[Megathread] Star Citizen

[masterhorus8]

Should only the most hardcore of fans be the first ones to test things? Is not feedback from a variety of people better than feedback from people who are likely to do little more than fawn over how great the game is no matter what the flaws?

Was being mostly sarcastic, but the "hardcore" players are the ones that were supposed to get it (at least according to how they did Evocati in the past; hardcore being the ones that I stated a few posts ago for the ones that were the ones to get the invites first in the past). He has a post suggesting that he got a refund a few months ago, leading me to believe he wasn't a backer anymore. But apparently he didn't follow through?

[zealo]

Wow, if you're in the first wave of backers, then they really did screw the pooch on selecting people. RIP CIG.

Having people able to actually view the game for what it is would actually be quite useful for a closed testing stage. People who'll do nothing but sing praises might be useful as customers and for word of mouth marketing, but for actually testing in development builds people that are capable of constructive deep criticism is worth so much more.

[masterhorus8]

Having people able to actually view the game for what it is would actually be quite useful for a closed testing stage. People who'll do nothing but sing praises might be useful as customers and for word of mouth marketing, but for actually testing in development builds people that are capable of constructive deep criticism is worth so much more.

Feeding them praise and what not doesn't matter at all if they were selecting based on contribution, as I said a few posts back. But yeah, I agree. I never said that they should only pick the knob diddlers.

[KyrtF]

So the finances are "Out there"... right lol And they must be bad because... well they must lol.

Why would they close studios when they still have money?

As for "out there...right lol"... I've told you where to get some of the info and said you can check out some of the vids and reports where the info is analysed if you want more detail.

You can check it out if you want or not as it pleases you but HMRC reports tend to be truthful.

Yeah all the "tech" and "systems" are "old news" and "easy" to do too bad there's so few games using them.

FOIP is hamstrung by the small fact it isn't worth the cost in CPU time and bandwidth, especially in a game with helmets. It is an almost perfect definition of the word "gimmick".

But RaaT? Thats standard. That IS in common use.

[masterhorus8]

But RaaT? Thats standard. That IS in common use.

Not in CryEngine as they needed it, it wasn't. And that was the point. Get over it. As everyone else in here as already said, you are literally the only person making a big deal out of it.

[MrAnderson]

1. I'm an original backer. I know more about SC than you ever will.
2. I am Evocati and tried 3.0 first wave today. It's unplayable for me. It won't release anytime soon.
3. There are no "couple of million" players just drooling and waiting for 3.0 to release at which point they will buy in. SC is PC only and not even good. There is no game and no core game mechanics.
4. The original 3.0 doesn't exist anymore which was what ultimately mattered. No performance increase no enjoyment.

You're a Shillizen and I am a Citizen. That's the difference. I thought Mr.Andersson chose the red pill to see reality rather than the blue pill to stay ignorant of the reality he lives in.

I also don't think you know how time I have invested in Star Citizen. I've spent over 200 hours testing for the Evocati which is why I am in it in the first place.

I have butted heads with Shillizens ever since the early days of Wingman's Hangar so that's not new. You're not new. Nobody is going to fall silent and enjoy 3.0 at this point. Nobody. Yet you're here praising it.. lmao.

You asked for a refund a long time ago remember:

I think they didn't "give up" per se, but realized that they're going to have to break the news some time. A lot of us are already mad that Chris lied last year. The timing also isn't a coincidence, they're hoping to shower all the negativity away with whatever they'll show at the upcoming event.

It's time for me to get a refund. Goodbye Orion and Super Hornet. I will make a new acc only with the base games, pack gifted from my main account.

I bet you $100 that whatever they'll show at gamescom will be more fake PoC stuff like the giant sand worm. Meaning: No content that is playable at the time and more flashy shit they won't release. It's all about keeping the dollars flowing.

The bottom line is that Chris Roberts is a fucking liar.

You are no Evocati and like always you are full of shit, like most of the kid's who are angry with Chris Roberts because he "broke his promise" you have no problem in lying and deceiving to get your way.

