Kelp Me! posted:

It's one of the most blatant "pot calling the kettle black" situations I've ever seen is what it is.

A good therapist would probably have a field day analyzing why Derek Smart is so transparently obsessed with mocking and shaming someone else for doing basically the exact same thing he did like a decade ago

El Grillo posted:

So I haven't really be following in the past month or so, has CIG actually made an announcement about the delay in release of 3.0, or do to they just keep pushing it back week-on-week with their schedule updates??

The transitions aren't seemless and they come before both of the clips you've linked here - you have a loading period where everything freezes and you then drop out of orbital flight.
Although maybe they've shortened the loading screens? I haven't played for months (due to the standard problem of there being a lack of game)

G0RF posted:

Thank you!

The existence or absence of Stanton's star (a dwarf G) from 3.0 is unclear to me, from what I've read. That was probably the chart detail I was least certain about.

I consider a star properly in the system if it can be physically approached in space, as opposed to being an inaccessible, static light source.

I don't assume it is, but perhaps I'm wrong about this. If it can be approached (and presumably blow up your ship if you get too close) then that would meet the minimum requirement for me and I'd definitely correct it. I want this to be an honest depiction of their plans.

Combat Theory posted:

Talking about women in computer science, I'm sure some of you already knew the story of Margaret Hamilton, but for those who don't, she was the programmer for the Apollo guidance computer. Here's a picture of her with the printed out source code that she wrote for it.

Combat Theory posted:

Titanic, I think it was C-Bag who asked me about my thoughts on Derek and I mentioned there that actually the strongest argument against cig is the game on people's computers. That has been the case for the better of 2 years now (since the introduction of the PU, the gameplay quality has been in a constant downward spiral). I mean I looked through this thread for many months from the outside and I think what sticked to most people is the videos of pgabz doing basic stuff in the PU that looks absolutely hilarious already because the game design and code execution are so bad.

Now imagine you don't just scratch the the surface of the game but you actually go in and analyze the whole behavior, networking and game stats with payoff for pvp in mind. You find absolutely horrible poo poo. And you don't need a big happening to expose that. It's on people's computers the moment they download the game. There are so many horror stories to be told I think I deliberately forgot half of them.

But just let me make an example shall I? One of my favorite issues, the desync

Star citizen uses a technique called spline based prediction, which means that for the movement of other ships over network, your client uses additional information like speed, acceleration and even jerk (the change of acceleration over time) to interpolate or predict the movement between networking updates. If you know the flight parameters of the ship (another great story of cig hose ups by the way) and the refresh rate of the network updates, you can calculate the worst case positional desync for a given ping.

Let's say you play international with 200ms of ping. After some mechanical mumbo jumbo you reach a positional desync max of 15 centimeters for an agile fighter.

Sounds pretty good honestly, especially considered that this desync is a singular event and despite any ping can be held at zero as long as the player on the other end doesn't change his flight inputs.

But not for cig.

Fidelity first in mind, cig introduced a time buffer into the prediction code. This time buffer allocates a certain amount of movement lag between the physical ship and it's visual representation. It intentionally desyncs the visual ship from the actual combat code so to speak. All for havin the fidelity of smooth movement on your client.

This comes with huge tradeoffs. Their entire combat model is now desynced from the visual happening by a distance of speed*time buffer. Usually between 20-70 meters.

That means their entire procedual damage model (which is shader based on the ship model), their targeting solutions, their hit registration and hit recognition, their entire combat model... Is off by a ridiculous amount. Stuff like the damage model or explosive projectiles which use check physics with either three visual or the physical model simply refuse to work. You can't use explosive projectiles in multiplayer. The damage model doesn't display in multiplayer. And it has been that way since late 2015.

This is the water on the Mills of us who say the game is doomed. Much more than any dubious happening behind the scenes. Everyone can see this. Everyone can experience this.

Combat Theory posted:

So people seemed to like the technical story about the desync, good thing I got more of those.

Let me tell you about missiles shall I?

In most games, missiles are rather simple constructs since you have to factor in the possibility that players will spam them when their supplies are full. Generally the more realistic a simulation gets, the more complexity you also find in the missiles. All the way up to for example a DCS where the missiles are pretty much equal in simulation depth to the planes itself. The game can afford that because even in a harsh engagement, missile use is complex and you won't find 2 digit numbers of them in air usually.

