This 'game' is 100% pointless in absolutely every possible way until they 'fix' the framerate being tieds to the network crap - and I am almost entirely convinced this cannot be done.
I'm not sure why you think this, of course it can be done
We already know the game runs really well in offline mode.
What facts do you have that makes fixing performance in multiplayer not possible?
The issue is pretty clearly mentioned and scheduled for being fixed.
If you are going to troll in this thread at least keep it to the plausible things like how the game will never be finished etc.
2.5 years after making this very comment, and the game is virtually unchanged. Defending the indefensible is admirable, but after 5.5 years of public development, and at least 2 years before that, I'm afraid that you really are a minority. Trolling, generally speaking, is only done by the minority, and as none of your comments have ever addressed how things can be improved, and only ever saying that they 'will'... I'm afraid I can probably safely state your comments have no real credibility.
Quote:
Grale wrote:
I'll try again in another 3 months..
It was never meant to be fixed in 3.1 so I'm not sure why you are disappointed.
If you want to play the game with this fixed, I'm going to estimate late December 2018.
Anything before then will likely be minor performance improvments which will probably not be worth booting up.
I don't think they should have released 3.0 in this state but you need to understand that this is what development is up to and they are clearly happy to give us their current development build, even if it barely works.
If they can't get the rudimentary aspects of a game working - multiplayer networking, cluster servers, performance, etc, in almost 8 years of development, it is not going to magically be fixed in December now is it.
If you can clearly state the evidence you have for your outlandish claims, please enlighten the rest of the world, as we're dying to know how you can be so sure of something that noone else knows. (citing direct quotes from SC developers is not credible evidence...)
Playing Valheim every weekday at 10pm GMT - twitch.tv/kaltern
Follow me on Twitter if you feel like it... @kaltern
If they can't get the rudimentary aspects of a game working - multiplayer networking, cluster servers, performance, etc, in almost 8 years of development, it is not going to magically be fixed in December now is it.
If you can clearly state the evidence you have for your outlandish claims, please enlighten the rest of the world, as we're dying to know how you can be so sure of something that noone else knows. (citing direct quotes from SC developers is not credible evidence...)
When you say "can't get the game working" its just showing your lack of knowledge.
Just for clarification, game development started in 2013, thats 5 years.
Performance was not a high priority from the players point of view until 3.0 which wasn't released that long ago.
Rewriting large parts of the engine takes time, you can't simply throw money or extra programmers at it.
As I said before, any other game developer would have delayed 3.0 for a year to prevent ignorant comments just like yours, this is Robert's fault for releasing it too early and having ignorant people like you think that 3.0 is the final game that will be released.
Game engine development takes a lot of time, due to your lack of knowledge on game development, you are comparing the time it takes to take an existing engine and just make your game, not recreate large parts of that engine.
Also nice screenshot, you do realise that I've always known the game will take a very long time for release? Right now I'm estimating 2020.
if performance was not their main concern and they thought new hardware was going to solve all their problems, their sure miscalculated the gpu market, people are stuck with 3-5 y old gpus atm cause they cant afford to upgrade or cant find an upgrade and the newest gen cards have minimal performance gains.
anyway it feels like they have no stable base to work on, u cant build a house if ur foundations are made of sand
if performance was not their main concern and they thought new hardware was going to solve all their problems, their sure miscalculated the gpu market, people are stuck with 3-5 y old gpus atm cause they cant afford to upgrade or cant find an upgrade and the newest gen cards have minimal performance gains.
anyway it feels like they have no stable base to work on, u cant build a house if ur foundations are made of sand
I'm not sure where you got that from but that couldn't be more wrong.
We've known for a long time that the game worked perfectly in offline mode.
Its not an GPU/CPU/Memory issue, you can have a 20Ghz CPU with a 20Ghz GPU and 128GB of ram and the performance won't get better.
same applies to world of warcraft,a game from 2004 ... and still makes modern systems cry when there is 200+ characters on the screen, cause at the core it stinks. which is a joke for what claims to be an mmorpg
its all about the core competences and optimizations, something they have zero track record of sofar it seems
When you say "can't get the game working" its just showing your lack of knowledge.
Performance was not a high priority from the players point of view until 3.0 which wasn't released that long ago.
Rewriting large parts of the engine takes time, you can't simply throw money or extra programmers at it.
As I said before, any other game developer would have delayed 3.0 for a year to prevent ignorant comments just like yours, this is Robert's fault for releasing it too early and having ignorant people like you think that 3.0 is the final game that will be released.
Just for the record, the Arena Commander section runs absolutely fine, even on a 970. So GPU's are not the issue here. Just the terrible choice of engine(s), and the network backend being forced to do something it was never designed for.
Oh and linking to SC's own roadmap is possibly the most pointless way to bolster an argument I can imagine. Considering that's changed more times than I can count.
