Support NeoGAF

[Raticus79]

I had hoped they would move away from the fps in space style....

I'll give it some more time to decide if I'm in or not.

How would you approach that?

I think the ability to have your ship travelling in a different direction than the nose is pointing is at the heart of what bugs people about the free movement in SC. That would still be an issue with the Kerbal Citizen approach of realistic physics since rotation is relatively easy. As far as gameplay goes, people like the mechanics better when we pretend space is full of air and the ships rely on aerodynamics.

So, say a game decides to roll with that. Real space physics make for bad gameplay, so we're going to pretend our ships are in atmosphere. Quantum Subspace Field Blah Blah Lore Etc - end result is our ships need wings, use control surfaces to turn, "drag" can be used to stop, main drives only push forward, and very weak thrusters can be used for 6DOF movement at very low speeds so people can dock and stuff. No circle strafing because thrusters aren't strong enough.

Stepping back from that, the result is pretty much Elite without decoupling. Could be fun and I think it's something that people who dislike the movement in SC would prefer.

They need to address, and frankly remove, the focus on pixel perfect aiming to achieve hit.

Are you suggesting an aim assist like console FPS? I don't think that would help close the gap between HOTAS and KB+M users - it would benefit the mouse users just as much.
(plus I'd be a beast with the Steam controller setup I'm using)

I think it'll have to come down to nerfing or removing gimballed weapons. I don't think IM is nearly as strong when it comes to fixed weapons.

 

[MasterOfPastures]

It seems that if we go by the newsletfer, there will be no info or demo regarding squadron 42 during next weeks stream. Dissapointing if that happens. And I doubt that RSI is in the habit of surprises that are not even hinted.
I guess we will have to wait.

 

[Dubbedinenglish]

How would you approach that?

I think the ability to have your ship travelling in a different direction than the nose is pointing is at the heart of what bugs people about the free movement in SC. That would still be an issue with the Kerbal Citizen approach of realistic physics since rotation is relatively easy. As far as gameplay goes, people like the mechanics better when we pretend space is full of air and the ships rely on aerodynamics.

So, say a game decides to roll with that. Real space physics make for bad gameplay, so we're going to pretend our ships are in atmosphere. Quantum Subspace Field Blah Blah Lore Etc - end result is our ships need wings, use control surfaces to turn, "drag" can be used to stop, main drives only push forward, and very weak thrusters can be used for 6DOF movement at very low speeds so people can dock and stuff. No circle strafing because thrusters aren't strong enough.

Stepping back from that, the result is pretty much Elite without decoupling. Could be fun and I think it's something that people who dislike the movement in SC would prefer.



Are you suggesting an aim assist like console FPS? I don't think that would help close the gap between HOTAS and KB+M users - it would benefit the mouse users just as much.
(plus I'd be a beast with the Steam controller setup I'm using)

I think it'll have to come down to nerfing or removing gimballed weapons. I don't think IM is nearly as strong when it comes to fixed weapons.

Decoupling still would be present. The difference in my post is that you'd have to be mindful of ship momentum and strong/weak axis for turning. You can still circle strafe but it would require much more finesse and rely on riding the momentum of the ship rather than brute forcing it like now. Same with turning on axis, still there and viable but you have to be mindful of changing direction and how it make be the wrong choice in a situation.

As far the ship design needing wings, forward cockpits, larger mains and smaller nav thrusters is already there. I'd argue that my post also makes more sense given how CIG is designing their ships. Hell, CIG even knows this because every time they advertise or fly on streams they do so which isn't reflective how the ships actually control.

To the last point I'm not saying aim assist, but the focus needs to first on flying the ship to aim and not what we have now. Another problem is depending on the control method you are playing a different game. IM is not even balanced against other mouse control modes which is hurting balance on a fundamental level.

 

[Anton Sugar]

Fascinating discussion, y'all--thanks. The evolution of the flight model, and the reasoning behind these changes, is really interesting to me. I love Elite's flight model but recognize it is "dated" in its foundation, as great as it is. I'm glad SC is trying something different and hope they find a way to make it rewarding *and* unique.

 

[Raticus79]

I saw they highlighted the leaderboards in that newsletter and thought I'd check it out.
I'm rank 1500 or so. Somehow the #1 player got there with only 1 hour of flight time, lol. Looks like it comes down to avoiding damage as much as possible to max out the kill/death and damage dealt/taken ratios.
https://robertsspaceindustries.com/community/arena-commander/leaderboard?mode=VC

 

[Pomerlaw]

There is a stream today, right?