Cig, visionary company, again thought it would be mighty cool to inject high complexity missile simulation into what's basically intended as an arcade combat design (this isn't a judgement, it's just a design philosophy)

Now before we go into the details of how they screwed it all up, please take the time and go Google star citizen DB and check out just how much crap gets calculated for a single missile launch and engagement

Here I just copy pasted the headers of the component data that a missile inherits in star citizen

code:

local name	name	category	class	type	subtype	manufacturer	size	mass	hp	price
	damage physical (hp)	damage cluster (hp)	explosion radius (m)	lifetime (s)	max range (m)
	signal type	guidance type	tracking distance (m)	angle (°)	ignition time (s)	
intercept accel main (m/s²)	intercept accel mav (/s²)	intercept accel rotation (/s²)
	intercept speed angular (°/s)	terminal accel main (m/s²)	terminal accel mav (/s²)
	terminal accel rotation 
(/s²)	terminal speed angular (°/s)	boost accel main (m/s²)	boost accel mav (/s²)	boost accel rotation (/s²)
	boost speed angular (°/s)	accel cost linear (fuel)	accel cost angular (fuel)	fuel terminal time (s)	signal
 minimum	signal maximum	signal amp seeking	noise amp	no lock timeout (s)	
cluster missiles	
cluster count (missiles)	trigger distance (m)	trigger angle (°)	eject speed (m/s)

As you can see from these data headers, missiles are fully simulated IFCS objects, which means they have a complex multi order flight model instead of a simple speed and direction one.

Now I said before hit detection and hit recognition are all client side. This doesn't go for missiles. Missiles are essentially AI ships and they are server controlled.
Now remember the servers already piss themselves with the least bit of load from single digit client numbers (10 people on server becomes a hindrance to good gameplay already) and now you have ships like the gladiator which can fire 8 missiles in short order, or the constellation with over 20 missiles.

But not enough. This is still not completely horrible. For that we need the cig factor.


Goons and goonettes, I present you, the rattler missile.



Gaze your eyes upon Roberts wet dream from wing commander times. A missile that fires 8 other missiles. And it's the best missile in game to and comes with a hardpoint size that almost any ship can carry.


Now imagine 2 people fire 2 missiles at each other. That's suddenly 32 physics enables ifcs controlled warheads on a server that's on last inch life support already. Absolute carnage.

You wanna know why you don't see people rattler spamming anymore nowadays? Because this poo poo has been Un touched for almost a year. Cig knew about this just as long as well. Just nobody did anything about it. So even the numbest missile spammer couldn't keep a straight face anymore after bringing the server down a fith time a night after all these months. The problem so to speak, has been solved by not touching it for so long that everybody just stopped playing.

Oh and guess what Roberts decided to put into 2.6?




Missile pickups...

spacetoaster posted:

BOOTCHA!! WERE IS OUR 25 PAGES OF STUFF?!?!?!

ManofManyAliases posted:

-We're going to see 3.0 release much earlier than "mid-year."
-SQ42 will, at the very least, have a level (or few levels) drop this year. Though, I'm optimistic for a full release before end-of-year.
-Certain evocati will begin testing 3.0 very, very soon.

Quote the poo poo out of this if you want.

Sarsapariller posted:

Well apparently not for everyone.


I also kickstarted The Mandate.

thatguy posted:

When that stream was happening and we were all in Discord someone kept posting cropped pictures of random portions of Ben and I was literally crying with laughter. I still don't know why I found it so funny. It was probably all the drugs and alcohol.

Beet Wagon posted:

SomethingJones posted:

Hello everyone


Gamescom 2017 Interview
GameStarDE & Christopher Robins
PART ONE

25 Aug 2017
https://www.twitch.tv/videos/169412267?t=47m32s


Q
How much longer will we have to wait [for Squadron 42] ?

