The flight model doesn't do 6DoF, it doesn't do Newtonian, it doesn't have good joystick support. It favours yaw over roll.
If those things are remedied then it would be much more fun for me.
It does do 6DoF, It does do Newtonian and although it currently doesn't have very good joystick support (Because they haven't implemented rebinding or the likes in the current build) and if it favours yaw over roll it's either because of the way G-Forces are felt by the human body or due to the thruster layout of the ship you're flying.
Before you make comments about what something can or can't do and how it needs 'fixed' maybe you should read up about it a bit on how the mechanics work.
We might as well just complain about the game having no skill autoaim while we're making sweeping statements about systems we don't understand. But just to clarify; The reason there is an 'auto aim' is because each gimbaled weapon independently accounts for target velocity and takes into account the speed of the projectile being shot? So you don't end up with a lead target indicator where only some or none of your shots actually hit even though you had it dead on due to differences in bullet velocity between weapons.
But like I said, it's easier to just stomp your feet and demand things be 'fixed' than it is to bother trying to figure out why it works the way it does in the first place. The physics in this game are incredibly well modelled at this point for what is essentially a pre-alpha game. But don't take my word for it, go read some of the developer posts about the systems and decide for yourself.
The flight model available to us in AC does not currently do 6DoF or Newtonian. Whether using coupled or un-coupled mode all we have is a bastardised flight model. This video shows the difference between what is and isn't implemented (language is colourful) - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1PR8auKrzbk
Yaw makes for much less engaging gameplay over pitch/roll and as I said - that is subjective but much more fun for me.
If you can't debate without sniping you're more than welcome to not debate.
You didn't read either of the links I posted did you?
It *IS* 6 DoF and it *IS* Newtonian.
The current levels you can select from only change the behaviour of the IFCS and the developers have already addressed why that is and what they are looking to implement. The thrusters counter thrusting when you stop using afterburners for example was a misunderstanding on Zyrain's part from a conversation he had with Chris Roberts and is planned to be changed.
The very first point in the second link also describes how the system is 6 DoF and also describes the additional control orders the system uses.
You are confusing what the model can do with the behaviour the IFCS is currently exhibiting due to the settings implemented by CIG. They went through the hassle of upgrading the engine to support double precision as well so they could model larger areas more precisely, to think they don't have a 6 DoF or Newtonian capable physics engine is just being short sighted. Based on both what is in game and what other features they are implementing it's clear to see it's going to be very well modelled. (Guns/Explosions for example push objects around in game and can knock you off your feet if you are standing inside a ship and cause damage to your player character)
You didn't read either of the links I posted did you?
It *IS* 6 DoF and it *IS* Newtonian.
The current levels you can select from only change the behaviour of the IFCS and the developers have already addressed why that is and what they are looking to implement. The thrusters counter thrusting when you stop using afterburners for example was a misunderstanding on Zyrain's part from a conversation he had with Chris Roberts and is planned to be changed.
The very first point in the second link also describes how the system is 6 DoF and also describes the additional control orders the system uses.
You are confusing what the model can do with the behaviour the IFCS is currently exhibiting due to the settings implemented by CIG. They went through the hassle of upgrading the engine to support double precision as well so they could model larger areas more precisely, to think they don't have a 6 DoF or Newtonian capable physics engine is just being short sighted. Based on both what is in game and what other features they are implementing it's clear to see it's going to be very well modelled. (Guns/Explosions for example push objects around in game and can knock you off your feet if you are standing inside a ship and cause damage to your player character)
No I'm not confusing anything, if I load up AC right now I cannot fly my ship using 6DoF nor can I fly it in full newtonian mode. I have to use a decoupling switch for a bastardised form of flight. That was my complaint from the start.
Pretty much what Mael said, yet I"d add I wouldn't call most of what I see in gaming news journalism, it's more like exploitation. You exploit the curiosity of the reader through sensational means to garner the most hits regardless of any accuracy. That's what internet news as a whole has become, but more so in fields like this. The worst part is; this article says you completely endorse that approach.
IN closing CR has a point, there's no sense of responsibility or honesty when it comes this type of thing, you say what you say simply to garner as much attention as possible, nothing else matters. What ever happened to integrity and fact finding? Money, hits mean money and the truth is boring.
Aye spot on.
