exmachina64
Banned
Poor Ben, I hope it goes well.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Star Citizen Alpha 2.0 | The 'Verse Awakens
- Thread starter Raticus79
- Start date
Poor Ben, I hope it goes well.
Dictator93
Member
First time seeing Ben Mendelsohn's character in game. Cool.
Cabbagehead
Member
First time seeing Ben Mendelsohn's character in game. Cool.
Well be interesting to see. How much we'll be able interact with these hologram display. Before missions and being interrupted at the same time. Can't wait.
CIG utilization of their PIP looks like it's going to be amazing. Given the breath of its use and cost effective.
Good stuff.
It looks like the structure could handle it, but we haven't seen it in motion yet:
New Female Head model with more detail it seems and better hair texturing/lighting. Looks amazing.
Not a video though, would have been nice seeing the new hair simulation in motion. But that will come soon enough for sure.
Cabbagehead
Member
Can we get some FFXV female model hairstyles in the game? They look damn nice, crossposting from the FFXV multiplayer thread. It's not 100% perfect, but they look at least like hair and not some plastic flower pot that has melted on your head.
That's some sweet looking stuff. Yeah i don't see why not, CIG is working on combing their hair model work and their own bone based physics system together. As shown above.
Just need to see it in motion. Plus they're researching and playing around with zero-g hair physics aswell.
Surprised this thread was so quiet while the community was melting down, it's even hit gaming news sites:
Eurogamer: Star Citizens 3.0 release slips again
Although they seem to quote a fansite that hasn't been updated since early 2016 there, mistaking it for the official SC site.
Anyway, the most recent schedule update had teams being reallocated away from 3.0 development. Combine that with some statements from CIG that there was no Bugsmashers this week because they were crunching, and I think they realised that 3.0 wasn't going to be ready to show "as is" at Gamescom and are scrambling to work on another more scripted demo to have something to show.
Honestly, that means 3.0 will probably be delayed further, as there'll be fewer people on it over the next month. This chart will probably stay horizontal for a while.
I agree that it seems likely they're crunching for gamescom, but I'm still kind of surprised that they're allocating so much time to it given CitizenCon isn't that far away.
Seems likely to me the original plan was "We're going to ship 3.0.0 for or at Gamescom, talk about future stuff at CitizenCon". Now it's clear they can't make 3.0.0 in time for Gamescom, but still feel obliged to show something, so they're firing all cylinders to get SOMETHING presentable. Maybe SQ42 vertical slice?
I guess the new goal is 3.0.0 to be released at CitizenCon in October. But if devs get burnt out creating the Gamescom vertical slice I could see it being pushed back further, probably after holidays.
masterkajo
Member
Oh wow. This is beyond awesome. Just thinking of the possibilites. Flying with a Carrack, finding a planet but before going down, you send your drones there that give you a live visual of the surface and landing area. Love it!
Zambayoshi
Member
As always, they have no choice. If they lose the confidence of the backers as a whole, the project is doomed. The only way to retain the confidence of the backers is to show progress.
Panajev2001a
GAF's Pleasant Genius
Unless Gamescom can help then get extra funding, wouldnt it make more sense to give up that slot and avoid crunching for a demo?
Panajev2001a
GAF's Pleasant Genius
It is indeed an amazingly flexible implementation.
If they had to show progress to backers, backers would have bailed out long ago.
True, but is it better to show a hastily constructed demo / slice / video? If I recall correctly, last year they had to cancel a demonstration the day of -- if there's a risk of that happening again, it seems like perhaps it's better to pull out of Gamescom and announce the focus on getting 3.0.0 out the door.
Yeah that's exactly what I was wondering. Unless maybe they had already been constructing a vertical slice for a long time and it just required unexpected additional manpower. I mean, Gamescom can help them secure more funds, but if it's a bad presentation or a presentation cancelled at the last minute, I thought that might hurt more than announcing no presentation one month ahead of time.
Cabbagehead
Member
Uh? why are you shit posting?
