Star Citizen General BS

[dsmart]

OK, looks like Goons have figured out the "source" of the GIF video being bandied around as "proof" that SM is enabled in the 2.6 Evocati build of 48hrs ago.

Original GIF video.

ATV stream video where it was thought to have been captured/exported from

NOTE: Someone said that the Black bar at the top (in the GIF) is the ATV logo; though it may be the client score/count or something.

UPDATE: Another Goon has now pointed out that the GIF is actually not from ATV...



But appears to be from the previously leaked (via file hacking of the Evocati build) single-player SM build. Which goes back to what I was saying that the GIF was manipulated to make it look like multiplayer, when it's single player.



I am going to say it again. This project is FUBAR. It's only a matter of time now before it all comes apart.

The SM debacle is just another part of the fiasco. The module was already deprecated over a year ago. Now imagine you're a dev working on such a module, which now needs to be brought back because it's the only tangible release for the year, seeing as SC and SQ42 were already a bust. Now you have to make that old code, work with the new code. This is where we are. There is no plausible reason for SM to be brought back, even after croberts himself went on the record saying that it was already in the PU.

So, this WHOLE year, with SC and SQ42 a bust, SM is the only thing they've got that shows any sort of tangible "progress"

Basically, 400 people with over $130+ million couldn't produce a stand-alone fps module using an engine built for an fps. Yeah.

Star Marine solo play using hacked files as per this Reddit thread which I posted yesterday:

The reality of the 2.6 :

[dsmart]

They're totally tying themselves in knots. It's glorious.

I disagree. Even if CIG would state that SM is active and playable, Derek and his lackeys will simply claim that it is only active in a new build and still wasn't active on day one.
No amount of proof will be enough for Derek and his lackeys, unless CIG states was in before something is in the hands of the Evocati. And even that wouldn't be enough. CIG would need to remove the NDA completely to make Derek shut up about something not being in. Frankly, I think that is actually what Derek wants. He is saying all this to get the NDA removed. With the NDA removed he probably hopes that the media will again report about the patches, especially on how buggy it is. All Derek does has an ulterior motive to try to cause a refund cascade.

The video isn't proof that SM is activated "in this build". Its only proof that the assest and gameplay mode are in there. Technically he's right; as long as CIG (or de avocado's) can't confirm that SM is "active and playable" in the current build it's not there. (or is it....... schrodingers star marine?)

https://www.reddit.com/r/DerekSmart/comments/5fvr2a/i_know_that_you_guys_are_desperate_to_create_as/dano0m6/

[dsmart]

LOL!!

From a presumably disgruntled caterpillar owner on r/starcitizen_leaks



PARKING
SENSOR

NOTE: SM is totally in, but we won't get any screen shots of it; just screen shots of the ship everything is complaining about. 

[Joseph]

The SC community I was once so strongly involved in looks and sounds like a building that is about to come crumbling down. I honestly believe 2017 is going to be the year where something is going to happen. I hope they somehow finish this game. Even if finishing it is a 1/3 of what they promised. If the game falters I don't have a shred of doubt that at least one fanatical person will end their life because of it.

[iHover]

Even if Star Marine manages to make it into the 2.6 build its just a shadow of what CR told everyone was coming in "weeks" at PAX East back in 2015. I know I was there. But that's when CIG was doing the funding drive for that year. And like usual CR was long on promise and short on delivery.     

[dsmart]

800 ms ping. In an internal QA build



Oh, guess what? Latest AtV, not a peep about whether or not SM is in Evocati's 2.6 release.

In today's AtV, Sean Tracy had this to say. And NO indication as to whether or not SM is actually enabled in the current 2.6 Evocati build.

"In addition to testing Star Marine and new ships like the Herald, the 85X and the Caterpillar, they’re also going to be helping test the web version of Spectrum. There’s a lot of kinks to work out still, but so far they’ve already done a lot to help us find and tackle bugs."

[jeezontorst]

The things I find the most surprising about Star Citizen is how there always seems to be blockers or claims of incredible technological achievement for things that I have seen in other games.

I’ve spent 150 hours or so playing Empyrion: Survival Evolved in recent months, it’s still in early access alpha on steam yet already dealt with things SC has been reportedly struggling with for a long time.

