Star Citizen General BS

[dsmart]

If Chris can't release 3.0 at least to the Avocado's before Shitizen Con, most bakers will (finally) accept that they have been had since Gamescom 2016. If he releases the crap that 3.0 is to the Avocado's and that stuff leaks, most bakers will (finally) accept that they have been had since Gamescom 2016.

So basically, Chris is fucked either way. The end is near. As can be deducted too from the huge sales success over the weekend. People are no longer putting their money in Scam Shitizen and that's the beginning of the end...

 

[dsmart]

They should have started with a custom made engine from scratch with a focus on the basic core elements of the game. basically, once Chris decided to go with CryEngine, the game was fucked.

Yup. Basically the gist of The July Blog  :eng101:

[Motto]

Oh? You did a blog?  :lol:

Yesssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssss  :toot:

[dsmart]

ICYMI, LumberYard had a major update (400+ improvements, and new tech) last week, which includes a brand new animation engine.

It's going to be absolutely hilarious if CIG tries to integrate John's EmotionFX animation engine. That engine is a fantastic but somewhat complex. I've tinkered with it for years; but never did end up using it because it was overkill for my games.

The fact that AMZ has now ripped out over 60% of CE3, is testament to how restrictive the CE engine is in the first place. Yet, as I wrote in this Dec 2016 blog, those lying bastards at CIG had the audacity to say it took them 2 days to implement LumberYard because they were using the the same (it's bullshit) branch as AMZ. Almost a year later, they still haven't released anything that remotely supports their "switch".

https://twitter.com/dsmart/status/914683492788834305

https://twitter.com/dsmart/status/914563550085042177

So @AmznLumberyard just released a major update to LumberYard, proving once again that CryEngine simply isn't suited for all types of games. Good call! Gee, it's almost as if I wrote a whole blog in 2015 about that.

Except in the case of Amazon, they actually took one look and decided, "yeah, we're gonna have to rip it all out to make a decent general purpose engine". Then went ahead and did just that.

@AmznLumberyard Basically created a new custom engine using baseline CryEngine. No, they couldn't have started from scratch with own engine as that would be admitting that someone up the food chain caused AMZ to lose a fortune by licensing CE in the first place.

[Fool Me Once]

They should have started with a custom made engine from scratch with a focus on the basic core elements of the game. basically, once Chris decided to go with CryEngine, the game was fucked.

Yup. Basically the gist of The July Blog  :eng101:

As a layman, Iīve always wondered the following: Is there a reason why CIG couldnīt use simpler (perhaps even in a stylized art style, like Blizzard always uses) models in order to make the game run smoother? From my uninformed outsiderīs perspective I canīt help but imagine that most CE limitations would be relatively minor if they could get over how hard it is for the engine to render all the things they need it to.

[dsmart]

As a layman, Iīve always wondered the following: Is there a reason why CIG couldnīt use simpler (perhaps even in a stylized art style, like Blizzard always uses) models in order to make the game run smoother? From my uninformed outsiderīs perspective I canīt help but imagine that most CE limitations would be relatively minor if they could get over how hard it is for the engine to render all the things they need it to.

Well no, because and art style is a matter of choice and depending on the game. It's what they wanted to go with, and they stuck with it.

I get the same queries all the time with Line Of Defense. I chose the colorful art style, compared to my previous games, because it suited the type and style of game I was making.

[Flashwit]

They should have started with a custom made engine from scratch with a focus on the basic core elements of the game. basically, once Chris decided to go with CryEngine, the game was fucked.

Yup. Basically the gist of The July Blog  :eng101:

As a layman, Iīve always wondered the following: Is there a reason why CIG couldnīt use simpler (perhaps even in a stylized art style, like Blizzard always uses) models in order to make the game run smoother? From my uninformed outsiderīs perspective I canīt help but imagine that most CE limitations would be relatively minor if they could get over how hard it is for the engine to render all the things they need it to.

Yeah, but Croberts' whole pitch was about crazy fidelity and so forth. And, without knowledge of game engines, my understanding is that it isn't really a rendering problem but an issue of having forced CryEngine into a role it was never meant to play. I believe it's also partially because they implemented so many things at an unnecessarily low-level that the amount of data flow is excessive and it just gets out of control when you're past 8 players. A great example is the recent announcement of that Air Traffic Controller nonsense. I don't believe any other game studio would waste time on something as ridiculous as an AI-controlled ATC with an actual physical model, especially when they haven't even got 10% of actual gameplay in the game yet. It's a real 

[Motto]

They'll throw anything in the mix just to keep the appearance going that everything is fine, that they are making real progress, that 3.0 actually does exist and will bring all the glory as promised one and half year ago et cetera. Unfortunately, the cracks in that story are becoming more and more visible every day. What increases the panic at CIG and their repsonse is by going even more out of their way to convince backers to stay onboard. But those days are gone. Chris finally has to deliver if he wants to make it another year. Which he can't and why he won't.