CR
Well ya have to wait a little bit longer ah... I mean it's going, it's going really well aah, we're not showing it here at Gamescon, aah... because... I... for me I want to have it at a... certain level of uh... POLISH and um, so... we're working at get... getting it there but, ah, there's a lot of the STUFF that we actually we show in our uh, UPDATES on ATV and a lot of... some of the STUFF in three point zero is specific STUFF that is ah, ENABLING and being used for um, Squadron 42 and in fact some of the STUFF that we, ahm, you know, introduced like the PLANETARY TECH, ehm, we also put into Squadron Um Forty Two, so there are, there is, you know... case... is when you... go down on like a MOON or a PLANET and it's something like that, so...

... ahm, but no, it's going... it's going very well, it's just... a huge amount of uh... HIGH QUALITY AAH PERFORMANCE AAH... and motion capture aah... DATA aah... that we're bringing in and making sure that ahm... when the characters are moving around that they look really great and really fluid, going between like AI pathing like from one location to another... you know... merging into like... scenes that we shot with the characters so we're... we're really trying to... make you feel like you're part of the story and feel like you're hanging out with AI you know just running around and ehm...

... I think it's gunna be really great, uhm-I'm-uh-eh-did... it's... it's ahm... s'gunna be... worth... the wait lemme put it that way




Q
Is there one specific feature right now in the alpha 3.0 that you are especially proud of?

CR
Well I... well I mean the planetary tech... so this is gunna be the first time that the community, ah, can go, and... and LAND on... in the case of Three Zero, mooooons, or in the case of this asteroid planetoid, they're FULLY REALISED, every inch of 'em you can move around and explore and you can cir-cum-nav-i-gate the entire conference (sic) of the moon if you wanted to, ah, and... ah.. it's ah.. you know... the amount of additional playable area that comes into the game now compared to what was in say two point six three, aah it's HUGE and how much the game is gunna OPEN UP cos we're introducing the planetary tech compared to what we were thinking we would have in the game... before...it uh... ah, you know... we sort of made the BREAKTHROUGH so to speak... uhhh... i-it's really exciting, there's a lot of gameplay that's gunna come out of it, it's one of the reasons why maybe things are taking a lot longer than... uhm... you know... SOME OF US... or you know... I'd like to... things move faster too... ah... would LIKE... ahh... but... once we've sort of opened up the potential of these planets we... because of the sort of DETAIL and the FIDELITY we're going for, we also need to make sure that there's... STUFF TO DO ON THE PLANETS

... and uh, you know... we are.. focused on STUFF, we're not just creating the planets but also creating, sort of... ah... SYSTEMS that will uh... allow the... whether it's... ah... you know... ECO SYSTEMS or uh... FLORA or FAUNA... aah... that... you know... MAKE IT ALIVE or THINGS TO DO ON IT or you need to sort of uh.. PROCEDURALLY YOU KNOW... create... little uh, OUTPOSTS or TOWNS or VILLAGES beyond the central landing zones, cos you know, the original version of STAR CITIZEN we were aiming to be a bit more like PRIVATEER or FREELANCER were we had indvidual sort of BEE SPOKE landing zones but you couldn't explore the planet, you would essentially be in ORBIT around the planet and you would have a LANDING and we would have a CINEMATIC that would transition you down and then you were, you know, essentially moving round a small limited FPS area were you could go to a SHOP and BUY THINGS and go to a BAR and TALK TO PEOPLE and get a MISSION...

...aahhh... you know... get your SHIP REPAIRED GO BACK TO SPACE so...

ahh, you know NOW we have WHOLE WORLDS OPENED UP TO YOU so the amount of ah, potential for exploration, long term in the game, and for players to do THINGS, for instance, you know, maybe... CREATE THEIR OWN LITTLE BASE or their own little SETTLEMENT on a moon or you know a planet that no one else has sort of gone to that particular area is... is... HUGE...

...so the gameplay potential is amazing, we're only just seeing the very very very beginnings of it in three point zero and I'm really excited, ahm, as we start to roll out more STUFF for three point one and beyond.




Q
Will there be anything on Friday, maybe a small teaser [of Squadron 42] ?

CR
Ah, no, no, not at Gamescon.




Q
What's the big part that is actually missing and preventing you from finishing Squadron 42? What's holding it back?

