Star Citizen – Musings

Main Star Citizen – Musings

  • Creator
    Topic
  • #4548

    dsmart
    Keymaster

    General musings on the on-going train wreck that is the Star Citizen project.

Viewing 4 replies - 41 through 44 (of 44 total)
  • Author
    Replies
  • #4746

    dsmart
    Keymaster

    SQUADRON 42 ON CONSOLE

    So over the weekend in a stream, Nicole “Batgirl” mentioned an off-hand comment that Sandi made about Squadron 42 coming to consoles. As these things go, seeing as the Star Citizen project, which includes the Squadron 42 single-player component, has always been touted as a PC game, some parts (e.g. 1, 2) of the community was set ablaze. Most were either freaking out, or trying to figure out wtf was going on.

    It’s easy to discard this sort of thing out of hand as being alarmist rumor. However, the irony is that CIG/RSI have consistently lied to backers so much, that this uproar is rooted in the fact that backers know this. They also know that when it comes to information – let alone those posing as truth – it’s hard to come by. As a result, it ends up being an issue with backers not knowing who to believe, let alone trust, anymore. Not even the company they gave $130 million and which, for all intent and purposes, most believe is actively running a scam of epic proportions. The Star Citizen backed (paid or unpaid) community streamers and writers, don’t even have an audience anymore; because they too lost whatever little credibility they had left, over a year ago. To make things worse, just this past week, several publications release completely false information posing as “reviews” of the game. To the extent that most now believe this to be the on-going work of an online “reputation management” company, as there is seemingly no other reasonable explanation.

    Back in July 2014 (the glory era before it all went to shit), Andy Chalk at PC Gamer wrote an article about this console nonsense. Now over two years later, most everything in that article and the interviews cited, has turned out to be pure lies. Much like the majority of the Star Citizen project.

    So with all the actions that CIG/RSI have taken in their on-going desperate cash grab, it’s clear to see how easy it would be for them to go back on the statements and promises that the project would remain a PC exclusive. It’s the natural progression of things. But here’s the thing, as I’ve written (1, 2, 3) extensively about Squadron 42 in my blogs, not only did they walk back various promises for that game, but they also split it earlier this year into a separate purchase in order to yield more money. Given that, as well as the history and the desperate need to keep raising money – especially now that it has been made clear that by the 4.0 release (slated for end of 2017), Star Citizen won’t even be 50% complete – it makes perfect sense that they would want to release SQ42 on consoles in order to make some money on that platform. Just like Elite Dangerous did, when they released it via the XBox Preview program, Microsoft’s equivalent of Early Access on the PC.

    Following Batgirl’s stream, on Sunday I tweeted “No, SQ42 isn’t coming to consoles. Stop it.” because, even though Sandi was probably just talking crap as usual, I knew that it was rubbish.

    You see, both games use the same FrankenEngine (aka StarEngine) based on the legacy CryEngine 3.0 kernel which Brian Chambers and others have gone on the record as saying they have modified by 50%. I covered that in this post from back in September. That base CE3 engine (depending on when they stopped taking drops) doesn’t support next gen consoles; let alone the VR they were also touting from back in the day. And seeing as they not only don’t have a source license for any CryEngine build above CE3, even as they stopped taking patch drops for that from CryTek years back, it’s impossible for them to have somehow added in next gen console support in FrankenEngine. And my very credible sources have stated – unequivocally – that no such build exists. Plus they would need separate source licenses from CryTek in order to do any such integration.