It seems to me that the problem is that you can't manage your feelings. Your heart generated hype that your brain can't handle.

You have no capacity to think clear and for yourself.
Just see the paterns: You splashed 600$ on a kickstarter project because you were passionate with the idea of a gracious space game without knowing exactly where you were getting into. You let yourself take for the gospel of the evil Chris Roberts! He got you! And now you've "awaken" and want revenge. A mad angry chap with a axe to grind so you turn yourself to the next gospel. The gospel of the Smarties and run with it because you need something to hold on to cope with your gamer's broken heart.

You are incapable of thinking for yourself, you reash the same bullshit spread by all the haters. You are incapable of dealing with your emotions, that's why you waste your time here being an angry bitter old sock. Basically you are incapable of following the development of a video-game so up-close getting all anxious and jumpy at any misfortune, delay or bug.

TLR you are not fit for crowdfunding. Stay far away with your belligerent and toxicity towards anything related to Star Citizen.

LoL Evocati my ass , pff.

[Deleted]

so the "3.0" (which is the Dec 2016 3.0 with around 80% of the features cut out) was released to small amount of testers

news are bad

the main issue is the performance. the game architecture simply does not support what this game wants to do. no amount of optimization will save it.

[MrAnderson]

so the "3.0" (which is the Dec 2016 3.0 with around 80% of the features cut out) was released to small amount of testers

news are bad

the main issue is the performance. the game architecture simply does not support what this game wants to do. no amount of optimization will save it.

Going full broken record again hein? Same was said when 2.0 released, then Star Marine now 3.0.
Maybe you guys should buy another record or try another approach because this one surely isin't working lol

[Deleted]

Going full broken record again hein? Same was said when 2.0 released, then Star Marine now 3.0.
Maybe you guys should buy another record or try another approach because this one surely isin't working lol

you are just a star citizen shill, an account made specialy to post in this thread, probably by a CIG employee. just be quiet.

I believe people should be able to make informed decisions, so here's what we know about Star Citizen Alpha 3.0 so far:

Three moons (Yela, Daymar, Cellin) and an asteroid (Delamar) that you can land on.

A new station/outpost (Levski).

Cargo, salvage and trading.

New missions, two mission givers (Ruto and Eckhart).

Basic NPC AI (aka subsumption).

Breathing, stamina and heart rate simulation.

New ships and vehicles, major reworks for existing ones.

New RSI launcher with delta patcher.

No mention of the new netcode or player counts.

No mention of a new TOS.

Full patch notes: https://pastebin.com/ns8vTSp4

Update 1: Comments from Evocati members

Launcher is 223 MB, full download is 38 GB

Moons are very pretty, landing is indeed seamless

Performance is poor, like 5-15 fps most of the time

High memory requirements, 32 GB RAM / 11 GB VRAM is a must

Lots of new bugs, in addition to the old 2.6.x stuff

Some questionable design decisions: poor visibility in some cockpits, MFDs can be used only with a mouse, UI in general is a mess

[masterhorus8]

you are just a star citizen shill, an account made specialy to post in this thread, probably by a CIG employee. just be quiet.

Anything you say has 0 value.

Remember when CIG was supposed to run out of money 3 years ago?
Remember when CIG was supposed to run out of money 2 years ago?
Remember when CIG was supposed to run out of money last year?
Remember when patch 2.0 was impossible?
Remember when 64-bit was supposed to be impossible?
Remember when Star Marine wasn't in 2.6?
Remember when 3.0 wasn't coming out at all?
Yeah, nor do I...

[Majestic12]

Wow, if you're in the first wave of backers, then they really did screw the pooch on selecting people. RIP CIG.

EDIT: Jeez, you guys don't know how to take a joke. here's the /s for you

If game devs only chose "yes-sayers" then they'd be in trouble. Plus, reporting bugs and other issues is just an issue tied to a reporter / contributor(me). I won't sugarcoat stuff and simply say it how it is. The reason I spent time on SC was because I do like development in general. I am a software dev professionally, just not a game dev.

