Mirificus posted:

CIG: Jump Point - The Road to Object-Container-Streaming


Nishanov: Fibers Under the Magnifying Glass

colonelwest posted:

After 8 years and 300 million dollars they're still trying to create the basic infrastructure for an MMO, now using 90's technology. It's all

Saladin Rising posted:

CI!G: "We are doing a new technology, FIBERS! Surely this will be the magic silver bullet we have been searching for! What do you mean 'Linux, Facebook and Sun Microsystems tried to make them work for years and then moved to something else'? Bah, they just didn't try hard enough."

This post is great, and it's CI!G in a nutshell: every single thing about fibers is a warning that they're too much of a pain in the rear end and not worth it, and that you shouldn't use them. So what is CI!G's new plan? Well obviously they're going to bash fibers into their overloaded zombie of a code base and hope it works somehow. Then in a few months (or years) when they slowly realize fibers won't do what they're blindly hoping they will do, CI!G will eventually abandon them and move to the next snake oil fix. Meanwhile their code base has become that much more impossible to fix because they blindly jammed fibers into it hoping it would magically fix everything.

Chris Roberts really is stuck in the loving 90's, and we're now in year 8 of him being confused that things didn't just scale linearly from the last time he actually worked on a Wing Commmander game or Freelancer, or that DVD-quality cut-scenes do not single-handedly make a game impressive anymore (if they ever did).

Sabreseven posted:

Star Citizen: Now with added Fibers to help clear the pipeline.

Mirificus posted:

quote:

In this 1997 GDC panel, Jonathan Wilson moderates a panel of legendary game designers in the prime of their work, including John Romero, Chris Roberts, and Nolan Bushnell.

Dementropy posted:

From 2015:
https://twitter.com/RobertsSpaceInd/status/596106147884507136

From 1997:

Bofast posted:

Star Citizen - no longer constipated

Dogeh posted:

Star Citizen - no longer working it out with a pencil

Hav posted:

It’s going to be a fractal explosion of bullshit after the refactor.

People who do this: could fibers be jammed into the concept of chained shaders to leverage the GPU? I know that one of the extrapolations of raytracing is specific vector calculations to extend physics engines, but the people who talk about these things assume a couple of years before application.

Hav posted:

It’s going to be a fractal explosion of bullshit after the refactor.

People who do this: could fibers be... anything

Sabreseven posted:

Star Citizen: Now with added Fibers to help clear the pipeline.

SoftNum posted:

It's hard to answer the question because it's not clear they are using "Fiber" in the way most people do.. Fibers are just stackful coroutines, that is routines that can "give up" their processing power at any point in their callstack, to have it "rescheduled" later. Stackless coroutines can't give up their processing in the middle of a subroutine, but this makes context switching way cheaper. But both are just ways to kind of simulate concurrency without actually achieving parallelism, and usually cannot be scheduled _by the OS_ on different compute units (read CPUs/GPUs). If they could we would call them threads.

Tokamak posted:

The example use-case is trivially solved with regular threads

Tokamak posted:

The use of fibers is emblematic of the way they have developed the engine 'on the go'. The side effect is that there is no real separation of concerns, and everything is poorly encapsulated. It has also led to a combinatorial object explosion, with everything simultaneously doing its own thing... poorly. Untangling the big ball of poo poo would necessitate a rebuild of the engine and game assets, which isn't going to happen.

Tokamak posted:

They have realised that a lot of the game/object data is 'sparse', and only a small amount of it needs to be running at one time. It seems like the solution is to split up the game into logical chunks by sticking each parent-object inside its own fiber. So you end up with ship fibers, landing zone fibers, point of interest fibers, planet_surface[x, y] fibers... with the idea that you'd just freeze and unfreeze each fiber wholesale, rather then having to manage the individual components inside the chunk of poo poo.

I can see this becoming the basis for server meshing. They could extend the fiber functionality to allow fibers to be transferred between servers. So as a server reaches 100% utilisation, they could spin up a new server, transfer half of the active fibers, then transfer the relevant players over. While none of this is exactly seamless, you could see how someone might come to the conclusion that fibers are a solution to the pile of poo poo CIG has created.