Originally posted by Arglebargle
I still would like to know why they released this incomplete, buggy module when they didn't have some evil corporate developer making them.
....
Many of us wanted them to release it as we were tired of waiting.
Brenics ~ Just to point out I do believe Chris Roberts is going down as the man who cheated backers and took down crowdfunding for gaming.
Wow.... this article is a joke. Sounds to me like Red is angry that CR hasn't forked out any cash to them for covering Star Citizen. MMORPG doesn't give out publicity hand outs obviously.
The guy started a ambitious project, it was successful, nobody has been forced to part with any money as it is all available in game for FREE when the game goes live, the only thing anyone has to pay is a base initial subscription for the cheapest ship around 40 bucks i think at launch. that's it, its free from then on.
How has it been successful? They've only released a strange version of the DFM that plays very arcadey (though it looks great thanks to CryEngine). He's been successful convincing people to pre-pay for every feature under the sun. He's struggling getting out a good flight-sim demo (what was it? six delays?), how long do you think it'll take before he's implemented all the features he's preaching will be in game?
I have finally just subbed up, downloaded the Arena commander and it looks fantastic. And to think this is just the primary Alpha release V0.8 of a fictional game within the game to allow players to dogfight against each other and AI, it's going to be quite amazing how the full game will develop.
Yeah it looks fantastic because it's been made on a ready engine that is famous for having the most awesome graphics.
It PLAYS rather crap compared to other flight/space sims. I presume they can fix it though if they listen to some of the experienced players forum posts.
I also like how you mention that dogfighting against AI and other players is going to be amazing, I mean it's not like we can already do that in other games.
You made absolutely no point at all. "dogfighting not like we cant do that in any other game" Well yeh because god forbid we have more than 1 game that has dog fighting,
Exactly, so maybe you shouldn't mention it in a way as if SC is unique in that it provides dogfighting?
"looks great because of cry engine" You don't say, yeh the engine does the work but you could also make a crappy looking game in cry engine so why try and suck away the effort of the developers?
With 220 developers, 45 million budget and the most gorgeous-looking-READY-engine on the market, I'd expect anyone to be able to make a good-looking game
I'm not trying to suck it out of the CIG artists but likewise give credit to the CryEngine crew.
and it plays crap? Hardly it is allot of fun but it's an Alpha, again why look at the job constructively and when you can compare finished games with a V0.8 Alpha part release of a very small part of the full game.
It's THE most important part of the game, it's an mmo flight sim, it's supposed to fly like a dream. It flies very very badly.. which is why it's caused such a turmoil on the forums. Of course there's going to be people who like it... but I think the people who dislike it have legitimate concerns.
You didn't read either of the links I posted did you?
It *IS* 6 DoF and it *IS* Newtonian.
The current levels you can select from only change the behaviour of the IFCS and the developers have already addressed why that is and what they are looking to implement. The thrusters counter thrusting when you stop using afterburners for example was a misunderstanding on Zyrain's part from a conversation he had with Chris Roberts and is planned to be changed.
The very first point in the second link also describes how the system is 6 DoF and also describes the additional control orders the system uses.
You are confusing what the model can do with the behaviour the IFCS is currently exhibiting due to the settings implemented by CIG. They went through the hassle of upgrading the engine to support double precision as well so they could model larger areas more precisely, to think they don't have a 6 DoF or Newtonian capable physics engine is just being short sighted. Based on both what is in game and what other features they are implementing it's clear to see it's going to be very well modelled. (Guns/Explosions for example push objects around in game and can knock you off your feet if you are standing inside a ship and cause damage to your player character)
No I'm not confusing anything, if I load up AC right now I cannot fly my ship using 6DoF nor can I fly it in full newtonian mode. I have to use a decoupling switch for a bastardised form of flight. That was my complaint from the start.
Regardless of what you can do right now it is simply factually incorrect to say the engnine is neither 6DoF or Newtonian just because the IFCS is limiting your manual control over the ship. The engine is both 6DoF and fully Newtonian, you simply do not have control over your ship at this point to 'feel' that and until they update the IFCS behaviour (Like the designer of the system has informed he is doing) I guess you will continue to think the engine isn't/can't do it.
Also, the guy in your link is correct but only when it come to sustained forces experienced when you are circling around a centre of mass. Strictly speaking lateral force would not make you feel dizzy or black out. The dizzy effect is from the fluid in your inner ear and you won't be losing blood to your brain since there's no force acting up or down on the body.
