I said come in! posted:What is the single player going to be like? In short: Wing Commander, with some outside the ship boarding/FPS missions thrown in, and online co-op play.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 27, 2014 20:49
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Jun 3, 2024 10:54 |
|
Eldragon posted:Mocking RSI forum mods maybe falls under "Importing RSI Forum Drama". At minimum, it does Goons no favors (Do you really think only goons can read this thread?). Confirmed: Eldragon is Ben Lesnick. But no, seriously, at this point, the less interaction anyone has with the RSI mods, the better, I think. On a thread-rules note: does the ship trading/buying/selling rule also apply to giving stuff away? If I recall, we had at least one contest going at the end of the last thread that never got resolved.
|
|
|
#
¿
Jan 27, 2014 22:04
|
|
Rastor posted:I'm curious how other goons voted in the joystick poll? I voted the same way, and supported a general-use Saitek-developed stick, though I'm honestly not sure how much different such a product would be from their latest offering, other than aesthetics. So long as the best control option doesn't end up being Xbox360 controllers, I'll be happy.
|
|
|
#
¿
Jan 28, 2014 00:07
|
|
Wee Tinkle Wand posted:For spacefighter games I have gone through a lot of control schemes from mouse+kb to simple joystick and HOTAS but finally after a long time ended up settling down with G13+Joystick. I don't use the throttle or base buttons on the joystick and instead the G13 joystick is my throttle with the 22 buttons on the g13 for all my various extra things like weapon switching and whatever else the game needs. This is why I really love my X52. With the three-mode switch and the pinky alt-trigger on it, I finally feel like I have more possible buttons than I need on my stick and throttle. I've managed to play X3 on it without needing to use the kb+mouse other than menus and such, and I think that's a decent benchmark for the max amount of controls one could reasonably expect to use in a space sim.
|
|
|
#
¿
Jan 28, 2014 00:32
|
|
|
Yeah, despite all their claims, I fully expect that in any game where KB+mouse is a viable control scheme, it will end up being the superior one. I just can't think of a situation where it works well, but not well enough for its accuracy to eclipse sticks in actual gameplay.
|
|
|
#
¿
Jan 28, 2014 16:28
|
|
Diran posted:Thanks for the info. I find the comment about zero-g interesting, it seems to imply that the flight model in the DFM will be very much an early version subject to much change, with such basic things as zero-g modelling still being worked on. A week or two ago, the main programmer working on the flight model was answering questions on the forums. Right now, they have a lot of the more advanced stuff like g-force modeling working, albeit in a basic state, but it's too data-heavy in the current implementation to be used with the standard netcode, so they've got it turned off for DFM testing until the real netcode is in or the system is more optimized.
|
|
|
#
¿
Jan 29, 2014 17:58
|
|
MoraleHazard posted:One thing I wonder if one can switch controllers depending on FPS vs. flight. I'm not sure I'd want to FPS w/ a joystick. Considering you can do this, right now, in the Hangar module with basically no actual input programming done whatsoever--I think it's a safe bet it will be possible.
|
|
|
#
¿
Jan 29, 2014 18:11
|
|
|
On the subject of control schemes, looks like holoKitten has been making some posts on the official forums this morning. Most interesting is their apparent take on the mouse+keyboard setup, which sounds sort of awkward and clunky for flight controls, to me: http://partedveil.com/index.php?p=1"e=1850618 quote:Currently the mouse control mode is neither of the methods you described. Pitch yaw and roll is all keyboard driven, while the mouse simulates your head/eyes. Since your class 2 and 4 mounts are tied to your eyes you get orientation control with the keys and weapon aim control with the mouse. This lets you easily track targets as they move around in relation to your fixed forward cockpit view. and on HOTAS setups: http://partedveil.com/index.php?p=1"e=1850727 quote:I'm happy to report that we are fully supporting HOTAS setups (I know, I did the X-65F default keybindings myself!) and that full newtonian control is at least as detailed as what you described, although I cant promise full analog control over every pitch and slide axis due to the limitations of the controller. Input mappings will be fully customize-able though so if you don't like the way I set up the default you'll be free to remap in any way you like
|
|
|
#
¿
Jan 29, 2014 19:19
|
|
Beer4TheBeerGod posted:It hasn't been done before because it's a terrible idea. The keyboard doesn't give you the precision needed to fly a craft, let alone the lack of enough DOF. And how will HOTAS players look around? I'm not sure if using a POV hat to move a targeting reticule would be doable or not. It doesn't seem like it would have the sort of precision necessary. Clearly, anyone without a full HOTAS + headtracking solution will be at a disadvantage. Pay to win, indeed.