CR
Ah, well I mean the... the... the... the big part is kind of what I was talking about before which is sort of... aah... trying... we... we very much want to get the quality of the animation and how the AI move around to be the equivalent to what you see sort of in like pre-rendered cinematics... cos we spent all this time shooting with these amazing actors... we spent about A HUNDRED... just over a HUNDRED DAYS doing PERFORMANCE CAPTURE and that's a MASSIVE amount of time to shoot so, for instance, most big-event movies are $150 to $200 million, they usually don't shoot for more than a hundred days, so... they shoot maybe 80 days, 90 days, ahm... and ah... so... for the amount that we have there, we have all these great performances so it's a vast amount of performance data and animation and motion, ah... and STORY... ah, we really want to make sure it comes across so when you're playing the game and you're moving around in it you're... they're... talking to you, you know, OLD MAN who is played by MARK HAMILL or, ah, you know, the various other characters that you're, uh, playing, uh, the game... like alongside with...

... because you're in... you're basically inside this MOVIE as opposed to sort of... you know the WING COMMANDER 3 and the WING COMMANDER 4 was sort of... you... you... you were like the STUNTMAN flying the ship, you got on the back of the ship, you would see what MARK HAMILL did and you would say, "No! Go... sort of... take this choice or this choice!", and, well in this case it's YOU and you happen to be the LEAD STAR in the MOVIE...

... so getting that to be the fluidity that we want, uh, because it's a huge story, ah, and dialling that in, ahm... is... you know, has been taking a BIT LONGER than we ANTICIPATED...




Q
So what you're saying is the other parts, for example the missions and stuff like that, they are further along?

CR
Well yeah, no... no we have... we don't... we... we... well we... we've... you know we've still... we're still working on, uhm... say, the final like ASSETS AND STUFF but we've blocked out all the MISSIONS and chapter... what we call CHAPTERS... we have these CHAPTERS

...uh, that each one would sort of be the equivalent of... you know, several missions in ah, say a WING COMMANDER because they would be sort of... LINK...




You can already play those missions from start to finish?

CR
Well so, so YES... we haven't BLOCKED what you... what you... what you would call sort of DESIGNER... somewhere between white and grey boxes and levels we're going to take to a more finished state but we're taking ah, certain ones... we're taking, so for instance we were talking about showing, ah, a sequence last year that was, ah, you know ONE SECTION of the story that we were gunna take to a finished level... and you know we're still basically doing that, we're in production on all of them... um... we, you know... we'll be showing some things at some point... ah, just it's not gunna be at Gamescon and I would hate to make promises because, ah, you know, last year I said, "well we're planning to show, uh, ah, uh... you know... a... a... piece of some Squadron 42 gameplay" and then we ended up not getting it to the point where we were happy with... but we didn't show it and everyone was very UPSET and ah, I felt kinda BAD because, one, we also showed some amazing stuff on the planetary tech... Homestead and all the sort of the next level of what the planetary tech was like and...

... that was actually like, in my mind, really great stuff, but... it was sort of... partly the HIGH of that was... was AFFECTED by the, uh... the fact that we didn't show Squadron 42. But no, you know I mean, I would say it's sort of the ANIMATIONS and the AI because we're going for a level of AI that you don't normally have so we want... ah... you know... when you're on, say... the ship you're serving on, at the beginning of the game it's the STANTON which is an IDRIS CORVETTE, you know all the crew have their full, you know... they have a SCHEDULE, they get up in the morning they EAT BREAKFAST, they go about their JOB, you know they go GET LUNCH, go back to their JOB...

... have CHIT-CHAT over DINNER, maybe UNWIND...

... then go back to SLEEP...

You know, there's a whole SCHEDULE and CYCLE and they're... so we... it's almost... like a level of sort of SIMS SIMULATION FOR THE AI, we're also using that... the planet's using that for the PERSISTENT UNIVERSE and uh... so just DIALING THAT IN WELL, ah, getting that WORKING, so that's the SUBSUMPTION SYSTEM which we're making GREAT PROGRESS ON so it's in three point zero... all the missions run on subsumption... now all in Squadron, everything runs in subsumption whereas before it wasn't, it was using sort of an older CryEngine system.

So just getting all that in, getting that all up to the level, and making sure that it's ah... you know... PERFORMING WELL and LOOKING GREAT... DIALED IN to look as great or better than anything else... which is what it's going to do... it's just taking some time unfortunately.




