Support NeoGAF

[KKRT00]

Like, right now SQ42 may or may not release this year and there's only three more months to do it, and they haven't said or shown anything about it. At this point they should already know whether they'll make it, and owe it to the backers to clarify that point. It took them until mid 2016 to remove the 2015 date on their site, too.

Thats not true. They talked about it in the interviews on Gamescom.
They plan to release it this year, but it depends on the quality, if they wont be able to polish it enough, they will release it few months later, because they want to make it right.
And they will show a lot of it in two and half weeks.

 

[DerZuhälter]

I don't think this looks particularly good to be honest. It seems stiff in certain parts of the face. I can't really point it out. Maybe I'm too spoiled by NaughtyDog and their addition of handanimated extra passes to the face capture stuff.

The bottom part looks great, the upper part not so much again.

 

[Chev]

Thats not true. They talked about it in the interviews on Gamescom.
They plan to release it this year, but it depends of the quality, if they wont be able to polish it enough, they will release it few months later, because they want to make it right.
And they will show a lot of it in two and half weeks.

Finger crossed, then. A lot of expectations are riding on that citizencon showing.

 

[Calabi]

I thought this game was about flying spaceships in space? I dont want to limp around on the ground like a doofus.

Spoiler

I'm sure it'll be great

 

[elyetis]

Thats not true. They talked about it in the interviews on Gamescom.
They plan to release it this year, but it depends on the quality, if they wont be able to polish it enough, they will release it few months later, because they want to make it right.
And they will show a lot of it in two and half weeks.

My current expectation is March for 3.0, June for SQ42.
It could lead me to being pleasantly surprised by an early release, while not setting me up for disapointement if there is a delay, like there was for (almost?) every "major" release up until now.

 

[VlaudTheImpaler]

It's most likely because his head is constrained and only the face itself is free to move. Something that never actually happens in real life.

Not necessarily, It's the exact same feeling I get whenever I see some footage of someone who strapped a go pro to their face.

 

[apav]

People assume it'd take two years because that's what the Kickstarter said, and they've not been very good at communicating delays. Like, right now SQ42 may or may not release this year and there's only three more months to do it, and they haven't said or shown anything about it. At this point they should already know whether they'll make it, and owe it to the backers to clarify that point. It took them until mid 2016 to remove the 2015 date on their site, too.

The Kickstarter release date has been outdated since 2013, and was never concrete to begin with (it does say estimated delivery for a reason):

4. The Q4 2014 release date was the planned release date for the original concept of the game back in 2012. As funding kept pouring in, much more than the original game would ever need, Chris held a poll in 2013 and asked the community if they would like to see the money be used to vastly expand the game's scale and scope. The community responded with a resounding yes. This obviously meant that development would take much longer, but most backers are fine with them taking the time they need to have the game fully achieve its potential.

CIG doesn't owe backers a set release date. I think it was a mistake for him to put release dates on anything. Compared to a publisher that may force a release date on a game, he can freely push it back as long as he wants, but doing so repeatedly has and will piss off backers. He should've just said it'll be ready when it's ready.

Not really sure why they have been so quiet about Squadron 42, they haven't even showed us gameplay besides the Morrow tour (which he just said in the video today is super ancient compared to what they have now). I'm guessing he's waiting until Citizencon to announce the release date.

 

[Crispy75]

I don't think this looks particularly good to be honest. It seems stiff in certain parts of the face. I can't really point it out. Maybe I'm too spoiled by NaughtyDog and their addition of handanimated extra passes to the face capture stuff..

Bear in mind this is just a tech demo, transitioning between poses, not an actual animated sequence from the game.

 

[More_Badass]

People assume it'd take two years because that's what the Kickstarter said, and they've not been very good at communicating delays.

They shouldn't. That's just being stubborn. One, people need to understand that a date on a Kickstarter isn't some concrete release date. It's an informed hope. The games are usually in pre-alpha or alpha. No developer can predict with any certainty the month their game is coming out when they've barely even started making the game. They only can estimate how long it might take

It's like writing a first draft of your first chapter, and then someone asking you what month the book is being published.

