|
What's all this nonsense about "epics" and "cards" anyway? Is standard game dev terminology or another CIG created obfuscating term?
TheBombPhilosopher fucked around with this message at 05:51 on Jun 20, 2020 |
#
?
Jun 20, 2020 05:42
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 6, 2024 10:03 |
|
|
TheBombPhilosopher posted:What's all this nonsense about "epics" and "cards" anyway? Is standard game dev terminology or another CIG created obfuscating term? Those are magic words. When your Agile Priest utters them, it increases fidelity.
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2020 05:53
|
|
|
Before CIG I'm not sure I've seen a company use version numbers and development terms to explain why they're not making a product and to obfuscate their progress. These things were created for the exact opposite purpose. Just another way CIG is breaking boundaries!
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2020 06:09
|
|
|
TheBombPhilosopher posted:What's all this nonsense about "epics" and "cards" anyway? Is standard game dev terminology or another CIG created obfuscating term? Agile development jargon.
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2020 06:13
|
|
|
TheBombPhilosopher posted:What's all this nonsense about "epics" and "cards" anyway? Is standard game dev terminology or another CIG created obfuscating term? It's just the way that work in software gets parceled out. Having cards and epics doesn't mean you know anything about project management any more than having a list of todo's in a google doc. It can be a handy way for someone to glance at a literal wall somewhere and see the state of a project at large- but only if you aren't constantly shoving cards into the backlog. If you do that, then it's just a shifting timeline window of whatever's on your team's mind. Here, take a short jaunt into the horrifying world of corporate thought: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jf0tlbt9lx0
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2020 06:16
|
|
|
The only thing you need for project scheduling is a Gantt Chart, all that other stuff is just excuses for why your project is behind schedule. So naturally CIG changes development scheduling systems every 6 months promising that this one is really gonna open up the pipelines.
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2020 07:25
|
|
|
Because it has the word space, star and citizen mentioned somewhere, I thought I'd mention that Shadow Empire has been released. It's a 4X game that I'm currently to scared to buy as I think it may take up to much of my time. https://www.matrixgames.com/game/shadow-empire NOTE: I am in no way affiliated with matrix games and receive no form of remuneration with respect to this game. However if you think you would like Star Citizen, please use this referral, STAR-WARS-SQUA-DRON-S.
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2020 07:29
|
|
|
G0RF posted:I cut out a part of “A Brief History of Time” with his test flight, talking about Chris and the power of believing in yourself. Wasn’t going to show the aftermath for obvious reasons, just the leap, but then decided it was a little too sad... You can tell looking at his body language that he knows it's not going to work and this will be his final farewell. Same with the parachute guy.
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2020 08:07
|
|
|
Dooguk posted:You can tell looking at his body language that he knows it's not going to work and this will be his final farewell. Yeah. Plus, everyone with any expertise or even common sense was telling him not to do it, that it would be a disastrous failure, that every element of his plan was flawed. Many even suggested other things he could try if he was serious about succeeding, but...he needed backers to give him money or he would have gone out of business entirely, so he just ignored them and went ahead anyway. The parachute guy had all of those things, too, but also the wind to deal with. So really, Star Citizen was less ambitious.
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2020 08:38
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2020 09:21
|
|
|
In other news: https://twitter.com/iBrews/status/1274021416770338817 I can't wait for that expensive web camera that is optimized for Star Citizen to come out. Or did they go bankrupt having put all their chips on Store Citizen?
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2020 09:23
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2020 09:55
|
|
|
Popete posted:The only thing you need for project scheduling is a Gantt Chart, all that other stuff is just excuses for why your project is behind schedule. I've not seen a Gantt chart in a great many years and I've delivered plenty of software projects. Gantt charts are just a great tool that project managers who still live in the 90s use in order to have an excuse to shout at inexperienced and incautious engineers because they didn't make the delivery deadlines the PMs made them estimate for before a single line of code was written. I imagine that dumbo places like banks and Bangalore-based, outsourcing hellfarms still use them for whatever Eisenhower-era cosplay passes for project management there.