Now admittedly it doesn’t have the graphical fidelity that SC is aiming for (although it improves with every patch), but what surprises me is things like:

• Switching between 3rd person and 1st person view & having the camera angle / gun placement correct. Empyrion does this, why is there so much talk of Star Citizen not being able to do it without the user having hands the size of giant turtles and so on?
• Local Physics Grid – You build a new spaceship, the gravity is locked to that ship. You leave the ship, you enter zero-g. You enter another ship nearby, you lock to the gravity in that ship. The 2 ships act differently to each other with their own gravity. Why is this such a big deal for SC? I saw a video the other day on youtube, I forget where, saying this was an outstanding technological achievement and one of the most amazing things about the game. Really??
• Team based shooting/fps/star marine – this is kind of thing is in Empyrion also. Me and a few mates have boarded other crafts and space stations both in space and bases on planets, had gun fights, raided them for loot etc…

Empyrion also has planets, space flight, and eventually will have multiple systems to fly around in. Although the transition from space to planetside is not completely seamless; there is a small jump for a second as you re-enter the atmosphere… you can see roughly where you are from space and gauge your re-entry point accordingly.

Plus it has all the base building and craft building you could want.

If an indie team of a handful of devs can pull all these things off in Empyrion, I'm not sure why it’s so remarkable for SC to achieve (or not to) them.

[somedude]

SC does nothing that other games havent already done. Its just a goto line for cig defenders.
There is admittably 1 thing that SC 'tries' to do that hasnt been done yet: the scale. To date there is no game (that i know of) that has the scale of what SC wants to be. At least not with the graphical fidelity they're aiming for. (NMS doesnt even count with their cartoon graphics, god i'm sick of cartoon graphics...)

But...SC wont do that either, in fact, there wont be an SC as pitched, ever.

[JoeBloggs]

I did implement a 128-bit floating-point 3D engine a year ago.


I'm going to call SC bluff on their 64-bit upgrade. Let me explain:


This has to do with data-types for 2^64:

A signed 64-bit int is +/- 2^63,
A 64-bit floating point is 2^52* precision, not 64-bit.

* See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Double-precision_floating-point_format


Thus, if you cast a 64-bit int higher than 2^53, you get cut-off, or truncation error. Did they not think about that?


You can see floating point errors in game-play - lock on weapons - only to miss, collision errors, oddly sized ships to name a few.


The proposed solution, was to use:
A signed __int128 would cast into long_double, with a guard or warning message if any of the maths goes above/below 2^64.


Yeah, the main reason to use 64-bit, is to get over the 4GB memory-space limit for the textures.


The 64-bit issue, is trivial. Any salted developer would make their Win32 EXEs, Linux ELF and IPA use 64-bit C++.


It's not like the 16-bit DOS era...

[JoeBloggs]

Have you seen Star Marine or SQ42?


Shitizens,
Close your eyes and don't look at the below video.

[Kyrt]

The things I find the most surprising about Star Citizen is how there always seems to be blockers or claims of incredible technological achievement for things that I have seen in other games.

In all honesty, what works in one game might not work in another due to the different engines and other systems. I could easily accept that they might be blocked by something that other games have already done, simply on the premise that their program is different. Similarly, I would expect that what might block other programs might be easily dealt with by CIGs system.

Having said that, their claims of incredible technological achievement appear to be mere hype. There is nothing in Star Citizen that strikes me as unique. Ambitious? Yes...but innovative? I don't think they can even claim that the link between SQ42 and SC is innovative as other games have such links, be it sequels using existing save positions or EVE and Dust 514

Star Citizen promises nothing that Elite or NMS or EVE or SWTOR or whatever also does not promise or provide.

That lack of innovation isn't a problem. They might even end up with the BDSSE if they ever get the game released and it lives up to expectations. No - the problem with hyping the game in such a manner is that it raises expectations...expectations that could be very difficult for CIG to meet.