And two, those dates are estimated before funds are collected, before stretch goals are reached, before scope is expanded. Context matters. As soon as a project clears a lot of stretch goals or is funded well beyond its initial goal, you should probably assume that date on the KS page is now outdated and not very accurate.

 

[CyberPunked]

Another nice one

 

[ramparter]

Even if they don't manage to make all the money they spent on this they will find clients to sell their technology.

 

[Durante]

I think it's great that the money people spent (and continue to spend, in some cases) on this game is - at least to a very significant part - flowing into actually moving the state of the art in rendering and game technology forward.

 

[ISOM]

People just finding things to complain about. It looks like a great game with great potential.

 

[Camp Freddie]

The tech is really cool.

My main concern is that no-one seems to stop and ask, "will this tech make the game better". They seem to start with tech development, then work backwards to make the tech into a game, rather than starting with the required game mechanics and developing the tech necessary to achieve them.
Most FPS games abandoned limb damage because it wasn't fun to limp or have crap aim because you took a hit in your arm. From a gameplay balance perspective, it also gives a huge advantage to whoever gets the first hit.
Adding limb damage is something you have to design your whole game around (like how bad rearm/repair mechanics for spacecraft can turn a great game into a tedious and annoying one). I hope SC has done this.

Meanwhile, Star Citizen is intent on realistically simulating being a vending machine repairman on a passenger liner (who wants to be Luke Skywalker when you can be Rimmer!) or adding new stevedore tech for loading your ship.

Davos Spaceworth is looking cool. I hope they can make regular player/NPC's look good too.
Still, it's hard to get excited about the appearance of some dude in your mission briefing screen for a space combat simulator.

 

[Dictator93]

Maybe I'm too spoiled by NaughtyDog and their addition of handanimated extra passes to the face capture stuff.

I don't think it has anything to do with that, rather just that it is switching between poses in a clinical non-full animated environment. ala below

 

[leng jai]

Is that the guy from Game of Thrones?

No it's the guy from Kodaline's song High Hopes.

 

[martino]

and from that do you begin to see how better a world driven by public subvention and not private profit could be ?

 

[Crispy75]

No it's the guy from Kodaline's song High Hopes.

and from that do you begin to see how better a world driven by public subvention and not private profit could be ?

No I don't quite follow.....

 

[nkarafo]

Injured character's animations?

N64 Perfect Dark had this. And it wasn't the first game either, probably. What's so special about this?

 

[Dictator93]

Injured character's animations?

N64 Perfect Dark had this. And it wasn't the first game either, probably. What's so special about this?

IDK, maybe you should watch the video and read up on the context and decided why it is interesting or not?

To give an example why injured character animations might be interesting in comparison to say Perfect Dark.... The animation from that .gif pertains to the player character. And since Star Citizen uses a unified 3rd and 1st person rig, animation, and model that means you will feel and see the effects of being shot and limping and having a ruinined leg or arm from the first person perspective. The same effects people will see on your character from the 3rd person perspective. Not many games do that to my knowledge.

 

[Sini]

It's crazy impressive, but why does game like Star Citizen need this? Will it have cinematic story?

 

[Dictator93]

It's crazy impressive, but why does game like Star Citizen need this? Will it have cinematic story?

Yes. It has had a single player campaign as part of the funding goals since 2012.
Some of the cast include Gillian Anderson (X-Files), Gary Oldman (Fifth Element, etc.) Mark Hamill (Star Wars)... etc. That .gif is of Liam Cunningham's in game model.

 

[Sini]

Yes. It has had a single player campaign as part of the funding goals since 2012.

Oh, I had heard of the Squadron 42, but didn't know what it actually was.

 

[pottuvoi]

It's crazy impressive, but why does game like Star Citizen need this? Will it have cinematic story?

Squadron 42 will be similar to Wing Commander series, meaning full 'interactive' story acted by professional actors. (In SQ42 case they use performance capture.)
Intro of Wing Commander 4
One of the reasons why I'm interested in SQ4. (We haven't seen a game similar to Wing Commanders in a long time with a proper Space Opera story line.)

In Star Citizen there will be a lot of animated NPC characters.

 

[Octavianus]

Of course. The biggest problem with NMS is that very few people questioned it, the developers didn't show anything, didn't talk about it and so what happened is that expectations went to strange places.