Delta patcher confirmed for 3.0, awesome
The secondary viewport stuff looks really cool. It's gonna be pretty neat seeing stuff like multiple screens here and there showing the same security camera footage, or watching a hologram of someone and then explosions happen around them and you know it's really happening somewhere else in the game.
With the studio updates having been so awesome for the last couple of months.. I think I might go into ATV withdrawal.
At least they'll be back once 3.0 is on the rails.
The holo/projection tech looks really great. Love how it looks currently, can't imagine all the cool possibilities this brings. Stuff like this is the first step to make something like a journalist/reporter role viable in SC. I've always been interested in how they would actually manage to get that in the game, but I'm starting to see the potential.
At least they'll be back once 3.0 is on the rails.
The holo/projection tech looks really great. Love how it looks currently, can't imagine all the cool possibilities this brings. Stuff like this is the first step to make something like a journalist/reporter role viable in SC. I've always been interested in how they would actually manage to get that in the game, but I'm starting to see the potential.
Panajev2001a
GAF's Pleasant Genius
I am not sure I agree... that would imply they already ran out of money or are close to running out.
It's really frustrating that the dev teams are still missing their goals. Things change, but I was hoping they might be able to hit their targets for once. I wonder what the underlying problems are. Personnel, new tech, etc.? Feels like 3.0 has been delayed quite a lot, though I know it's a huge package.
iHaunter
Member
There's a reason why a game like this hasn't been made yet.
If it was so easy other companies would've attempted it.
Honestly I think a lot of the problems stem from the fact that the scope changed so drastically from the original plans and they keep rolling from there. After it was such a success CR really should have stepped back and re-planned the whole thing from scratch with a completely different time table. But because of the backer element they can't really do that.
mercenar1e
Member
staticneuron
Member
This is a fascinating idea. A couple of questions for you though. At what point should things be re planned from scratch? What funding level? At $9 million (2013), $36 Million (2014), $68 million (2015), $104.6 million(2016),or at $140.7 million(2017)? What features do you believe needed for them to replan from scratch? What elements do you feel have not been in step? At what point would you choose to handle things within company and hire internally versus outsourcing? What timetable do you use when creating tech no one has created and integrated before?
In the words of Chris Roberts in the most recent ATV.
Since it seems you are under the impression that they could create a more reliable schedule and that the issue deals with scope instead of new tech... Maybe you should tell them how its done. better yet, show them..
https://cloudimperiumgames.com/jobs
The fans will hold you in the highest regard and sing praises to your legacy.
Cabbagehead
Member
What he say make sense for the delay we saw with the internal shedule we get from the shedule report. But I don't think the complain would be the same if we were only speaking a on original estimate for June slowly becoming september, the crux of the matter is the original 2016 estimate.
I love that they choose to give us the shedule report, I really do, but the problem it solve isn't their inability to give a good estimate, only that with their old way of communication we wouldn't have known about a 3.0 delay sooner than a couple day ( at best ) before they would get past their estimate. It really only solve their inability to communicate delay in a timely manner.
I always said that the problem was their inability to manage people expectation, and the shedule report isn't an answer to that. It still sharing what is the most optimistic estimate possible and go with it, with just a few sentences here and there to temper expectation.
Imho that's a cop-out which clearly doesn't work, jdlshore reddit post about planning schedules and release forecasts ( accompanied with a release forecast ) is pretty much something that should be at the top of the official shedule report.
Cabbagehead
Member
Little bit of naive thinking and gross underestimations. So lets began with this:
https://waypoint.vice.com/en_us/article/4w33ed/why-its-so-hard-to-make-a-video-game
(An that's the perspective of traditional triple A game making, still the exact premise is true, almost everywhere. That making a game is not an exact science. Inherently. But at the time time no one project will be function or make their games in the same exact, ways either)
CIG job is not to manage peoples impossible expectations, when they've already put up guidelines. They've tried that and it still kind of doesn't work. Turns out people will get bent out of shape for anything small or big and that's been proven as fact over the last four years, especially for the loud impatient ones. So yes, the schedule is a very good answer currently. That does indeed bridge the gap between technical and reasonable and it's laid out bare with caveats and a guideline to help folks understand the process and its pretty darn clear, with what to most likely expect.