 

[tuxfool]

Fascinating discussion, y'all--thanks. The evolution of the flight model, and the reasoning behind these changes, is really interesting to me. I love Elite's flight model but recognize it is "dated" in its foundation, as great as it is. I'm glad SC is trying something different and hope they find a way to make it rewarding *and* unique.

I don't think the issue with the Elite flight model is that it is dated, rather that it is artificial. Most space sims did not use the bank and roll model.

Elite found something that worked for them, but I rather dislike it, precisely because it is unconventional. To me even the smaller ships feel like flying space submarines and tbh I'd love a submarine game, I'd just not like it to be in space.

There is a stream today, right?

Next week. Unless you're talking about Reverse the Verse, in which case that is here:
https://youtu.be/4JWnN8cpX6k?t=307

 

[Anton Sugar]

I don't think the issue with the Elite flight model is that it is dated, rather that it is artificial. Most space sims did not use the bank and roll model.

Elite found something that worked for them, but I rather dislike it, precisely because it is unconventional. To me even the smaller ships feel like flying space submarines and tbh I'd love a submarine game, I'd just not like it to be in space.

You're right, I used the wrong phrasing. I had the ol "WW2 model" complaint in my head.

As I said, I love Elite's model, but understand where you're coming from. I do feel that more agile ships feel distinctly less u-boatish, though. Actually, the maneuverability of the ship-launch fighters vaguely reminds me of SC. You can stop/turn/boost on a dime.

 

[Pomerlaw]

Yeah even small ships in Elite are sluggish.

But then, the small ships in Elite are ENORMOUS.

 

[Dubbedinenglish]

A couple things I dislike in Elite is the yaw limiting and that maneuvering is based on throttle position and not speed/momentum. The thing though that it does that draws me in is that everything follows logic with how you fly. Flying from smaller ships to large ones let you feel the size and adjusts play depending on it. As someone who loves flight games from Ace Combat to IL-2 it has that hook that makes flying just fun and a layered experience. Which is what I'm hoping they can get right with SC. Ultimately if the core flying model/mechanics are not engaging I can't see it being worthwhile.

 

[Zalusithix]

Yeah even small ships in Elite are sluggish.

But then, the small ships in Elite are ENORMOUS.

Yeah, most of the currently playable ships in SC are more or less the equivalent of the smaller ships in Elite. Elite doesn't lend itself well to selling the scale of their ships. Walking up to - and through - a ship in SC style does wonders to give a frame of reference.

As a counterpoint though, Elite in VR gets the scale across even better than SC. VR is the king of scale setting.

 

[Burny]

As a counterpoint though, Elite in VR gets the scale across even better than SC. VR is the king of scale setting.

It'll be interesting to see how they tackle on foot first person gameplay in VR, seeing as that seems to be the Achilles' heel for all things VR when it comes to make users want to puke. The last trailer is already teasing the space legs part a bit.


As for the flight model, the WW2 in space is more a compliment than anything. At least modeling those era's planes' behavior guarantees dramatic dogfights. If devs were to simulate space combat based on actual physics, we'd more likely than not be firing guided weapons at ranges were the targets aren't even visible to the human eye.

I don't even mind if Star Citizen ends up as 'turrets in space'. Elite already makes great use of a HOTAS, so there's plenty of room for a different arcadey fantasy space flight model and it doesn't have to be a HOTAS game. The most important parts for me will be whether it conveyes the mass and size differences of the ships as well as different handling characteristics convincingly and whether they make the actual ship control fun. Bonus points for creating a level playing field between control methods. Elite has shown that it's possible, with the way their gimbal s work and not having an 'aim to fly' mode.


Not that it matters at this point as the wasted time won't come back, but perfecting their flight model is what I would've expected them to do in Arena Commander during the last two years. If needs be, with grey boxes as placeholders for ships. In the end, the flight model is a bunch of computations based on player input and a number of parameters. They could even transfer it to a completely different engine once they have it down. It just strikes me as a wasted opportunity for rapidly prototyping changes to the FM.

 

[iHaunter]

I really hope they show SQ42 or something at least related to it.

I think it would make the backers even more restless.

 

[Zabojnik]

I really hope they show SQ42 or something at least related to it.

I think it would make the backers even more restless.

Roll on Gamescom.

 

[kutthoat5150]

I really hope they show SQ42 or something at least related to it.

I think it would make the backers even more restless.

I don't think we will according to the preview of what's to come from the newsletter...