This was pointed out in the comments in the thread you linked. It was a good read and I'm sure Zyrain knows of this and is taking it into account. I seem to recall them saying they weren't sure on how they wanted to visualise the yawing forces on the pilot. His previous posts on the subject of the flight modelling and physics have been very detailed in how the system is modelling the physics and it doesn't seem like he would leave something this simple out of the equation completely. They have mass for objects, they can measure distance between your player and the centre of mass and we know the limitations of the human body as well.
So its all good when media reports how good SC is looking and giving ammo for the hype train but when said media is firing ammo where and when shit is happening he hates it ?
This man should just focus on getting shit done instead of "making trailers to sell ingame ships trough the same media"
Using backers money to get even more fund from said backers.
45 million and what does it show ? a dog fighting module thats not even close to beta.
If this man fails to deliver it will ripple trough tons of future projects that depend on backers.
He should just prove how well invested the backers money is spend instead and hurry up abit before shit realy hits the fan and it creates a ton more negativity.
Stop crying and start showing where all that money went by releasing a damn playable game.
More critics are needed instead of ass kissing in this industry.
You made absolutely no point at all. "dogfighting not like we cant do that in any other game" Well yeh because god forbid we have more than 1 game that has dog fighting, you say that like it a bad thing. "looks great because of cry engine" You don't say, yeh the engine does the work but you could also make a crappy looking game in cry engine so why try and suck away the effort of the developers? and it plays crap? Hardly it is allot of fun but it's an Alpha, again why look at the job constructively and when you can compare finished games with a V0.8 Alpha part release of a very small part of the full game.
Fun is entirely subjective. I think the AC looks pretty but plays like complete crap.
The flight model doesn't do 6DoF, it doesn't do Newtonian, it doesn't have good joystick support. It favours yaw over roll.
If those things are remedied then it would be much more fun for me.
Of course fun is subjective. That is the whole point and part of why the 'reviewing' of the Area commander as a finished game is nuts.
Arena commander was supposed to just be a dogfighting modual to address that exact thing, making the flight right by putting out a testing modual for people to report back what does and does not work. However they decided, why waste the effort when we can add some flare and make it into a neat little game with the game. But the main reason for it is still there.
IT is a test modual to get the damage, flight model and physics just right. that's exactly what we are supposed to be testing and feeding back to the developer, what works, what don't, what's broken etc.
Instead of telling everyone the alpha flight and damage model test program 'it flys like crap' which is a no brainer, folk should be putting the input back to the developer, its what its there for,
And as for the 6 DOF flight model, it's coming, they are going to do it. Chris has said in yet another piece of useful feedback information that folk simply don't seem to read that it's coming they are just trying to figure out how best to put 6 DOF into a control system.
The media, as far as I am concerned has lost ALL integrity in reporting the NEWS wether it be real world events/gaming/sports/etc. Everything I read nowadays I have to take with a grain of salt and pick through an article and choose wether I want to believe the author or not. Then I end up having to decide on how biased the author is towards the subject and if he is just writing his opinion on the subject and throwing a couple of sources/facts to be able to sell the article to as many readers possible.
Then these people who call themselves news reporters act out in wonder and amazement as to why their articles get flamed and ridiculed.
Regardless of what you can do right now it is simply factually incorrect to say the engnine is neither 6DoF or Newtonian just because the IFCS is limiting your manual control over the ship. The engine is both 6DoF and fully Newtonian, you simply do not have control over your ship at this point to 'feel' that and until they update the IFCS behaviour (Like the designer of the system has informed he is doing) I guess you will continue to think the engine isn't/can't do it.
Also, the guy in your link is correct but only when it come to sustained forces experienced when you are circling around a centre of mass. Strictly speaking lateral force would not make you feel dizzy or black out. The dizzy effect is from the fluid in your inner ear and you won't be losing blood to your brain since there's no force acting up or down on the body.
This was pointed out in the comments in the thread you linked. It was a good read and I'm sure Zyrain knows of this and is taking it into account. I seem to recall them saying they weren't sure on how they wanted to visualise the yawing forces on the pilot. His previous posts on the subject of the flight modelling and physics have been very detailed in how the system is modelling the physics and it doesn't seem like he would leave something this simple out of the equation completely. They have mass for objects, they can measure distance between your player and the centre of mass and we know the limitations of the human body as well.
