Support NeoGAF

Dictator93 · Jun 14, 2016

Geist- said:
Star Citizen Main Theme Final

Apparently this is the new Main Theme found in the 2.4 game files. Sounds absolutely perfect.

This is bliss. I loooooooooove the keyboards that come in as well.

edit: loving the iron man coloured RSI suit

Also loving how silly high res its textures are

Danthrax · Jun 14, 2016

Geist- said:
Star Citizen Main Theme Final

Apparently this is the new Main Theme found in the 2.4 game files. Sounds absolutely perfect.

Cool!

Dictator93 said:
Also loving how silly high res its textures are

This is a pretty good example of the PBR materials looking distinctly like the real-life material they're supposed to look like.

mnannola · Jun 14, 2016

Zalusithix said:
If nothing else, SC has resulted in lots of high quality assets. Models, textures, audio effects, music, etc. Getting the actual game behind these things finished might be a challenge, but the individual parts are second to none. By far the highest production quality for a crowdfunded game so far. Not surprising given the amount of money taken in, but still.

I hope for this reason they are able to incorporate VR into a majority of the game. Even if the gameplay turns out to be a dud, being able to experience the assets and environments in VR would be worth the price of admission.

Burny · Jun 14, 2016

staticneuron said:
Please give it a rest.

Nope, I'm afraid. Nearly 400$ into backing and unlike some other frustrated backers I don't think trying to get a refund will do the project any good, so the less than... fair ToS change doesn't really bother me and I won't just get out. But from time to time - until the game is released and turns out to be at least halfway competent - I'll have to keep venting. Or until it crashes and burns. Depending on which happens first.

You also seem be under the misconception that I'm coming from the "SC is a scam angle". The reality is far from it. I'm having the feeling the project has been nearly run into the wall which, from time to time, causes peaks of frustration.

staticneuron · Jun 14, 2016

Burny said:
Nope, I'm afraid. Nearly 400$ into backing and unlike some other frustrated backers I don't think trying to get a refund will do the project any good, so the less than... fair ToS change doesn't really bother me and I won't just get out. But from time to time - until the game is released and turns out to be at least halfway competent - I'll have to keep venting. Or until it crashes and burns. Depending on which happens first.

You also seem be under the misconception that I'm coming from the "SC is a scam angle". The reality is far from it. I'm having the feeling the project has been nearly run into the wall which, from time to time, causes peaks of frustration.

Thats the thing, most backers would at least see something they are interested in, almost every post you have made is negative, throwing out baseless speculations about price and development. Trying to point out how buggy the alpha is (which by the way is a silly thing to do). Exalting Elite dangerous in almost every post you mentioned them together. And this is from the very first time you posted. You talk as if they never explain anything, which they constantly do in videos and posts on their webpage. Even if you didn't want to take the time to look at the videos you can see transcripts on inn. You moan about them not implementing star marine when the whole purpose was to demonstrate the mechanics for the PU. When they had the chance to release an early version of the PU with the FPS mechanics in it, you cry foul and say they cant be trusted. You keep on saying they have piled up promises as in feature creep except they haven't announced anything new in over a year and a half and are simply working to bring out what was already been agreed on.

Burny said:
The red flag would be not realizing how complex your vision/game has become, keeping piling up promises on top of the initial, already very ambitious promises and missing the intially targeted release by probably more than two years without giving any dependable release date. Also financing the whole thing through pledges ranging from reasonable crowd funding average for games to thousands of dollars.