"Join us on our Twitch and YouTube channels for our Holiday Live Stream next Friday, December 16th at 11 AM PST / 7 PM GMT. Expect to see 2.6 gameplay and features, a friendly international competition, more details about an alien race, a new concept ship and details on our upcoming Holiday Promotions."

 

[KKRT00]

I don't think we will according to the preview of what's to come from the newsletter...

"Join us on our Twitch and YouTube channels for our Holiday Live Stream next Friday, December 16th at 11 AM PST / 7 PM GMT. Expect to see 2.6 gameplay and features, a friendly international competition, more details about an alien race, a new concept ship and details on our upcoming Holiday Promotions."

They do not hype surprises recently.
We will definitely see more than it is described here, thought the possibility of not having S42 demo on stream is quite high.
I think the plan is to show S42, but they didnt want to confirm it in case it wouldnt be ready in polished enough state. Basically they do not want the second CitizenCon situation and because we are already passed CitizenCon, most people do not care if they will see it next Friday or sometime in January.
Chris promised quality and polish, and he knows that he has to deliver this time.

 

[MasterOfPastures]

Neat find, although I don't know if it is "new" for 2.6
2.6 Freelancer UI
Only thing sticking out is the sphere ball radar. If it were a flat circle with vertical lines (like HW's sensor screen) this might be the best and most immersive ship UI I have seen.

 

[Eolz]

Neat find, although I don't know if it is "new" for 2.6
2.6 Freelancer UI
Only thing sticking out is the sphere ball radar. If it were a flat circle with vertical lines (like HW's sensor screen) this might be the best and most immersive ship UI I have seen.

It was shown off in the Gamescom demo, but yeah, new for 2.6.

 

[Dubbedinenglish]

Neat find, although I don't know if it is "new" for 2.6
2.6 Freelancer UI
Only thing sticking out is the sphere ball radar. If it were a flat circle with vertical lines (like HW's sensor screen) this might be the best and most immersive ship UI I have seen.

Eyesore ball aside the should adjust the yoke position a little down and closer to the pilot. Looks silly with arms outstretched lol

 

[Actual]

My friend just spent 275$ on a single ship for this game. He talks like that's a bargain and says that if I played, I would understand.

Is he insane? In which world is a single virtual ship worth more than 3 full video games???

 

[Zalusithix]

My friend just spent 275$ on a single ship for this game. He talks like that's a bargain and says that if I played, I would understand.

Is he insane? In which world is a single virtual ship worth more than 3 full video games???

In a world where you value the potential of the game more than 3 other video games. That was easy. If Star Citizen was limited to people only contributing $60 to the project, then they'd have a small fraction of their current funds. It wouldn't be financially viable to attempt what they are. Meanwhile traditional publishers wouldn't touch something this risky with a 100 foot pole (especially back when SC took off).

Also, $275 isn't all that much for crowdfunded project pledging. Plenty of projects have pledge tiers in that price range that are plenty popular. As an example, 4157 people pledged $250 and above in the Bloodstained Kickstarter. Combine this with the fact that Star Citizen pulls from an older, passionate demographic with money to burn, and $275 is a drop in the bucket compared to what many fans are willing to spend.

 

[Danthrax]

My friend just spent 275$ on a single ship for this game. He talks like that's a bargain and says that if I played, I would understand.

Is he insane? In which world is a single virtual ship worth more than 3 full video games???

the ship is a pledge reward

your friend donated money to make this game a reality.

 

[Anton Sugar]

I think y'all are kinda answering a question Actual didn't ask. His friend said it was a "bargain" (implying this is a good price, either for the game or the ship) and that if he played he would understand (not really sure how that makes any sense, esp if just viewing it as a crowdfunding transaction).

I would just ask your friend what they're talking about, haha. Maybe it's a bargain in the sense that the ships are only going to get more expensive (at least, in $ value, not in terms of how easy or hard it is to get them in-game) as the game's development progress?

 

[Burny]

Is he insane? In which world is a single virtual ship worth more than 3 full video games???

In any world where the limits of what awesome parallel life things you can do with that fancy virtual space ship aren't dictated by the grey, pedestrian reality of a released game, but by the imagination of such a released game instead. All with procedural birds on planets and cocktail mixing mechanics in your ship, with an abundance of highly intelligent NPCs on the many planets of a 100 star systems or in their Starports. And whatever fancy thing you could imagine you'd like to have in a Wing Commander meets Second Life product.