Playing Valheim every weekday at 10pm GMT - twitch.tv/kaltern
Follow me on Twitter if you feel like it... @kaltern
Just for the record, the Arena Commander section runs absolutely fine, even on a 970. So GPU's are not the issue here. Just the terrible choice of engine(s), and the network backend being forced to do something it was never designed for.
Oh and linking to SC's own roadmap is possibly the most pointless way to bolster an argument I can imagine. Considering that's changed more times than I can count.
There was no suitable engine in 2013, there isn't even an engine today that wouldn't require a lot of additional work (for example planets)
We can debate what could have been if they made their own engine from scratch, used Unreal Engine, etc, but the fact is we don't really know things would be in a better situation.
I agree with you that the roadmap is constantly being delayed but thats not my point, the game is going to be delayed, we all know that.
My point was that they specifically mention the problems and what is required to fix it, that means that the issues mentioned will be fixed assuming they don't run out of money before then.
OK now you are all just showing your lack of knowledge. These glitches were not the focus of the development efforts, they will be addressed in 3.2. The devs have said time and time again that the scope of the project is immense and they have enough funds left to keep working on the game for years. And once a suitable engine exists, they will switch to it and refocus their efforts, I expect this will be in place by the end of this year or early 2019.
Guess its time to do another kickstarter, perhaps another 200 million will give them new engine, then they need to do actual content to the game, not sure if the money is enough.
It's not the company per se, it's just Roberts, trying to promise everything that was ever asked, so as to keep the funds rolling in.
The really sad thing is, I honestly believe the game COULD be done as originally intended, but due to terrible management decisions and poor staff retention, it simply isn't possible. 7 years, and the GPU market has changed significantly. The engine is woefully incapable of doing what's asked of it, and of course there's all the licensing issues they're trying to (hopelessly) defend themselves against.
While Frontier, in the same time scale, has knocked out Elite, Planet Coaster and Jurassic World. 3 premium quality games, and all within the same development time as SC so far.
And people still defend it
Playing Valheim every weekday at 10pm GMT - twitch.tv/kaltern
Follow me on Twitter if you feel like it... @kaltern
I have to agree, the more I saw of Roberts and how he acted on the livestreams or wingman's hanger the less I thought of him. Not many of these great dev's of the past actually live up to their image these days.
It's not the company per se, it's just Roberts, trying to promise everything that was ever asked, so as to keep the funds rolling in.
The really sad thing is, I honestly believe the game COULD be done as originally intended, but due to terrible management decisions and poor staff retention, it simply isn't possible. 7 years, and the GPU market has changed significantly. The engine is woefully incapable of doing what's asked of it, and of course there's all the licensing issues they're trying to (hopelessly) defend themselves against.
While Frontier, in the same time scale, has knocked out Elite, Planet Coaster and Jurassic World. 3 premium quality games, and all within the same development time as SC so far.
And people still defend it
I can see what you are saying but you are the exact reason why so many people kickstarted the game, because Elite Dangerous is absolute crap compared to what they want. And just as a side note Planet Coaster is a pretty bad game compared to rollercoaster tycoon 1 & 2, its a great park builder and has pretty graphics though. Can't comment on Jurrasic World as I've never played it.
My point is that the reason why Star Citizen received so much money is purely because they wanted a real space MMO, not something thrown together due to lack of budget or time or scope, which is literally Elite Dangerous and other games.
Elite Dangerous has P2P multiplayer instead of servers, full of cheaters and unfair gameplay due to networking.
Space is faked, every time you jump somewhere its a different map, you can't fly from one place to another without using your loading screen machine (Frame Shift Drive)
The missions are more repetitive and grindy then any other MMO
And there is so much more.
I understand your overall point and I do personally think that Star Citizen will finish most of what they promised while at the same time appear to be creating a game that isn't that fun.
I think the problem here is you think Robert should have created something like Elite Dangerous, when nobody wants something as crappy as that and they certainly wouldn't have invested money for it.
I'm not sure if it's possible for you to be more wrong
Firstly, I backed SC - I never backed Elite. Simple as that. I liked the Wing Commander series, and when I heard Roberts was wanting to create an up-to-date version of a properly good space sim, I was all over it.
The promises made way back then, were almost possible. Anyone who backs such things expecting to get exactly what is stated is probably suffering from a little wishful thinking - there are generally setbacks, constraints and compromises.
But what Roberts did is promise MORE than was originally planned. He wanted to go beyond the initial fundraising and try to get people to add more to the moneypile by promising more and more outlandish features. Which was his first, and most critical error. It was pretty much right there, that I knew my pledge money was likely going to be wasted.
