So until some VERY BASIC things are shown to me and people that have seen plenty of games come and go, then you will forgive us for drinking the kool aid.
See that's the thing It's just as much like "drinking the kool-aid" to be steadfast to the opposite side you ridicule. There's all kinds of kool-aid being tossed around on that side, so much, I don't even know where the straw starts.
I feel you'd have to be extremely gullible to buy into that information feed with no questions asked.
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
Neither of us can prove what we believe so its just as much a pile of poo as what anyone else is saying.
How about you guys stop making shit up then no one has to make shit up (as I said, it is hard to disprove made up shit...prove Santa is not real. Burden of proof and all that).
why do you keep bringing up something so ridiculous? What does a fictional make believe character have to do with a 'publicly' funded game that can easily prove or disprove anything and everything said about it with a few simple actions.
Using the Santa example is the most common example used to demonstrate how burden of proof works. I am using it to try and explain as simply as I can why when a claim is made it is up to the person making the claim to provide the proof.
I will gladly substitute another example if someone has anything easier to grasp to explain the concept.
This might work to understand why your posts get ridiculed and why people are always asking for evidence and proof: -
Nothing provided so far is BARD, C&C or even POE. Lots of allegations though but nothing to show for it.
Neither of us can prove what we believe so its just as much a pile of poo as what anyone else is saying.
How about you guys stop making shit up then no one has to make shit up (as I said, it is hard to disprove made up shit...prove Santa is not real. Burden of proof and all that).
why do you keep bringing up something so ridiculous? What does a fictional make believe character have to do with a 'publicly' funded game that can easily prove or disprove anything and everything said about it with a few simple actions.
Using the Santa example is the most common example used to demonstrate how burden of proof works. I am using it to try and explain as simply as I can why when a claim is made it is up to the person making the claim to provide the proof.
I will gladly substitute another example if someone has anything easier to grasp to explain the concept.
This might work to understand why your posts get ridiculed and why people are always asking for evidence and proof: -
Nothing provided so far is BARD, C&C or even POE. Lots of allegations though but nothing to show for it.
Lol this a forum not a court room. Burden of proof. ROFL.
Once again you will never get a rational truthful reply to any truth that is said about CR or SC. Like I said before just don't reply to their bait at attempting to get thread closed or put in jail (just make friends with Bubba). :-D
After doing research and talking to actual developers (no not just DS) the video's being put out by CIG are just being faked to make it seem like they are actually doing something.
Care to share with us the type of "research" you did ? Maybe disclose the names of said "actual developers" ?
You know, for someone in his 60's, as you claim, i would expect something more mature, less juvenile. Something showing that you are addressing intelligent persons.
By typing stuff like this you're insulting everyone's intelligence. We are not some sort of just basic cortex function primates you know.
It's been brought up multiple times in different threads about how horrible Chris is at managing a company or that when given complete control he can't produce anything. Also that he is well known for over promising and under delivering. When you point to freelancer or digital anvil as proof of this we get responses that range from defending his poor decisions to trying to spin it into a positive by saying "look at all those high scores!" even though Chris got the boot from Microsoft and they cut out things he promised in order for it to even see the light of day.
Only because he is not so good or even bad at project management or his overpromising does not make him a horrible manager. He is not good at it... we know... he enthusiastically overpromises quite often... we know. Luckily Erin is in place to keep things in line.
But we also know he is a great visionary. He likes to dream big. That's why I baked. I like people who think outside the box.
Yes Freelancer/Digital Anvil didn't work out as planned. Still Freelancer is well received and even played till today.
He had successfull games and movies and some not so good movies.
Please show proof of said boot Chris received from Microsoft with details please. Something only insiders can know
Also "ad nauseam".
I do like that you had to say freelancer was well received/still played today when that is what I said the fans do to try and gloss over that Chris was booted.
And yes being bad at project management and over promising and under delivering to the extent that Chris does it does make him a horrible manager. I think that would be the definition of one
Neither of us can prove what we believe so its just as much a pile of poo as what anyone else is saying.
How about you guys stop making shit up then no one has to make shit up (as I said, it is hard to disprove made up shit...prove Santa is not real. Burden of proof and all that).
why do you keep bringing up something so ridiculous? What does a fictional make believe character have to do with a 'publicly' funded game that can easily prove or disprove anything and everything said about it with a few simple actions.