    So the only way for them to even start to think about something as foolish as that, is to obtain a new source license from CryTek to the current CE5, then integrate all the changes between CE3 and CE5 into FrankenEngine. As a developer who builds engines from scratch, integrates middleware etc, that sort of thing is not the same as integrating middleware into a custom engine. Heck, even when we licensed the now deprecated Havok Vision Engine (previously Trinigy Vision Engine) as the baseline graphics engine for our Line Of Defense custom engine, there was a time when we simply stopped integrating their engine updates into our custom builds because it’s a lot of work. Especially for a small indie team. So we just planned it out for specific periods where we didn’t do anything but integrate whatever it is we needed. It’s horrendous, and a lot of work. Everything that can break, is likely to break. Then you have to go and fix that.

    sc-sq42-promo-large

     

    The other barrier to next consoles is that they have stringent guidelines for passing certification; even the indie programs setup by both Microsoft and Sony, adhere to that. While it’s easier in this console gen to push patches to console products, the problem remains that the product has to meet various criteria for functionality before it can even pass cert. Even though Microsoft subsequently came up with the XBox Game Preview last Summer, their version of Early Access, as of this writing only two notable games, Elite Dangerous and Everspace are released there. The game still have to be functional in some capacity, and has to pass some other requirements for it to be allowed to release there.

    So, as much as I know they would love to have the additional revenue stream, seeing as the writing is on the wall that they have tapped out the whales funding Star Citizen, at this point in time, and with the work-in-progress FrankenEngine going through drastic changes in order to support the “dream”, they simply can’t do it. Period. End of story. And not even with SQ42 which is a smaller and different game from Star Citizen.

    And no, they don’t have any Scorpio dev kits either. That was just a baseless rumor. That aside from the fact that, last I checked (I would be notified, since we are getting them for LoD) said kits don’t even exist yet.

    The fiasco doesn’t end there. After the furor erupted over the weekend, Batgirl, in another stream decided to pin the blame for this apparent FUD on myself and the Goons. Here is a Goon transcript of precisely what she stated, complete with Goon commentary. It’s hilarious.

    what’s going on right now is that Derek Smart and other people are using my statement as a way to say this is what they said. And it’s not what she said and those people are just trying to incite bad feelings amongst the game. Now I do consider myself a pseudo journalist, which someone that is in the community and likes the game but also knows that I have to somewhat of a non-bias approach *laughs* when I do my videos and I’ve tried that in the past but people get a little bit upset.

    Earlier At 1 minute 35 seconds

    Now it does make sense for Squadron 42 to move to the console, being the type of game that it is

    At 2 minutes 07 seconds

    It would be a huge seller on that platform, just because it’s going to be an amazing game. Never was it mentioned it was definite and never was it mentioned that it was in the works, it was just something that we talked about hypothetically“.

    There are several layers of comedy here that I’ve really enjoyed. First you have the idea that something that logically makes sense, doing a console version of a single player spacegame can be discussed with one of the game company founders, float the idea that it makes sense to both of you, would be great, would sell loads but it’s just talking “hypothetically”. The idea that because you aren’t saying something for definite or making an announcement, while the something in question would takes years to develop, but the conversation isn’t important considering what Elite dangerous did.

    Layered on top of that you have the hilarity of referring to yourself as a “pseudo journalist” within a couple of minutes of saying Squadron 42 is “going to be an amazing game”, while displaying your own complete inability to refer to yourself as “unbiased” without laughing.

    Then you have the historical record of Cloud Imperium Games displaying virtually zero professional behaviour, unable to release anything at all of even a decent quality, never mind “good”, during an interview with a VP of marketing that seemingly has no relevant marketing experience and who appears to have landed the role purely based on being married to a chubby liar with a bad haircut.

    Nichole D’Angelo you are funny and I’ll sleep well once CIG goes bust, I hope you can do the same after plugging this expensive hobby of dreams for years to the mentally ill, while asking for money to continue to do so.

    Also lol at fucking up an audio track, you had one job, you really are talented enough to work there.

    Thing is, I never made any such commentary. All I stated was precisely as written in my one and only Tweet on the matter. Someone actually laid it out precisely as it happened.

