[Megathread] Star Citizen

[Yelmurc]

This guy is making the same mistakes on interpreting the Progress Tracker as a lot of other people.

1) The Persistent Streaming and Server Meshing Deliverable is about all of server meshing not just static. We only need static server meshing to get Pyro. Static Server meshing could be delivered at any time. Look at Gen12 rendering or Derelict Spaceships as examples on a Progress Tracker deliverable that has progress through the year yet we've gotten pieces of it throughout the last few patches.

2) The Core Gameplay teams have focused on Squardron 42 first. What he fails to mention is that the work done for Squadron 42 will get added to the PU in a more polished state than before and a quarter or two after its been used and polished in Squardon 42.

Star Citizen might have a very dry year. But his evidence and assumptions are wrong, and I hope he corrects them in a follow up video.

[Thestrawman]

This guy is making the same mistakes on interpreting the Progress Tracker as a lot of other people.

1) The Persistent Streaming and Server Meshing Deliverable is about all of server meshing not just static. We only need static server meshing to get Pyro. Static Server meshing could be delivered at any time. Look at Gen12 rendering or Derelict Spaceships as examples on a Progress Tracker deliverable that has progress through the year yet we've gotten pieces of it throughout the last few patches.

2) The Core Gameplay teams have focused on Squardron 42 first. What he fails to mention is that the work done for Squadron 42 will get added to the PU in a more polished state than before and a quarter or two after its been used and polished in Squardon 42.

Star Citizen might have a very dry year. But his evidence and assumptions are wrong, and I hope he corrects them in a follow up video.

And your assumptions are right? How?

[stormgust]

From a thread on the forum of robertsspaceindustries.com



Reading that, how is that going to work at a reasonable speed with regards to latency just between servers (let alone any network switches/routers(/firewalls)), you would want most if not all servers as close to each other as possible preferably connected to each other directly without a switch. Sounds like expensive servers to have.

And I doubt that it is possible when they need more servers (on demand adding servers) that those are in the same datacenter as the existing ones, those would introduce more latency (?).

In a space battle, player X fires on player Y, server of player X needs to know where player Y is.. Now you can scale that 50 up to 500 or so, that just means a lot more data to throw around from/to instance.

So, what if 1 person moves from instance 1 to instance 2 (boarding the spaceship)

How is a database server going to handle that with hundreds of instances (on top of everything else)? (100 people isn't anything special, but I imagine we are talking about hundreds of thousands of possible players on hundreds of servers with hundreds of data transfers). Mostly concerned about speed here. (EG, server 1 needs to unload any unnecessary data (commit to DB) while 2 needs to load it, without the player(s) noticing)

Wouldn't every instance need know on what server another player is? Especially if they can see each other?

That's why server meshing won't be fixing anything, unless they can make a single server handle a considerable higher load. Syncing up a handful of servers is still reasonable, but given the low number of players a single server can handle, they'd have to sync several dozens of them.

[Yelmurc]

And your assumptions are right? How?

My points are the two reasons he gives on SC not getting updates this year. I posted why I think he is wrong. In point 1 I mention how I think the progress tracker works and give two examples proving my points. In point 2 I am more vague and don't give proof so I will send you to this video posted last year of the Head of the Core Gameplay Teams explaining the change.



If anything is unclear let me know what you don't understand.

[Thestrawman]

My points are the two reasons he gives on SC not getting updates this year. I posted why I think he is wrong. In point 1 I mention how I think the progress tracker works and give two examples proving my points. In point 2 I am more vague and don't give proof so I will send you to this video posted last year of the Head of the Core Gameplay Teams explaining the change.



If anything is unclear let me know what you don't understand.

If you can't put it into words I'm just going to go with you're just talking more pr bs like Kenn and Anderson. You didn't even say why your assumptions were right. When there is no evidence or proof of the claims you're making.

[Yelmurc]

If you can't put it into words I'm just going to go with you're just talking more pr bs like Kenn and Anderson. You didn't even say why your assumptions were right. When there is no evidence or proof of the claims you're making.

Can you not read?

1) They are using the project tracker to make a assumption that static server meshing isn't going to be ready in 2022. I gave the fact that the deliverable on that progress tracker does not mention "static" server meshing at all. Which is what we need for content like Pyro. Its server meshing work in general so that includes static server meshing and dynamic server meshing any any work related. I also point out that even if a deliverable on that progress tracker goes past a certain point there is multiple examples including Derelict Spaceships and the Gen12 rendering in which we received pieces of said deliverable before the tracker finishes. So my point is that just because the deliverable goes through December 2022 does not mean we will not receive what we need for Pyro. So them making that assumption is incorrect.