All you have to do to make all that a reality, is throw money at Chris Roberts for as long as he keeps asking you to. Whenever (and if) the game eventually is released, you'll have the most grandiouse virtual space toy to play with instead of starting in a 60$ game buyer's peasant ship. Nothing of the myriad of things he has promised during the last four years will be left out, no sir!

Don't ask for deadlines of the project though, because you don't understand game development then.

 

[Zalusithix]

I think y'all are kinda answering a question Actual didn't ask. His friend said it was a "bargain" (implying this is a good price, either for the game or the ship) and that if he played he would understand (not really sure how that makes any sense, esp if just viewing it as a crowdfunding transaction).

I would just ask your friend what they're talking about, haha. Maybe it's a bargain in the sense that the ships are only going to get more expensive (at least, in $ value, not in terms of how easy or hard it is to get them in-game) as the game's development progress?

A value for the game that he perhaps always dreamed of getting? That'd make sense with the "if you played it, you'd understand" mentality. There's no way to objectively rate a given ship as being "worth it" right now in SC. Especially since any ship that I can think of at that price point isn't going to appreciate much in price in later sales.

Edit: Alternatively you can pledge like Burny so you can always have a reason to complain about the status of the game! Now that's a bargain.

Nothing of the myriad of things he has promised during the last four years will be left out, no sir!

I doubt many actually expect every single thing they've ever mentioned to be implemented, let alone right away. Stuff changes in development, and that should be plenty obvious to any veteran backer just by how ships themselves have changed. That said, CIG could end up leaving out a number of things and still end up with a result that's more ambitious than anything else out there currently or on the radar.

 

[Agremont]

In any world where the limits of what awesome parallel life things you can do with that fancy virtual space ship aren't dictated by the grey, pedestrian reality of a released game, but by the imagination of such a released game instead. All with procedural birds on planets and cocktail mixing mechanics in your ship, with an abundance of highly intelligent NPCs on the many planets of a 100 star systems or in their Starports. And whatever fancy thing you could imagine you'd like to have in a Wing Commander meets Second Life product.


All you have to do to make all that a reality, is throw money at Chris Roberts for as long as he keeps asking you to. Whenever (and if) the game eventually is released, you'll have the most grandiouse virtual space toy to play with instead of starting in a 60$ game buyer's peasant ship. Nothing of the myriad of things he has promised during the last four years will be left out, no sir!

Don't ask for deadlines of the project though, because you don't understand game development then.

Pretty much.

 

[Camp Freddie]

The worrying thing is that a lot of people buy ships during sales and then obsess about what cross-class chassis upgrade pack they buy for their limited edition ship and what they can "melt" without losing some perk or other.

It gives the lie to "it's just a donation towards the developer".

I splashed out an extra $10 for the pack with beta access and a light fighter (mustang?) back in the day, but the people that act like a $250 ship being reduced to $200 for the limited anniversary sale makes it a 'bargain' are insane.

The ship combat changes surprise me. I still can't believe they're making major changes this far into development. The basic flight mechanics are the sine qua non of the game. If they suck, the game is dead, no matter how many boundaries they push in facial textures and lip-syncing.
I expect continual balance changes forever, but it doesn't seem like they even have the basics locked down (like how you balance fixed/gimball or HOTAS and M/KB users).

On space combat, I think the key is balancing thrust with momentum, in the same way that airplane simulators are about balancing thrust and gravity. You need enough momentum to allow drifting but not so much that it becomes a game of jousting turrets.

I don't see how SQ42 can work when they are making these combat changes. I also wonder if they will be able to keep SQ42 missions balanced as they inevitably fiddle with the flight mechanics to solve PvP issues in the PU.

I'll have to boot up arena commander again to see what it's like now. Does the tutorial work again or is it still broken? I always leave just enough time between plays to completely forget the control scheme

 

[Burny]

That said, CIG could end up leaving out a number of things and still end up with a result that's more ambitious than anything else out there currently or on the radar.

If they could release a game, that is. So far they're stuck at tech demos.

 

[Zalusithix]

The worrying thing is that a lot of people buy ships during sales and then obsess about what cross-class chassis upgrade pack they buy for their limited edition ship and what they can "melt" without losing some perk or other.

It gives the lie to "it's just a donation towards the developer".

I splashed out an extra $10 for the pack with beta access and a light fighter (mustang?) back in the day, but the people that act like a $250 ship being reduced to $200 for the limited anniversary sale makes it a 'bargain' are insane.