If you're anything but an absolute space game fanatic and/or stoic believer in Chris Roberts' abilities to make his vision a reality, also taking into account the generally unfinished and often broken state of the piecemeal alphas we get to play, then sure, this ought to raise a whole lot of red flags for you. And taking the one other halfway comparable space game project into account (yes, Elite...), which started out at a similar point, released when Star Citizen was initially supposed to release, was and still is in a woefully unfinished state years away from even coming close to its own ambition not to mention Roberts' one (Star Citizen minus SQ42), but is today still more complete and less broken as a game, that doesn't give any hope for Star Citizen's "PU" coming anywhere near its own vision in the next two years. And that's ignoring many of Elite's hair raising design issues which only show because it's a playable game and not a vision of the "BDSSE" in people's heads. Who's to know that the "BDSSE"'s design will be any better or that it'll avoid any of the pitfalls Elite finds itself in? Before it's released and playable, it's mostly imagination, trust and projection. The gulf between those and what they actually have to show for themselves other than impeccable assets is narrowing rather slowly.

I'll eat my words of course, if in the next two years, I'm playing cocktail mixing minigames, commanding AI flight attendants, all in a seamless believable space/ground PU while experiencing "Prevalent use of NPCs" (whatever that means), all without running into a bug that catapults my player character out my civil space craft into the void without hope of returning, chrashes the game to desktop or slows it to a crawl. And of course all without relying on the rampant forced grind we can experience in Elite, the mostly samey and uninvolving exploration game mechanics, as well as the hair raising RNG based game designs leading to more grind.

Burny said:
If they don't have an extended trailer and S42 gameplay demos to show around Gamescom, I think we can bury any hopes for a public release of S42 this year. Even that would leave them precious little time to polish up a full scale AAA game for a release at the end of the year, if they aren't already 80-90% done by then.

It was also confirmed that Star Marine was "weeks, not months" away iirc. I wouldn't take "confirmations" from CIG without a bucket of salt. Not to say they won't have "procgen" for "2.5". But there's no guarantee when that hits or if it'll be in a usable state, rather than a very early alpha state, many months or years away from a public "1.0" release.

Burny said:
Very reasonable sentiments. But how they handled the communication on that was... poor. Keeping up the facade of the mode being practically right around the corner up until they're asked about it and then tell people that all the functionality is/will be present in the game, but the specific previously promised mode has been canceled - as reasonable as the cancelation may have been - is poor form. It does not lend credibility to any other promises they may make. After all, any other of their promises may be affected by unforeseen circumstances just as well. Technical blockers, re-priorization of tasks and according re-distribution of budget.

Burny said:
How do you determine which game is better or cheaper at this point? For starters, both games' claims should make it clear that concluding which eventually ends up "better", is hardly even possible:

SC - A wannabe simulation heavy PC exclusive MMO-like space game build on a largely hand crafted galaxy, supposedly largely driven by player agency. Adopts a very detailed, mostly realistic visual style. Unlikely to be released before the end of 2017, if they even manage that. Comes in tandem with a story driven campaign.

NMS - A mostly single player focused PC/PS4 exploration and crafting space game, sporting accessible game mechanics in a practically wholly procedurally generated and nearly limitless galaxy. Goes for heavily stylized visuals. Has a set release date this summer.

As for expensive: What Star Citizen will eventually cost at release if you're not a backer remains to be seen, while NMS is a full priced release. Getting into what's available of SC at the moment (think of preordering by means of backing the project) is available for a bit less than a full priced game. If you have the self restraint to avoid buying further pledges and the attached ships - which are supposed to be all available by ingame means eventually. There's a good chance both will introduce means of additional monetization though, whether that's ingame purchases, addons, subscritpions etc..

Burny said:
And I guess I find the need to shout the news from the rooftops when a video shows a character walking off/onto a ledge/falling flat on their face into a zone of different gravity pretty irritating. In the time and financing context I mentioned above, when the playable "Alpha 2.0" is a broken mess, when their scope would allow for myriads of situations where the characters enter/leave such zones e.g. through differently shaped ship doors warranting more complex transitions not shown in a really smooth form yet, when other - primarily 3rd person games - have both similar animation systems and multiplayer (and GTA5 even has a limited FPS mode on top of it) - I guess I fail to see how the video showing off a tiny detail of all the things their animation engine has to be able to do is threadworthy news.