    1. Batgirl said some shit
    2. I typed that shit out, 100% accurately
    3. That shit got posted on the RSI forum
    4. Batgirl blames Derek Smart

    She said:

    potential console delivery of Squadron 42 only

    I held off the stuff about CONSOLE because CONSOLE SCARES EVERYBODY

    And now that she created a shitstorm she’s blaming Derek Smart. Here’s what journo’s do – they take fucking responsibility for what they say. Pseudo-journalist my arse, sit the fuck down Batgirl and go back to shilling for a scam company because it’s the only thing you do well.

    Also…

    I think batgirl is just pissed because it’s obvious what’s going to happen, CIG wants to do a console version as CIG has always only been interested in money and the vast majority of the pc gamers who would buy SQ42 already have. Therefore console sales are a new source of potential cash, but she’s also pissed because CIG being CIG, it’s never going to happen, so she has the drama of CIG gradually informing the Citizens of their console intentions through her, while knowing it’s pointless drama as everything is on fire anyway.

    That’s exactly it.

    She’s having to placate backers (by blaming Derek Smart) for something she said about something that Sandi said about something about consoles that won’t happen anyway.

    Yeah, we know that invoking “Derek Smart and the Goons” is the norm, but I think we’re at the point now whereby they really, truly believe that we are more responsible for all these screw-ups, than CIG/RSI – who have lied repeatedly to backers, and to the tune of $130 million dollars. They’re blaming one “failed jealous game developer” and a “bunch of morons on a dead gay comedy forum” for all the problems with the project; even as other sensible backers are waking up and trying to now hold Chris Roberts and CIG/RSI accountable for the mess that the project is in. This despite the fact that, all things considered, some backers have claimed to be getting more information out of myself and the Goons, than from even CIG/RSI themselves. Imagine that. The “open development” is only as open as the material they choose to share, while keeping everything else (e.g. financial accountability, state of the 2.6 and 3.0 patches etc) of relevance and importance, a big secret.

    I’ve said this over and over, and I’m going to repeat it. The project is FUBAR. There is no saving it. And anyone still giving them money, continues to make the Roberts and Elms family get richer, while keeping the responsible exec level devs like Tony Z, Brian Chambers, Derek Senior et al in highly paid jobs and within the realms of “plausible deniability”.

    UPDATE2: In today’s Batgirl broadcast “Ask Sandi Ep4, the lady herself chimed (30:44) in – clearly and on the record. Quote: “I mean yeah, FOR SURE, going forward, um… for STAR CITIZEN and SQUADRON 42 to go to CONSOLE. Not my decision. But that’s a whole other audience again, another… yeah… but we have… I have a different MARKETING PLAN for SQUADRON 42 which hasn’t started yet but…

    UPDATE1: Shortly after this went live, I ended up in a bit of a Twitter spat with Batgirl. Even though she only had herself to blame for what happened, she actually saidit’s on me. That is not in question. But like a piranha is the bloody fish you are to issue that promote your attacks on SC.” But yet, somehow, it’s still my fault. A Goon said it best: “Derek saying he doesn’t believe in some rumor started by an SC shill is an attack on CIG by itself

     

    #4725

    dsmart
    Keymaster

    PROCEDURAL GENERATION OF PLANETS

    This became a buzzword again with No Man’s Sky. We know how that turned out. But enough of that.

    So anyway, I decided to visit the denizens of my very own sub-Reddit to enlighten them on the wanton obfuscation that’s going on regarding this nonsense. Seeing as those morons over there are just going to down vote it to oblivion, I decided to leave here as well for posterity. It all started like this:

    “Given what your source has said you are arguing semantics, similar to your thoughts and implementation of seamless transitions (no I am not poking fun here you have stated your definition of it and are entitled to it). Take for example the gentleman in Minnesota who runs a business called Drive a Tank. The business is called Drive a Tank but only two of his four packages includes driving an actual tank. The other two have you driving a British FV433 Abbott SPG (self propelled gun, or self propelled artillery piece) and a British FV432 APC (armored personnel carrier). Neither of those vehicles are tanks by any definition of the term tank. Is he misleading customers? No, he states what his vehicles are. Should his business be called Drive a Tank? Who cares, in the end you get to drive something cool. Should CIG be calling it “procedurally generated planets”? Who cares, as long as the end result is good.”