Backers have donated the funds to CIG either way. They're given the ability to migrate what perks they get for contributing, so they might as well take advantage of that. There's nothing wrong with playing the ship sale meta-game if you're still based in the reality that your primary objective is supporting the game with everything else as a bonus. Once you've lost track of that then all is lost.

Also ships generally don't get cheaper in the sales outside of bundle packs. They actually get more expensive which rewards earlier backing. This allows some level of speculation on "maximizing returns" for an "investment", but it'd be silly to buy specifically for that reason alone. It all ties back to the previous part where donating X to CIG and then get to play a sort of meta-game alongside the development of the real game. Once the game actually releases, all ships will effectively be worth $0 as anybody will be able to buy them with in game money.

Edit:

If they could release a game, that is. So far they're stuck at tech demos.

Sure, they could pull an Elite and release something that was one step removed from a tech demo until many updates down the road. Or they could do what they're doing now. Or they could go belly up and do nothing. Such is the risk of backing projects.

 

[chifanpoe]

Sure, they could pull an Elite and release something that was one step removed from a tech demo until many updates down the road. Or they could do what they're doing now. Or they could go belly up and do nothing. Such is the risk of backing projects.

To add to this, what is in the current 2.6 PTU build is more fun than what was in the orginal release of Elite... Not bad for a tech demo.

 

[Burny]

Sure, they could pull an Elite and release something that was one step removed from a tech demo until many updates down the road.

Wheter you label and sell a tech demo as the "1.0" release, or insist on calling your tech demo "Alpha 2.x" for as long as not everything is perfect or some such and keep your studio running on pledges, it doesn't change one thing about the fact that updates have to keep coming. Whatever Star Citizen does with 200+ devs however, the updates to their alpha this year have been rather slim, even in the case they manage to finally release the 2.6 update.

To add to this, what is in the current 2.6 PTU build is more fun than what was in the orginal release of Elite... Not bad for a tech demo.

Very hard to demonstrate for something only available to super-spenders partly under NDA. But it also took two more years of dev time and contains less fundamental space ship related mechanics compared even to to the original Elite Dangerous release (unless they secretely snuck exploration, cargo and mining mechanics in there?), so it better be. The FPS gameplay it definitely has over Elite, but that's still as much in search of a game as the spaceship flying, unless they've implemented a game loop outside of the handful of available missions in the fraction of an available system?

 

[chifanpoe]

Also took two more years of dev time compared to the original Elite Dangerous release.

And rightfully it should.

What does Elite, or any game for that matter, have to compare with a Cat and Starfarer onscreen flying next to each other with people actively manning them? Let alone 4 of each of them actively jousting each other, or people EVAing from the side of one of them to actively board and take over another.

The fidelity and scope at this level will always take longer.

" for something only available to super-spenders" - I have been in the Evocati sense day 1, the small first group to get selected (sub 250) was there because we submitted the most bug reports and or feedback on the game. The majority of those testers had not spent more than $60 for the base game. Even now with the larger 400 or so group size most are not huge money backers of the game. What is your SC handle I could put in a good word for you if you like and maybe get you in? There are several other very cynical Evocati Testers you could group up with.

 

[Zalusithix]

Wheter you label and sell a tech demo as the "1.0" release, or insist on calling your tech demo "Alpha 2.x" for as long as not everything is perfect or some such and keep your studio running on pledges, it doesn't change one thing about the fact that updates have to keep coming. Whatever Star Citizen does with 200+ devs however, the updates to their alpha this year have been rather slim, even in the case they manage to finally release the 2.6 update.

There's a huge difference between labeling a tech demo as public release 1.0 and an alpha. People can't reasonably spend money on SC expecting a complete game right now without bugs and all that. With a non alpha/beta release there's expectations that simply aren't there otherwise.

Beyond that, people are free to not continue to donate money to the project if they're not satisfied with the current rate of development. Given that the level of money that CIG has managed to take in over the past year hasn't gone down at all, obviously there's a large contingent of people that aren't that concerned about the release frequency. No doubt based on what has been shown as being worked on. Obviously that's not sustainable forever and CIG will have to show more progress in 2017. Something I'm fairly confident that they will end up achieving. There's no way that it'll be enough to please you, but enough to keep the pitchforks at bay for the majority at least.

 

[Burny]

What does Elite, or any game for that matter, have to compare with a Cat and Starfarer onscreen flying next to each other with people actively manning them? Let alone 4 of each of them actively jousting each other, or people EVAing from the side of one of them to actively board and take over another.