I may be wrong of course. Maybe I just don't realize how this perfectly shows off "physicalised animations for an FPS game sync'd over multiplayer" and how it constitutes a revolutionary new breakthrough, instead of some absolutely fundamental functional requirement for Star Citizen to even work as a game.

Burny said:
Oh, come on! *rollseyes* It's called marketing, not generosity.

And it's probably effective marketing at that. For probably negligible cost, they can potentially get more people into Star Citizen.

Burny said:
Not to mention that any criticism directed at Star Citizen means being likened to that lunatic, because he's such a convenient straw man.

Burny said:
Am I the only one getting the impression every aspect of Star Citizen's development is being overblown out of any reasonable proportions?

This looks good, ignoring the imo janky and probably non-interactive watch-my-character's-ragdoll-do-its-little-dance-for-five-seconds parts. Seriously though? It's Rockstar/Naughty Dog level of character animation and transitons with added zero G part. In a game about seemless EVA and zero G transitions with aspirations to be cinematic. It's in the grand scheme of things a minute piece of the puzzle. If they couldn't get that much right, they'd have no business in attempting to make that game.

It's also nearly four (!) years and 110 Mio.$ funding into the game's development, to put the whole "we can do the basic required animations for our game" into a financing and time context. Iirc, the single player portion Squadron 42 or parts of it are supposed to be released by the end of this year.

Burny said:
I'll take that with a bucket of salt and see what has been shown in about two months.

Neither did Star Marine seem to be that far away this time last year. I talk about faithfully and patiently waiting with a ton of cynism. I can't take CIG - its management, not its artists or coders - too seriously anymore, as the visible rift between their impeccable looking assets and the trainwreck (from a technical PoV) they call the "Alpha 2.0", which I tried to play last week, is simply too gaping. That 2020 estimation may be about right - that's both, "still" and "only" four years away after all. Not much time to beat something into shape with the scope of Star Citizen that's not progressed past a very unstable alpha, which has next to none of the high level features working that the game promises to offer ("high level" as in a meta game build on simply roaming around the world).

Burny said:
I wish they'd show some actual mining game mechanics before dreaming up intricately distinguished mining ships.

But I guess that's par for the course here. You don't sell one colored box mining another colored box representing an asteroid. You sell super detailed ships and scramble to get some game logic integrated into your project to validate the existence of those later. At some point. Maybe. >.<

It's as if they can dream up ships faster than the actual game's development can keep up with implementing the base mechanics required to make those ships useful. When are the Hornet Ghost and Tracker supposed to be useful again?

I could go back further but I don't have the time or patience. You have done this even in the last OT and your tone is unchanging, needlessly negative and at every turn down on SC even if what you are saying has no merit at all. Again, It is beyond obvious but if you are content with playing the concerned investor that has nothing but negative stuff to say then that is fine. Don't believe you and just wanted to point out how it looks across multiple threads in which SC is mentioned. I won't bother speaking about this again.

mercenar1e · Jun 14, 2016

Undead Labs dropped CryEngine and switched to Unreal Engine 4 for State of Decay 2.. i wonder what the reasons are behind that. Is the engine incredibly frustrating to work with?

besides Star Citizen the majority of the other games powered by CE are low budget/janky games. a few years ago i thought more people would be working with it but i was completely wrong.

Zalusithix · Jun 14, 2016

mercenar1e said:
Undead Labs dropped CryEngine and switched to Unreal Engine 4 for State of Decay 2.. i wonder what the reasons are behind that. Is the engine incredibly frustrating to work with?

besides Star Citizen the majority of the other games powered by CE are low budget/janky games. a few years ago i thought more people would be working with it but i was completely wrong.

I've never used it, but apparently documentation and support were never a strength of CE. In CIG's case, they have a number of people that actually worked on the engine, so it's less of an issue.

tuxfool · Jun 14, 2016

mercenar1e said:
Undead Labs dropped CryEngine and switched to Unreal Engine 4 for State of Decay 2.. i wonder what the reasons are behind that. Is the engine incredibly frustrating to work with?

besides Star Citizen the majority of the other games powered by CE are low budget/janky games. a few years ago i thought more people would be working with it but i was completely wrong.