Q
What is the best way to experience Star Citizen? Are you going to play it on one monitor or two? With a gamepad? With keyboard & mouse? Is it for joystick? What is your personal preference?

CR
Ah. Aaaaahhhh. That's... ehm... kinda hard to qua... I mean we basically build the game and support the game for everything so... whether it's... joystick, ahm... you know, gamepad... ah, keyboard mouse... ah, and they all have sort of pros and cons it's sorta hard to say, I mean obviously for running around on foot and sort of the FPS stuff, um, keyboard mouse is probably the best

Ah, for flying I'd say that joystick, I mean I know there's some people that feel like the MOUSE FLY is too easy and it gives people an edge but... I... I mean, I'll just say that, like, when we do STUFF when we're trying to fly stuff around, so for instance we were, ah, you know... ah, in the PRESS we were sort of showing a preview of what we'll do on FRIDAY and I'm hoping people will like what we show... ah, so I don't really wanna spoil it, it's pretty cool, ah... but it would definitely have been better to have a joystick, ah, for the, ah, you know... so we had... a sort of mix of... of PR PEOPLE PLAYING and sort of, some were playing HOE TAS and some were playing MOUSE AND KEYBOARD... some of the things were easier to do with the KEYBOARD than they were with MOUSE... ahm, so for me, ah... I would say, ah...

...you know I HAVEN'T SET IT UP YET but ah... um... my... a nice little wide monitor, you know, the one that's kinda sort of... 4k across, one of the curved ones... ah, and then uhm... you know... I tend to sort of ah, switch between a HOE TAS and a mouse... a keyboard... a mouse keyboard for running around doing stuff, HOE TAS for the flight stuff.

Dark Off posted:

https://forums.somethingawful.com/showthread.php?threadid=3748466&userid=33425&perpage=40&pagenumber=34#post465359145

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vUHUW_magpU&t=11244s



unfixed since citizencon





pop in's

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vUHUW_magpU&t=13399s room system doesnt work you can still skip airlocking

ramp kill count 5
1:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vUHUW_magpU&t=11586s
2:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vUHUW_magpU&t=11695s
3:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vUHUW_magpU&t=11723s
4:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vUHUW_magpU&t=11743s
5:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vUHUW_magpU&t=11766s

G0RF posted:

I'm behind but thank you for the reminder, AP -- I've been sampling the deluge of post-show reactions but somehow I forgot the Relay gang. Any Relay episode that has Erris saying "this is bad" inside the first 90 seconds is one I will make time for.

Combat Theory posted:

Soooooooooo after the most legendary "catched up with the thread" struggle of ages, I have finally returned, hello friends.

What I should post first has been quite an interesting question, but luckily it was answered for me with yesterday's presentation disaster.

I won't post about how the idris looks like a joke even compared to the morrow tour, I won't post about "The ramp" and I won't post about the atmospheric flight being an abomination that everyone with a bit of understanding of high school physics could have seen long ago when calculating the acceleration reserves of the ships.

I won't even post about the hilarious face cap technology that will never work over networking...

What I decided to comment on is much smaller and much more telling about CIGs way of thinking in my opinion. The buggy. Well not exactly buggy but that 6 wheeled Apc they archered from Alien 2.

We all know that cry engine has a class for vehicles with okay-ish functionality. Indeed they used that for the grey cat for example (that buggy thing for the hangar)
But that's not what the APC or any of the levitation vehicles run on.

Now before we go into what these new fidelitious star citizen vehicles run on, we should go into how stuff like wheeled or tracked vehicles actually work and how they are simulated in video games. Because that's quite the ample topic with many possible handwaving I'll just break it down to the absolute core. The MVP for driving so to speak. That's the chassis and suspension technology. No matter if you use engines, rockets, muscle force or horses, the suspension and chassis setup and/or its simulation is the critical factor for driving behavior in real life and accuracy of a simulated system in virtual worlds.

In real life, a chassis is a volumetric elastic body with varying mass and varying center of gravity. In real life, suspensions are made of several linear and non linear elastic components, all with non linear dampening characteristics. Depending on the suspension type, you have a non linear varying roll axis, pitch axis and yaw axis, as well as non linear movement of the wheel, resulting in changes of camber, caster and the like.We can simulate them to a highly accurate degree virtually, but that takes days of calculations for a single second of run time.