    Well at least you actually did the research, instead of just spewing rubbish like others tend to do.

    I concede the point that right now – especially after yesterday’s AtV broadcast which shows what they are doing and how, that it’s probably all down to semantics. Why is that? Simple, because CIG themselves are to blame for yet another fiasco. If you search here on Reddit, Google, RSI forums etc, it is clear that the insinuation of procedurally generated planets implies the pure sense of the term as used by us devs over the years, and which isn’t open to interpretation.

    That’s how the media, gamers – and everyone took it. Then they started thinking NMS, Battlescape, Dual Universe etc. All of which use the term and tech correctly.

    Right now, this is what you see on Google when you search for Star Citizen procedural planets.

    The minute Chris went on stage and called it “procedural generation of planets” – which btw my sources (and recently confirmed by Goon, TheAgent) say devs have asked Chris to stop using – he created expectations that the planets would be created as such.

    Also, try reading these…

    Nov 2015

    Sept 2016

    Don’t think Chris is the problem? Fine. Read this and this.

    Then read the transcript of this interview. Specifically this part: “Q: A game like No Man’s Sky is using procedural generation of planets, how will Star Citizen be different in that aspect?”

    So….

    All this time, and even with the unclear methods which started all the way back to August, everyone (myself included) was under the impression that they were in fact doing procgen planets.

    Then finally, the Oct 27th broadcast of AtV 3:11 made it clear that what they were in fact doing, is what most of us with experience building terrain tech, have been doing all this time. And in their StarEngine editor is no different from what you see in the likes of Grome, World Machine or with tools like Gaia (1, 2), Terrain Composer (1, 2) etc on Unity. It’s just a height map. In an editor. In which artists hand-craft most of the elements, while use the editor’s toolset to generate repeating (e.g. grass) assets, manipulating a 3D object (the Sun or star in the scene) with an attached light source etc.

    All basic rudimentary stuff. What’s shocking is that as per the funding stretch goals:

    They got $1m (at the $20m stretch goal) for:

    “First person combat on select lawless planets. Don’t just battle on space stations and platforms… take the fight to the ground!”

    And another $1m (at the $41m stretch goal) for:

     

    “Procedural Generation R&D Team – This stretch goal will allocate funding for Cloud Imperium to develop procedural generation technology for future iterations of Star Citizen. Advanced procedural generation will be necessary for creating entire planets worth of exploration and development content. A special strike team of procedural generation-oriented developers will be assembled to make this technology a reality.”

    And it’s going to take a LOT of time for ANY of that to be in the SQ42 (which has planetary missions, according to sources), let alone the PU.

    The biggest problem is going to be performance. You think the game’s performance sucks now? Just wait until they finish doing the first planetary scene with all their high fidelity graphics – then you’ll see.

    Then you have data storage. Storing those height maps on disk is going to be a major problem. We’re talking terrabytes of data if they even think of doing any scene that’s more than 12 sq km large.

    This procgen fiasco is no different from all the other instances whereby reality takes a backseat to obfuscation. Some recent examples:

    FPS headbob: they disabled headbob in fps, and all of a sudden it has a nonsensical name, “visual stabilization” to make sound like it’s something else – or some newly discovered tech.

    Persistence: Same rubbish. There’s nothing persistent about Star Citizen. The ability to save and restore player data from a dB isn’t new tech, and nobody ever accused it of being “persistent” in the sense of the term as recognized in gaming tech. The game is 100% instanced, and that will never change. So no matter what is being told to backers, even if they invent some fantastic networking tech (hint: they won’t) that’s going to solve their multiplayer issues, there’s never – ever – going to be an MMO coming from this. Why? Because the design was all wrong – right from the start. All MMO games are persistent. You login, game state changes, you logout, log back in, and the state you left is no longer there. So regardless of whether or not you are on the server, the world state is consistently updated and persists. Even when servers are taken off-line, most save the entire state so that when it is brought back up, it is restored “in-place”. e.g. in Line Of Defense, you can login at a certain time, e.g. 1pm and the Sun is up, logout, come back later and it’s night time and it’s pitch dark and anything that was around during the day, is still there.