I'll put this as I understand it. The CryEngine was an extremely impressive engine a few years ago, a more encompassing package than something like UE3 or idtech5, but it was difficult to use and had poor documentation. It remains an impressive engine, but since then UE4 has shown up, and which is constantly receiving large updates. There are a few things CryEngine still does natively (without other middleware) such at Dynamic TOD, and it handles large spaces more efficiently than UE4.

However, UE4 is completely engineered to make it as easy as possible to use, there is a lot of documentation and support from within Epic and without. One can see why third party developers would use an engine that has a lot of public support, a large base of knowledge and is easy to use.

KKRT00 · Jun 14, 2016

tuxfool said:
I'll put this as I understand it. The CryEngine was an extremely impressive engine a few years ago, a more encompassing package than something like UE3 or idtech5, but it was difficult to use and had poor documentation. It remains an impressive engine, but since then UE4 has shown up, and which is constantly receiving large updates. There are a few things CryEngine still does natively (without other middleware) such at Dynamic TOD, and it handles large spaces more efficiently than UE4.

However, UE4 is completely engineered to make it as easy as possible to use, there is a lot of documentation and support from within Epic and without. One can see why third party developers would use an engine that has a lot of public support, a large base of knowledge and is easy to use.

Its also easier to hire people with experience in Unreal Engine 4, which could be a big factor for smaller teams that are growing.

staticneuron · Jun 15, 2016

Zalusithix said:
I've never used it, but apparently documentation and support were never a strength of CE. In CIG's case, they have a number of people that actually worked on the engine, so it's less of an issue.

I imagine this, in addition to tenured developers they hired, helps out greatly. Still the stuff they are trying is ambitious as they come so the talent is needed on a project of this scale.

Geist- · Jun 16, 2016

ATV 2.36

AI Subsumption Test

Transcript

I'm glad they're making progress on the AI. Assets look great and all, but I'd much rather see a populated planet or station, something the other big space simulators aren't doing (at least not in first person).

And here's what the Dragonfly looks like:

Looks like they didn't mess it up, I was scared it wouldn't look enough like a space bike.

KKRT00 · Jun 16, 2016

Wow, so fucking awesome.

Zalusithix · Jun 16, 2016

Geist- said:
Looks like they didn't mess it up, I was scared it wouldn't look enough like a space bike.

Less like a bike and more like a space four wheeler. Utilitarian and boxy, four pods. Closest thing to a bike is what looks like saddle bag storage.

Geist- · Jun 16, 2016

Zalusithix said:
Less like a bike and more like a space four wheeler. Utilitarian and boxy, four pods. Closest thing to a bike is what looks like saddle bag storage.

Well, I was expecting something like a Merlin, so the fact that it doesn't have a cockpit makes it enough of a bike for me.

Although to be honest, it does look like those pods retract, which makes me think it can look much closer to a bike. They probably have to be placed like that because of how thruster placing works.

Zalusithix · Jun 16, 2016

Geist- said:
Well, I was expecting something like a Merlin, so the fact that it doesn't have a cockpit makes it enough of a bike for me.

Although to be honest, it does look like those pods retract, which makes me think it can look much closer to a bike.

No, they need to extend forward to make it look more like a pod racer.

Dubbedinenglish · Jun 16, 2016

Eh was hoping it would look more like a dragonfly or one of those one person submersible vehicles.

chifanpoe · Jun 16, 2016

Here is some more Dragonfly:

http://imgur.com/a/VFmQq

Geist- · Jun 16, 2016

chifanpoe said:
Here is some more Dragonfly:

http://imgur.com/a/VFmQq

Looks like it does retract, very cool. I think I'll be trading in my extra Archimedes for 1 or 2.