In video games and especially racing simulations, a few general short cuts are taken.

The chassis is at least a volumetric rigid body with a set mass.

The suspension per wheel is an ideal spring and dampener at least. The suspension geometry is rigid. There is almost always a change of camber and caster and they often influence the force that can be transmitted by the tire. Most games, even simple driving models, simulate anti roll bars. All simulate pitch and roll of the chassis as a result of the mechanical forces on the elastic suspension during dynamic driving.

In short, although a simpler mechanic, all driving simulations from GTA over flat out to asetto corsa have in common that they use a mechanical model with clearly defined mechanical parameters and apply forces to it to simulate a realistic behavior of the chassis under dynamic driving. The behavior here is the result of the mechanics. This is important.

Now for star citizen.
As I said cry engine has a little package for simple vehicles like the grey cat which is a rudimentary mechanical driving model. But the apc had nothing to do with it. What the apc does is it completely splits the chassis from the wheels. The chassis runs on it's own behavior and the wheels have an independent code to "look like they guide it on the surface"
This becomes very clear when you look at what the chassis does when the vehicle runs over an obstacle for example. It does something no chassis of a wheeled vehicle ever does in real life or simulation. It stays still. There is a ton more indicators for this lack of actual mechanical connection between the wheels and the chassis too, like the lack of harmonics, the lack of feedback into the chassis etc. But the most telling thing is really that the chassis doesn't care if a wheel is fully compressing it's suspension.

I asked myself what would result in such behavior and what keeps the chassis in it's vertical position and the answer is as disappointing as funny. It's the same IFCS monstrosity that keeps the ships and the hover vehicles going.

IFCS is a strictly high order system. This means it doesn't care for details like mechanical parameters. You tell the ifcs "how something moves" not what keeps it moving that way. This means the entire mechanical simulation is floating. It's parameters don't matter. What matters is how you envision something to look like and the IFCS will use whatever it has available to achieve that movement pattern. This means that a spring might force 10 kilonewton between its ends at a certain compression, but when it gets compressed more it suddenly goes down to 0.1 kilonewton. This behavior is impossible for a spring, it goes against what a mechanical spring would ever do. But it is what the IFCS tells the spring to do in order to achieve a certain movement pattern.
This focus on the movement instead of mechanics is very similar to how a drone like a quadrocopter works, or a robotic arm. This kind of aproach to a full on vehicle simulation though, apart from the very strictly limited realm of zero G spaceflight, will always result in nightmarish and unsatisfying driving and flight behavior.

This use of a high order IFCS system is why the chassis doesn't give anything about the position of the individual wheel. And this is why the Rover can just gtfo into low earth orbit occasionally like the nox does when something goes haywire.

But you have to understand what this means for a gameplay versus cinematic design side. For gameplay, this is disastrous. It means that the player is unabled to predict what a vehicle is gonna do because we humans don't have a feeling for movement parameters, we have a feeling for repeatable mechanics. At the same time it's a blessing to the cinematics, because you can now go and tell a live simulation of a vehicle "how to look like" instead of going the route of actually finding a mechanical tune to support that visual appeal (which is likely impossible, because what looks good usually doesn't drive good) and now that you read this about the vehicle suspension, you should all take a good look at the ships landing gear too.

This whole train of thought behind this system, the tons of work that must have went into it and the horror that this system made it through a whole 400+ employees company without anyone of the "experienced game designers" asking "why the gently caress are we doing this instead of using something that works guaranteed and is easy to do" is what's the most telling about this whole project.

Potato Salad posted:

Hey, does anyone have a link to a recording of Derek's Discord channel during the Gamescom 2017 Star Citizen demo?

Dark Off posted:

https://www.dropbox.com/s/rj4ca3ovecjvh90/discord%20recording.mp3?dl=0
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B6SB-B1cyoLbY3gxTWI2bU5FUjA/view?usp=sharing backup
here is the recording of discord voice chat, unfortunately i forgot to record my own voice. It causes some long pauses during the recording. i ran out of phone battery so i lost last half hour on that recording
basically its a alpha 3.0 recording

15min show start
3h 25min aftershow chat starts

Jobbo_Fett posted:

You don't have messages, but I got a cert for you.