CIG has made a ginormous batch spaghetti, so why not split up the spaghetti into individual containers of spaghetti, stick them in the freezer, and then thaw as needed. That way everybody gets a plate of spaghetti when they want it and when you no longer want spaghetti, you can pop it back in the freezer for the next person. It also means you can cook more spaghetti to freeze without worrying the old spaghetti. This is a very good and sane plan and we can foresee no problems with juggling a million containers of frozen spaghetti.

Tokamak posted:

The example use-case (deferring initialisation of unneeded components of a spawning spaceship until required) is trivially solved with regular threads, but after reading more of the article I think they have much greater ambitions.

The use of fibers is emblematic of the way they have developed the engine 'on the go'. Whenever they implement a new feature, it is implemented on a per parent-object basis. This was okay when there were only a few ships and one location, so the copy/pasting was relatively minimal and trouble free. As they kept adding new content, it made implementing features a huge burden and forced them to come up with 'Object 2.0' (which provides a framework to 'macro' in features as needed). The side effect is that there is no real separation of concerns, and everything is poorly encapsulated. It has also led to a combinatorial object explosion, with everything simultaneously doing its own thing... poorly.

Untangling the big ball of poo poo would necessitate a rebuild of the engine and game assets, which isn't going to happen. They have realised that a lot of the game/object data is 'sparse', and only a small amount of it needs to be running at one time. It seems like the solution is to split up the game into logical chunks by sticking each parent-object inside its own fiber. So you end up with ship fibers, landing zone fibers, point of interest fibers, planet_surface[x, y] fibers... with the idea that you'd just freeze and unfreeze each fiber wholesale, rather then having to manage the individual components inside the chunk of poo poo.

I can see this becoming the basis for server meshing. They could extend the fiber functionality to allow fibers to be transferred between servers. So as a server reaches 100% utilisation, they could spin up a new server, transfer half of the active fibers, then transfer the relevant players over. While none of this is exactly seamless, you could see how someone might come to the conclusion that fibers are a solution to the pile of poo poo CIG has created.

CIG has made a ginormous batch spaghetti, so why not split up the spaghetti into individual containers of spaghetti, stick them in the freezer, and then thaw as needed. That way everybody gets a plate of spaghetti when they want it and when you no longer want spaghetti, you can pop it back in the freezer for the next person. It also means you can cook more spaghetti to freeze without worrying the old spaghetti. This is a very good and sane plan and we can foresee no problems with juggling a million containers of frozen spaghetti.

Baxta posted:

The way they describe many of the issues they face really seems like encapsulation was never implemented. When they say they need massive amounts of time to produce a new component for a ship or add a shiny new hat to a commando, it really seems like most of these objects have been developed on the fly with no link to parent objects like Ship or Player.

Its really strange.

Terebus posted:

Haven't been following the thread in a while, what's the status of lawsuit development?

MostlyRandom posted:

in the halloween video by CI not G they show the character editor in action.

I was under the impression that they rewrote Cryengine

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KYu9je0IQdQ&t=563s

character tool is a default cryengine module. (lumberyards character editor is EmotionFX and animation editor)

Quavers posted:

Has PC gaming been saved yet?

Spatial posted:

The trick CIG tried to pull is pretty good.

Their engine is built on CryEngine. Lumberyard is too. Their common ancestry means if you go back far enough in time they are 100% identical. And Lumberyard is free. So to avoid giving Crytek anything, one day they decided that their development history which up until then was on top of CryEngine, was actually on top of Lumberyard the whole time, and that they're now developing in Lumberyard as a result and it's not CryEngine anymore. They try to make this look like a technical change by calling it an "engine switch" but it isn't. No code changed. What they're trying to change is their interpretation of the past.

You can see how this allows for a lot of bullshitting about what is actually being used and how it relates to whatever license they agreed to and that's the idea. They figured with this ambiguity they would slip out of their agreements with Crytek and they couldn't afford to fight it. That gambit hasn't quite gone to plan. Chris has an unfortunate history with breaches of contract so he might be getting a bit worried!