I love the speeder bike imagery.

chifanpoe · Jun 16, 2016

Geist- said:
Looks like it does retract, very cool. I think I'll be trading in my extra Archimedes for 1 or 2.

I love the speeder bike imagery.

I think I will pick up two depending on how they work with the Cat.

Looks like two people can be on these as well.

mercenar1e · Jun 17, 2016

chifanpoe said:
Here is some more Dragonfly:

http://imgur.com/a/VFmQq

damn its going for $35 lol

KKRT00 · Jun 17, 2016

mercenar1e said:
damn its going for $35 lol

Hmm good

Finally something i can buy to support development that does not cost hundreds

epmode · Jun 17, 2016

If it wasn't for the whole being-a-bike thing, it would look like a Wipeout design.

chifanpoe · Jun 17, 2016

Just finished watching RtV, they talked abou the Dragonfly sale starting today.

Two colors available for $35 each. Limited Yellow/Black and Normal Flat Black.

They will also offer a Pack that has two Dragonflies and a Caterpillar at a discount.

The Avenger and Reliant can not fit a Dragonfly inside of them. Freelancer and above can fit at least 1. Reworked Cutlass should hold 1. The Caterpillar can hold 2 per module.

Dragonflies do not fly in atmosphere only hover above the ground.

Zexen · Jun 17, 2016

Tell me it's coming with a LTI, then I'll buy like 3 or 4 of them.

Pagusas · Jun 17, 2016

anyone have a referal code they want me to use as I register?

chifanpoe · Jun 17, 2016

Zexen said:
Tell me it's coming with a LTI, then I'll buy like 3 or 4 of them.

Of course it does, all concept ship sales do.

jblank83 · Jun 17, 2016

Pagusas said:
anyone have a referal code they want me to use as I register?

STAR-RYYD-9ST5

Sure, here you go. Thank you =)

Zexen · Jun 17, 2016

chifanpoe said:
Of course it does, all concept ship sales do.

Thought it would, but given the low price I had my doubts.

chifanpoe · Jun 17, 2016

Zexen said:
Thought it would, but given the low price I had my doubts.

I am sure they will sell a boatload of them. The Cat pack as well should sell pretty good with all the Cat coverage they have done over the past 2 months. (Cat pack all 3 ships come with LTI)

I am going to melt my current Cat and get the pack for the discount.

Zexen · Jun 17, 2016

chifanpoe said:
I am sure they will sell a boatload of them. The Cat pack as well should sell pretty good with all the Cat coverage they have done over the past 2 months. (Cat pack all 3 ships come with LTI)

Oh yeah sure, it will sell like crazy given the value, they will soon need to increase the hangar's size at this rate.

mercenar1e · Jun 18, 2016

the greycat is my most pointless Star Citizen purchase.. if only i can trade it in for credit.

tuxfool · Jun 18, 2016

Caterillar Progress update.

Dragonfly page

Some images:

Zalusithix · Jun 18, 2016

mercenar1e said:
the greycat is my most pointless Star Citizen purchase.. if only i can trade it in for credit.

The greycat was great with the old multi bay hangars when you had every bay maxed out. Moving across 4 bays by foot took awhile.

mercenar1e · Jun 18, 2016

Zalusithix said:
The greycat was great with the old multi bay hangars when you had every bay maxed out. Moving across 4 bays by foot took awhile.

the new hangar system makes the greycat pointless. CIG should scrap the buggy and redesign it as an armored planetary exploration vehicle.

something like this perhaps.. or a larger vehicle that can transport people and valuables.

staticneuron · Jun 18, 2016

Getting a huge star wars vibe off of this. I tried to fight it. But away goes the Starfarer in favor of this combo. It seems as if the SF holds much more but I am guessing that is because of the massive fuel tanks.

Geist- · Jun 18, 2016

tuxfool said:
Caterillar Progress update.

