Star Citizen General BS

[Motto]

Well, the thread has now 757 comments in the 10 hours that it been up there. So they're talking about it rather than just taking it up from behind. Or should I say they're talking about before still taking it up from behind?

[ChrisIhao]

Ok. Here is a long post I just posted on one of those Reddit threads (deleted in an hour probably):

Welcome to the forum. Don't worry, as long as you're not here to troll us, you're more than welcome. It's not Reddit. We're not trying to convince anyone of anything, and nobody is going to up or down vote you. Backer, hater, neutral or whatever, we don't care. We're just here for the lols of this on-going train wreck.

Anyway, your analogy is a perfect take on similar ones that some of us have come up with over the years. Which is hilarious because some of those other guys completely entangle it when they talk about 3.0 saying crap like "Yeah, they promised us that 3.0, but what we have now is so much bigger and better" <----  :lol:

I backed before there even was planned a fps aspect in the game, and already at the time this was introduced I was somewhat skeptical.

I believe that fps was always in the original design. They only tacked on the Godawful Star Marine as a test bed; in the same way that Arena Commander was the test bed for the flight combat.

That said; of course this is a voluntary endeavor, and no one is forcing anyone into something

Except for the part where they've now stopped giving refunds; even though they have failed to deliver on promises.

and in my case I just sold off everything except from a core package of around 70 dollars (which includes SQ42). I think I will keep this one, but no way if I am putting more money into this as long as 3.0 is the best they can come up with.

That's pretty reasonable. You can buy a bad game for $70 and not get a refund.

Late answer here but no, I didnt expect my post HERE to be deleted. I meant on Reddit. Suprisingly it didnt happen. Times are a changing on the SC subreddit  :golfclap:

Actually I remember, early after the post-kickstarter stretch goals were introduced, that ship boarding was included in stretch goal five (3.5 mill usd). Just check the strech goals page. Considering the planetary landings were not added until much later, the fps part would be pretty limited. Like a lobby while being docked at a station or a planet. In fact I think I remember discussions about planetside landings being cutscenes which led to menus with trading etc. I think the fps implementation was pretty minuscule if you are correct.

[dsmart]

Late answer here but no, I didnt expect my post HERE to be deleted. I meant on Reddit. Suprisingly it didnt happen. Times are a changing on the SC subreddit  :golfclap:

Yeah, the tide has changed. But that's only because the more reasonable voices are drowning out the zealots. And also even some zealots are seeing the writing on the wall now; and nobody likes to look stupid.

Actually I remember, early after the post-kickstarter stretch goals were introduced, that ship boarding was included in stretch goal five (3.5 mill usd). Just check the strech goals page. Considering the planetary landings were not added until much later, the fps part would be pretty limited. Like a lobby while being docked at a station or a planet. In fact I think I remember discussions about planetside landings being cutscenes which led to menus with trading etc. I think the fps implementation was pretty minuscule if you are correct.

Both FPS and planetary landings were always in the stretch goals.

[ChrisIhao]

Ok. But planetary fps combat was the 20 mill goal. On "certain lawless planets". Dont fit the bill if planetary landings were already in the pipeline before this. Sure you arent mixing up "being able to land on planets", as in automated landing with interaction menus, with seamless in-cockpit landings?

[dsmart]

Latest schedule is out.

One persistent bug was a memory leak issue where the game (either on the client or server side) soaked up more and more system RAM until it crashed. The team has been squashing this bug whenever they find it, but with performance issues like this, there is rarely a single solution. As more mechanics and code are implemented, any one of them can cause the issue to return.

- Gee, it's almost as if that Derek Smart guy called this one the same day 3.0 was released on Oct 5th.

According to this, 3.0 probably won't hit the PTU until sometime around the end of the year - assuming they're brave enough to pull that stunt like they did with 2.0 and 2.6.



Also, both 3.1 and 3.2 sections have now been removed from the schedule report. That's pretty ominous if you ask me. MVP here we come!

FYI, the latest Evocati 3.00F build is pure crap. The more they "fix", the more problems show up. Performance issues, crashes, all still very much a thing.

[dsmart]

Ok. But planetary fps combat was the 20 mill goal. On "certain lawless planets". Dont fit the bill if planetary landings were already in the pipeline before this. Sure you arent mixing up "being able to land on planets", as in automated landing with interaction menus, with seamless in-cockpit landings?

Yeah. Don't forget one important thing: They've been making up all this shit on-the-fly, with no design docs, nor correlation to the actual games they claimed to be building.

[ChrisIhao]

Yeah, I know. Should be a reference to this in the dictionary under "talking out of your ass", as in Roberts talking from a stage. :aaaaa: Lol. I remember when someone asked, on last years con I think, if you could collect fish and trade them or something, and Chris was like (freely quoted from fading memory): "Ehhh. Sure. Ehh. We can do that". Wont bother searching the whole shit show to find the exact words.

Oh, and I love the 54 mill stretch goal: "More Detailed AI Activities – we’ll add ten distinct types of AI character roles on planetside environments! At $54 million, this includes Bartender, Doctor, Entertainer, Nurse, Sanitation Worker, Security Guard, Shopper, Tourist, Vagrant and Vandal. Future AI roles will be added with future stretch goals! Each additional ‘class’ of character will be fully expressive and have a role to play in Star Citizen’s planetside interaction AND the game’s greater economy."

