A rare Grand Admiral makes an appearance. The result is hilarious.
https://robertsspaceindustries.com/spectrum/community/SC/forum/3/thread/back-to-roots-fix-player-experience-first
My favorite comment is the first one. And 31 (as of this post) members found this tripe worthy of an up-vote:
I should perhaps create a Twitter thread about all the ways that what he wrote above is the usual head-in-sand apologist bullshit. The primary reason that the project is an absolute train wreck.
1) They're never - ever - going to be able to fix performance. Like ever. I recall when 3.1 was just out and the servers were empty, some idiots where making shit up on-the-fly that it was somehow faster. It wasn't even 48hrs after it was released, that it dawned on everyone that they didn't fix shit. It was just another card in the roadmap - marked as complete - which ended up being a placebo effect on some.
Our respondent is a moron.
What our respondent posted is pure and utter rubbish. Since 2016 CIG has been touting one thing (item 2.0, serialized variables, network bind culling etc) to the next, as they continued to make excuses for performance issues. They literally write about this in various bulletins, while talking about in their shows. I've also written several articles going all the way back to 2016 which laid out clearly why NONE of what they were saying, would make a difference. This proved to be true not only in 3.0, but in 3.1 which they stunned me by somehow releasing something in worse shape than 3.0 before it. Something they created (after trimming it by over 50%) based on their own "schedule".
What these guys don't yet realize is that, as 3.1 has shown, it's only going to get worse as they add more stuff to the game. There is NO way they're making an MMO out of this. No way. It's going to remain a session based game with 64 client max cap that will continue to suffer with bugs and performance issues.
Remember, they still only have these two moons and a planetoid. Imagine what will happen if/when they eventually get all of Stanton (1 system of the 100 promised) built. Hurston is coming in 3.3 and ArcCorp in 3.4. Well,
take a look at the map.
2) It's cute that OP is talking about bugs, even as the list continues to grow. From what I can tell, they fix 10 things, and 33 more pop up. That's actually not an exaggeration; I track these things by comparing their bug fixes in the changelog, to the issue council.
Our respondent is a moron.
It's amazing that the issue of bugs in a
7 yr, $180m+ project that's over
THREE YEARS late and has had over 500+ people working on it at some point or another, warrants a flippant response and accompanying rhetoric. While ignoring the fact that in both
3.0 and
3.1, there were more bugs than gameplay features (planetary tech was the only notable thing in 3.0 - and it's a mess). And there are currently
5000+ known & reported bugs in
issue council.
3) Like the entry before it, that's a standard bug caused by the fact that the elevator is an entity that's part of the ship model. Unlike the ship, it knows nothing about the world around it, let alone the terrain. Which is why it can go below it, and one hilarious video I shared last week, go up into the sky and out of the ship. Considering that they have had elevator related bugs like this for YEARS, is testament to the fact that these are considered low priority - and it's not like there's an easy fix.
Our respondent is a moron.
He ignores simple facts above, while poking at the OP saying that "We all know, CIG leaves all the bugs in just to annoy you.". The people who tend to write things like that, are those who can't come up with reasonable counter or explanation.
4) The "flight" model has been broken for years. Each time they try to "fix" it, they somehow manage to make it worse. It doesn't have as much to do with being an fps engine, as it does it being about physics. It has to do with math and knowledge of flight dynamics, as well as parameters for each ship. They don't appear to have anyone who knows wtf they are doing with this. I have written so many flight models in my time, that I pretty much know that it's not simple and it takes LOTS of iterations to get it just "right" for the type of game.
Our respondent is a moron.
Ignoring all this, our respondent comes up with arbitrary numbers which he pulled right out of his ass - with zero context - while not even addressing what the OP was talking about the flight engine being shit. Yeah, because replacing an engine or making changes, somehow explains a flight model that's been shit for years now.
5) It's interesting that OP talks about "experience", ignoring the fact that it's a pre-alpha build of a tech demo proof-of-concept. Nothing is supposed to actually work at this point. So it's no surprise that something as simple as carting boxes of rubber dog shit from A to B, is fraught with issues. The issues are not related to the missions. They are related to the fact that engine which the missions and experience rely upon, is badly broken.
Yes, it's pre-Alpha, but that's not the point anyone is making at this point. And those who keep harping that bullshit, are using it as excuse. As I mentioned in one of my Tweets, at this rate, and considering everything they have yet to do - assuming they don't keep cutting things - this project has another +7 years to go. Which means that it's pretty much dead.
Our respondent is a moron. But you already knew that.