In regards to how THEIR development (Not every process is going to be the same. Not at all) works and how estimates and forecast may/will be used. Which don't have guarantees and is not therefore some kind of "cop-out"...regardless of how you may feel about it. It doesn't matter, because that their reality in regards to this project. While it's currently in alpha. The 3.0 patch contains a lot of new/updated work yet untested in a full on live environment.
Plus (as one of the developer said in a post) there are a lot of interdependencies and at play and all jdlshore post is doing is relaying the most obvious outcome. Based, what has been explained in every update and it's therefore a no brainier that a delay may happen given that context. Plus it's a small sample base and it's a abnormal situation. So the probability margins will be more predictable, depending on. Whats explained in the next update. It's the simplest of deduction skills but it has little barring on game development and the scheduling process itself. Especially under the weight of being ambitions in alpha.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qOjXfNnhxf0
(Star Citizen: Building a Schedule for a Universe, they made this video for the masses to understand how they try and contain all the shit they are doing and will be doing or should be doing.)
So what's a top of the official schedule already perfectly explains it to people, the why's and how's and possible when's. That's why agile/scrum development always caveats and utilize estimates. It's just that people don't read that shit nor do they understand the rigmarole of dealing with having to both work and finish new features, new mechanics, new everything and then worry about all the possible positive and negatives. Not just for themselves but for all the backers...it would turn out much, much different if the community wasn't that other mouth to feed. Because the developers wouldn't give a shit about things being in a relatively polished state. Truth be told CIG has done plenty at this point in time to help folks manage it themselves.
While their main job is to make the game and let the chips fall where they may on the other end of the spectrum. Because it's almost all out there for people to understand their world and there are a lot of stories from the industry itself as-well. To avoid double standards.
MasterOfPastures
Banned
C'mon dude, this is overly aggressive for the tone he gave. It's bordering on salty. I completely agree with your answer, since the inability of people understanding the sliding rise in funding and quality plus the completely unheard and new phenomenon of a studio growing through crowd-sourcing in the tens of millions, makes the idea of the original scope (and it's delivery dates) outdated and no longer valid.
Just... be the better person when communicating this.
And that Sandy captured moon footage at night is gorgeous.
I'm a backer since 2014. I can't even enter my ship without clipping to the ceiling. Saying trust in this game is based on progress made is false. I'm not saying the game will not turn out well (I hope so).
I disagree, they really didn't really try that much.
Sharing an estimate even with a big "It will likely change" isn't managing expectation, it's hoping people will manage it themselves ( how often, by how much ? make your own uneducated guess ).
Giving a conservative ( or even pessimist ) release forecasts, that's managing people expectation. It's being willing to share a.. less attractive date as what is the more reasonable level of expectation people should have.
If jdlshore model end up giving closer result of the actual release, of the previous and next release than what is given by the initial shedule report, or announced estimate; then it's proof that a better job can be done officially too.
I can see some of your points, but I'm sorry to say most of it still sounds like ( to me ) the answer people gave a year ago ( and before ) to people complaining about a lack of transparency. The common answer being that they already were more transparent than other dev, an the usual snarky "what do you want ? being able to see each dev screen and a live webcam of their office ?"; while the current event actually proved that a reasonable answer to that complaint did exist since we ended up getting the shedule report.
Cabbagehead
Member
Ugh, you really don't understand and i can't remember enough in detail to ramble and debunk. The first sentence of your post. Because it's plainly false and you just don't know by how much. That's to say CIG did try many ways and went through all the growing pains you can imagine and dealing with a bi-polar community. As they tried to negative the unknown and also trying to get developers to do stuff that they weren't really doing before, so directly.
An not all of them like it and the same applies today. They just want to make the game. But that's the project and it's abnormal. No one is going to do what CIG did in the beginning as a new studio, as they built up the staff and expanded the scope of the game. While trying to stay homely. Even though lots of people called it cringe and the like.