Using the Santa example is the most common example used to demonstrate how burden of proof works. I am using it to try and explain as simply as I can why when a claim is made it is up to the person making the claim to provide the proof.
I will gladly substitute another example if someone has anything easier to grasp to explain the concept.
This might work to understand why your posts get ridiculed and why people are always asking for evidence and proof: -
Nothing provided so far is BARD, C&C or even POE. Lots of allegations though but nothing to show for it.
Lol this a forum not a court room. Burden of proof. ROFL.
It still explains what the burden of proof is. Which you guys obviously do NOT understand.
Proof of God: a book Proof against God: war, diseases, crime, hatred, unfairness, painful deaths of innocents, corruption.
Even though the evidence is mountainous and in your face, most churchgoers find wacky explanations as to why it can be ignored - 'God knows exactly what he's doing! Look, it's all there on page 52'
this is why, from non-religious outsiders, SC looks like a religious organisation. Arguing with some of the SC backers is eerily reminiscent.
stop asking for evidence that you won't read. There is no evidence you would accept.
Neither of us can prove what we believe so its just as much a pile of poo as what anyone else is saying.
How about you guys stop making shit up then no one has to make shit up (as I said, it is hard to disprove made up shit...prove Santa is not real. Burden of proof and all that).
why do you keep bringing up something so ridiculous? What does a fictional make believe character have to do with a 'publicly' funded game that can easily prove or disprove anything and everything said about it with a few simple actions.
Using the Santa example is the most common example used to demonstrate how burden of proof works. I am using it to try and explain as simply as I can why when a claim is made it is up to the person making the claim to provide the proof.
I will gladly substitute another example if someone has anything easier to grasp to explain the concept.
This might work to understand why your posts get ridiculed and why people are always asking for evidence and proof: -
Nothing provided so far is BARD, C&C or even POE. Lots of allegations though but nothing to show for it.
bwaahaaahaaaa, this is awesome. How about proving theyre actually making the game?
I dont even go as far as to call it an outright con. But when push comes to shove there is far more empirical evidence (or lack of evidence) that says there is more likely a chance NO game gets made (in any form beyond the broken mess that already exists) as there is to be one one (in any form).
Its the typical distract and diffuse is being used by the pro camp when it reality it should be being used by the anti camp.
EVERYTHING coming out of CiG and FROM them is the game is delayed or being redone or will be redone eventually. Not that anything is actually working as intended. The only thing they have managed to do is put about 10 or 12 ships (IMO I think its the same skeleton with 12 different skins thats why they dont all work right) into their broken tech demo theyre presenting as an alpha. A medium that isnt even permanent (persistent) but one that completely disappears and restarts whenever it goes down and comes back up. That is what is being called an 'alpha' after 4 (some would say closer to 5) years of development and who knows how many millions of dollars spent.
The cons really dont have to prove shit, (although they try to) all they need to do is sit back and watch this thing implode on itself. Or let time pass by and see the complete lack of anything pertinent coming from the studio.
The next RELEVANT release from CiG, Chris Roberts or any other entity related to this project will be the first. THAT just shows how meaningless everything they have delivered in relationship to this IP/title actually is.
People cant even answer just what that alpha/tech demo is. Is it related to Squadron 42 or the MMO proper? Both? Neither? Its a completely generic (broken) space sim that could be for any other space game. Other than the few advertisements in the graphics for CiG or Roberts space camp (or whatever its called). There is absolutely NOTHING that identifies this game as anything remotely related to Chris Roberts or Star Citizen. That is also something a lot of people dont touch on, because there is so much other stuff that is wrong with it the debates dont get that far, Same as the whole Pay to Win aspect of the game.
Even if the game gets made (eventually) there is going to be a lot of other things wrong with it it will be niche at best. PvP focused pay to win instanced games have never fared well. I doubt this one will be any different. If it gets made at all.
Neither of us can prove what we believe so its just as much a pile of poo as what anyone else is saying.
How about you guys stop making shit up then no one has to make shit up (as I said, it is hard to disprove made up shit...prove Santa is not real. Burden of proof and all that).
why do you keep bringing up something so ridiculous? What does a fictional make believe character have to do with a 'publicly' funded game that can easily prove or disprove anything and everything said about it with a few simple actions.