    Seamless space<->planet transition: Rubbish. They’re using trigger points on the planet, in much the same way they do jump targets. Not new. Not revolutionary. Which is why in the Homestead tech-demo from the CitizenCon2016 presentation which I wrote about in my Shattered Dreams blog, you can see the area on the planetary sphere where the base is located. They jumped to it. They couldn’t pick an arbitrary point on the planet and jumped to that because it’s just a textured sphere that bears no relation to the planetary height map below. How do I know? Well watch this Universal Combat CE video (start at 12:05). I select and jump to the planet, pick a spot on the sphere, engage, and my ship appears (I use an external camera transition sequence) exactly at that spot. Why? because it’s procgen and the data for the planet, corresponds to what’s mapped to that sphere of the planet. Right now, you can download the UCCE or GALCOM Echo Squad demo on Steam and try it.

    I could go on and on and on, but I’m sure that you get the idea of what I’m going on about.

    So this “procedural planet” nonsense that’s now a huge bone of contention, is just more of the same. The disappointment that’s coming is when backers realize that by creating these planets the way they have, it limits the surface coverage for any planet. So instead of having large planetary surfaces – assuming they ever finish and implement it – you will end up with small planetary surfaces, with key points of interest. No different from how space has locations like ArcCorp, GrimHex etc.

    The end result? Well, that’s precisely how it’s done in Line Of Defense and most games. Create a height map to define the terrain area (in LoD it’s 256 sq. km edge-to-edge). Have the artists and modelers build the assets into it. Then use scripts to add other dynamic content that’s not static (e.g. rivers, canals, bridges) in the scene. Use rendering tech for water (we use Triton), atmosphere (we use Silverlining), weather, dynamic day/night cycles etc – and a trigger point (in LoD it’s the jump gates or the location selection on the map if you are using the HAIS to go to the planet from space) to get to those locations.

    That’s not procgen planets. Which, btw is what’s implemented in every single Battlecruiser and Universal Combat game since 1989. That’s why the smaller 2009 games, All Aspect Warfare & Angle Of Attack, use a different terrain tech that’s similar to what is described above.

    And I opted not to do procgen in LoD because it’s a different kind of game and wouldn’t have benefited from it, seeing as I already designed the entire game’s world scope from the onset.

    In conclusion, the bottom line is that, once again, backers are being sold a bill of goods that’s not representative, nor indicative of what they were promised. The $20 million stretch goal promised “First person combat on select lawless planets“. The $41 million stretch goal promised “Advanced procedural generation will be necessary for creating entire planets worth of exploration and development content“. Nothing they have shown thus far, is any of that. And my guess is that even the rudimentary FPS on planets, is a long way off, and because doing a proof-of-concept demo (as in Homestead) with a single player in a heavily scripted environment, is a lot different from the actual implementation for multiplayer. And that was promised in the 3.0 patch which was promised “end of this year“.

    #4589

    dsmart
    Keymaster

    QUICK THOUGHTS ON STAR CITIZEN GAMESCOM 2016

    The presentation was bullshit. All of it. It’s staged using an R&D dev branch which was already shown two weeks ago and CLEARLY STATED BY THE DEVS to be in R&D and (I quote): may never be done. Meanwhile, during the stream ahead of the show, this is the ganky 2.5 patch that paid streamers were playing.

    Sources say it was heavily scripted, and even that quest giver animation was done last month specifically for THIS canned/scripted Gamescom presentation.

    Even the barren moon used for the procgen, anyone with access to CryEngine can put together in a weekend.

    Note that they did this SAME thing ELEVEN months ago when it too was “coming soon”. That was the Nyx (https://vimeo.com/137655209) base. Still MIA.