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2020 10:02
|
|
|
The last few big EU projects, with multiple partners across EU, that I've been involved in (so up to 2017 or early 2018) had Gantt charts for planning the deliverables and fitting the project in the budgeted timeframe. Of course quite often there were a few deviations especially towards the end of the project, but certainly not in a monthly or semester basis, and it was a useful tool to go back to and reference for progress, current status and what's coming next. It's good for a project to have the end in sight, as well as everything leading up to it and making it possible (building blocks/ deliverables) or enhancing it (marketing/promotional stuff). The SC Gantt charts have been a joke since day one, and not even one of those had the actual release in sight. Not to mention they were a mess of entangled fuzzily described tasks, non-existent organization of goals and no real milestones other than "next patch". They're really for those backers who try to understand "game development" via CIG, and think, well that must be it then. Why else would they hire people to talk weekly about this poo poo on Youtube if they don't know their stuff? Why indeed.
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2020 10:16
|
|
|
Gantt charts are perfectly fine as long as you use them as a measurement tool, not a deadline generator. Just make each bar a feature, or whatever. As long as the work is visible and the tools adapt to the process, it doesn't really matter what you use. The constant willful misuse of agile terminology is the one thing in this disaster that genuinely annoys me.
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2020 10:20
|
|
|
I mean, they misuse all their terminology.
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2020 10:24
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2020 10:50
|
|
|
It's an alpha.
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2020 11:02
|
|
|
HorseBodyInspector posted:Amiga derailment Necroposting, but I really recommend watching Kim Justice's 4 part series on Peter Molyneux. The Godus part in particular in part 4 really highlights the cultist "How can it be a scam if they're making the game? " excuse. P A T H O L O G I C A L L I A R.
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2020 11:17
|
|
|
Peter Molyneux posted:“You know, I think you can either bury your head in the sand and say ‘I’ve got the way I am working and that’s that’s the way I’m going to work’, or you need to adapt and have your pulse on what’s happening in the rest of the world,” laughs Molyneux, unsurprised we’ve reached the topic so quickly. “I think promoting your games, or exposing your what your game’s going to be while it’s in development, that’s just not the world we’re in anymore. I think honestly it would have just been foolish for me to continue that.” Someone should tell Molyneux about Chris Roberts and the 300 million dollars he has made by doing the exact opposite. https://www.kotaku.co.uk/2019/02/11/peter-molyneux-still-isnt-hyping-his-new-games-except-the-next-one
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2020 12:43
|
|
|
Tippis posted:To clarify: Star Citizen does not have realistic physics. Ever. It has a control system that dynamically rewrites physics to generate a desired outcome based on input (as opposed to realistic system where the controls would generate an outcome based on physical effects on input). This is why vehicle mass doesn't matter: because it's the desired outcome that dictates what will happen, not the physical properties of your ship. here is a 21 page document the original physics programmer wrote up when he left. https://drive.google.com/file/d/1poxfPYfm32r84G4WWWJ6uK-rU6ijl85g/view
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2020 13:25
|
|
|
Mirificus posted:(Waterfall vs Agile stuff) See, this is exactly why SC fails. Because it shouldn't use Agile at all, or only for updates past release. Agile was meant for iterative releases with small team (say, Elite Dangerous during Horizons/Beyond; I bet even Odyssey is done via Waterfall or at least Waterfall-ish method). But Star Citizen should release in one big push - it was even said to do that in the initial stage. Doing it via Agile will just delay it and make sure nothing gets done, because it's too big. It should use some RUP with XP in the final phase (also known as crunch to an extent). But I guess you can't really do waterfall when you have 3 to 1 ration of programmers and artists. Then you can only do agile and give out appropriate - failing - results.