Go look up Wing-mans Hangar or Wing-mans nuts as many used to call it way back then. Though you would have to achieve search or time machine the older forums from back then as-well. But yeah they did their thing to the best of their ability and knowledge at the time. With the community as their test subjects. For better or for worse and for the good times and the weird/bad times.
.............................................
The rest with the "What do you want them to do" notions is kind of right. They've laid it out pretty clearly (Plans, Pitch, Segments, Schedule Communication...etc).I even provided examples to back up their caveats and general game development knowledge and realities of making games. In a creative field.
"If jdlshore model end up giving closer result of the actual release, of the previous and next release than what is given by the initial schedule report, or announced estimate; then it's proof that a better job can be done officially too."
The fact that you want to latch on to his "model" and really due think his is some kind of holy grail of reporting. Then all the other studios have been doing it wrong for decades. Because it was just that easy....but it's not. The caveats on the schedule report page is all you need. Especially since the 3,0 sched doesn't talk about everything, only the relevant stuff. Which why CIG is doing Burn Down Chart style ATV...estimates are the easy part and any half-decent "Model" can predict the probability of a delay. You don't think CIG's planning doesn't? it would be stupid if they didn't. But it's not that black and white.
Again, i gave examples. Turns out that groups of creative people that have to deal with the particulars of timelines and estimates and deadlines. There's a very, very fine line. So despite that redditors "model" it does not and wouldn't be able to help developers do their jobs and fix bugs and determine. How long that would take between four studios in different time-zone. Working on new and complex features and then getting into a build that needs to be released. Along with the new patching system. But that's why estimates exist, they aren't handcuffed by the limitations of a deadline or a release date and that's the point. At this stage of the development specifically.
Plus last year was last year not this year by a mile. Because it was super tense and hyped up at around this time and CIG was working hard despite the backlash. Now though we aren't being left in the dark.
iHaunter
Member
And it's off-screen footage captured on a mobile phone...
They seriously need to direct capture that scene and post it on Spectrum or something. It's easily one of the most impressive videos I've seen of SC.
And a cool bonus pic:
Sorry if I offended you for some reason. I was just giving my opinion on why they were having some difficulties with time tables and whatnot. They clearly seem to have it in hand now probably because they have taken stretch goals off the table so they have a defined set of features and do have to worry about new ones popping up a few months later.
staticneuron
Member
Since you can't see tone on the internet, I am not sure how you got to those. I find it humorous actually. We always see these type of posts whether it is a drive-by or a straight assertion but we have a complaint about scope and them needing to plan and rework it. It is fine to say that, but given the increase in funding, the progression of the tech, the plan laid out that they are still working on, it is only perfectly logical to ask "where" in this project someone would assume that it could be done better. Not only to post it here, but take it to the devs. CiG has established people who have worked before on Activision, Sony, Crytek, Origin, Digital Anvil, Shiny, Rockstar, THQ and many more. The Development team is filled with people who have been in the industry for quite some time. The engine chosen was Cryengine, and they literally hired most of the people who worked on the crysis games and even some of the main architects of the engine to work on this game. So the normal comments about the game from many seemingly informed people are about "How" CiG is handling development, what engine they are using, and the nebulous and undefined but often used assertion of scope. So is it really that bad to ask specifics including the jumps in budget every year or for them to talk about mechanics when referring to scope?
The original Kickstarter Goal was $500,000, so the question if people are going to talk about scope is about exceptions they hold since game as surpassed the original funding estimate by 311 times.
And about the working at CiG comment, if you were thinking I was being Snarky, I was not. Disco Lando went from fan to being hired at CiG. So I am serious if people have the know how and believe they can make the project better to seriously join the team (if they are not already busy with other project) and help this get completed faster.
Answered above. Not Offended. Actually curious if you have any specifics on what you claim and if you also have skills to make this game come out faster to join the team. They don't seem to have a problem hiring established devs.
Understand the frustration but the game is still an Alpha, As much as they would like polish they are still working on the fundamental building blocks that will make up the game. Some of the legacy ships still have a disparity of design and functionality, but they are addressing them all, they just need time. I am not sure what ship you have but I do know they are working on the aurora soon. The last issue I had was with the mustang. I think those remain unresolved to this day. I have never tried the 300 series so I don't know if they have issues.