I see your /s but just wanted to get that out. I don't write "Chris Roberts burned me" on the tracker.

- - - Updated - - -

You asked for a refund a long time ago remember:



You are no Evocati and like always you are full of shit, like most of the kid's who are angry with Chris Roberts because he "broke his promise" you have no problem in lying and deceiving to get your way.

It seems to me that the problem is that you can't manage your feelings. Your heart generated hype that your brain can't handle.

You have no capacity to think clear and for yourself.
Just see the paterns: You splashed 600$ on a kickstarter project because you were passionate with the idea of a gracious space game without knowing exactly where you were getting into. You let yourself take for the gospel of the evil Chris Roberts! He got you! And now you've "awaken" and want revenge. A mad angry chap with a axe to grind so you turn yourself to the next gospel. The gospel of the Smarties and run with it because you need something to hold on to cope with your gamer's broken heart.

You are incapable of thinking for yourself, you reash the same bullshit spread by all the haters. You are incapable of dealing with your emotions, that's why you waste your time here being an angry bitter old sock. Basically you are incapable of following the development of a video-game so up-close getting all anxious and jumpy at any misfortune, delay or bug.

TLR you are not fit for crowdfunding. Stay far away with your belligerent and toxicity towards anything related to Star Citizen.

LoL Evocati my ass , pff.

I've splashed more than $600 FYI. I've used the Black Market extensively (which is cheaper, just that it doesn't count towards Concierge). $600 was the amount I pledged to CIG directly.

And I have applied for a refund, by the way. They just take time (because of a backlog on tickets) and there's no gaurantee I'll even get one. You'd know that there's a backlog if you've been around and didn't have a stick so far up your bum.

Your entire post is basically "I don't like what you've been saying, so I won't consider the possibility that you're a backer at all". You proved that in your first post by immediately leaning on "backer vs. hater". You just can't process it because of your bias and refusal to acknowledge that Star Citizen's honeymoon is over.

And I do blame everything bad with SC on Chris, by the way. It's completely justified. He has mismanaged the project. I don't care if you like that or not, it's the truth. That's why I am Evocati and you aren't -- because I have contributed to Star Citizen. You're just a keyboard warrior.

[MrAnderson]

you are just a star citizen shill, an account made specialy to post in this thread, probably by a CIG employee. just be quiet.

That's just as dumb as me saying you were hired by Derek Smart to spread FUD righ?
I don't how much he's paying you but it's not enough lol

[KyrtF]

Not in CryEngine as they needed it, it wasn't. And that was the point. Get over it. As everyone else in here as already said, you are literally the only person making a big deal out of it.

Doesn't change the fact it is 20 year old technology and if they really "needed" it in CryEngine, it's yet another example of why CE was a poor choice.

I'm also not one of the people making a big deal about how CIG is developing all sorts of new groundbreaking technologies and we should excuse their glacially slow progression and development because if it. Whether its serialised variable, FOIP and VOIP or RaaT, the ground-breaking technologies they are supposedly developing are old or in use with other games. Sometimes decades old.

SC is not groundbreaking. It is not innovative. It is generating nothing new, nor anything that has not been done before. Just about everything CR has promised is doable - though I'd question the viability of 1000 player instances for the average player. SC is not operating at a scale or with a scope that had never been done before.

- - - Updated - - -

Anything you say has 0 value.

Maybe so...but those reports are similar to what I have been hearing.

OOH, this is the "early" 3.0 release. If any of the issues are true, they might fix some of them by the time everyone else gets to play. But then, we knew 3.0 had performance issues based on the GC17 demo. And that was with a stripped down version on a system that was optimised for performance. If they haven't fixed the issues since then, what chance they'd be able to improve it in two weeks? If another couple of weeks would have seen them resolved - why would they have released it now?

Conversely, maybe there are issues just with the specific set up of specific players and for everyone else its running fine. We don't know. We'll probably have decent idea fairly soon, NDA or no.