To answer that question, which of the mechanics Elite currently has that are absent from Star Citizen's tech demos would you like to pick as a basis for comparison? Canyon runs on planets? Launching fighters from larger ships? Exploring the ingame galaxy with a group of people? Bounty hunting/trading/mission running for credits to go from a starter ship to the ones of Starfarer/Caterpillar size?

To turn the question round, what does Star Citizen or any other game for that matter have to compare with the above?

That's right, a promise. Just like Elite has the promise of maybe not beeing totally poo for coop gaming anymore in the foreseeable future, when they manage to release multicrew, while it's pretty serviceable for solo gaming (before the grind sets in) or PvPing.

 

[Akronis]

To answer that question, which of the mechanics Elite currently has that are absent from Star Citizen's tech demos would you like to pick as a basis for comparison? Canyon runs on planets? Launching fighters from larger ships? Exploring the ingame galaxy with a group of people? Bounty hunting/trading/mission running for credits to go from a starter ship to the ones of Starfarer/Caterpillar size?

To turn the question round, what does Star Citizen or any other game for that matter have to compare with the above?

That's right, a promise. Just like Elite has the promise of maybe not beeing totally poo for coop gaming anymore in the foreseeable future, when they manage to release multicrew, while it's pretty serviceable for solo gaming (before the grind sets in) or PvPing.

I mean, most other games are actually fun to play and not money grinds for better ships.

 

[Outrun]

I have no expectations of this game at the moment. Hoping for the best in 2019 and a complete SQ42 campaign.

If it fails, then it fails.

 

[Cabbagehead]

It's crazy how much time he spends here, lurking.

 

[Anton Sugar]

And rightfully it should.

What does Elite, or any game for that matter, have to compare with a Cat and Starfarer onscreen flying next to each other with people actively manning them? Let alone 4 of each of them actively jousting each other, or people EVAing from the side of one of them to actively board and take over another.

The fidelity and scope at this level will always take longer.

Well, it's a released game, for one

You know that EVA, on-foot exploration, FPS combat, etc. is coming to Elite, too, right? Just like most shared features between SC and ED, its implementation and design will likely differ wildly, but the scope of SC PTU will seem less unique when it's released amongst other space games that have added similar/same features in 2-3 years (or whenever).

SC and ED are doing similar but very different things. ED can't match a lot of aspects of SC and SC can't match aspects of ED--nor do they need to. It's mostly ridiculous to compare them outside of your subjective amounts of fun with each and personal preferences. I guess you can compare development processes, project management, flight models, ship design, etc. but it's easier to compare their differences than what they have in common.

 

[chifanpoe]

To answer that question, which of the mechanics Elite currently has that are absent from Star Citizen's tech demos would you like to pick as a basis for comparison? Canyon runs on planets? Launching fighters from larger ships? Exploring the ingame galaxy with a group of people? Bounty hunting/trading/mission running for credits to go from a starter ship to the ones of Starfarer/Caterpillar size?
.

https://robertsspaceindustries.com/feature-list

Canyon runs on planets? - not in current build, but there is ship racing on a set course (AC).

Launching fighters from larger ships? can do in current build with the correct ships / good piloting skills.

Exploring the ingame galaxy with a group of people? can do in current build (just stuck in 1 galaxy but with multiple planets)

Bounty hunting - can do in current build with working faction based system.

Mission running for credits - can do in current build

Exploring - can do in current build - and find loot for credits and weapons.

No in game ship progression yet
No in game trading system yet - but you can buy items with credits you earn in-game.

 

[chifanpoe]

Well, it's a released game, for one

You know that EVA, on-foot exploration, FPS combat, etc. is coming to Elite, too, right? Just like most shared features between SC and ED, its implementation and design will likely differ wildly, but the scope of SC PTU will seem less unique when it's released amongst other space games that have added similar/same features in 2-3 years (or whenever).

SC and ED are doing similar but very different things. ED can't match a lot of aspects of SC and SC can't match aspects of ED--nor do they need to. It's mostly ridiculous to compare them outside of your subjective amounts of fun with each and personal preferences. I guess you can compare development processes, project management, flight models, ship design, etc. but it's easier to compare their differences than what they have in common.

Well said sir, thank you.

 

[mercenar1e]

How cool is the sharing of the internal release schedule? Now we know about delays, etc without having to wonder whats going on. It's been close to a month since doing this... Surely they wouldn't fuck this up right ?