Zaphod42 posted:

This is the way of insanity and madness.

Tokamak posted:

All of histories biggest visionaries were told their ideas were mad. Who are you to suggest fibers won't work? Maybe in the future all computers will be made out of fibers. If you don't try, how will you succeed? Better get to work then.

quote:

"This is what happens when you work to changes things, first they think you're crazy, then they fight you, and then all of a sudden you change the engine"

S1rmunchalot posted:

I suggest you watch the Squadron 42 vertical slice with directors commentary, Chris answers two of the questions you mention in that video - Mirrors and NPC reactions. Invisible walls are not going to be a problem, never have been in Star Citizen even before procedural generation, it certainly won't be now. Coloured force barriers? Yeah.. we probably will have those. All the other things you mention - we tell them... 'Do better' and they do it because we are the ones they answer to.

Chris also talked about NPC's reactions to players not getting on with missions. The insubordination mechanic and ships brig will deal with that issue. Insubordination and incarceration means you failed that mission section. You will not be given multiple warnings, you are in the military, if you fail to do your duty in a timely manner then the military police will come and deal with you. Also events take place according to a timeline, once aboard ship time passes and you will have periods when you are 'off duty' to go and explore. It is not a case of .. you did one mission, go to next mission briefing immediately. You have to think of it more like an interactive movie, you will respond to events as they unfold.

Few players take on board how different Squadron 42 is going to be from standard single player games that have a multiplayer. In the Squadron 42 game you will be faced with choices to make about your character, once you have made those choices they are fixed for your character, you can't go back and make a different choice. This multi-part mission and branching structure is not new, that feature existed in Wing Commander and Freespace 1 and 2. Chris explained why the game cannot be multiplayer, YOU have to make the hard choices. Everything goes in your characters personal history log and you have the choice to take your war veteran character with his/her history into the PU or create a brand new character in the PU. PU NPC's can and will refer to your war history log and they will react to what that log tells them about what you did and the kind of character you are. Anyone who has not played Squadron 42 does not have this choice and will start in the PU as a civilian with no relevant history, there are differences between what a civilian can do in the PU and what a citizen can do. You can earn or buy citizenship in the PU but you cannot serve in the armed services, you cannot be ex-military unless you at least start Squadron 42. "Service Guarantees Citizenship". You can have your citizenship revoked by the UEE.

The only way to make different choices for your character in Squadron 42 is to create a new character slot and play the whole game again. You don't pay for the game, you pay for the right to create a unique character in the game universe and history.

During your service in Squadron 42 you will receive training on certain vehicles and equipment that only military personnel have access to. If you don't take your Squadron 42 character into the PU you will not be able to 'legally' use or operate those features. Chairman's Club Members above a certain level are gifted an F8C Lightning space superiority fighter in the PU, this is really two perks - a free ship you don't have to buy in the game, but also a license to own and operate that ship. Those who do not qualify for the Chairman's Club perk can buy the F8C Lightning in the PU for in game currency if they have reached that part of Squadron 42 that licenses them to have it legally. There will be other such 'carry-overs' from Squadron 42 such as military security clearances to enter restricted zones etc. As ex-military you can always be called back to service by the UEE and as such you will be expected to remain 'current' in all front-line procedures, vehicles and equipment. This is why the UEE allows civilian variants of front-line equipment.

You can repeat the combat sections of Squadron 42 in the EA simulator, it was designed as a military training simulator that became a game inside the game. Anything you do in the Sim Pod doesn't count in your Squadron 42 service log and they have talked about letting players co-op for the mission simulations. If you have access to Squadron 42, and you have completed the relevant missions, they will turn up for you in Arena Commander. Anyone who doesn't have Squadron 42 or hasn't completed those missions will not have access to them in Arena Commander.