2) I linked a video specifically show that they intend to develop Core Gameplay features for Squadron 42 first, then once they are polished move them into the PU. They have said this since last year its expected. The features are still being worked on, but we might get them a few quarters later than originally since they are going into Squadron 42 first.

The person in that video A) makes the claim Pyro is delayed by assuming the progress tracker is tracking static server meshing instead of all server meshing work. This is wrong. and B) Makes the claim that we will not get anything added to the PU since its only being added to Squadron 42, which is also false.

Please explain to me what is not clear. I really can't fathom you don't understand and I'm starting to think your just a troll.

[Kyanion]

Can you not read?
They are using the project tracker to make a assumption that static server meshing isn't going to be ready in 2022. I gave the fact that the deliverable on that progress tracker does not mention "static" server meshing at all. Which is what we need for content like Pyro. Its server meshing work in general so that includes static server meshing and dynamic server meshing any any work related.

Which is it man? The tracker does not mention static server meshing but then you say static server meshing is included in the tracker. Again, the server meshing is shown on their OWN ROADMAP to last until right before 2023. You think it is going to be out Dec 28th 2022 so it just gets in under the wire? Come on. CIG's track record shows how shit they are at making dates.

- - - Updated - - -

Please explain to me what is not clear. I really can't fathom you don't understand and I'm starting to think your just a troll.

Refer to what I bolded. You aren't clear at all...well besides being clear in your weak attempts to die on a hill over this roadmap and defend CIG to the death I guess.

- - - Updated - - -

they intend to develop Core Gameplay features for Squadron 42 first

They intend to do a lot of things that have been pushed back, failed to materialize and ever be mentioned again. Don't forget SQ42 was greyboxed years ago, remember?

[Yelmurc]

Which is it man? The tracker does not mention static server meshing but then you say static server meshing is included in the tracker. Again, the server meshing is shown on their OWN ROADMAP to last until right before 2023. You think it is going to be out Dec 28th 2022 so it just gets in under the wire? Come on. CIG's track record shows how shit they are at making dates.

- - - Updated - - -



Refer to what I bolded. You aren't clear at all...well besides being clear in your weak attempts to die on a hill over this roadmap and defend CIG to the death I guess.

It doesn't mention static or dynamic server meshing because it's a deliverable that encapsulates all work on server meshing. How is that not clear?

[ldev]

I open this thread from time to time and Star Citizen is amazing, there's so much drama with people just stating the truth and invested fanboys going "nuuuuh it's a real game since 2014"

[Yelmurc]

They intend to do a lot of things that have been pushed back, failed to materialize and ever be mentioned again. Don't forget SQ42 was greyboxed years ago, remember?

This isn't a argument about what they will or will not do. It's an argument about people making assumptions on none concrete data. I honestly don't care if Pyro comes in this year or not. I just not going to claim I know one way or another based of bad data and assumptions.

- - - Updated - - -

I open this thread from time to time and Star Citizen is amazing, there's so much drama with people just stating the truth and invested fanboys going "nuuuuh it's a real game since 2014"

I should probably leave it alone, but I really hate seeing people post claims about what will happen based on incorrect infomation.

[Edge-]

1) They are using the project tracker to make a assumption that static server meshing isn't going to be ready in 2022.

Which, IMO, is more on CIG for the opaque nature of what is supposed to be a transparent roadmap.

When they won't give more clarity and have an extensive history of long delays, overpromising, and missed targets it's absolutely reasonable to take a more skeptical approach until CIG is willing to commit more specifically.

You keep focusing on this point and it seems like you don't seem to acknowledge that this is a valid position given CIG's history.

[ldev]

It takes years for any company to build it into a game that is already fully established, CIG built a company from scratch and they have to make everything from the ground up

Well that was a colossal failure and a waste of human work. Next time try `npm install dynamic-server` - even node.js javascript bs should handle 75 players, which is still a 50% improvement of your current technical turd.

[Kyanion]

It doesn't mention static or dynamic server meshing because it's a deliverable that encapsulates all work on server meshing. How is that not clear?

So it encompasses ALL server meshing? And this will be done right before Jan 1 2023? Can you show me where on the roadmap it claims this? You yourself said it does not mention static server meshing but then in the same paragraph claim it includes it. You can't even get that much straight and you expect CIG to be clear about what this tracker means? Lol ok.

- - - Updated - - -

This isn't a argument about what they will or will not do. It's an argument about people making assumptions on none concrete data. I honestly don't care if Pyro comes in this year or not. I just not going to claim I know one way or another based of bad data and assumptions.

