nobody tell them that the rough sum of ALL space game players on Steam is usually not even HALF of what a 2 year old COD release has over the same period . Honestly by that point i'm surprised they have not announced they are planning a MOBA mini game to challenge LOL.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2016 20:35
|
|
|
aleksendr posted:Nobody tell them that the rough sum of ALL space game players on Steam is usually not even HALF of what a 2 year old COD release has over the same period . Oh shut the hell up. Don't give them ideas.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2016 20:37
|
|
|
G0RF posted:In other news...
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2016 20:37
|
|
|
Mirificus posted:
I'm still not sure if it's just that shitizens have really bad taste in games or if they are so deep into sunk cost that they
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2016 20:38
|
|
|
Mirificus posted:
Of course. Because it only takes five minutes of playing FO4 to realize that doing the same dumb SC mission for the 30th time, getting your ship stolen or blown off the pad for the 69th time, and crashing for the 999th time, is much more fun.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2016 20:39
|
|
|
G0RF posted:In other news...  How the actual gently caress do you get away with putting unrepresentative concept art up for an article like that when the game is literally "playable" right now and looks nothing like that what so ever?
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2016 20:40
|
|
|
Chalks posted:
Is... is that Elite: Dangerous' UI
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2016 20:41
|
|
|
aleksendr posted:Also all the cheating must be redone if you publish a new module that should affect flight model (thrusters, engines, ect). What was the rational behind the whole thruster-sim promise anyway? That individual thrusters could be blown up and send the ship spinning? My only programming experience is in industrial controls systems and their UIs (and that was over a decade ago), but wouldn't it be easier to just do the whole thing backwards? In other words, just make it a dummy box with very simple maximum yaw/pitch/roll rates and prograde/normal/radial acceleration. Then, rather than removing various forces as you lose thrusters, add phantom forces to simulate a particular damage. E.g. your lower starboard control thruster is gone — any attempt at rolling will be multiplied by a damage matrix that creates additional unwanted negative pitch. For gradual damage, just scale the matrix. Multiple thruster hits? Multiply the manoeuvre by each successive damage matrix. Sure, it would require a bit more tweaking for every ship to get the proper “feel” for each damage state rather than have the physics engine magically make the whole thing right, but on the other hand, it would be orders of magnitudes faster and easier than to make that physics engine to begin with and to design ships with properly balanced thrusters. Tippis fucked around with this message at 20:47 on Jan 6, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2016 20:41
|
|
|
Chalks posted:
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2016 20:43
|
|
|
G0RF posted:In other news...  conspiracies about big publishers and media wanting to suppress Star Citizen and only publishing negative articles. If anything, the gaming press has been consistently lenient with Star Citizen.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2016 20:43
|
|
|
Lowtax posted:I like the UI. There's nothing better than text and graphics that seem to be wanting to run away from you they can't get the reticule to stay in the center of the screen, its not a surprise that the UI is running away
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2016 20:44
|
|
|
Eonwe posted:they can't get the reticule to stay in the center of the screen, its not a surprise that the UI is running away Trying to run to Elite Dangerous, since it called that it wants it back.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2016 20:46
|
|
|
Mirificus posted:I'm always confused by the I'd even say "suspiciously lenient." I'm not sure what kind of sway Christ Roberts has over game reviewers, but precious few of them seem to be really looking at this closely. None of them have obviously logged in, and that PCGamer article last week was especially weird. An entire preview with all this praise, then in the last paragraph, the guy admits he's never seen the game and is going entirely on what is being described to him.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2016 20:47
|
|
|
Mirificus posted:
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2016 20:48
|
|
|
Scruffpuff posted:There doesn't seem to be any inertia either. Even if they suddenly realized "we put center of mass in wrong place LOL I've been doing center of mass since I was a very small girl" and fixed that, there's still the issue of the janky, instantaneous, inertialess movement these ships make at the slightest provocation. If you decide to rotate in place, for example, there should be inertial resistance to that rotation relative to the mass of the ship. In this game, you just spin. You'd also expect when you try to stop rotating, you have to fight the inertial tendency of an object in motion to stay in motion, and take time to overcome the mass to stop spinning. In this game, you just stop. And then you vibrate in place. And then you crash. To desktop. Its a shame, really, because with a robust physic engine we could have pulled off very interesting shenanigans, like using an Idris thruster to push a 300i at ludicrious speed. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NTyroE2DqxY
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2016 20:50
|
|
|
Ash1138 posted:Oh the same Call of Duty that by all accounts got a shot in the arm by adding MORE mobility with Advanced Warfare and to a lesser extent BLOPS 3? Because flanking people in an FPS by being able to parkour or superjump or whatever is actually way more fun than crouch-walking in vents? I didnt put much time into AW, but that exoskeleton was a poo poo ton of fun to use. I miss the OP laser gun so much though 
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2016 20:51
|
|
|