Using the Santa example is the most common example used to demonstrate how burden of proof works. I am using it to try and explain as simply as I can why when a claim is made it is up to the person making the claim to provide the proof.
I will gladly substitute another example if someone has anything easier to grasp to explain the concept.
This might work to understand why your posts get ridiculed and why people are always asking for evidence and proof: -
Nothing provided so far is BARD, C&C or even POE. Lots of allegations though but nothing to show for it.
bwaahaaahaaaa, this is awesome. How about proving theyre actually making the game?
I dont even go as far as to call it an outright con. But when push comes to shove there is far more empirical evidence (or lack of evidence) that says there is more likely a chance NO game gets made (in any form beyond the broken mess that already exists) as there is to be one one (in any form).
Its the typical distract and diffuse is being used by the pro camp when it reality it should be being used by the anti camp.
EVERYTHING coming out of CiG and FROM them is the game is delayed or being redone or will be redone eventually. Not that anything is actually working as intended. The only thing they have managed to do is put about 10 or 12 ships (IMO I think its the same skeleton with 12 different skins thats why they dont all work right) into their broken tech demo theyre presenting as an alpha. A medium that isnt even permanent (persistent) but one that completely disappears and restarts whenever it goes down and comes back up. That is what is being called an 'alpha' after 4 (some would say closer to 5) years of development and who knows how many millions of dollars spent.
The cons really dont have to prove shit, (although they try to) all they need to do is sit back and watch this thing implode on itself. Or let time pass by and see the complete lack of anything pertinent coming from the studio.
The next RELEVANT release from CiG, Chris Roberts or any other entity related to this project will be the first. THAT just shows how meaningless everything they have delivered in relationship to this IP/title actually is.
People cant even answer just what that alpha/tech demo is. Is it related to Squadron 42 or the MMO proper? Both? Neither? Its a completely generic (broken) space sim that could be for any other space game. Other than the few advertisements in the graphics for CiG or Roberts space camp (or whatever its called). There is absolutely NOTHING that identifies this game as anything remotely related to Chris Roberts or Star Citizen. That is also something a lot of people dont touch on, because there is so much other stuff that is wrong with it the debates dont get that far, Same as the whole Pay to Win aspect of the game.
Even if the game gets made (eventually) there is going to be a lot of other things wrong with it it will be niche at best. PvP focused pay to win instanced games have never fared well. I doubt this one will be any different. If it gets made at all.
If you cannot see proof that they are making a game than you have a concerning selective perception. We are provided insight into parts of the development like never before (or show me a game where you had such detailed information about the dev process).
If you really and honestly believe that for example the "news from around the verse" where every studio talks about what they were doing the last week is scripted and the people on there can't talk free than your people knowledge might have some issues.
Maybe you are from SA and/or just troll here... That would be the less worried explanation.
How do we as pro SC people distract from there, as you say, being no game at all? Wanna tell us how stupid we are to not see the con or Ponzi scheme or scam but your intellect provides you with insight that we don't get because we are blinded by godly CR? Come on...
Saying that everything it's redone is a bad argument because not everything is redone. But if you would have followed some other games and their development process you would know that especially with new IPs that a lot of thing are redone, refined, trashed, etc. because that is how game development works. Even standard R&D works just like that. Trial and error.
You can call the SC alpha how you like... it doesn't change the fact that it proofed the doomsayers were wrong on some of their arguments (the tech is not there, they have no demo, smoke and mirrors). Alpha, tech demo, PU sneak peak, working prototype, testbed... It does not matter. It is what it is... some hate it and say it's broken, others have a lot of fun with it and use it as proposed. But it is there and it becomes more stable, receives constant visible and non visible updates.
And what did you say about the ships and the skeleton they use? Excuse me? Please educate yourself about the actual ship pipelines and how it has been before that.
You sound like someone who really wants to say "I told you so" because it fits your personality and we will look up and shout "Save us!"... and you'll whisper "no."
No no no... I think you are not like that because you just sound angry.
Proof of God: a book Proof against God: war, diseases, crime, hatred, unfairness, painful deaths of innocents, corruption.
Even though the evidence is mountainous and in your face, most churchgoers find wacky explanations as to why it can be ignored - 'God knows exactly what he's doing! Look, it's all there on page 52'
this is why, from non-religious outsiders, SC looks like a religious organisation. Arguing with some of the SC backers is eerily reminiscent.
stop asking for evidence that you won't read. There is no evidence you would accept.