|
|
|
#
¿
Jan 29, 2014 21:04
|
|
CLAM DOWN posted:I don't know about anyone else here, but I don't consider a game a real "sim"/"simulation" unless I can use at least 3 FlightMaster HOTASS 6000 XP joysticks complete with 3D throttle pumps in my military-grade cockpit with complete avionics in my mom's basement. You're in luck! That was part of the $4.5 million stretch goals. Overly Ambitious Project Manager posted:Extended hardcore flight sim controller support: Flight Chairs, multiple monitors, Track-IR, MFD (Multi Function Displays) and more on launch.
|
|
|
#
¿
Jan 30, 2014 03:45
|
|
Wee Tinkle Wand posted:I hope everyone is ready for EPISODE ONE OF THE NEXT GREAT STARSHIP on Friday. A lot of the stuff people had been posting looked really cool. Is there a full listing of all the teams that entered or anything out before the episode? I have no idea what we're actually expecting to see from this series. Is it going to be Star Citizen's version of a Bravo reality design show?
|
|
|
#
¿
Jan 30, 2014 04:00
|
|
Justin Tyme posted:If there isn't a control scheme similar to War Thunder I will be very sad. Forcing people to play with joysticks and trackir just to be able to effectively use all the features isn't very sound gameplay. Chris has been pretty adamant that they are going to make all control schemes viable. However, given how effective a mouse is in precision aiming compared to a joystick or gamepad, if you have a mouse bound flight system, it risks making alternative control schemes nonviable because the mouse is just that much better. It's not a matter of them only wanting hardcore joystick pilots at the expense of all others. They just don't want to give mouse players an unfair advantage and remove all choice in the matter. That probably means that the mouse controls will feel clunky compared to some of the smoother mouse space sims out there, but those sims aren't trying to make different controls balanced.
|
|
|
#
¿
Jan 30, 2014 06:10
|
|
Chronojam posted:I'm hoping crewing a larger ship is at least somewhat like playing a LAN game of Artemis. Navigation why aren't we movi-- Engineering, what the gently caress are you doing, turn the engines back on The best way to balance multiplayer ships is to make your allies the most difficult foes.
|
|
|
#
¿
Jan 30, 2014 20:29
|
|
CLAM DOWN posted:Yeah, those crazy Elite nutjobs paying $200 bucks for a space sim! Gotta save that sweet moolah for my Super Mary Sue upgrade pack!
|
|
|
#
¿
Jan 31, 2014 03:49
|
|
|
It seems pretty much like they've been forced to overhaul their development strategy completely as a result of their own success. The original small-shop extreme agile methods probably haven't scaled up as well as Chris would like to the new team sizes and complexity of simultaneous development, and the summit recently is more about realigning development efforts to fit the larger organization than anything else. Before, their development plan seemed more like Chris was heading up a very talented and motivated indie game studio and acting as lead developer as well. Now, they're being forced to actually become a real dev studio, and their production has dropped off quite a bit while they focus on the transition.
|
|
|
#
¿
Jan 31, 2014 06:23
|
|
|
So, it looks like TNGS is taking WMH's spot on Fridays, and WMH will be airing on Wednesdays starting next week. No new episode this week.
|
|
|
#
¿
Jan 31, 2014 17:44
|
|
In other news from the latest update, Banu Merchantman continues to outclass every other ship in style points. I hope the actual model ends up looking as good as the concept art does.
|
|
|
#
¿
Feb 5, 2014 02:21
|
|
Beer4TheBeerGod posted:The lack of new game content is a common complaint. I don't know what the gently caress is going on or why. In January we only got three new pieces of concept art. From maintaining the devs list for the tracker, it looks like, in addition to their growing pains in general, they've also had some turnover in art staff. Both -Starlight- and E1IJ4H left the staff, and they seemed to be the highest output concept artists, at least, so I assume they are struggling to even get back to their original productivity levels right now.