2.6 PTU should have been released? And it hasn't? And the website makes no mention of it? And CIG hasn't said a word?


Oh.

 

[tuxfool]

How cool is the sharing of the internal release schedule? Now we know about delays, etc without having to wonder whats going on. It's been close to a month since doing this... Surely they wouldn't fuck this up right ?

2.6 PTU should have been released? And it hasn't? And the website makes no mention of it? And CIG hasn't said a word?


Oh.

They have released it every Friday. And the reason that they did release it is so people like you can make educated guesses as to the state of the release. Instead what you're now asking them to do is to nurse your anxieties and chew your food for you. Internal schedules changed as one could clearly see between each subsequent weekly release.

Use your thinking cap, look at the dates of specific features and see if it would be realistic for 2.6 to be released already.

 

[Besthelboy]

How cool is the sharing of the internal release schedule? Now we know about delays, etc without having to wonder whats going on. It's been close to a month since doing this... Surely they wouldn't fuck this up right ?

2.6 PTU should have been released? And it hasn't? And the website makes no mention of it? And CIG hasn't said a word?


Oh.

What? They've updated it every Friday with explanations and reasoning for delays.

 

[mercenar1e]

What? They've updated it every Friday with explanations and reasoning for delays.

We are in the estimated release week. PTU should have gone up but it hasn't. The update shouldn't have to wait until Friday. CIG should let us know with a brief answer and have us come back to the site on Friday to find out the specifics for the delay.

 

[Burny]

I mean, most other games are actually fun to play and not money grinds for better ships.

Most games, as in: most non-sandbox multiplayer games you mean? All of the "sandbox multiplayer" genre tends to have some grindy activity for progress, seeing as none can offer infinite handcrafted content, while the very nature of sandbox games it to be open ended. What makes you think Star Citizen won't have to the very same design hurdle to take, once it has to actual offer ingame progression to take normal buyers from an Aurora to the Idris instead of only letting in people with ships they bought by means of real word dough or some placeholder ingame currency? How many hours of hand crafted mission content do you imagine for that specific progression scenario?

The one thing Star Citizen very, very realistically promises to do a lot better than Elite, no matter how complete compared to the actual KS promise it eventually turns out, is to not act as if multiplayer focus and guild play are naughty words. Seeing as cooperative play can turn even basic game elements into fun activities with friends, that's a real boon. Frontier has a lot to learn in that regard.

https://robertsspaceindustries.com/feature-list

Canyon runs on planets? - not in current build, but there is ship racing on a set course (AC).

Launching fighters from larger ships? can do in current build with the correct ships / good piloting skills.

Exploring the ingame galaxy with a group of people? can do in current build (just stuck in 1 galaxy but with multiple planets)

Bounty hunting - can do in current build with working faction based system.

Mission running for credits - can do in current build

Exploring - can do in current build - and find loot for credits and weapons.

No in game ship progression yet
No in game trading system yet - but you can buy items with credits you earn in-game.

No idea if you've ever actually played Elite, but spinning things to look like the same "bullet point" features is rather disingenuous. No amount of scavenging equals exploration as in "first to lay eyes on a pair of binary ringed earthlike worlds out in the void", no singular race course equals canyon racing on copious amounts of procgen planets, no amount of space men dressup and hand gun bying equals ship progression and outfitting meta game or trade implemnetation and no amount of glitching small ships into cargo holds equals a formal ship launched fighter implementation (unless 2.6 finally makes the Constellation's carried fighters usable, in which case it's a formal implementation). And while "stuck in 1 galaxy" is technically correct, stuck in a fraction of one star system is more accurate, so week long exploration trips into uncharted territory are out of question.


Point is, Star Citizen's scope is neither as uniquely grand nor as unchallenged as people like to sell it as, whenever the its current state in relation to. Elite is easy to dismiss as comparison based on the grind (yes, sadly very much true), but Star Citizen's PU portion promises to do what Elite currently does and will have to tackle the same issues in terms of generating potentially infinite content for players and shows very little progress in that regards in favor of fancy tech demos that may or may not end up being part of the released game.

 

[Besthelboy]

We are in the estimated release week. PTU should have gone up but it hasn't. The update shouldn't have to wait until Friday. CIG should let us know with a brief answer and have us come back to the site on Friday to find out the specifics for the delay.