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2020 13:36
|
|
|
quote:The problem is we're now too close to October now so everything is being held back for Citizencon digital event. quote:You had no idea what you invested in at the time. You were gambling on an outcome that was in your imagination, as did the entire fanbase. quote:I mean I’m in my early thirties and haven’t gamed in a decade because I honestly lost all interest in it and this game hooked me right around the jump town days.
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2020 14:24
|
|
|
stinch posted:here is a 21 page document the original physics programmer wrote up when he left. Someone who actually played the game (I only every played arena commander for like 15 minutes during a free fly) correct me if I'm totally wrong, but IIRC he posted this after they introduced atmospheric flight, and shitizens latched on to this PDF saying "see, the whole thing is so advanced, that you won't even notice gravity, momentum or <waveshands>. It's an advanced AI that makes your ship seem like noclip, but there's millions lines of code behind it so it only seem like it's noclip to you, because everything is so advanced". And then goons played it and it was basically noclip. I assume I'm remembering it wrong...it's been such a long time...
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2020 14:25
|
|
|
stinch posted:here is a 21 page document the original physics programmer wrote up when he left. Thank you. The unimaginable horror lurks beneath the surface of this seemingly innocuous passage: (ex) CIG Senior Physics Programmer posted:My general rule is that all ship motion must be derived from forces, and that the properties of acceleration, velocity and position must all change smoothly and continuously over time. For example, I do not simply snap a ship’s velocity or position to the goal values unless they are near enough to the final value that this snap is imperceptible. I rely on the reaction control system to drive all values to their final goals over time. e: tuo posted:Someone who actually played the game (I only every played arena commander for like 15 minutes during a free fly) correct me if I'm totally wrong, but IIRC he posted this after they introduced atmospheric flight, and shitizens latched on to this PDF saying "see, the whole thing is so advanced, that you won't even notice gravity, momentum or <waveshands>. It's an advanced AI that makes your ship seem like noclip, but there's millions lines of code behind it to seem like it's noclip". And then goons played it and it was basically noclip. The problem is, of course, that if you abstract away all physics and reduce it to a single parameter, to the point where you have to rewrite “constants” to do so, what you end up with is something that — shockingly — seems wholly removed from anything related to actual physics. It's millions of lines of code to create a system that causes an underlying system behave the way it would if neither of the two systems existed. They do this all over the place, like with the “camera stabilisation” they had to add to get rid of head-bobbing: implement a pointlessly complicated animation and camera control system that makes the viewport bob around like a drunken pigeon on a pogo stick, and then implement a pointlessly complicated counter-acting system that pre-calculates that bob and moves the camera around to cancel it out. As opposed to, you know, not tying the camera to the animation to begin with and just not have any view bobbing to deal with. Tippis fucked around with this message at 14:36 on Jun 20, 2020 |
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2020 14:26
|
|
|
quote:CIG should have pulled off a scam like David Braben from that Elite poo poo game that gets plugged here by their snake marketing all the time. quote:not praising Braben for his bait and switch tactics is an instant ban on that fascist forum of white knights, so discussion is hard to imagine
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2020 14:29
|
|
|
They sound mad.
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2020 14:35
|
|
|
Tippis posted:Thank you. One of the best things about Star Citizen is watching this Sisyphean cycle play out with all of their gameplay mechanics.
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2020 15:11
|
|
|
Endie posted:I'm not white-knighting for a second: SC is hosed and doomed. But that looks like a perfectly normal (if over-complicated because super-imposed) set of burn-up charts, albeit not in any skin of Jira I've ever imagined existed. I suspect that they are full of lies because they're at the comfortable end of the spectrum for a very large project (bigger than I've ever run, obviously) and there are a couple of teams in there that badly need further help with their estimating, but if your mate needed to explain a burn-up chart to people working in software then the target audience must have been pretty fresh-faced young pups. We don’t use burn-ups anymore. They’re largely a justification tool rather than anything helpful, and there’s a question of how appropriate they are connected with whatever version of scrumban they’re attempting to use. That was produced for management.