Elite Dangerous I didn't buy until the first beta, and that was because I didn't really know a great deal about it - I was surprised at just how far it had come along in the short space of time since it's kickstarter. And don't get me wrong, back then there was a finished game - empty, and in dire need of more 'stuff', but it was out there and it was complete, as much as was initially promised. And I've personally spent thousands of real hours in the game, I'm planning on returning now the Thargoid/Guardians story is finally kicking off.
ALL space games that promise galaxy sized 'maps' will always have to be instanced, I have absolutely no idea why you thought it was or could be seamless - SC has ALWAYS maintained it will be instanced, for example. However, with ED, while you have to jump everywhere, it IS still offering the correct sense of scale.
But keep in mind, ED and SC are, essentially, completely different games. As you already mentioned, SC is an MMO in space. ED is not, it is a combat/trader game, which Elite always has been, set in a galaxy where other people can also fly. It is not the same concept. Given this then, SC has even fewer excuses to be taking as long as it is. Adding an FPS which NOONE wanted, was simply a way of trying to bring in even more funding, as when it was announced, CoD and BF games were still very popular, and it was painfully clear Roberts wanted some of that action.
As for your last point? I wanted Roberts to create what he initially promised, before stretchgoals and the other pointless embellishments he added after the funding period had apparently finished. All good developers know to create a base game to build upon. All good publishers know to release updates to the core game via DLC. Roberts clearly either didn't undestand this or, more likely, realised that he couldn't release a game anywhere close to what he promised, so instead blagged about releasing a full game at launch... which is never, ever going to happen.
And why Squadron 42 has suffered so much is one of the mysteries of this whole project that I doubt we'll ever get a proper answer to.
The whole thing is a shambolic disgrace, that will forever tarnish all those quality developers with the reputation of working on a failed project.
Playing Valheim every weekday at 10pm GMT - twitch.tv/kaltern
Follow me on Twitter if you feel like it... @kaltern
I'm not sure if it's possible for you to be more wrong
Firstly, I backed SC - I never backed Elite. Simple as that. I liked the Wing Commander series, and when I heard Roberts was wanting to create an up-to-date version of a properly good space sim, I was all over it.
The promises made way back then, were almost possible. Anyone who backs such things expecting to get exactly what is stated is probably suffering from a little wishful thinking - there are generally setbacks, constraints and compromises.
But what Roberts did is promise MORE than was originally planned. He wanted to go beyond the initial fundraising and try to get people to add more to the moneypile by promising more and more outlandish features. Which was his first, and most critical error. It was pretty much right there, that I knew my pledge money was likely going to be wasted.
Elite Dangerous I didn't buy until the first beta, and that was because I didn't really know a great deal about it - I was surprised at just how far it had come along in the short space of time since it's kickstarter. And don't get me wrong, back then there was a finished game - empty, and in dire need of more 'stuff', but it was out there and it was complete, as much as was initially promised. And I've personally spent thousands of real hours in the game, I'm planning on returning now the Thargoid/Guardians story is finally kicking off.
ALL space games that promise galaxy sized 'maps' will always have to be instanced, I have absolutely no idea why you thought it was or could be seamless - SC has ALWAYS maintained it will be instanced, for example. However, with ED, while you have to jump everywhere, it IS still offering the correct sense of scale.
But keep in mind, ED and SC are, essentially, completely different games. As you already mentioned, SC is an MMO in space. ED is not, it is a combat/trader game, which Elite always has been, set in a galaxy where other people can also fly. It is not the same concept. Given this then, SC has even fewer excuses to be taking as long as it is. Adding an FPS which NOONE wanted, was simply a way of trying to bring in even more funding, as when it was announced, CoD and BF games were still very popular, and it was painfully clear Roberts wanted some of that action.
As for your last point? I wanted Roberts to create what he initially promised, before stretchgoals and the other pointless embellishments he added after the funding period had apparently finished. All good developers know to create a base game to build upon. All good publishers know to release updates to the core game via DLC. Roberts clearly either didn't undestand this or, more likely, realised that he couldn't release a game anywhere close to what he promised, so instead blagged about releasing a full game at launch... which is never, ever going to happen.
And why Squadron 42 has suffered so much is one of the mysteries of this whole project that I doubt we'll ever get a proper answer to.
The whole thing is a shambolic disgrace, that will forever tarnish all those quality developers with the reputation of working on a failed project.
I agree Roberts promised more then he should have but everyone has literally thrown money at him for this.
Elite Dangerous as you said released a complete game, that was empty, but at least you could play it, and as you already said, they are completely different games.
The point I am stressing is that Elite Dangerous is a very basic and simple game made by someone who at least knows how to make a good game, just without putting any time or money into making into something mode then a demo with randomly computer generated things to make it feel like a full game.
Star Citizen is completely seamless, you can fly from one area to another without jumping.
The issue of whether heavily modifying CryEngine, Unity making their own etc is a mystery, but what isn't a mystery is that they would always have, and actually have spent an insane amount of time working on the engine, and will do so at least until the end of 2018.