Until I have the ability to make use of 6DoF without using some sort of modifier I stand by my opinion that it contributes to AC playing as complete crap.
If the IFCS changes in v0.9 or in a patch before then I will change my opinion at that time.
I've got nothing more I want to add to the conversation.
Originally posted by FGP123
Of course fun is subjective. That is the whole point and part of why the 'reviewing' of the Area commander as a finished game is nuts.
Arena commander was supposed to just be a dogfighting modual to address that exact thing, making the flight right by putting out a testing modual for people to report back what does and does not work. However they decided, why waste the effort when we can add some flare and make it into a neat little game with the game. But the main reason for it is still there.
IT is a test modual to get the damage, flight model and physics just right. that's exactly what we are supposed to be testing and feeding back to the developer, what works, what don't, what's broken etc.
Instead of telling everyone the alpha flight and damage model test program 'it flys like crap' which is a no brainer, folk should be putting the input back to the developer, its what its there for,
And as for the 6 DOF flight model, it's coming, they are going to do it. Chris has said in yet another piece of useful feedback information that folk simply don't seem to read that it's coming they are just trying to figure out how best to put 6 DOF into a control system.
I am not a fanboi, but I believe in what Roberts is doing. He could be single handedly changing how the industry works with how he is developing this game.
He has zero obligation to share any information at all. And like you said Suzie, "CIG could potentially walk away right now in the black and there’s not a thing anyone could do about it."
But what he IS doing is pushing out updates, and being fairly transparent on their activities with updates on the status of the various projects going on. Treating the backers like they are shareholders in a company.
I do disagree that it is CIG's responsibility to educate the public on the process on "How to make a game". Putting all the blame on him and CIG unjust. It is the person who needs to educate themselves.
Like I said, I am not a fanboi, but I like the idea of Star Citizen, and I hope that idea turns out to be reality, but I do not support your article. Between CitiCon, Wingman's Hangar, 10 For the Chairmen, Developers and directors both being extremely active in the forums... there is a lot of information passing from CIG to the world.
Kudos to you Wolf for a well written reply and I am 100% in agreement with what you have written. Shame the media has to glorify everything to get their point across. If we do it in here we get a slap, but then the guys working for this site pretty much get a free rein and that's why I have not been posting here for a long time but felt I had to on this and the only way to not encourage BS is not to rise to it.
I hope that the guys from CIG make a shit load of money and that the game becomes and EPIC game changing games forever to show not just the media but the other idiots sucking from customers for all these years. This gives independent games makers so much hope and I hope they do not abuse it but prove to the world that you don't need suits to make games.
Thanks NightBandit.
Maybe I should be writing stories, but just base them on fact and shining the light on both sides of the issues.
Originally posted by mayito7777 Maybe SBFord hates Chris Roberts?
It wasn't her that wrote the article. It was Red Thomas.
I still blame the staff at mmorpg.com for the publishing of this article as it casts a reflection on them with what articles are published on their site.
Originally posted by mayito7777 Maybe SBFord hates Chris Roberts?
It wasn't her that wrote the article. It was Red Thomas.
Oh maybe then Red Thomas?
<- Red Thomas is a Rear Admiral, so my money is where my mouth is.
Also, I like Chris and think he's a pretty cool guy. Doesn't mean I have to agree with him 100% all the time.
For those who didn't get past the title, I actually support the game a lot, and even called the DFM a success. I just took exception to the idea that you can be upset with the media for "sensationalist" headlines when you refer to your own game as the BDSS consistently.
Originally posted by mayito7777 Maybe SBFord hates Chris Roberts?
It wasn't her that wrote the article. It was Red Thomas.
Oh maybe then Red Thomas?
<- Red Thomas is a Rear Admiral, so my money is where my mouth is.
Also, I like Chris and think he's a pretty cool guy. Doesn't mean I have to agree with him 100% all the time.
For those who didn't get past the title, I actually support the game a lot, and even called the DFM a success. I just took exception to the idea that you can be upset with the media for "sensationalist" headlines when you refer to your own game as the BDSS consistently.