|
|
|
#
¿
Feb 6, 2014 16:23
|
|
Bootcha posted:If a solid date and time is nailed down, we'll probably have about 80% alpha-access login rate within the first hour. There's also a need to test the servers themselves, so I'd expect a simple login shell program that sends prepackaged junk to assault the various servers and see how they hold up. CRoberts is very adamant about the DFM launch going relatively smoothly as opposed to the clusterfuck of SimCity. Keep in mind, the planned server infrastructure is not what most PC games traditionally use. They are planning, from their vague descriptions about it so far, to use something that behaves much more like a modern content delivery network such as Netflix uses. That means they aren't going to be running their own traditional server farms and the like, but rather they have a service agreement with a provider that will dynamically allocate more server resources and essentially spin servers up and down as necessary to handle the load. Whether this system works at all like they have described or not with the massive loads they'll have is another story, but if it works correctly, there shouldn't be much of the traditional "we don't have enough server hardware! Quick, order more!" scramble that has come to be the norm for online launched.
|
|
|
#
¿
Feb 13, 2014 06:34
|
|
BitBasher posted:None of the special hulls can be upgraded to, they must be purchased separately in game as a whole ship. This goes for the SuperHornet, Aurora LN, and 350r. They have physically different hulls than the base models. Just wanted to point out that this isn't necessarily true. We already know of at least two instances where base hulls can be upgraded to special hulls with an in-game conversion kit item: the Idris-M kit, and more drastically, the Mil-spec Hornet kit. Both of these have been confirmed as available addons for the base hulls in-game that change the basic hull characteristics. There is no guarantee that we won't see similar kits to, say, upgrade a 300i to a 350R or an Aurora MR to an LN.
|
|
|
#
¿
Feb 18, 2014 20:00
|
|
DatonKallandor posted:Have they confirmed the Hornet Kit? There was a lot of confusion coming from the developer side about it being cosmetic only, not being cosmetic only, not bringing it up to full mil-spec after all (since they made it very clear at the start that you'd never be able to get a Military Spec Hornet except for the singleplayer campaign). They eventually confirmed it will be a cosmetic and stats change that will be a part of allowing you to build a near military spec Hornet, but you'll also need some additional gear that may not be readily available. The kit essentially just adds the slots you need and the fuselage, the actual gear isn't included.
|
|
|
#
¿
Feb 18, 2014 21:23
|
|
|
Watching the mining base stuff from WMH, it really shows what an art conundrum they've built for themselves. When you watch the detailed Hornet model flying by the first-pass level of detail concept for the base, the model work on the base looks so low-detail in comparison to the ship that it's almost painful to look at. They've got a hell of an art climb ahead of them.
|
|
|
#
¿
Feb 19, 2014 20:48
|
|
warcrimes posted:Yes, it's pretty much required viewing for the info whores among us. They seem to be sticking to the "less fluff, more stuff" self-mandate and the info/content seems to be flowing like spice now. With the good new info coming out, and the lack of horrid fan videos, I actually look forward to watching it for info now, instead of dreading having to sift through stupid poo poo in hopes that info might be put out. It's much more a production befitting a venture as ambitious as Star Citizen, now. Knowing how finicky Chris is about quality control of stuff put out to the public, I honestly wonder how the first year of episodes ever got his stamp of approval after seeing the new stuff.
|
|
|
#
¿
Feb 20, 2014 01:02
|
|
Zeike posted:
Given that the human ships will probably be of a similar scale to their Vanduul counterparts, the Retaliator may end up being a bit bigger than initially advertised, since it would likely correspond to the "Voids" bomber on this chart, which seems to be a significant portion of the Idris's size, not the ~1/3 in size the Retaliator is currently sitting at. Unless we can expect an even bigger, better bomber down the line, that is. Edit: Didn't even realize that the Idris size there is now listed as 240m, vice the currently listed 140m. If that is really the new size, and the Retaliator is comparable to the Voids in size as shown on this chart, it's basically the size of the old listed Idris size. Octopode fucked around with this message at 04:48 on Feb 20, 2014 |
|
|
#
¿
Feb 20, 2014 04:38
|
|
Beer4TheBeerGod posted:I'm just gonna hope that the massive turret looking thing on the front of the flagship is actually an Idris-sized gun. Idris-sized beam cannon.