The whole point of the production schedule report is to update us on the progress of certain builds, which they've agreed to share every Friday. The vast majority of people are fine with waiting until Friday to know specifically why a certain Evocati/PTU date was missed. In fact I haven't even seen one complaint other than you. They've determined that the build wasn't ready for a wider scale PTU release, we will find out exactly why with specifics in the next report tomorrow. However we already have a brief answer of why the PTU build wasn't released listed directly on the caveats section of the report.

CAVEATS

But also, we would like to establish some ground rules before proceeding:

I.Quality will always be our number one goal. We set out on this journey by looking at the gaming landscape and asking: can we do better? We continue to ask that question about everything we do. As a result, we will ALWAYS extend timelines or re-do features and content if we do not feel they are up to our standards. The freedom to fight for a new level of quality in game development is what crowd funding has allowed us, and we will continue to fight to make sure Star Citizen is the best possible game it can be.

II.The estimates we provide are just that: estimates. They are based on our knowledge and experience, but there are many aspects of game development that are impossible to predict because they literally cover uncharted territory. You will see the same estimates we use in our internal planning, but it is important to understand that in many cases (especially with groundbreaking engineering tasks) these estimates are often subject to change due to unforeseen complexity in implementing features.

III.The time expected for bug fixing and polishing is also very hard to estimate, increasingly so in online and multiplayer situations. The complexity and the difficulty in testing at a large scale make it harder to reproduce and isolate bugs in order to fix them. We base our estimates, again, on our experience, but we also know that it’s possible for a single bug to cause a delay of days or weeks when a hundred others might be fixed instantly.

IV.Internal schedules, the ones you will now be privy to, tend to have aggressive dates to help the team focus and scope their tasks, especially in the case of tech development. Every team, even a team blessed with the kind of support and freedom you have allowed us, needs target dates in order to focus and deliver their work.

Just a reminder, in case you forgot to read the big text at the very beginning of the page.

 

[Burny]

Just a reminder, in case you forgot to read the big text at the very beginning of the page.

None of which invalidates basic project management or deceny towards the people funding you: If you sail though a deadline for a certain deliverable, even if it was an estimate, you provide a reason and at least a new estimated deadline. Not after you've sailed through, but before.

Something Chris Robert's seems to think is not necessary.

 

[KKRT00]

Most games, as in: most non-sandbox multiplayer games you mean? All of the "sandbox multiplayer" genre tends to have some grindy activity for progress, seeing as none can offer infinite handcrafted content, while the very nature of sandbox games it to be open ended. What makes you think Star Citizen won't have to the very same design hurdle to take, once it has to actual offer ingame progression to take normal buyers from an Aurora to the Idris instead of only letting in people with ships they bought by means of real word dough or some placeholder ingame currency? How many hours of hand crafted mission content do you imagine for that specific progression scenario?

You are completely forgetting whole FPS gameplay and ability to enter ships.
This by itself mean that you can steal ships and goods from other players, not only destroy it, which completely changes the economy and how you can acquire wealth.

The other part is that Idris or even Constellation are not singleplayer ship, where every ship in Elite is singleplayer.

 

[Burny]

You are completely forgetting whole FPS gameplay and ability to enter ships.

No, I'm not, on the contrary. Only the point I'm trying to make seems to be flying past you. There's no point in pointing out individual features one game (or tech demo) has already while the other promises to add them or similar features (notwithstanding detailed differences of the implementation) down the line and then, based on that, claim either is oh-so unprecedented compared to the other with unparalleld scope and whatnot.

Who knows what state both projects are in come E3 2017? Who knows, maybe the FPS gameplay you like to bang about will manifest in Elite, while maybe Star Citizen get's more playground than a fraction of one Star System and some more ship related mechanics than walking through them, driving them and shooting their cannons?

The other part is that Idris or even Constellation are not singleplayer ship, where every ship in Elite is singleplayer.

Another disingenuous comparison, seeing as multicrew will be introduced in Elite as part of 2.3 onward and Star Citizen - iirc - promised the ability to hire NPC crew.

 

[KKRT00]

Who knows what state both projects are in come E3 2017? Who knows, maybe the FPS gameplay you like to bang about will manifest in Elite, while maybe Star Citizen get's more playground than a fraction of one Star System and some more ship related mechanics than walking through them, driving them and shooting their cannons?

Sure, FPS gameplay will appear in Elite both with multi crew ships when they still have not released seated coop.

----

Another disingenuous comparison, seeing as multicrew will be introduced in Elite as part of 2.3 onward and Star Citizen - iirc - promised the ability to hire NPC crew.

Seated gameplay is not multicrew.
And disingenuous is a strong word coming from you.