Sales pitches that's all they are, all sales pitches are sensationalist by nature, are Kellogg's Frosted Flakes so great after all? Some of us read the article and still came away tasting the sour grapes. You're a writer he's a salesman, we expect that from him, it doesn't excuse a lack of honesty, but it's his job to sell the game to you. On the other hand your job should come with a responsibility, I'll just leave it at that I"ve stated enough how I feel about that responsibility.
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
Damn right the media should be calling chris out on every little thing, in his past he has always blamed everyone else for his "promises" not making it into the finished project, this time if it all fails he will probably blame the media :-)
It would be nice for someone to post the original kickstarter for SC with his time scales in black and white to remind defending Chris how many of those promises he broke or will never deliver on in the time scale given.
Oh make as many excuses as you wish for him and as for him calling SC the BDSS has anyone actually informed him of the fact it isn't out yet, it is still in alpha and thus claiming these things goes far beyond enthusiasm into the realms of delusion.
Chris call it the BDSS out there once it is released OR better yet let the people playing it tell you that once it is out otherwise you are more hyperbole and sensationalist than this or any other article I have read to do with SC.
Wow lots of media critics and fanboys here. Have to wonder if he puts people up to trolling websites like the above comments.
Dude took 45 million dollars by charging ridiculous amounts for in-game benefits and virtual items. Let's get real here.
And that's your problem how?
If the people wanted to give money for things, whether they're real or not doesn't seem to have anything AT ALL to do with you. If you wouldn't do it, good for you. Move along now.
It doesn't affect him directly, on that you are right. However, when a man makes 45 million based on self-created hype, he loses the right to complain when the media tightens the screws on him a little bit. Especially when he's not under any sort of legal obligation to actually spend that money on developing his game at all, and doubly so given he raised it primarily by selling digital assets for that game which for all intents and purposes, doesn't exist yet.
In response to other posts here: There's nothing libelous or unethical about speculation, so long as it is clearly presented as such. There's a big difference between, "Chris Roberts could walk away with all that money any time he pleases, were he so inclined", and "Chris Roberts is going to walk away with all that money someday."
I wouldn't think I'd have to point that out, but there it is.
Not to argue your point, I see where you're coming from and I'm not one of the people I tried defending, as I'd never gamblewith my money like that. But what CR did (or could, or might) do is no different from many well funded 'charities' and X research donation groups in the world. If people believe in something enough, they'll throw money at it sight unseen. At least these days, the lucky few get multicolored rubber bands for all the money they've thrown away, though after billions (trillions?) of dollars given over decades, those rubber bands are the only real thing they'll probably ever see happen with their wallets.
The so called open financing model would be a developers' paradise. Gamers will pay them to make a game and then they'll pay to play the game. Hahahah. Brilliant idea.
Originally posted by BananaSoup The so called open financing model would be a developers' paradise. Gamers will pay them to make a game and then they'll pay to play the game. Hahahah. Brilliant idea.
well they are not charging a monthly fee and not selling ships on launch so........... wth are you talking about?
I know, I can't believe they didn't get the game finished in 2 months. Them so slow programmers, if EA was backing them they would have released a game already.
Of course he hates the media. I'm sure he'd rather everyone just throw money at him and sit idly by waiting for him to actually produce something with it but that's not how things work. The media pulls back the veil and forces accountability for his promises. They are the boss's boss and some of these guys have had it their way for so long they hate having to answer to anyone, least of all you, me, or the media.
I sort of have to agree with Red... I can not remember Chris complaining when he get positive articles or get praised to the skies. Then it is ok to use sensationalism...
That being said i do not know one single creative person who like to have their passion and their product/production questioned. So his reaction is as expected as it is futile.
That pretty much sums up my thoughts.
I haven't really followed CZ's development much, but it's clear to see the guy is passionate about what he's doing. So obviously he's going to be irked whenever someone takes a dump all over his work, not to mention himself and his employees when they imply they're scamming people or other comments like that.
My SWTOR referral link for those wanting to give the game a try. (Newbies get a welcome package while returning players get a few account upgrades to help with their preferred status.)
Comments
The flight model available to us in AC does not currently do 6DoF or Newtonian. Whether using coupled or un-coupled mode all we have is a bastardised flight model.
This video shows the difference between what is and isn't implemented (language is colourful) - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1PR8auKrzbk
Yaw makes for much less engaging gameplay over pitch/roll and as I said - that is subjective but much more fun for me.