No, the biggest problem with NMS is that it was made by a bunch of lying scumbags.
Remember those stage demos that were completely unscripted and just a small slice of the things you were supposed to be able to encounter in the game? Yeah...

 

[xealo]

Of course. The biggest problem with NMS is that very few people questioned it, the developers didn't show anything, didn't talk about it and so what happened is that expectations went to strange places.

Chances are it could still fail, but implying they (Star Citizen devs) aren't showing and talking about what's going on is just misinformed nonsense at best.

 

[Spukc]

Is this game anything like elite?
Can i trade ect?

 

[Dictator93]

Is this game anything like elite?
Can i trade ect?

Yep. Here you can get a sense how cargo trade will work upon release 3.0.

 

[pottuvoi]

Is this game anything like elite?
Can i trade ect?

Yes.
Perhaps I would rather use Privateer in this case as SQ42 would fit the example perfectly. (Being same universe as Privateer, but an army/mission based storyline.)

 

[Dubbedinenglish]

The tech is really cool.

My main concern is that no-one seems to stop and ask, "will this tech make the game better". They seem to start with tech development, then work backwards to make the tech into a game, rather than starting with the required game mechanics and developing the tech necessary to achieve them.
Most FPS games abandoned limb damage because it wasn't fun to limp or have crap aim because you took a hit in your arm. From a gameplay balance perspective, it also gives a huge advantage to whoever gets the first hit.
Adding limb damage is something you have to design your whole game around (like how bad rearm/repair mechanics for spacecraft can turn a great game into a tedious and annoying one). I hope SC has done this.

Meanwhile, Star Citizen is intent on realistically simulating being a vending machine repairman on a passenger liner (who wants to be Luke Skywalker when you can be Rimmer!) or adding new stevedore tech for loading your ship.

Davos Spaceworth is looking cool. I hope they can make regular player/NPC's look good too.
Still, it's hard to get excited about the appearance of some dude in your mission briefing screen for a space combat simulator.

This. So far every aspect of actual gameplay has been bad. The ship handling, the ship combat, FP movement, combat etc etc. There is a lot of boasting about the technical complexity they are pushing but time and time again when it comes to the core gameplay they are using horribly simplistic systems after claiming to simulate. Just about every single game I've followed they get the core gameplay down and develop systems outward from it. CIG seems to want to try to make the tech work, then design a game afterwards.

 

[apav]

This. So far every aspect of actual gameplay has been bad. The ship handling, the ship combat, FP movement, combat etc etc. There is a lot of boasting about the technical complexity they are pushing but time and time again when it comes to the core gameplay they are using horribly simplistic systems after claiming to simulate. Just about every single game I've followed they get the core gameplay down and develop systems outward from it. CIG seems to want to try to make the tech work, then design a game afterwards.

It's currently in alpha. But they are working on the core gameplay, different teams are working on different things at the same time. That is development. You hear more about the flashier progress updates like planetary landings, vision stabilization and high fidelity characters because that's just how people work. The patch notes are there for those who want to know about all the changes and updates, but big news like these will always gain more traction. That doesn't mean that's their sole focus right now though.

 

[Spukc]

Yep. Here you can get a sense how cargo trade will work upon release 3.0.

Great video thanks! Any idea when i can play this? Completed and working for about 55 euro's?

 

[aeolist]

This. So far every aspect of actual gameplay has been bad. The ship handling, the ship combat, FP movement, combat etc etc. There is a lot of boasting about the technical complexity they are pushing but time and time again when it comes to the core gameplay they are using horribly simplistic systems after claiming to simulate. Just about every single game I've followed they get the core gameplay down and develop systems outward from it. CIG seems to want to try to make the tech work, then design a game afterwards.

most games are really bad until a point late in development

i don't have a dog in this fight but it's completely unsurprising that what they've released so far isn't fun to play

 

[whoszed]

Ser Davos Spaceworth

So that's where the money went.

 

[MrFrankFontaine]

Although I'm a kick starter backer, it's hard for me to get excited for this game until they start talking about VR. Which is interesting because I don't think VR wasn't even announced (Oculus Kickstarter) when I first backed this.

However, after spending time in Elite Dangerous in VR, I can't imagine playing a space sim any other way now.