Mne nravitsya posted:

No it doesn't. If you want to make your dreams, go start your own independent company. Look at all the indie games that are successful. Your can have your creativity (and there is some great stuff out there) and make a living off it. But, If you want to work in the big machines of the 150+ million dollar AAA business: You start as a cog, because the machine is huge. I might seem a bit blunt and jaded, but part of that comes from exactly what you are all so upset about : Many of us have tried to change things a few times in our industry careers, and many of us were either punished, branded as malcontents, blackballed, or found unemployment on the other end. Even worse is when you do make a change that makes the team better and people are happier, then the game you make fails to meet projections, and you are all let go. Then, sadly, the magic of what was changing is now lost and scattered - while you go to the next company to work, and they tell you that "This is how we do it here: there's your desk"

Edit: And for Foo Didley: I'll give it a rest.

Ramadu posted:

ah cmon. how can you say all that junk about aaa games and then say you never played or bought them and just looked for a couple minutes on youtube.

thats ridiculous hyperbole

Breetai posted:

No poo poo: the dev diaries that Factorio does are hands-down some of the best forms of REAL open development I've ever seen. They talk about achievable goals in real terms, and when talking about bugs, blockers, and technological challenges they provide excellent detail and give it in easily digestible terms even for a layman, but without sounding dumbed down.

Read this:

That's just one dev diary, but I can recommend reading through a bunch of them to see how clear they are being with their approach to dev. Even if you don't want to click, check this out:



lLook at these motherfuckers who actually clearly know what they're doing.

Maldoror posted:

what is wrong with the kitty

peter gabriel posted:

CIG are in a unique position where they spend half a decade and unheard of amounts of other peoples money to make absolutely zero of worth
In this way they are breaking new ground

quote:

‘I have a foreboding of an America in my children’s or my grandchildren’s time — when the United States is a service and information economy; when nearly all the key manufacturing industries have slipped away to other countries; when awesome technological powers are in the hands of a very few, and no one representing the public interest can even grasp the issues; when the people have lost the ability to set their own agendas or knowledgeably question those in authority; when, clutching our crystals and nervously consulting our horoscopes, our critical faculties in decline, unable to distinguish between what feels good and what’s true, we slide, almost without noticing, back into superstition and darkness. The dumbing down of America is most evident in the slow decay of substantative content in the enormously influential media, the 30-second sound bites (now down to 10 seconds or less), lowest common denominator programming, credulous presentations on pseudoscience and superstition, but especially a kind of celebration of ignorance.’

toanoradian posted:

No, I genuinely do not get it, is the 45k refund a fact or fiction? Or is it still in that nebulous phase of "he said she said"? But, even if the 45k refunds are fake, is the 'refund cascade' real?

Mne nravitsya posted:

I am so confused as to what to believe anymore. This Subforum and the Reddit Star Citizen forums are like Bigfoot and the Loch Ness Monster arguing over which one of them faked the moon landing.

peter gabriel posted:

I know we've overdone it a bit but it is so childish and funny



As I closed the window he was still going on about how little he's bothered

Natron posted:

So, I've been away from the thread for a while, but I have a question. Is CIG's current solution to releasing 3.0 not the antithesis to what they said they've been doing all along? Every shitizen keeps on saying something to the effect of "I don't care if it takes forever, so long as they get everything right. I don't want them to cut features to release, I'd rather they just delay until it's ready. Be patient, I'm a loving idiot, I'm not owned, etc., etc."

Cutting features to push something out is what dirty, filthy publishers force you to do isn't it?

Also, L-O-loving-L at that fake refund. I think the most surprising thing is that it doesn't appear to be anyone from either camp. Someone slipped in here and hoodwinked both sides, which is loving hilarious.

Dark Off posted:

c) everyone suddenly realizes that they screwed up. CIG for stating lie, and fake refunder for damaging CIG more than helping em.
everyone quietly sweeps the whole issue under the rug. The whole thing was just drat big self own by shitizens.

BeigeJacket posted:

Goons don't realise
That true haikus should contain
Nature reference