If you can't debate without sniping you're more than welcome to not debate.
You didn't read either of the links I posted did you?
It *IS* 6 DoF and it *IS* Newtonian.
The current levels you can select from only change the behaviour of the IFCS and the developers have already addressed why that is and what they are looking to implement. The thrusters counter thrusting when you stop using afterburners for example was a misunderstanding on Zyrain's part from a conversation he had with Chris Roberts and is planned to be changed.
The very first point in the second link also describes how the system is 6 DoF and also describes the additional control orders the system uses.
You are confusing what the model can do with the behaviour the IFCS is currently exhibiting due to the settings implemented by CIG. They went through the hassle of upgrading the engine to support double precision as well so they could model larger areas more precisely, to think they don't have a 6 DoF or Newtonian capable physics engine is just being short sighted. Based on both what is in game and what other features they are implementing it's clear to see it's going to be very well modelled. (Guns/Explosions for example push objects around in game and can knock you off your feet if you are standing inside a ship and cause damage to your player character)
No I'm not confusing anything, if I load up AC right now I cannot fly my ship using 6DoF nor can I fly it in full newtonian mode.
I have to use a decoupling switch for a bastardised form of flight. That was my complaint from the start.
Your links are wrong regarding human tolerances to g-forces, a correct read - https://forums.robertsspaceindustries.com/discussion/144997/urgent-devs-have-fundamentally-misunderstood-yaw-g-forces-and-the-human-body
I still would like to know why they released this incomplete, buggy module when they didn't have some evil corporate developer making them.
"News is what people do not want you to print. All the rest is advertising.” attributed to Alfred Harmsworth, 1st Viscount Northcliffe
If you are holding out for the perfect game, the only game you play will be the waiting one.
Aye spot on.
Many of us wanted them to release it as we were tired of waiting.
Brenics ~ Just to point out I do believe Chris Roberts is going down as the man who cheated backers and took down crowdfunding for gaming.
..Cake..
Regardless of what you can do right now it is simply factually incorrect to say the engnine is neither 6DoF or Newtonian just because the IFCS is limiting your manual control over the ship. The engine is both 6DoF and fully Newtonian, you simply do not have control over your ship at this point to 'feel' that and until they update the IFCS behaviour (Like the designer of the system has informed he is doing) I guess you will continue to think the engine isn't/can't do it.
Also, the guy in your link is correct but only when it come to sustained forces experienced when you are circling around a centre of mass. Strictly speaking lateral force would not make you feel dizzy or black out. The dizzy effect is from the fluid in your inner ear and you won't be losing blood to your brain since there's no force acting up or down on the body.
This was pointed out in the comments in the thread you linked. It was a good read and I'm sure Zyrain knows of this and is taking it into account. I seem to recall them saying they weren't sure on how they wanted to visualise the yawing forces on the pilot. His previous posts on the subject of the flight modelling and physics have been very detailed in how the system is modelling the physics and it doesn't seem like he would leave something this simple out of the equation completely. They have mass for objects, they can measure distance between your player and the centre of mass and we know the limitations of the human body as well.
So its all good when media reports how good SC is looking and giving ammo for the hype train but when said media is firing ammo where and when shit is happening he hates it ?
This man should just focus on getting shit done instead of "making trailers to sell ingame ships trough the same media"
Using backers money to get even more fund from said backers.
45 million and what does it show ? a dog fighting module thats not even close to beta.
If this man fails to deliver it will ripple trough tons of future projects that depend on backers.
He should just prove how well invested the backers money is spend instead and hurry up abit before shit realy hits the fan and it creates a ton more negativity.
Stop crying and start showing where all that money went by releasing a damn playable game.
More critics are needed instead of ass kissing in this industry.
Of course fun is subjective. That is the whole point and part of why the 'reviewing' of the Area commander as a finished game is nuts.
Arena commander was supposed to just be a dogfighting modual to address that exact thing, making the flight right by putting out a testing modual for people to report back what does and does not work. However they decided, why waste the effort when we can add some flare and make it into a neat little game with the game. But the main reason for it is still there.
IT is a test modual to get the damage, flight model and physics just right. that's exactly what we are supposed to be testing and feeding back to the developer, what works, what don't, what's broken etc.