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2020 15:24
|
|
|
ggangensis posted:My money is on: They won't. But even if they manage to put out decent flight physics it's all pretty meaningless when you crash to desktop every 20 minutes or fall through the floor. I don't play a ton of games, but when I do it's usually on some kind of console. Horizon was one of the games I actually beat. So that's saying something. Enjoy the ride! 
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2020 16:44
|
|
|
So a little nerdism here, but that design basically becomes a solid wall above a certain speed due to the turbulence created by each winglet interacting with winglets above and below. I imagine its first attempt ended with a large section bending backwards and breaking. So a perfect example for CIG!
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2020 16:53
|
|
|
Mirificus posted:
Imagine skipping over the best decade of gaming and then thinking that Star Citizen is the peak.
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2020 17:27
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2020 18:16
|
|
|
Endie posted:I've not seen a Gantt chart in a great many years and I've delivered plenty of software projects. Gantt charts are just a great tool that project managers who still live in the 90s use in order to have an excuse to shout at inexperienced and incautious engineers because they didn't make the delivery deadlines the PMs made them estimate for before a single line of code was written. This post is like an arrow to my knee.
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2020 18:19
|
|
|
tuo posted:Someone who actually played the game (I only every played arena commander for like 15 minutes during a free fly) correct me if I'm totally wrong, but IIRC he posted this after they introduced atmospheric flight, and shitizens latched on to this PDF saying "see, the whole thing is so advanced, that you won't even notice gravity, momentum or <waveshands>. It's an advanced AI that makes your ship seem like noclip, but there's millions lines of code behind it so it only seem like it's noclip to you, because everything is so advanced". And then goons played it and it was basically noclip. This sort of occurrence is generally a handful of failure options. Somebody massively over engineered something that some further down the road is going to refactor into what it should have originally been, due to losing sight of the original goal along the way. Or somebody missed some targeted goal/expected result. This is where good communication and clear expectations come in handy. Cig seems like both of these options are up their alley.
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2020 18:26
|
|
|
tuo posted:Someone who actually played the game (I only every played arena commander for like 15 minutes during a free fly) correct me if I'm totally wrong, but IIRC he posted this after they introduced atmospheric flight, and shitizens latched on to this PDF saying "see, the whole thing is so advanced, that you won't even notice gravity, momentum or <waveshands>. It's an advanced AI that makes your ship seem like noclip, but there's millions lines of code behind it so it only seem like it's noclip to you, because everything is so advanced". And then goons played it and it was basically noclip. I kind of remember a similar thing, but someone who plays the game in its current state could verify. My memory is that he wrote this, but then left, and the whole system was again scraped / "refactored (ugh)"
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2020 20:05
|
|
|
Hav posted:We don’t use burn-ups anymore. They’re largely a justification tool rather than anything helpful, and there’s a question of how appropriate they are connected with whatever version of scrumban they’re attempting to use. We generally don't use burn-ups, either, although one super-keen roundhead engineering manager colleague clings to them for some dark purpose of his own. But the chart that was posted was one. I wasn't proselytizing for the chart, its maker (just some random fanboy, I believe, but God knows I'm not paid enough to read every post in this thread in forensic detail) or its intent, just mentioning that anyone who needs the cited best-part-of-an-hour of explanation for one isn't really the proper audience for it, anyway. Endie fucked around with this message at 22:02 on Jun 20, 2020 |
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2020 21:59
|
|
|
Jesus, there's plenty of goofy poo poo to parody SC with, without using a film of someone actually dying.
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2020 22:18
|
|
|
Jonny Shiloh posted:Jesus, there's plenty of goofy poo poo to parody SC with, without using a film of someone actually dying. I dunno, we’ve definitely had a ton of 9/11 parodies with Chris at the controls, it’s not like you’re actually watching him gasp his last breath.
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2020 22:35
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 6, 2024 10:03 |
|
|
Torquemada posted:I dunno, we’ve definitely had a ton of 9/11 parodies with Chris at the controls, it’s not like you’re actually watching him gasp his last breath. Yuck.
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2020 22:38
|
|