|
|
|
#
¿
Feb 20, 2014 05:08
|
|
|
The letter was pretty clear that it's specifically for researching technology and building development resources for after the launch. Essentially, pre-funding the first major expansion to the PU, which includes atmospheric flight and ground exploration/combat. It's not really much of an expansion in scope, systems-wise, since all the pieces are generally there, they just rely on hand-built locations right now. It's more about finding a way to generate the content without overloading their already overloaded art teams. Gameplay wise, it seems like it's a decent longevity tool, since it expands the game horizontally. There's only so many new and different classes of spaceship you can go blow up and steal before you hit diminishing returns, gameplay-wise, but giving the option of taking those spaceships and supporting a planetary assault via bombing runs and dropshipping troops instead adds a lot more to the game, if they can do it well.
|
|
|
#
¿
Feb 21, 2014 21:52
|
|
Justin Tyme posted:How would procedural environments in an MMO even work? Correct me if I'm wrong but can something be "procedurally generated" for an entire multiplayer server? I thought that was the big advantage of the tech, that you didn't have to have canned level design or art assets and just let a formula generate the environment, wouldn't that mean planet LV-446 for one person would have slightly different mountain ranges than for another person? Procedural generation does not necessarily mean on-the-fly generation. It just means that it can be generated algorithmically, rather than being hand built. But that doesn't mean it can't be built on-the-fly and still be the same for everyone. If the algorithm is designed such that the same thing is built every time with the same inputs to the algorithm, then so long as each time a planet is generated, it is done using the same inputs, it would be the same for every player/visit. So, if properly designed, it can work just fine. Or they can just use it on the back end to generate everything beforehand, then load those assets onto the server.
|
|
|
#
¿
Feb 21, 2014 21:59
|
|
|
Theoretically, a properly designed procedural generation system also means that the universe could be basically infinite in scope. New jump points are randomly spawned by the universe to be discovered, and they essentially just take you to a new sector of space that has been completely procedurally generated, planets and all. No dev involvement really required at all for continual new content. Once systems are established and explored publicly for long enough, devs can step in and add things like colonies and space stations (or even have the servers do that automatically over time, if the system is robust enough.)
|
|
|
#
¿
Feb 21, 2014 22:15
|
|
Beer4TheBeerGod posted:TNGS is using the progress of the Mustang as their way of showing how ships are developed. So glad I picked up an LTI Aurora to convert to one of these.
|
|
|
#
¿
Feb 22, 2014 00:25
|
|
Barnsy posted:Wait, so for starter ships I can choose between this and the aurora? People who enjoy the comfort and security of flying a space minivan instead of a space muscle car. Edit: ^^^ Nope, the Aurora is RSI, this one is from a new manufacturer, Consolidated Outland.
|
|
|
#
¿
Feb 22, 2014 00:38
|
|
AP posted:The game has missed the promised first actual game content by months, there's plenty to worry about other than arguing about unknown features we aren't liable to see for two plus years. They pretty well demonstrated that they had a functional build that they could have released when promised, if they so chose. Acting like the delay is some evidence of the production having major problems is fairly disingenuous. I understand that "the game is vaporware" is a thing, for some reason, but there's a world of difference between "we can't get anything ready to release right now" and "we've made a production choice about the value of releasing now vs releasing later, and later makes more sense."
|
|
|
#
¿
Feb 23, 2014 00:25
|
|
AP posted:Read what I wrote again, it's a factual description of the events. Whereas you saying they pretty well demonstrated that they had a functional build is not, unless somehow "pretty well" means not in the slightest. Dogfighting may be awesome or terrible, that's yet to be determined and spinning a missed deadline strikes me as a waste of time. I'm honestly not certain if you completely missed the demonstration of the functional build of the dogfighting module, being played, multiplayer, live in December shortly after the delay announcement, or if, for some arbitrary reason, you don't believe that was actually a demonstration of a functional build.