Instead of telling everyone the alpha flight and damage model test program 'it flys like crap' which is a no brainer, folk should be putting the input back to the developer, its what its there for,
And as for the 6 DOF flight model, it's coming, they are going to do it. Chris has said in yet another piece of useful feedback information that folk simply don't seem to read that it's coming they are just trying to figure out how best to put 6 DOF into a control system.
The media, as far as I am concerned has lost ALL integrity in reporting the NEWS wether it be real world events/gaming/sports/etc. Everything I read nowadays I have to take with a grain of salt and pick through an article and choose wether I want to believe the author or not. Then I end up having to decide on how biased the author is towards the subject and if he is just writing his opinion on the subject and throwing a couple of sources/facts to be able to sell the article to as many readers possible.
Then these people who call themselves news reporters act out in wonder and amazement as to why their articles get flamed and ridiculed.
Until I have the ability to make use of 6DoF without using some sort of modifier I stand by my opinion that it contributes to AC playing as complete crap.
If the IFCS changes in v0.9 or in a patch before then I will change my opinion at that time.
I've got nothing more I want to add to the conversation.
See above.Thanks NightBandit.
Maybe I should be writing stories, but just base them on fact and shining the light on both sides of the issues.
Wait, isn't that called journalism?
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/journalism
writing characterized by a direct presentation of facts or description of events without an attempt at interpretation
I still blame the staff at mmorpg.com for the publishing of this article as it casts a reflection on them with what articles are published on their site.
That is a warning to you Bill...
<- Red Thomas is a Rear Admiral, so my money is where my mouth is.
Also, I like Chris and think he's a pretty cool guy. Doesn't mean I have to agree with him 100% all the time.
For those who didn't get past the title, I actually support the game a lot, and even called the DFM a success. I just took exception to the idea that you can be upset with the media for "sensationalist" headlines when you refer to your own game as the BDSS consistently.
Sales pitches that's all they are, all sales pitches are sensationalist by nature, are Kellogg's Frosted Flakes so great after all? Some of us read the article and still came away tasting the sour grapes. You're a writer he's a salesman, we expect that from him, it doesn't excuse a lack of honesty, but it's his job to sell the game to you. On the other hand your job should come with a responsibility, I'll just leave it at that I"ve stated enough how I feel about that responsibility.
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
Damn right the media should be calling chris out on every little thing, in his past he has always blamed everyone else for his "promises" not making it into the finished project, this time if it all fails he will probably blame the media :-)
It would be nice for someone to post the original kickstarter for SC with his time scales in black and white to remind defending Chris how many of those promises he broke or will never deliver on in the time scale given.
Oh make as many excuses as you wish for him and as for him calling SC the BDSS has anyone actually informed him of the fact it isn't out yet, it is still in alpha and thus claiming these things goes far beyond enthusiasm into the realms of delusion.
Chris call it the BDSS out there once it is released OR better yet let the people playing it tell you that once it is out otherwise you are more hyperbole and sensationalist than this or any other article I have read to do with SC.
Not to argue your point, I see where you're coming from and I'm not one of the people I tried defending, as I'd never gamblewith my money like that. But what CR did (or could, or might) do is no different from many well funded 'charities' and X research donation groups in the world. If people believe in something enough, they'll throw money at it sight unseen. At least these days, the lucky few get multicolored rubber bands for all the money they've thrown away, though after billions (trillions?) of dollars given over decades, those rubber bands are the only real thing they'll probably ever see happen with their wallets.
So you go and prove him right with this rabble rousing clikbait headlined tirade of drivel?
I barely come here anymore. You just made me stop coming here altogether. Got much better things to do than associate with this kind of rubbish.
well they are not charging a monthly fee and not selling ships on launch so........... wth are you talking about?
I know, I can't believe they didn't get the game finished in 2 months. Them so slow programmers, if EA was backing them they would have released a game already.
That pretty much sums up my thoughts.
I haven't really followed CZ's development much, but it's clear to see the guy is passionate about what he's doing. So obviously he's going to be irked whenever someone takes a dump all over his work, not to mention himself and his employees when they imply they're scamming people or other comments like that.
My SWTOR referral link for those wanting to give the game a try. (Newbies get a welcome package while returning players get a few account upgrades to help with their preferred status.)
https://www.ashesofcreation.com/ref/Callaron/