Dragonfly page

Some images:

Damn...I want that Cat/Dragonfly package. That Cat is looking fine. And I was going to buy the Dragonfly anyway... but all I have left to melt are game packages, old ones that I bought in 2013...damn...

staticneuron · Jun 18, 2016

Geist- said:
Damn...I want that Cat/Dragonfly package. That Cat is looking fine. And I was going to buy the Dragonfly anyway... but all I have left to melt are game packages, old ones that I bought in 2013...damn...

Oh man, don't melt stuff you cant get back. That would be sad. I think there is a limit on the things you can unmelt if they no longer exist as a pledge.

Geist- · Jun 18, 2016

staticneuron said:
Oh man, don't melt stuff you cant get back. That would be sad. I think there is a limit on the things you can unmelt if they no longer exist as a pledge.

Ya, I'm probably going to stick to a double pack of Dragonflies. To be entirely honest, I'd probably melt it when the Polaris comes out anyway (if it's the pricepoint I'm comfortable with).

Also, FYI, if anyone wants to get the two-pack, but wants two of the same color, you can get a upgrade for you odd Dragonfly and upgrade it to that color for free:

Dubbedinenglish · Jun 18, 2016

Don't really care for the Dragonfly but I hope the consider micro-vehicles like it to assist with EVA like scuba vehicles. Like:

Shy · Jun 18, 2016

If i get a two pack. Can i gift one to a friend. ?

Geist- · Jun 18, 2016

Shy said:
If i get a two pack. Can i gift one to a friend. ?

Sadly not, dividing game packages isn't possible.

Shy · Jun 18, 2016

Geist- said:
Sadly not, dividing game packages isn't possible.

Ahh. That's a shame.

Thanks for letting me know.

chifanpoe · Jun 18, 2016

tuxfool said:
Caterillar Progress update.

Dragonfly page

Some images:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pRMCI-d1rUc

kadath · Jun 18, 2016

tuxfool said:
Caterillar Progress update.

Dragonfly page

Some images:

those interiors are great

Zalusithix · Jun 18, 2016

mercenar1e said:
the new hangar system makes the greycat pointless. CIG should scrap the buggy and redesign it as an armored planetary exploration vehicle.

something like this perhaps.. or a larger vehicle that can transport people and valuables.

Dunno, I already have a rover coming with the Carrack and Phoenix. I just want my multi bay hangars back, which would give the greycat purpose again. The modularity of the current hangar system is great, but not a replacement for multiple bays. I have a stupid number of ships with many of them being large. One bay doesn't cut it.

And speaking of stupid number of ships, the Dragonfly is already the most numerous Drake Interplanetary ship in the org lol.

GamerKingFaiz · Jun 18, 2016

Geist- said:
Sadly not, dividing game packages isn't possible.

When you buy the two pack can you keep one and use the other as a LTI upgrade token?

Zalusithix · Jun 18, 2016

GamerKingFaiz said:
When you buy the two pack can you keep one and use the other as a LTI upgrade token?

Yes, multiship packs can each be upgraded individually and the value of each ship is treated as if they were bought alone.

GamerKingFaiz · Jun 18, 2016

Zalusithix said:
Yes, multiship packs can each be upgraded individually and the value of each ship is treated as if they were bought alone.

Sweet!

Now to decide if I actually need a Caterpillar or not...

EDIT: Bought it. And oh hey, look at that, we're over $1000 spent on this game now...

Zabojnik · Jun 18, 2016

How's the ship selling market these days? I have an extra Avenger LTI standalone ship I don't need, if anyone's interested.

Zalusithix · Jun 18, 2016

GamerKingFaiz said:
EDIT: Bought it. And oh hey, look at that, we're over $1000 spent on this game now...

You're now a bonifide concierge member. Welcome to the crazy club. =P

Support NeoGAF

Star Citizen Alpha 2.0 | The 'Verse Awakens

Member

Batteries the CRISIS!

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Banned

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Banned

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Elden Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Banned

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Banned

Member

Member

Member

Member

Banned

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Similar threads