Scruffpuff posted:I'd even say "suspiciously lenient." There's nothing there other than a couple of allegations, and a whole bunch of weird poo poo about Sandi Gardiner - and nobody wants to touch anything that might be GG poop. Come up with a concrete issue, or when one of them decides to 'revisit' their story, and you'll see a difference, but without a solid complaint it's a nerdfight, and at least one party in the nerdfight has history of this poo poo.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2016 20:53
|
|
|
Tippis posted:What was the rational behind the whole thruster-sim promise anyway? That individual thrusters could be blown up and send the ship spinning? Hey, what's up honeywell/siemens/modicon/ge/pilz/allen bradley etc buddy. And yes, it would and any competent dev would at least try and fake it this way if they could. The reasons why not are probably interesting ones. Dunno if they're 105 million interesting.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2016 20:54
|
|
|
Tippis posted:What was the rational behind the whole thruster-sim promise anyway? That individual thrusters could be blown up and send the ship spinning? That doesn't have the proper amount of fidelity to please the true believers. (a giant helmet in zero g fps doesn't either but we won't talk about that)
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2016 20:54
|
|
|
Sandi Garnidiner is Matilda
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2016 20:55
|
|
|
Lowtax posted:I, for one, am incredibly excited about the stealthy parts of the FPS. it has always been a dream of mine to be able to crawl through air ducts in a video game, but so far the technology simply wasnt there and nobody could engineer a method to make this available. I'm so excited that Roberts and Co. were able to finally figure out a way to maximize the leverage of the CryEngine to make such a vital, realistic, and unquestionably original idea of crawling through air ducts in a FPS spring to life. But. have they finished the female crew shower room simulator module? Only reason for a good duct crawl. Samizdata fucked around with this message at 21:05 on Jan 6, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2016 20:57
|
|
|
Wafflz posted:That doesn't have the proper amount of fidelity to please the true believers. The true believers will believe anything they're told — that's why they're true believers. So just cheat it and tell the idiots you didn't. Problem solved.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2016 20:57
|
|
|
this man needs to get some friends in the real world or at least have some real person to person interaction.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2016 20:58
|
|
|
Tippis posted:The true believers will believe anything they're told — that's why they're true believers. The head true believer signs your paycheck though
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2016 20:58
|
|
|
Wafflz posted:The head true believer signs your paycheck though Same answer applies. 
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2016 21:00
|
|
|
Hav posted:There's nothing there other than a couple of allegations, and a whole bunch of weird poo poo about Sandi Gardiner - and nobody wants to touch anything that might be GG poop. you realize there's a janky pile of poo poo they can log in to see that is woefully incomplete and way behind schedule
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2016 21:02
|
|
|
aleksendr posted:Its a shame, really, because with a robust physic engine we could have pulled off very interesting shenanigans, like using an Idris thruster to push a 300i at ludicrious speed. when the first large ship just... takes off. i couldnt stop laughing. This video is amazing.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2016 21:05
|
|
|
I just read this and it was worth the read. This is why you don't let family be executives in your company with any real power.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2016 21:06
|
|
|
Samizdata posted:But. have they finished the female crew shower room simulator module? Only reason for a good duct crawl.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2016 21:08
|
|
|
aleksendr posted:Its a shame, really, because with a robust physic engine we could have pulled off very interesting shenanigans, like using an Idris thruster to push a 300i at ludicrious speed. This just reminds me that I have a few side ops to complete before I can write off MGSV as 100%-ed.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2016 21:08
|
|
|
Lowtax posted:Um clearly the Space Rape module will be released before the Showering Naked Space Lady module, do you not know anything about basic game design?!? Please don't give Chris roberts more ideas from metal gear 5
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2016 21:09
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2016 21:13
|
|
|
Wafflz posted:That doesn't have the proper amount of fidelity to please the true believers. tfw the rocket boosters in Just Cause 3 are more realistic than the thrusters in Star Citizen
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2016 21:13
|
|
|
Chalks posted:
The express prefer things that aren't tangible. Like Princess Di and our Maddie
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2016 21:14
|
|
|
Truga posted:Yeah, it's glorious reading. Palmer said "more than $350 but in that ballpark" back in Oct, now it's suddenly 741 eurodollars with shipping. I can understand the price being high right now due to the tech involved and that, as always, a new product will cost more initially. Look at the XBONE, it was what $600 on launch? Which is why I'll just wait for Gen 2 or 3 and see if the price lowers like they always do. Vive being cheaper will be unlikely because of the same reasons, but who knows. Mekchu fucked around with this message at 21:26 on Jan 6, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2016 21:22
|
|
)
|
|
| # ? Jun 12, 2024 20:34 |
|
|
Tippis posted:What was the rational behind the whole thruster-sim promise anyway? That individual thrusters could be blown up and send the ship spinning? I think they got themselves trapped in a corner by promising it early on and having 5 out of 6 finalist ships in the "The next great startship" show feature vectored and/or rotating thrusters. Remember the ship design pipeline of RSI begin with "Looks" and end with "All the equations that make it fly" at the end.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2016 21:23
|
|