- - - Updated - - -




I should probably leave it alone, but I really hate seeing people post claims about what will happen based on incorrect infomation.

Dude YOU are making assumptions on what the tracker means as well, because it is not clear! No one knows what this shit is supposed to mean. You're not correcting claims made on 'incorrect information'. Holy shit.

- - - Updated - - -

Which, IMO, is more on CIG for the opaque nature of what is supposed to be a transparent roadmap.

When they won't give more clarity and have an extensive history of long delays, overpromising, and missed targets it's absolutely reasonable to take a more skeptical approach until CIG is willing to commit more specifically.

You keep focusing on this point and it seems like you don't seem to acknowledge that this is a valid position given CIG's history.

Yup it is the same blind defense made by other people in the thread. Ignore CIG's past and track record and yet defend what a vague roadmap/tracker means.

[Surfd]

When you mention server meshing as jesus tech you are just embarassing yourself, the tech already exists, it just needs a ton of groundwork implemented first before it can be used, so server meshing is not a question of if it can be done or not, also i have never once said anything about everything just being built ontop of anything, server meshing has always been a system that requires many things inplace before.

Do you realize how moronic this comment sounds?

Let me break this down to what you just said, but using a real world comparison:

The technology to build castles already exists.
Therefore my grand plan to solve global homelessness by building floating sky castles is a surefire thing!
(Please ignore the part where we haven't actually solved the jesus tech problem of how to make the castles float in the sky, it's irrelevant because the tech to make the castles is the important part here).

[Revamp Man]

If they are still having problems with pathing for npcs I know a few people who took 3 computer classes and run a private WoW server

- - - Updated - - -

So it encompasses ALL server meshing? And this will be done right before Jan 1 2023? Can you show me where on the roadmap it claims this? You yourself said it does not mention static server meshing but then in the same paragraph claim it includes it. You can't even get that much straight and you expect CIG to be clear about what this tracker means? Lol ok.

- - - Updated - - -



Dude YOU are making assumptions on what the tracker means as well, because it is not clear! No one knows what this shit is supposed to mean. You're not correcting claims made on 'incorrect information'. Holy shit.

- - - Updated - - -



Yup it is the same blind defense made by other people in the thread. Ignore CIG's past and track record and yet defend what a vague roadmap/tracker means.

They essentially took Phil Phish’s tactics and went pro

[kenn9530]

Well that was a colossal failure and a waste of human work. Next time try `npm install dynamic-server` - even node.js javascript bs should handle 75 players, which is still a 50% improvement of your current technical turd.

And yet again another poster that cant post constructive and has no idea on the systems the company is developing.

[Kyanion]

And yet again another poster that cant post constructive and has no idea on the systems the company is developing.

Well you don't have an idea on what the company is developing either. They only show you what they want to show and tell you what you want to hear. They could be lying out their asses, not like you can prove it one way or another. But hey when that fails just attack the other person.

[kenn9530]

Do you realize how moronic this comment sounds?

Let me break this down to what you just said, but using a real world comparison:

The technology to build castles already exists.
Therefore my grand plan to solve global homelessness by building floating sky castles is a surefire thing!
(Please ignore the part where we haven't actually solved the jesus tech problem of how to make the castles float in the sky, it's irrelevant because the tech to make the castles is the important part here).

When ppl call it jesus tech they are just posting to insult the company because they cant understand what is actually required to get something to work.

Server meshing is not just one system that can just be implemented, it could be ready right now but without other systems inplace it cant be used, fact is the tech already exists and just needs to be fully developed to work for the game just like everything else.

[Kyanion]

fact is the tech already exists and just needs to be fully developed to work for the game just like everything else.

Uh that isn't a fact. It does not exist if it needs to be fully developed to work for the game. Rofl. Jesus. You're basically proving their point FOR them.

[Surfd]

Server meshing is not just one system that can just be implemented, it could be ready right now but without other systems inplace it cant be used, fact is the tech already exists and just needs to be fully developed to work for the game just like everything else.

Let me use another real world example to break down what you just said:
Server meshing = Wheels on a car.
Other Systems = The rest of the car.

You are straight up going full apologist for the company for effectively saying "we have wheels, and we know they work, because other people have made them work for them, but you will have to excuse us because while we have wheels, they don't work yet because we are still trying to implement the rest of the car. But don't worry, this car we are making will totally work as intended once we get finished implementing the engine so that it can power the wheels and the frame so we can mount the wheels. You just have to put your complete faith in our ability to custom build the engine and frame from scratch when we have never actually provided any proof to support our claim that we actually know how to do that".

That is you. Telling us that the wheels will totally work, all they have to do is build the rest of the car the wheels go on first.