[MrAnderson]

Your entire post is basically "I don't like what you've been saying, so I won't consider the possibility that you're a backer at all".

That's why I am Evocati and you aren't -- because I have contributed to Star Citizen. You're just a keyboard warrior.

Again, I reiterate, You're full of shit. Lying and deceit it's all you got. You can't be an Evocati because You can't handle playing buggy alphas remember much less report them in a constructive way.

You are just another hater having a smeltdown because a patch that "would never release" has indeed been released. Star Marine all over again.
Shameful behaviour but it's to be expected, from the same folks that fake refunds and harass CIG dev's.

Hope your refund goes through.

Doesn't change the fact it is 20 year old technology and if they really "needed" it in CryEngine, it's yet another example of why CE was a poor choice.

A 20 year old engine? Poor choice? Oh god.... could you be more clueless? Really?

Answer me this then, Why did a company likeAmazon (a top 5 company in the world along brand giants like Google, Microsoft, Facebook and Apple) choose CryEngine as their Engine to step into the game development world instead of building their own proprietary engine? Why?

God knows they don't lack funding to pay the best wages or have problem luring the best in the world into their company.

So why did they did exactly what Chris Roberts did but 4 years later and with an even bigger compromise and investment?

Clearly they saw something in that "poor old technology", those Amazon guys sure are dumb and obtuse to the point of going with a "20 year old engine"... Clearly the move of someone who doesn't know how to run a business...

Isin't it?

[masterhorus8]

Again, I reiterate, You're full of shit. Lying and deceit it's all you got. You can't be an Evocati because You can't handle playing buggy alphas remember much less report them in a constructive way.

You are just another hater having a smeltdown because a patch that "would never release" has indeed been released. Star Marine all over again.
Shameful behaviour but it's to be expected, from the same folks that fake refunds and harass CIG dev's.

Hope your refund goes through.



A 20 year old engine? Poor choice? Oh god.... could you be more clueless? Really?

Answer me this then, Why did a company likeAmazon (a top 5 company in the world along brand giants like Google, Microsoft, Facebook and Apple) choose CryEngine as their Engine to step into the game development world instead of building their own proprietary engine? Why?

God knows they don't lack funding to pay the best wages or have problem luring the best in the world into their company.

So why did they did exactly what Chris Roberts did but 4 years later and with an even bigger compromise and investment?

Clearly they saw something in that "poor old technology", those Amazon guys sure are dumb and obtuse to the point of going with a "20 year old engine"... Clearly the move of someone who doesn't know how to run a business...

Isin't it?

Most of what he said was still stupid, but he was referring to the Render tech being that old, not the engine itself.

[KyrtF]

A 20 year old engine? Poor choice? Oh god.... could you be more clueless? Really?

Well...you could learn to read what I say before you make a fool of yourself.

CE itself as an engine is about 15 years old. Of course, there are more recent iterations. CR himself licensed CE3.

However - I was referring not to the engine as "20 year old technology" but to the "ground breaking new inspirational" technology of "Render as a Texture"....which has been in use in the industry since the early 90s.

Answer me this then, Why did a company likeAmazon (a top 5 company in the world along brand giants like Google, Microsoft, Facebook and Apple) choose CryEngine as their Engine to step into the game development world instead of building their own proprietary engine? Why?

You are aware they rewrote 60% of the engine simply to get to the version they have today? You are also aware that simply because an engine exists does not make it a good fit for every game? That an engine that is good at rendering a low player count FPS on a 32 bit map might not be the optimal choice to power a space sim that requires 64 bit math and is to support several hundred players? CE had one great thing going for it when CR chose it...it was pretty. Other than that, he had a choice of licensing an engine that was totally unsuited for his game and modifying it, or writing one from scratch. He made the wrong call.

As for Amazon...they licensed CE in 2015 and has LY ready less than a year later. CIG still hasn't finished its updates after seven years of development.

