this post was submitted on 19 Oct 2024
429 points (96.5% liked)

Games

32231 readers
818 users here now

Welcome to the largest gaming community on Lemmy! Discussion for all kinds of games. Video games, tabletop games, card games etc.

Weekly Threads:

What Are You Playing?

The Weekly Discussion Topic

Rules:

  1. Submissions have to be related to games

  2. No bigotry or harassment, be civil

  3. No excessive self-promotion

  4. Stay on-topic; no memes, funny videos, giveaways, reposts, or low-effort posts

  5. Mark Spoilers and NSFW

  6. No linking to piracy

More information about the community rules can be found here.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
(page 3) 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 34 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (7 children)

Because Crysis looked good, Chris Roberts mandated that Star Citizen would use Cryengine 3.

To make astronomically large spaces fit in the game engine from 2009, they made everything infinitesimally small.

So now due to the inaccuracy inherent in floating point calculations, instead of invisibly nudging things a few millimeters in the wrong direction, teleports people hundreds of feet out of their ships into space if they bump into a physics object, ladder, elevator, etc.

This is what happens when an ideas guy with no technical knowledge is making technical decisions.

[–] [email protected] 39 points 2 days ago (2 children)

This is not even true, they rewrote the engine to support native 64-bit precision to let them fit large spaces, they didn't just make everything small. They basically employ all the people that used to make Cryengine since Crytek went out of business, so the engine they are building is actually pretty good.

[–] [email protected] 14 points 2 days ago

I am engine developer, but even to this day you can clearly see Cryengine 3.x issue in star citizen.

They simulate zero-g areas as a Cryengine underwater map. You routinely see stuff floating as if in water even on planets with gravity.

You can also witness strange bugs that confirm the size issue (that they made everything extremely small in a Frankenstein version of a Cryengine map); one example would be your footmarks suddenly becoming massive.

The completely fucked up physics in sc (e.g. tanks bouncing like beachballs) is also a legacy of Cryengine 3.0.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 9 points 2 days ago

This is what happens when an ideas guy with no technical knowledge is making technical decisions.

If you're talking about Chris, he's a coder too, and wrote some of the entiry container system for the game.

I'm not sure where you're getting your info about them scaling everything down and that being the cause for wonky physics, though.

[–] [email protected] 33 points 2 days ago

To make astronomically large spaces fit in the game engine from 2009, they made everything infinitesimally small.

In fairness, when Star Citizen first went in to development CE3 was a modern engine.

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] [email protected] 33 points 2 days ago

Damn. I had really hoped my grandchildren would get to play Star Citizen in their lives.

[–] [email protected] 25 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Today was day one of Citizencon and CIG revealed a lot of stuff that shows they're still working to give players the game they want. Most of it was actually tech to answer the scalability problem for everyone wondering how they're going to get to 100 star systems when they still only have 1

[–] [email protected] 19 points 2 days ago (2 children)

Next it’ll be 1000 star systems while we’re still waiting on Squadron 42.

[–] [email protected] 30 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

Fun fact: If you take the year, add two, you'll get the current planned release date for sq42

This isn't dependent on the current year

[–] [email protected] 11 points 2 days ago (11 children)

Personally, I don't think they should be aiming for 100 anymore, even if it was promised. That number was for the original pitch and was arbitrarily high since it was for a much shallower and easier to create game

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Today they announced that it was cut down to 5 and they will slowly work their way back up to 100 after launch (whenever that is)

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 10 points 2 days ago

I’d gladly take a single functioning system rather than wait another 12 years of my life for this Kickstarter project to deliver.

load more comments (9 replies)
[–] [email protected] 15 points 2 days ago

Dull surprise.

[–] [email protected] 14 points 2 days ago (3 children)

We already knew this. It's just a grifting thing now.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] [email protected] 14 points 2 days ago

If they finished it they’d have to find a new revenue stream.

[–] [email protected] 14 points 2 days ago (1 children)
[–] [email protected] 11 points 2 days ago

You’re just jelous of my 5k kimited edition spaceship (will be ready next year)

[–] [email protected] 9 points 2 days ago

What's the latest build weight in at?

It's so many gigs, it's not even worth trying every so often. Every time you load it, gigs to download.

Glad I only ever spent the initial $60

The first big disappointment was the end of the funding rewards. Is any of those original rewards even noticable? Oh yay a fish! And a 42 towel to look at!

[–] [email protected] 11 points 2 days ago (8 children)

OK. Never played SC so honest question here; What is wrong if the game is technically not complete? I mean the way I thought is that this means that it keeps evolving and expanding so new content and features become available as the game development progresses. What am I missing? Is this a similar situation to the Eve Online BitterVets?

[–] [email protected] 14 points 2 days ago

Instead of focussing on getting the core of the game finished and THEN expanding it they do it the other way around.

For example the mining loop now is broken again, people bought mining ships and vehicles with $$ and they are completely unusable. Not to mention all the bugs and instability. I hope they succeed but right now things are not pointing to something enjoyable within the foreseeable future at all.

[–] [email protected] 24 points 2 days ago (1 children)

It was kickstarted a decade ago with release dates which they’ve never kept thanks to a constant modification of what a release looks like - namely splitting the MMO-like Star Citizen out from the single-player blockbuster Squadron 42 - as well as scope bloat. A lot of people originally kickstarted the game (mostly for what we now call Squadron 42 + some multiplayer thing) but now a decade on, the MMO-like Star Citizen is seemingly the priority project and most of the people who are currently funding the game are primarily interested in that.

After hundreds of millions of dollars of funding, it seems clear that Squadron 42 in particular is in development hell as it still can’t seem to make it to market. Star Citizen, while playable, teeters back and forth from basically unplayable to playable and all “progress” is subject to wipes.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Just some context: from 2017 until last year they had the majority of the development staff working on SQ42, which they declared feature complete last year and now we have a planned release of 2026. Most of the development staff has been moved back to Star Citizen which is finally seeing a lot of tech come online that was promised years ago. Definitely has a ton of scope creep, and it'll probably never have an official release, but it's definitely a cool tech demo that you can play.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 8 points 2 days ago

Long story short, they severely fail to deliver on their promises and also mismanaged their development incentives so that they are not financially interested to ever release, or even make the game fully playable.

[–] [email protected] 11 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

They consistently make promises for things that will exist in the future, which then takes them years beyond their expected timeframe to achieve, or just never do them because some other past promise or promise they will make later makes an original promise either totally unworkable or wildly different.

So, so many missed deadlines, which uh, actually were just aspirational.

And... this is a game that sells you ships, gear, for hundreds, thousands or even tens of thousands of real world dollars.

Some crazy promise will be made and oh, turns out that means we have to rework something like half the game's systems to support that, but also they're adding new content constantly that is always in some limbo state between following the old system's paradigms and attempting to follow the new system's paradigm.

What you end up with is a constant state of everything being a bit broken, and a lot of stuff being completely broken.

Its less like a released game getting DLCs and more like an alpha test that just never ends.

Which, again, costs hundreds or thousands of dollars.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 2 days ago

Game keeps wiping players inventories including the in-game money used to buy ships. You can't progress in the game, they just wipe you.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] [email protected] 9 points 2 days ago

It's still around?

I remember when Star Citizen first popped up, and it makes me feel old.

load more comments
view more: ‹ prev next ›