I'm sure Star Citizen will eventually release VR support, but until then I can't really get all that excited for this new tech regardless of how cool it seems.

 

[Dubbedinenglish]

It's currently in alpha, and they are working on the core gameplay too. Different teams are working on different things at the same time. That is development.

Well look at the ship designs for example. They pen out cool looking ships from designers. Then they model it in the game. Now they try to make them fly in game by modeling the ship's thrusters to where they are visually, problem is the ships cannot fly as they are designed because they were designed aesthetically without technical consideration. So now we have phantom thrusters to get the sips to behave and what we see in game does not actually match what the ship is actually doing. This seems like needless corrections to something that could've been avoided by having clear parameters when designing ships.


Alpha excuse wears thin when they are relatively close to S42. Basic mission design relies on the core gameplay, and especially flight games where you need to match the mission design to what you can do with the ships. If they're working on mission structure and objectives without knowing what the core gameplay will be then the game is DOA.

 

[BigEmil]

There's something about their faces that doesn't look too realistic can't put my finger on it

 

[Dictator93]

Well look at the ship designs for example. They pen out cool looking ships from designers. Then they model it in the game. Now they try to make them fly in game by modeling the ship's thrusters to where they are visually, problem is the ships cannot fly as they are designed because they were designed aesthetically without technical consideration.

This was maybe true in 2014, but not these days. The white and grey box phases for thruster placement is also now done during the intial stage concepting at this point.

 

[apav]

So that's where the money went.

What they have shown us that's coming in the near future looks equally as impressive, and expensive to accomplish. What we haven't seen but is planned, even more so if they can accomplish it.

 

[Crispy75]

Although I'm a kick starter backer, it's hard for me to get excited for this game until they start talking about VR. Which is interesting because I don't think VR wasn't even announced (Oculus Kickstarter) when I first backed this.

However, after spending time in Elite Dangerous in VR, I can't imagine playing a space sim any other way now.

I'm sure Star Citizen will eventually release VR support, but until then I can't really get all that excited for this new tech regardless of how cool it seems.

Given the extensive FPS sections and the tying of view control to the 3rd-person camera, I think Star Citizen would be a terrible VR game.

 

[KKRT00]

Alpha excuse wears thin when they are relatively close to S42. Basic mission design relies on the core gameplay, and especially flight games where you need to match the mission design to what you can do with the ships. If they're working on mission structure and objectives without knowing what the core gameplay will be then the game is DOA.

The problem with your critic is that you write everything like game is unplayable or not fun in current state, which is not true.
You dont personally agree with all they design ideas and balancing they have now, but in no way game is not fun even in current state.

 

[Vigilant Walrus]

I really, really want the ability to play the shooting portions from a third person perspective. It bothers the shit out of me that I cannot see my character. I want to change it on my terms.
The idea that is unfair because you can "look" behind walls is some dumb as fuck. It's akin to whining about radar. It's just something you should accommodate for. Not reduce the amount of options you'd have.

I constantly switch between first and third person perspective in Bethesda games for example. And GTA Online. And Jedi Knight, and every other game that allows it. I want and need the multiple perspectives.

 

[CypherSignal]

Edit: Heck, wasn't this a Cryengine 3 game? What if Crytek goes out of business before they even ship this thing?

Approximately nothing. They're not actively taking new engine releases from Crytek, and haven't for years. They have a license for the full source code that they'd probably have paid for upfront, or at least paid for when they had a first deliverable to players.

Even if they somehow haven't moved all of the money to Crytek yet, or there's some ongoing stream of money (e.g. "every year you're shipping new versions of the game to players so as per licensing agreement these are new skus that you need to reup your license to the src code for" or something like that) then that money just goes to some other entity that would have bought up Crytek's assets & liabilities in the event that they approach some end-of-life scenario. That is, unless German bankruptcy laws and such work vastly differently than what I'm loosely familiar with in US/CAN.

 

[Dubbedinenglish]

This was maybe true in 2014, but not these days. The white and grey box phases for thruster placement is also now done during the intial stage concepting at this point.