You can transfer the religious argument for example on Xbox vs PS, Apple vs Samsung, groupies...
If you think about how religion works and what it is then the religious aspect can be transferred to everything that you like and believe in. If someone has a different opinion than what do you do? You defend your opinion and believe.
The bad thing is that, whether you are for or against something, it can make you narrow minded if you have a tunnel view.
As I said... this applies to pro and con people. So please look into the mirror first if your believe is set right.
And I want to add that one pattern is always the same. Sometimes we get to the root of the discussion which I really like because people from both sides admit being not completely right, being ready for compromise and the topic gets discussed properly. Only one angry rant post is necessary to derail the honest conversation. This mostly only happens on the Internet because we do not talk to each other personally. We cannot look each other into the eyes to see how honest the argument is.
There always needs to be place for emotions but they don't get easily shut down gracefully on the Internet.
If you cannot see proof that they are making a game than you have a concerning selective perception. We are provided insight into parts of the development like never before (or show me a game where you had such detailed information about the dev process).
If you really and honestly believe that for example the "news from around the verse" where every studio talks about what they were doing the last week is scripted and the people on there can't talk free than your people knowledge might have some issues.
Maybe you are from SA and/or just troll here... That would be the less worried explanation.
How do we as pro SC people distract from there, as you say, being no game at all? Wanna tell us how stupid we are to not see the con or Ponzi scheme or scam but your intellect provides you with insight that we don't get because we are blinded by godly CR? Come on...
Saying that everything it's redone is a bad argument because not everything is redone. But if you would have followed some other games and their development process you would know that especially with new IPs that a lot of thing are redone, refined, trashed, etc. because that is how game development works. Even standard R&D works just like that. Trial and error.
You can call the SC alpha how you like... it doesn't change the fact that it proofed the doomsayers were wrong on some of their arguments (the tech is not there, they have no demo, smoke and mirrors). Alpha, tech demo, PU sneak peak, working prototype, testbed... It does not matter. It is what it is... some hate it and say it's broken, others have a lot of fun with it and use it as proposed. But it is there and it becomes more stable, receives constant visible and non visible updates.
And what did you say about the ships and the skeleton they use? Excuse me? Please educate yourself about the actual ship pipelines and how it has been before that.
You sound like someone who really wants to say "I told you so" because it fits your personality and we will look up and shout "Save us!"... and you'll whisper "no."
No no no... I think you are not like that because you just sound angry.
Not a very 'defiant' post, plenty of wiggle room and apprehension in that little diatribe. So its pretty clear yu dont know anything either and are not willing to take an absolute stand on what will or will not happen. Its typical of most pro guys.
But I will correct you on one point, your first. Theyre not making a game, at best right now theyre TRYING to make a game. which ironically is 'proven' by all this so called transparency. Because, like I said, everything they release is half assed, half done, and nothing that really instills confidence in them. Your post itself pretty much shows that.
But I will correct you on one point, your first. Theyre not making a game, at best right now theyre TRYING to make a game. which ironically is 'proven' by all this so called transparency. Because, like I said, everything they release is half assed, half done, and nothing that really instills confidence in them. Your post itself pretty much shows that.
This is your biased interpretation. More accurate, wishful thinking. And, how typical, you're trying to enforce your hot air filled hyperboles upon us. As facts.
Or i maybe i am wrong and you do have something to actually back your statements. Like some "research" you made or "interviews" with "actual" developers showing that the whole CIG thing is just a staged charade. You see, these are the types of arguments you people rely on in order to enforce your views. Nothing but hot air, speculation, exaggeration, hyperbole and in many cases lies. Not even semi-intelligent ones but rather of the sort a 6 year old would come up with.
As a backer all the proof i need is on my SDD. You and the rest can twist facts and try to alter reality as much as you can. They are making a game, a very ambitious one. And the development process is by far the most transparent i've ever seen for a crowdfunded project.
If you cannot see proof that they are making a game than you have a concerning selective perception. We are provided insight into parts of the development like never before (or show me a game where you had such detailed information about the dev process).
If you really and honestly believe that for example the "news from around the verse" where every studio talks about what they were doing the last week is scripted and the people on there can't talk free than your people knowledge might have some issues.