    Aside from that, this was 2 clients in a controlled environment on a private local LAN server. Which is NOT indicative of the shit that was being streamed just days before at the show. And THAT version which is the 2.4x kernel, is still largely broken. Which, when you think about it, is hilarious that the 2.5 build they were hoping to use, is somehow a LOT worse than that one; so they couldn’t even use it.

    It’s all designed to show “progress” where there is none. This was more to appease the whales (stuck in Sunk Cost Fallacy), and somehow con new gamers into giving them money because they DO need the new money.

    Thing is, if this was 2 years ago, and they hadn’t done this SAME SHIT before with various builds at PAX, GDC, E3, Gamescom, CitizenCon, nobody would care. But now, FIVE years – and going into year SIX and $119m later, this is still a pre-Alpha proof-of-concept tech demo that’s nothing more than a glorified CryEngine mod.

    Then there’s Star Marine which they shit-canned months back. I wrote a huge blog about it amid the uproar. Then Chris went on the record and said that he was “annoyed” that people are asking about something that was “already in the game”. Yes. With a straight face, he said that SM was already in the PU and being played.

    Now that State and Fed officials are looking up their skirt, and given the fact that Star Marine – as a separate module – was PROMISED and PROMOTED for over FOUR years, all of a sudden, it’s back again. That’s what happens when you start to worry about the legal liabilities of your actions.

    Not to mention the fact that the games were due out in Nov 2014. It’s now Aug 2016. And neither Star Citizen nor SQ42 is going to be released before year end. So this Nov makes BOTH of them TWO YEARS late.

    NONE of this sways my opinion about the game. They can’t build it. They don’t have the tech. They don’t have the expertise. And now they’ve run out of TIME and MONEY.

    Anyone who thinks this “game” is ever seeing the light of day, should just ignore me and go give them money.

    To be CLEAR: This is NOT about raging against them for “trying”. It’s about HOW they’ve LIED CONSISTENTLY while raising money for a game they KNOW FULLY WELL they can’t build. Also, it’s not about whether or not it’s alpha, pre-alpha, a tech demo or any of that. It’s about THIS being WHAT they have FIVE years and $119 MILLION dollars later. Anyone who thinks that’s somehow OK, SHOULD go give them money. Long after this shit-show collapses, most of us will just be staring into the abyss where dreams go to die.

    It’s amazing to me how Shitizens are claiming “victory” over a scripted demo based on wonky R&D. Like the games were suddenly delivered. Even as they conveniently ignore/forget that CIG have done this same very thing many times before and NONE of that is IN the game right now. Shitizens wanted “something” to tide them for the next 6 months. then come Dec 2016, they’re going to (again) pretend Gamescom 2016 never happened. Meanwhile, they’re completely oblivious to the fact that NEITHER Star Citizen now SQ42 is a 2016 release & BOTH will be 2 YEARS late in Nov 2016

    Then there’s this…

    WHY STAR CITIZEN GAMESCOM WAS SMOKE & MIRRORS

    #4550

    dsmart
    Keymaster

    THE NEW RADAR SYSTEM

    So in the most recent AtV 3.9 broadcast, the F42 guys showed (start at 5:26) off the new and upcoming radar system. Shortly thereafter, the most vocal community backers were up in arms, quickly expressing [misplaced] outrage, and dubbing it “golf swing radar“. A thread (with over 26 pages) on the forums was quickly moved to concern, away from the main forum thread deleted. Shortly after, another thread (30 pages as of this writing) popped up; this time with a poll. That one was moved to the concern forum once CIG/RSI got wind of it.

    It’s much ado about nothing.

    As a systems designer and someone who has developed some of the most complex (go play any of my Battlecruiser/Universal Combat games if you think this is hyperbole) systems in a space combat sim, I quite like how they implemented it. It looks cool, straightforward and functionally sound. Plus (and this is a biggie), they unified it across the infantry and ships. I did the same thing in my BC/UC games, whereby even the NPC infantry characters, have some sort of radar system which not only detects sounds, but also prioritized based on range and elevation.