Eh, have yet to actually see this. Take the Sabre and Vanguard, both have massive retro thrusters that don't actually work (visually) and the stopping and reverse speed is no different than other ships. Roberts even admitted earlier this year that ships thrusters are are not what we are seeing in game because they would look too sporadic or something.

 

[Zalusithix]

They shouldn't. That's just being stubborn. One, people need to understand that a date on a Kickstarter isn't some concrete release date. It's an informed hope. The games are usually in pre-alpha or alpha. No developer can predict with any certainty the month their game is coming out when they've barely even started making the game. They only can estimate how long it might take

It's like writing a first draft of your first chapter, and then someone asking you what month the book is being published.

And two, those dates are estimated before funds are collected, before stretch goals are reached, before scope is expanded. Context matters. As soon as a project clears a lot of stretch goals or is funded well beyond its initial goal, you should probably assume that date on the KS page is now outdated and not very accurate.

The estimated date for game based Kickstarters annoys me to no end. It's just so utterly pointless. Regular Kickstarters that don't even change in scope as they get over-funded rarely meet their target date. Then you have games that can end up being an order of magnitude more complex than the initial pitch after the stretch goals... They don't have a snowball's chance in hell of meeting those dates.

Fact is, CIG could have delivered something that met the base requirements of the original pitch by now. It would have been out some time ago even, and it'd have been quickly forgotten by all but the hardcore space sim folks. It's precisely because of the buckets of money that it pulled in and the resulting scope increases that we have something that can potentially be something truly special though instead of just another game. Some things are worth waiting for.

 

[Dictator93]

. Roberts even admitted earlier this year that ships thrusters are are not what we are seeing in game because they would look too sporadic or something.

They micro fire more often than is visually represented because it would look like they flicker on and off all the time. So it is an interpollated result you see because of the rule of cool and the fact that the game does not run @ 1000fps.

Eh, have yet to actually see this. Take the Sabre and Vanguard, both have massive retro thrusters that don't actually work (visually) and the stopping and reverse speed is no different than other ships

You ever quick stop in a vanguard? You can see huge visual distortion in the front of the ship and to the left and the right of the cock pit from those retro thrusters.

 

[Geist-]

This. So far every aspect of actual gameplay has been bad. The ship handling, the ship combat, FP movement, combat etc etc. There is a lot of boasting about the technical complexity they are pushing but time and time again when it comes to the core gameplay they are using horribly simplistic systems after claiming to simulate. Just about every single game I've followed they get the core gameplay down and develop systems outward from it. CIG seems to want to try to make the tech work, then design a game afterwards.

Eh, I actually like the ship handling and ship combat...

You should be happy to hear that 2.6(the next patch) will be almost entirely a core gameplay patch(ship balancing and FPS specifically). They released a video about FPS last Friday.

https://youtu.be/vtQCz1dZf90

 

[Maximo]

I'm happy keeping it to the farthest reaches of my mind until someone makes a new thread for it every now and then, game isn't close to being at least what I would consider worth my time yet but I'm definitely interested in it. Take as long as they want doesn't bother me I'll wait till its more or less "done".

 

[Vigilant Walrus]

Eh, I actually like the ship handling and ship combat...

You should be happy to hear that 2.6(the next patch) will be almost entirely a core gameplay patch(ship balancing and FPS specifically). They released a video about FPS last Friday.

https://youtu.be/vtQCz1dZf90

Love the music. sounds very Mass Effect-esque!


Also very nice to see the shooting look so smooth. the first videos they showed of FPS gameplay was a laggy mess with delay, stutters and awkward transitions.


Will there be any more work done to the bullet holes?


We've still not seen a game that gives a sense of shooting up the actual enviornment like FEAR. And that was in 05' more than a decade ago!

 

[CyberPunked]

I really, really want the ability to play the shooting portions from a third person perspective. It bothers the shit out of me that I cannot see my character. I want to change it on my terms.
The idea that is unfair because you can "look" behind walls is some dumb as fuck. It's akin to whining about radar. It's just something you should accommodate for. Not reduce the amount of options you'd have.

I constantly switch between first and third person perspective in Bethesda games for example. And GTA Online. And Jedi Knight, and every other game that allows it. I want and need the multiple perspectives.

You can play in 3rd person, but you get no HUD because that's rendered in world-space not screen-space.