Which makes me wonder, I assume more top people know by now that CIG is the Titanic and that the iceberg has been hit. Are they making their own files and dossiers? When CIG crashes, will they provide us with the gossip and the details we currently lack? Or do the keyplayers prefer to jump ship in advance? Does anybody has some (industry) background on that?

[Ghostmaker]

As a layman, Iīve always wondered the following: Is there a reason why CIG couldnīt use simpler (perhaps even in a stylized art style, like Blizzard always uses) models in order to make the game run smoother? From my uninformed outsiderīs perspective I canīt help but imagine that most CE limitations would be relatively minor if they could get over how hard it is for the engine to render all the things they need it to.

Well no, because and art style is a matter of choice and depending on the game. It's what they wanted to go with, and they stuck with it.

I get the same queries all the time with Line Of Defense. I chose the colorful art style, compared to my previous games, because it suited the type and style of game I was making.

There's also been some solid pushback over the years against dull, brown and gray color palettes in games. The whole 'Real Is Brown' trope. Thankfully the pushback has resulted in some nicer, more vivid games.

[nightfire]

As a layman, Iīve always wondered the following: Is there a reason why CIG couldnīt use simpler (perhaps even in a stylized art style, like Blizzard always uses) models in order to make the game run smoother? From my uninformed outsiderīs perspective I canīt help but imagine that most CE limitations would be relatively minor if they could get over how hard it is for the engine to render all the things they need it to.

Well no, because and art style is a matter of choice and depending on the game. It's what they wanted to go with, and they stuck with it.

This I get. But why did they have to go overboard with "fidelity" in the pre-alpha phase? Wouldn't it have been better to use simpler models for flying around during the development phase and focus on, you know, the gameplay and such things instead? For implementing and testing game mechanics and such, wouldn't it have been better to implement low-fidelity models and world entities with Minecraft-style complexity, and flesh them out once the game loop was running?

[dsmart]

This I get. But why did they have to go overboard with "fidelity" in the pre-alpha phase? Wouldn't it have been better to use simpler models for flying around during the development phase and focus on, you know, the gameplay and such things instead?

1) He used CryEngine

2) He sold the visual fidelity as the main USP (Unique Selling Point) for the game

With both of the above, he had no choice but to keep going.

[Spunky Munkee]

What is interesting is that we see the problems being baked into the process long ago. Roberts insists on being the Alpha and the Omega in all phases and processes in the game. He gets warned that the artists need to have parameters for the art to work and not cause issues further down the line. Eventually the models he decides upon are too detailed for the game to handle and it then plays into the netcode (as I understand part of the problem) but somehow it's not his doing. Chris says "IT'S HARD". 

Chris Robbers has reached his highest level of incompetence and exceeded it. Star Citizen is the result.

[N0mad]

As a layman, Iīve always wondered the following: Is there a reason why CIG couldnīt use simpler (perhaps even in a stylized art style, like Blizzard always uses) models in order to make the game run smoother? From my uninformed outsiderīs perspective I canīt help but imagine that most CE limitations would be relatively minor if they could get over how hard it is for the engine to render all the things they need it to.

I have played with Lumberyard a little (very little) when it first came out (effectively still Cryengine) and it became apparent that Cryengine is really good at making very pretty first person single player shooters, which is all that Crytek needed it to do. It doesn't do MMO games, it doesn't do open world (just levels), it doesn't do space. It loads in levels for a FPS - that is all. Nor will the scripting system allow you to modify it to do any of the above in an easy and fast way - the only option is to delve into the core engine code to make it do these things. This is fine if you've built the engine from scratch and known it in detail, but trying to modify complex code written by someone else (which almost certainly has minimal documentation) is a recipe for disaster as everything you change can cause all sorts of things to break later in ways which are almost impossible to fix. I'm pretty sure this is the problem CIG are have right now.

Before someone says that they employed Crytek engineers for this very reason, I'm sure that those programmers are very talented, but unless they wrote that core engine code then they are just as good as any other programmer for the job of modifying it.

[teufelhunden]

SANITIZED SERENDIPITY ALT

[Spunky Munkee]

Obviously they are trying to fit a MUCH SMALLER round peg in that square hole.