Yeah, right. More like Miles Eckhart and a bunch of brainless, "get stuck in doors" zombies. No further mention of this in other goals either. Coherent? Nah.

Been reading your blogs since about 1.5 years ago btw. Lots of fun following this farce.

[dsmart]

Yeah, I know. Should be a reference to this in the dictionary under "talking out of your ass", as in Roberts talking from a stage. :aaaaa:

Yes. And that's precisely what doomed the project.

Been reading your blogs since about 1.5 years ago btw. Lots of fun following this farce.

Been one helluva ride.  :supaburn:

[David-2]

One persistent bug was a memory leak issue where the game (either on the client or server side) soaked up more and more system RAM until it crashed. The team has been squashing this bug whenever they find it, ....

I've been in software development for 40+ years.  When we find a memory leak - it's a bug, each time.  it isn't just one bug that exists in multiple places in the code.  Each individual instance is its own bug. 

So ... if one of those 24..26 ship stoppers is a "memory leak" that is actually a bunch of different memory leaks in different places in the source code, each one of which has to be individually found and nailed ... how many ship stoppers do they really have?

And what if they're doing this for other ship stoppers.  E.g., a bug which is written as "UI for Mobiglass is wrong" might actually be 5..10 different bugs that each have to be found and fixed ...

(Not that I believe in their count anyway; I want to make that clear.  It's just that their bullshit excuses are as badly done as their "game".  And no, despite 40+ years writing compilers, performance monitors, static code analyzers, desktop applications, and high-availability back-end servers, I am, sadly, not a "game developer".  So I guess my opinion is bullshit too, huh?)

(BTW, based on previous bug notes in their "release notes" they're using C++.  C++ before the 2011 standard was notorious for the ease with which you could write code that had memory problems: leaks, double deletes, accessing memory after deletion, accessing memory out of bounds, etc.  That's what gave rise to Java, C#, etc.  However.  There's no reason on new code anymore to be using pre C++11.  It is still possible in modern C++, with modern best practices, to write memory leaks/access out of bounds/etc.  But it should be damn unlikely, if you're doing it right.  But I guess we all know they're not doing it right.)

[Motto]

Patchnotes for 3.0g are here

[dsmart]

One persistent bug was a memory leak issue where the game (either on the client or server side) soaked up more and more system RAM until it crashed. The team has been squashing this bug whenever they find it, ....

I've been in software development for 40+ years.  When we find a memory leak - it's a bug, each time.  it isn't just one bug that exists in multiple places in the code.  Each individual instance is its own bug. 

So ... if one of those 24..26 ship stoppers is a "memory leak" that is actually a bunch of different memory leaks in different places in the source code, each one of which has to be individually found and nailed ... how many ship stoppers do they really have?

And what if they're doing this for other ship stoppers.  E.g., a bug which is written as "UI for Mobiglass is wrong" might actually be 5..10 different bugs that each have to be found and fixed ...

(Not that I believe in their count anyway; I want to make that clear.  It's just that their bullshit excuses are as badly done as their "game".  And no, despite 40+ years writing compilers, performance monitors, static code analyzers, desktop applications, and high-availability back-end servers, I am, sadly, not a "game developer".  So I guess my opinion is bullshit too, huh?)

(BTW, based on previous bug notes in their "release notes" they're using C++.  C++ before the 2011 standard was notorious for the ease with which you could write code that had memory problems: leaks, double deletes, accessing memory after deletion, accessing memory out of bounds, etc.  That's what gave rise to Java, C#, etc.  However.  There's no reason on new code anymore to be using pre C++11.  It is still possible in modern C++, with modern best practices, to write memory leaks/access out of bounds/etc.  But it should be damn unlikely, if you're doing it right.  But I guess we all know they're not doing it right.)

Yeah, but clearly you don't know anything about software development :colbert:

[StanTheMan]

Yeah, but clearly you don't know anything about software development :colbert:

My thoughts exactly ...

[Andrew]

There's no reason on new code anymore to be using pre C++11.

What if your Engine has a codebase that was developed way before 2011? Maybe that forces some problems on them?

Really asking, I have no clue.

[dsmart]

There's no reason on new code anymore to be using pre C++11.

What if your Engine has a codebase that was developed way before 2011? Maybe that forces some problems on them?

Really asking, I have no clue.

It's backwards compatible. The only time you need to make any changes are when syntaxes change. And that hasn't happened to any greater degree for decades.

[David-2]

What if your Engine has a codebase that was developed way before 2011? Maybe that forces some problems on them?

Do not mistake the "engine" - which provides a framework for graphics and user interface and multitasking and so on - with the absolutely enormous mass of code you have to write to get an actual game.

Everything they talk about when they they're bullshitting about "item 2.0", local physics grids, "subsumption AI" (as if), the (as yet nonexistent) gameplay, health and damage and all the calculations behind the stuff that's displayed on the "mobiglas", the store where you can look at and try on and buy clothes, the procedurally generated whatevers, the behavior about menus and "inner thoughts" and so on ... all of that and much much much more is their own, not the engine.

And all of the code you write can be in modern C++ even if the APIs you call are in an earlier version of C++ (or even in C).  And all of that API can be wrapped (one time!) to provide a modern look (wrapping raw pointers with smart pointers, for example).