Not having a finished engine is 100% on why the game isn't ready and released today. Honestly there was no easy solution to that, I'm sure that Ubisoft and Electronics Arts would have the man power and skill to do it better and faster though (not that they ever would)
You can't argue that Roberts shouldn't have done the stretchgoals and overpromised because you and I are worth nothing to him in terms of opinion.
I paid $30 USD for the Squadron 42 and the MMO while some people pay $80-$500.
If you look at the timeline and when money has been thrown at Robert, it happens every time he stretches the goals.
So overall I struggle to blame Robert, I would have done the same.
Can I just remind everyone that gamers and gamer whales have invested 181 million dollars into this game, the last stretch goal was 65 million.
With some rough maths that puts it at an average of $90 USD paid which is 2-3 times the actual cost of the game (depending on when you paid)
I will just point out that SC is not seamless, because all you can do is fly around one system - and you can do exactly the same thing in ED.
If you jump out of a star system in SC, it will load up a new instance, I guarantee it.
Oh, and saying you think HE thinks we're worthless is precisely the problem. A developer/publisher will try to deliver what they promise, not ignore absolutely everything they're reading because of their own hubris. EA, Ubi etc, they may not really listen to the public, but they DO listen to QA and suchlike. And at least THEY release games - crap or othrewise.
Playing Valheim every weekday at 10pm GMT - twitch.tv/kaltern
Follow me on Twitter if you feel like it... @kaltern
Sounds more like you paid for something without understanding what you were funding for in the first place. From day 1 it was always going to be the most ambitious project ever. That was all part of that presentation and the materials that came out shortly afterwards. He pitched for a game was only possible on PC, with the highest fidelity that not even AAA game would have, level of detail that is previously impossible to achieve at the scale that SQ42 and SC would be at. He promised 1st person and 3rd person camera views, and the ability to walk through the entire carrier while a battle could be waging outside, you'd be able to hop on to your ship and fly out. All of this was to be seamless, as everything would need to be rendered if you look at it from outside or inside. And it needs to be multiplayer capable.
You tell me when you watched that presentation and thought this wasn't "Pipe Dream - the game"? That was like 5 years ago and still is the impossible game project. Because when I funded it, I didn't actually believe it was possible, I just wanted someone who had the balls and actual clout and connections to seriously give it a try. I was sick of console AAA safety-first bullshit games that were getting pumped out.
If Chris Roberts didn't have those stretch goals, then just release whatever at a base level, that would actually to turn his back on what he was pitching and what I was paying for. I didn't pay for a game that was "do-able".
Rubbish. The base game was definitely pushing the bounderies, however it was definitely achievable. What happened is after the initial kickstarter had completed, he realised he could make even more money while promising as much as possible. And besides, your silly little arguments don't hold up when he himself came up with a fairly realistic release date, which was continually pushed further and further back. That might have been acceptable IF he's not tried to add all the ridiculous 'features' that he did.
Besides, it is HIS responsibility to deliver what he promised. You can try and defend it all you want, the bottom line is he's taking money without the possibility of delivering - he's even trying to change the meaning of the word 'sale' to the word 'promotion' in order to attempt to deny the fact that 'selling' something means to have to actually deliver the subject of that sale.
Oh and I am not remotely concerned about what *YOU* were paying for. I'm far more interested in what *I* paid for, and the many others who also paid their money.
I would suggest not telling me what I did or did not do in the future - it just makes you look stupid, and very troll-like.
Playing Valheim every weekday at 10pm GMT - twitch.tv/kaltern
Follow me on Twitter if you feel like it... @kaltern
As you can see, Elite Dangerous fakes it, Star Citizen does not.
Kaltern wrote:
Rubbish. The base game was definitely pushing the bounderies, however it was definitely achievable.
His engine developers, which have done nothing but develop the engine, have still not finished it.
The amount of work for engine developers has not gone up dramatically, so your base game wouldn't have come out that much sooner as the original scope for this game was already huge.
Kaltern wrote:
Besides, it is HIS responsibility to deliver what he promised. You can try and defend it all you want, the bottom line is he's taking money without the possibility of delivering
Welcome to every kickstarter, the ones that do deliver something, often deliver garbage.
With a small selection actually delivering what the backers expected from the start.
Also while progress is slow Star Citizen has still made a lot of amazing progress including planet tech.
Yes the game has been delayed well past the original date, but this happens to all kickstarter games and many of those companies instead decided to scrap 10-50% of the scope while also releasing late.
Mister_s wrote:
@dannofdawn: are you really saying you funded it so Roberts could fuck around with your money, chasing his dream
That was essentially his kickstarter pitch and why I didn't back it at that point.
Signature/Avatar nuking: none (can be changed in your profile)
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