Like anything else, CE could be changed into a suitable engine for SC. That isn't the problem. And you keep missing that point. It's never been a case of "this can't be done"...it's always been "why are CIG so slow?".

Amazon developed their LY from CE engine in less than a year. CIG has been developing their game for seven years and there are still huge chunks of the engine that need to be updated and replaced. What's worse is that CIG are prioritising the cosmetics over the core.

If CIG were to spend years modifying CE, they would have been better of writing their own engine instead.

[Jastall]

If CIG were to spend years modifying CE, they would have been better of writing their own engine instead.

Yeah this really seems to be the crux of the issue. You use an existing engine to save yourself work. If you then spend so much dev time and money to make your engine actually usable, that decision becomes quite questionable IMO.

[MrAnderson]

[QUOTE=KyrtF;47519092]Well...you could learn to read what I say before you make a fool of yourself.

CE itself as an engine is about 15 years old. Of course, there are more recent iterations. CR himself licensed CE3.

However - I was referring not to the engine as "20 year old technology" but to the "ground breaking new inspirational" technology of "Render as a Texture"....which has been in use in the industry since the early 90s.

It's not the same tech or the same application, again just showing how clueless you are. You are not even understanding what the tech is used for or the possibilities it opens.

You are aware they rewrote 60% of the engine simply to get to the version they have today? You are also aware that simply because an engine exists does not make it a good fit for every game? That an engine that is good at rendering a low player count FPS on a 32 bit map might not be the optimal choice to power a space sim that requires 64 bit math and is to support several hundred players? CE had one great thing going for it when CR chose it...it was pretty. Other than that, he had a choice of licensing an engine that was totally unsuited for his game and modifying it, or writing one from scratch. He made the wrong call.

As for Amazon...they licensed CE in 2015 and has LY ready less than a year later. CIG still hasn't finished its updates after seven years of development.

Like anything else, CE could be changed into a suitable engine for SC. That isn't the problem. And you keep missing that point. It's never been a case of "this can't be done"...it's always been "why are CIG so slow?".

Amazon developed their LY from CE engine in less than a year. CIG has been developing their game for seven years and there are still huge chunks of the engine that need to be updated and replaced. What's worse is that CIG are prioritising the cosmetics over the core.

If CIG were to spend years modifying CE, they would have been better of writing their own engine instead.

Again with ignorant engine talk... So Amazon did exactly what CIG did, rewrite more than 50% of the engine to make it fit the needs of today/future.

How hard is it to aknowledge that plenty of successful games emerged from engines that had nothing to to with the genre those said games were made for at the start.

A company keeps improving it's engine as long as it's games are played, Blizzard is still improving it's Warcraft3 engine, yes a RTS and that they adapted to make World of Warcraft. Amazon is still developing Lumberyard like CIG will continue developing it's engine for years to come.

It's normal game development procedure.

[KyrtF]

It's not the same tech or the same application, again just showing how clueless you are. You are not even understanding what the tech is used for or the possibilities it opens.

Actually...I am quite familiar with the technology and what it can do.
I also think it is a good thing CIG integrated it with their game engine

But it is not new...it is not innovative...it is not ground breaking.

Again with ignorant engine talk... So Amazon did exactly what CIG did, rewrite more than 50% of the engine to make it fit the needs of today/future.

And you'll note they didn't work on a game at the same time.

How hard is it to aknowledge that plenty of successful games emerged from engines that had nothing to to with the genre those said games were made for at the start.

Easy. A game engine can be modified to provide whatever behaviour you want....so long as you are willing to spend enough time and money to do so. Its also easier...if you do buy an off the shelf engine...to choose one that is already suited to your needs because otherwise you are going to spend a lot of money and time tearing it apart and adding code and then tearing it down again to fix the incompatibilities.

CE was not a 64 bit engine
CE was not optimised to host huge WAN links
CE was not designed to simulate star flight

CE is an engine best suited to small scale FPS.