|
|
|
#
¿
Feb 23, 2014 01:00
|
|
Doctor Zaius posted:Reading this thread it seems like a lot of people are imagining this game to be EVE 2, and I'm not really sure that that's the game being made here. Everything I've read about the game thus far makes it seem like a much smaller-scale experience than eve, from the battles to the economics, and while that's not a bad thing it does seem like SC is gonna be a rather different experience from EVE. The design vision for the persistent universe seems rather schizophrenic in this regard. They're planning for a massive, interconnected universe with dozens of systems containing millions of actors with dynamic, emergent gameplay, but their technology design goals seem to point to something more akin to small skirmish matches and the like in carefully curated instances. It's discordant, and I don't think we'll really see any firm design direction for the PU until the DFM is actually out and some of their isntancing tech work begins. Until they know that, they're really designing around a vision of a game, rather than what the game will actually be.
|
|
|
#
¿
Feb 23, 2014 05:10
|
|
rockopete posted:So the Idris corvette is slightly longer than the Javelin destroyer? Right... The scale for the Javelin is based entirely on the (not final) measurements of the Gladiator shown in the artwork for the destroyer over the landing bay hatch and then extrapolated from there to estimate the size of the ship by comparison. So, you've got several layers of guesses, assumptions, and artistic license going on, and it probably isn't anything near what the actual size will end up being.
|
|
|
#
¿
Feb 23, 2014 08:33
|
|
BULBASAUR posted:Oh this should just be some light reading materia I, too, enjoy applying naval doctrine based on a 2D plane centered around chokepoint control and widely recognized as irrelevant once battle moved into limited 3D spaces onto fake space combat tactics. If they're going to sperg, at least put some effort into it.
|
|
|
#
¿
Feb 25, 2014 23:20
|
|
|
New Poll Up: Do you want to give Christ Robots your money now, or later? https://robertsspaceindustries.com/comm-link/transmission/13598-Poll-Mustang-Sale E: In other news, it seems that the Brown Sea finally has a real moderator: https://forums.robertsspaceindustries.com/discussion/comment/2015238/#Comment_2015238 Octopode fucked around with this message at 00:29 on Feb 26, 2014 |
|
|
#
¿
Feb 26, 2014 00:23
|
|
Cheston posted:What's that bobbing webcam thing coming out through the rear door 35 seconds in? Is it supposed to scout out a boarding area? Does it do dubstep? That's the tractor beam turret, I believe.
|
|
|
#
¿
Feb 26, 2014 00:38
|
|
Isizzlehorn posted:Well, the patch for Oculist Rift support should be available now. Some impressions from any of you goons out there that have one would be cool, be as honest as possible. I guarantee 90% of opinions from the Brown Sea will sing praises and push as much hype as possible, which is completely useless. I want to know how long you can handle it before getting motion sick. That's the kind of poo poo nobody wants to bring up. They mentioned in WMH that they're not really rendering stuff properly yet, with actual stereoscopic rendering, but they're just using the postprocessing hack to split the images. That, alone, will probably mean that the experience right now isn't going to be representative of the final support. If the current implementation turns out to work well, I'll be super excited for the "real" implementation.
|
|
|
#
¿
Feb 26, 2014 20:49
|
|
Uba Stij posted:Yeah, I mean unless they plan to use global comms (which would just lead to people learning the patterns anyway) it's sort of pointless to have special call signs for this at all. Don't tell the US (and NATO allies') Navy that. We still steadfastly cling to a similar codeword system over a clear circuit, despite all the arguments against such a system. I fully believe this ridiculous system will survive to the era of pew pew spaceships, if for no other reason than it makes no goddamn sense to do so, and thus must be preserved in the name of tradition.
|
|
|
#
¿
Feb 27, 2014 04:25
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Jun 3, 2024 10:54 |
|
Pogue Mahoney posted:Do we know what will happen to our rare cloaks and hats when our character dies? Losing my space hats will seriously ruin the game for me. The respawn animation is actually a short animation showing your charred space fedora and other remains being turned over to your new character in a small box.
|
|
|
#
¿
Feb 28, 2014 20:00
|
|