    What’s lost in the translation I think, is how the dev described it. But the fact of the matter is that he described it correctly for the layman to understand how it works. On the face of it, the system is no different from any other implementation of a “power up” mechanic in hundreds of games. So this outrage is completely misplaced I think. Plus, he also stated that it’s a first iteration, and that LA is going to be running with it. Which means that they are going to be tweaking and fine tuning it along the way.

    The issue that I have with this system is that unless you’re going to be doing this “scanning” while stationery or moving at low speed, it’s going to be quite cumbersome to use – if you’re the pilot. Using a mechanic such as this, whereby the player needs to provide constant input, is counter-intuitive and misplaced in a game like this. Heck, even the most hardcore air combat sims don’t do it like this. I think it should be implemented as a fire-and-forget type system, but with simple key presses to activate whatever modes (e.g. ACTIVE vs PASSIVE) they want. Then all the benefits and restrictions are embedded within those modes.

    In games of this type, the operation of a radar system is usually automated (it’s not like this is a realistic air combat game which requires accuracy and fidelity). You plot the targets, give the radar a range, give the player a way to select targets etc. You can also differentiate the radar op based on range, elevation, altitude (if on planet surface), target cross-section size, op mode etc. You can literally go crazy with it.

    If they wanted to implement this as a “skill” (which is precisely what I think they’re going for) based op for multi-crew ships in which one player is going to be using this; then this is probably the way to do it. It’s not like the pilot is going to be doing any of this; in much the same way that a turret gunner isn’t expected to fly a multi-crew ship.

    But here’s the problem which all multiplayer games which require player cooperation, run into: who the frack wants to be sat there, in a chair, pissing around with a game mechanic which, for all intent and purposes, doesn’t provide the same instant gratification and satisfaction as any other game mechanic? I don’t care what some of these guys keep dreaming up, even as they theory craft their way through a litany of pure and utter BS (which not even Chris Roberts has promised they could do in the game); when it comes down to it, most of them won’t want to be that guy. In games which require player co-operation, there is always “fun” stuff for all player classes to use. e.g. a medic, a tank etc. In a game like this, there is nothing fun about a skill based radar system, no matter how it’s implemented. Again, this is all assuming they are targeting this as a skill based system. If they aren’t, then this point is moot.

    At the end of the day, it’s all down to user experience. If they keep it this way, in which it’s a timed “progress bar” type system which requires constant input (among other things), instead of just a fire-and-forget key input (which can also have the progress bar as it powers up and activates), it will be a complete disaster. And then they will have to do what they always do: go back in, rip it all out, or nerf it. Time wasted.

    My suggestion would be to keep everything as-is, but instead of the constant “golf swing” input, simply make it a fire-and-forget mode change input. e.g. passive is the default, then you press a key, and it switches to active, which then initiates the same progress bar. Then, it could be that once the player (pilot or other) switches modes, the pilot would have to keep the ship pointed at the target in order for the progress bar scan to complete quickly. Doing it this way also allows the player to operate the radar system, even without a co-op player. And in the event of a co-op player, perhaps the ability to select multiple targets based on priority (which the pilot may not be aware of; especially in a combat situation), is the add-on benefit. The other benefit to this is that it would work in all ship types, since it gives the pilot autonomy, but at a cost.

    FYI, I don’t believe this is a QTE (QuickTime Event) they are showing as the progress bar. It just looks like a Flash based UI (probably using Scaleform or similar; we use Iggy in LoD) animation.

    Additional reading:

    The radar system in my BC/UC games is quite complex under the hood, and I did my best to not expose too much of that to the user. Read how it works on p27 of the UCCE 3.0 game docs.

     

Viewing 4 replies - 41 through 44 (of 44 total)

The forum ‘Main’ is closed to new topics and replies.