Have they improved the Crusader textures? Looks a lot better than 2.6.
UpDownLeftRight
Banned
I don't think there is a Mac version right now and if it's planned it's probably a long way off.
staticneuron
Member
Probably not at all. Maybe if you used Bootcamp, but even then, as it stands now it is pretty intense on resources, so I couldn't tell you what performance you would see.
The min is
So if you meet those reqs, give it a try. Please keep us updated.
He mentioned Sandbox Windows. I think he is aware of that except most VM's I know of have hardware and resource limitations that would make trying a game like this either very taxing, or downright impossible.
shockthrill
Banned
maybe to amend the rift
Chris Roberts should bring Derek Smart in CIG,
Derek might have some good ideas about the game that Chris could implement, plus they could amend their relationship
Chris Roberts should bring Derek Smart in CIG,
Derek might have some good ideas about the game that Chris could implement, plus they could amend their relationship
its a new one, the cheapest one listed here.
game runs pretty nicely on my i7 4770k and 770. I dont think she will need crazy performance. I'll remain hopeful but skeptical i suppose. Maybe I'll ask on spectrum.
UH...why? literally the only thing DS does is rail against SC. DS probably makes more money off being a SC hater than if he were working there, since it seems to be the only thing on his twitter feed.
staticneuron
Member
That def looks like that can run game in Bootcamp. Bootcamp has unrestricted access to hardware. It puts windows on a separate partition. If you are intent on looking for VM, make sure you go over what the app can and cannot do. But the hardware is pretty solid. Pretty Great Mac.
Yeah they just updated the line and decided to bite. I'd probably do bootcamp if it's better then. I've ran a hackintosh build before so vaguely familiar, but eventually gave up on it because it was too unstable/too much maintenance and I need my computer for work. Here's hoping! She loves space, and everytime I take a look at SC again it's like 'yeah this is what gaming should be in 2017'. Can't wait.
I'm not really frustrated. I understand this is an alpha. I've seen development of Project CARS 1 and 2 through WMD and I've (recently) started developing my own games. I understand the oddities of game creation. I'm not in the vaporware bandwagon or anything like that. I guess people are used to that around here and jump at similar speech fast.
I've had this clipping problem (with the Mustang) since the PU was introduced (two years now?), but that's not really the issue. The issue is that I haven't seen any real advancement in that time frame. Last year showcase was technically amazing, ground breaking, but I judge my games out of the builds I play, not out of videos. In this time I've been playing Project CARS 2, with daily builds, and seen it go from basically Project CARS 1 to a whole new game (as ambitious as it gets for a racing sim).
So, basically my opinion is that trust by backers is mostly based on faith and a desire for everything to turn out great (this last one I share), not on progress. Which is fine, I guess? When 3.0 hits I will download the game again and try it. If it works, great, I will play it some. if it doesn't, I will continue waiting until the next big milestone or the game is released to pass judgement.
These shots are something else. Even with the yellower colour tone on the left it still looks good.
that aliasing tho.
Damn.
I will have fun just hanging around and explore on these planets.
I think we are mostly speaking about two very different things. In one hand it feel like you are equating my complaints about how they communicate their estimates, with how hard they are working. On the other hand, that regardless of what date is being given to the backer, it wouldn't help the project itself.
So I'll try to be more precise this time. I only speak about their communication with backers, and how they choose manage their expectation, regardless of if it's useful to the dev team themself or questioning how hard they work.
Over trying to say "they should do this", I'll ask the question :
What would be the downside of them sharing a conservative release forecasts in addition to what they currently do ?
The only downside I personally see is that the initial announcement of all the big release would have been received with less hype.
The benefits I see : most release wouldn't have felt like the result of consecutive delays, with a couple of exception where we might have had a few early release compared to what was expected ( or that time would have been taken by CIG for more polishing or to limit/avoid their crunch time which seemed pretty frightening at times ).
Similar threads
- Locked