That doesn't mean it can't be modified. But given the scale of the necessary changes, given the time and money CIG would need to spend to make it suitable, using CE was a mistake.

CR should have written a custom engine.

And yes...a finished engine can always be improved. But ehat CIG are doing is changing the engine while at the same time developing features which use parts of the engine they haven't developed yet...then going back and adding them in then trying to fix bugs by cutting features out with the plan of coming back later and then....

That is not normal development procedure. That is a terrible way to create any program, never nind a game where performance and optimisation are important.

You get the engine features locked down BEFORE you add features which use them. Take FOIP and VOIP as an example. CR kinda made a big deal out of them at GC17.

Trouble is...neither if them are necessary and both require network infrastructure that doesn't exist yet. He can't know if these features will be viable without that netcode being finished and hes already spending CPU cycles and bandwidth, and compromising the engine design by forcing needless requirements onto the programming team.

Its behaviour like that that means I'm not going to be surprised if the game performance really is as bad as tbe supposed leaks say. It certainly was at GC17.

All in all, its a simple concept. You build the engine first...or buy it...so that when you do add gameplay or content, you know exactly what tbe game engine can do and what it can support. You build the foundations first...and then you build once the foundations are complete.

THAT is normal development.

Having an unfinished engine seven years after development behan? THAT isn't normal.

[MrAnderson]

Actually...I am quite familiar with the technology and what it can do.
I also think it is a good thing CIG integrated it with their game engine

But it is not new...it is not innovative...it is not ground breaking.



And you'll note they didn't work on a game at the same time.



Easy. A game engine can be modified to provide whatever behaviour you want....so long as you are willing to spend enough time and money to do so. Its also easier...if you do buy an off the shelf engine...to choose one that is already suited to your needs because otherwise you are going to spend a lot of money and time tearing it apart and adding code and then tearing it down again to fix the incompatibilities.

CE was not a 64 bit engine
CE was not optimised to host huge WAN links
CE was not designed to simulate star flight

CE is an engine best suited to small scale FPS.

That doesn't mean it can't be modified. But given the scale of the necessary changes, given the time and money CIG would need to spend to make it suitable, using CE was a mistake.

CR should have written a custom engine.

And yes...a finished engine can always be improved. But ehat CIG are doing is changing the engine while at the same time developing features which use parts of the engine they haven't developed yet...then going back and adding them in then trying to fix bugs by cutting features out with the plan of coming back later and then....

That is not normal development procedure. That is a terrible way to create any program, never nind a game where performance and optimisation are important.

You get the engine features locked down BEFORE you add features which use them. Take FOIP and VOIP as an example. CR kinda made a big deal out of them at GC17.

Trouble is...neither if them are necessary and both require network infrastructure that doesn't exist yet. He can't know if these features will be viable without that netcode being finished and hes already spending CPU cycles and bandwidth, and compromising the engine design by forcing needless requirements onto the programming team.

Its behaviour like that that means I'm not going to be surprised if the game performance really is as bad as tbe supposed leaks say. It certainly was at GC17.

All in all, its a simple concept. You build the engine first...or buy it...so that when you do add gameplay or content, you know exactly what tbe game engine can do and what it can support. You build the foundations first...and then you build once the foundations are complete.

THAT is normal development.

Having an unfinished engine seven years after development behan? THAT isn't normal.

Again this conversation is pointless because you fail to grasp the big picture. Some points though:

- Back in 2011/12 there was no other option.
- CIG had to keep showing stuff while developing the game, that's part of their development and funding campaign.
- Making a engine from scratch takes more time than using an already available and known one.
- Making a engine from scratch doesn't solve all of your problems and it creates new ones like making it difficult to find people who are familiar working with it or willing to learn it.
- Amazon did exactly the same as Chris Roberts / CIG despite not needing to present games to backers.

Every game engine is constantly being developed, the thing is that usually it's done behind doors and the public is not aware of it. Tech and features just appear when they are ready and ironed out so gamers think those came out of nothing and took only a couple of days of work when in reality it's years and years of iteration.