As it is....Star Citizens biggest problem appears to be the usual problem with Chris Roberts' games. Chris Roberts appears to have vastly underestimated the time and resources required to fulfil his vision, and has compounded that error with some bad decisions. Such as the money wasted on Ilfonic because of poor communication/management and other third parties or the choice of CryEngine. As Derek Smart says, the CryEngine licensed for the game might have been suitable for the Kickstarter vision,  but given the amount of time and resources necessary to modify it to make it suitable for his expanded vision, he likely would have been better starting from scratch. He should have said "Now that we have the funds to expand the vision, we have the funding and excuse to design and build a custom engine"

Maybe - as someone suggested - CIG are doing that in parallel with the ship funding we have seen. Maybe this new engine will be 3.0. Maybe this new engine explains the lack of visible progress on many aspects of the game. Maybe. But it seems doubtful.

[dsmart]

The things I find the most surprising about Star Citizen is how there always seems to be blockers or claims of incredible technological achievement for things that I have seen in other games.

In all honesty, what works in one game might not work in another due to the different engines and other systems. I could easily accept that they might be blocked by something that other games have already done, simply on the premise that their program is different. Similarly, I would expect that what might block other programs might be easily dealt with by CIGs system.

Having said that, their claims of incredible technological achievement appear to be mere hype. There is nothing in Star Citizen that strikes me as unique. Ambitious? Yes...but innovative? I don't think they can even claim that the link between SQ42 and SC is innovative as other games have such links, be it sequels using existing save positions or EVE and Dust 514

I’ve spent 150 hours or so playing Empyrion: Survival Evolved in recent months, it’s still in early access alpha on steam yet already dealt with things SC has been reportedly struggling with for a long time.

Star Citizen promises nothing that Elite or NMS or EVE or SWTOR or whatever also does not promise or provide.

That lack of innovation isn't a problem. They might even end up with the BDSSE if they ever get the game released and it lives up to expectations. No - the problem with hyping the game in such a manner is that it raises expectations...expectations that could be very difficult for CIG to meet.

As it is....Star Citizens biggest problem appears to be the usual problem with Chris Roberts' games. Chris Roberts appears to have vastly underestimated the time and resources required to fulfil his vision, and has compounded that error with some bad decisions. Such as the money wasted on Ilfonic because of poor communication/management and other third parties or the choice of CryEngine. As Derek Smart says, the CryEngine licensed for the game might have been suitable for the Kickstarter vision,  but given the amount of time and resources necessary to modify it to make it suitable for his expanded vision, he likely would have been better starting from scratch. He should have said "Now that we have the funds to expand the vision, we have the funding and excuse to design and build a custom engine"

Maybe - as someone suggested - CIG are doing that in parallel with the ship funding we have seen. Maybe this new engine will be 3.0. Maybe this new engine explains the lack of visible progress on many aspects of the game. Maybe. But it seems doubtful.

^ This was a good post. 

CIG had the chance to innovate with all the money they raised. But all they're going to end up doing now is playing catch-up. And for a game that's coming out in 2017, it no longer even has the graphics edge that it once had. Even with LoD, we're facing the decision of porting to UE4 and just going all out on the graphics while we're at it because that's what happens when games take too long in development.

They will never get the BDSSE, as that's going to be Elite Dangerous once they get space legs working. And once we go full time on the Universal Combat CE visual upgrade, well then, all bets are off. Even with LoD, the plan is to expand it via DLC once we get the core game out.

There are always going to be high end space combat sims, including the likes of Battlespace Infinity and Dual Universe, which push the limits of what we have now. Star Citizen isn't going to be one of them, as they have already missed the opportunity to really do anything ground-breaking.

[dsmart]

Ho Lee Cow!! 



FYI, the 2.6 release schedule has been moved - again - to Dec 16th.

[JoeBloggs]

Hi Derek,


Don't be surprised on Dec 16th it gets moved to Dec 23rd, then ... Jan 10th 2017.


With this kind of scheduling, you can imagine what kind of ***** quality the production managers have.


If this was an AAA game, someone would get fired, or censured (salary-cut).

[Kyrt]

Hi Derek,


Don't be surprised on Dec 16th it gets moved to Dec 23rd, then ... Jan 10th 2017.


With this kind of scheduling, you can imagine what kind of ***** quality the production managers have.


If this was an AAA game, someone would get fired, or censured (salary-cut).

For a 16th December release, its already been effectively moved to Jan. 17.

How many are going to give it a lot of time over Christmas?