Very few outside (or even inside the community) have any real idea how revolutionary Squadron 42 is going to be. There has never been a single player game so intimately connected to the multiplayer. Both games take place in the same universe, with some of the same characters, places and in-fiction lore/organisations. What you do in Squadron 42 will directly impact your experience of the multiplayer. The things that are in Squadron 42 such as the Spectrum Services and the Empire -advocacy, military and diplomatic corps with all it's structures and organisations will also be in the PU and they will know about your service history. The places that you go to in Squadron 42 will also be in the PU.

Your entry into the PU is after your tour of duty in all episodes of Squadron 42. There are 3 chapters that we know of but that doesn't mean that there can't be an unlimited amount of single player Squadron 42 type games that they can churn out in rapid succession after all the tools and assets are already built. How many World War 2 movies have you seen? Do they have to create brand new weapons, aircraft or uniforms for each? No it wouldn't fit the history to keep creating new ones would it? That whole WWII period was less than 8 years. That's how you have to think about the Vanduul War timeline, it is history written in stone from the perspective of our players entry into the Persistent Universe. The current mini-PU is pre-Vanduul War timeline. Go look at the wall of history in Hurston Dynamics - a major arms manufacturer who supplied the military during the Tevarin wars doesn't even mention the Vanduul War on it's marble walls. How likely is that if that war has already happened?

My advice would be stop trying to judge the Star Citizen project by what you see in other games or from other studios, it is absolutely nothing like what you have seen before.

We're not in competition with other games, we never have been. No-one ever said you could only ever own one PC game. You can draw comparisons between other games that try to do aspects of what Star Citizen is doing only by ignoring the true scope of what the project is doing overall. I've said this many times before, there will be games before Star Citizen and there will be games after Star Citizen.. just like there were gas lamps before electric lights, and horse poo poo covered every street before there was the internal combustion engine. There will be those who will go to other games forums and say.. Hey are you going to make your game like Star Citizen! and the answer will almost certainly be 'not for a very long time' because private investors would never pay for the R&D and creation of new tools that this community has - the head start we have given Cloud Imperium would cost a fortune for other companies to even catch up. If Cloud Imperium never sold another copy of the game after the game is released, they would still not be in debt to investors. Every copy sold after release is pure profit to pay for the next instalment.

What Chris wanted was the Best drat Space Combat Simulator, what we're getting is the Best drat Universe Simulator. We paid for the best both in dollars and patience. We paid for them to make the tools to allow us to do anything, and go anywhere with more realism than has ever been attempted before. We paid Cloud Imperium to do something no other game developer has ever done as well, listen to the customer - the gamer. If you think you're frustrations at the industries current games limitations are unknown to Chris Roberts then I wonder what you have been listening to, if you think that Chris Roberts doesn't want the absolute best for those who have given their trust to him then you really don't understand him or the community that supports him. Chris would never 'settle for' any limitation he didn't absolutely have to.

We supported the project to change the industries attitude to gamers. We've had years of them telling us we are fools to trust in the project, that it will never happen. Year by year, month by month we silence them, not because they can't keep coming out with such crap but because their jaws hang so slack now they can hardly speak, as each new major patch arrives the realisation hits them harder. You don't get the best by next Christmas, you get the best by having patience and perseverance. We had only 3 months money left.. 3 years ago.. didn't we? We'd never get procedural planets to land on, then we did. We'd never get a whole planet made of one city, then we did. You want to take bets on whether CI will get the AI or server meshing working based upon their history of proving every naysayer wrong? Good luck with that but remember if by some crazy event the doom merchants are correct..

...we ALL lose.

Other development companies, and the gaming press they support, really would prefer to see this project fail because they and the money men make no profit from it and yet they feel they have to compete with us. Do you know Chris Roberts is planning to go BIG with E-Sports for Star Citizen? New releases of content that can be churned out on a yearly basis for the next decade or so - clothing, artwork and toy franchises.. and no private investors get to put their grubby fingers in and dictate what the player gets, and when. 75% of all Star Wars revenue comes from franchise sales and licensing.

Revolutionary. It's what the Star Citizen community has always been about. Your list of current day game mechanic limitations is soon to be as anachronistic as gas lamps and saddle polish.

Ramadu posted:

chris roberts

Quavers posted:

Has PC gaming been saved yet?