Maybe you are from SA and/or just troll here... That would be the less worried explanation.
How do we as pro SC people distract from there, as you say, being no game at all? Wanna tell us how stupid we are to not see the con or Ponzi scheme or scam but your intellect provides you with insight that we don't get because we are blinded by godly CR? Come on...
Saying that everything it's redone is a bad argument because not everything is redone. But if you would have followed some other games and their development process you would know that especially with new IPs that a lot of thing are redone, refined, trashed, etc. because that is how game development works. Even standard R&D works just like that. Trial and error.
You can call the SC alpha how you like... it doesn't change the fact that it proofed the doomsayers were wrong on some of their arguments (the tech is not there, they have no demo, smoke and mirrors). Alpha, tech demo, PU sneak peak, working prototype, testbed... It does not matter. It is what it is... some hate it and say it's broken, others have a lot of fun with it and use it as proposed. But it is there and it becomes more stable, receives constant visible and non visible updates.
And what did you say about the ships and the skeleton they use? Excuse me? Please educate yourself about the actual ship pipelines and how it has been before that.
You sound like someone who really wants to say "I told you so" because it fits your personality and we will look up and shout "Save us!"... and you'll whisper "no."
No no no... I think you are not like that because you just sound angry.
Not a very 'defiant' post, plenty of wiggle room and apprehension in that little diatribe. So its pretty clear yu dont know anything either and are not willing to take an absolute stand on what will or will not happen. Its typical of most pro guys.
But I will correct you on one point, your first. Theyre not making a game, at best right now theyre TRYING to make a game. which ironically is 'proven' by all this so called transparency. Because, like I said, everything they release is half assed, half done, and nothing that really instills confidence in them. Your post itself pretty much shows that.
Please ignore... After I clicked on "Post comment" only the quote was posted but my text vanished I have no motivation to write it again. Wouldn't change a thing even if I did because of Internet discussion rules.
Proof of God: a book Proof against God: war, diseases, crime, hatred, unfairness, painful deaths of innocents, corruption.
In 1485 St. Thomas Aquinas outlined 5 proofs of God in Summa Theologica: 1) Movement 2) Perfection 3) Change 4) Causation 5) Governance (to paraphrase). If you can accept rationalism, the man had a point. It goes a little bit deeper than "a book" (lol @ page #). I've found Aquinas' proof oddly reminiscent of some of the writings of Heraclitus ('everything flows').
Sorry for the OT, but it's hard to pass up a good strawman.
Whether you're a rationalist or an empiricist, I think it's important to look at what CIG has done so far when considering whether or not to pledge.
"The simple is the seal of the true and beauty is the splendor of truth" -Subrahmanyan Chandrasekhar Authored 139 missions in VendettaOnline and 6 tracks in Distance
This is your biased interpretation. More accurate, wishful thinking. And, how typical, you're trying to enforce your hot air filled hyperboles upon us. As facts.
Or i maybe i am wrong and you do have something to actually back your statements. Like some "research" you made or "interviews" with "actual" developers showing that the whole CIG thing is just a staged charade. You see, these are the types of arguments you people rely on in order to enforce your views. Nothing but hot air, speculation, exaggeration, hyperbole and in many cases lies. Not even semi-intelligent ones but rather of the sort a 6 year old would come up with.
As a backer all the proof i need is on my SDD. You and the rest can twist facts and try to alter reality as much as you can. They are making a game, a very ambitious one. And the development process is by far the most transparent i've ever seen for a crowdfunded project.
Not biased or wishful thinking, its called proof by inspection and using what they have been saying the past few months. They changed player character models (that video about pants confirmed that) later in that same video the fat guy with the beard said they would also eventually be changing ship models as well. After they have already changed/upgrade (allegedly) the whole engine.
Also the transcripts of the LATEST interviews from Roberts, which are reading more and more like poster comments here, with little defiance and more apprehension and capitulation that theyre not proceeding as wished and they need more skilled people in certain positions. I guess you guys will refute that as well.
There is the typical rainbows and butterflies smoke up the ass hyperbole, but there is also more and more REALISTIC discussions of what is and is not being done and why and why it isnt getting done.
But keep using that key word...'ambitious'. It is the catch all for the denial and excuses pro camp wants to spew. But the irony is every time the makers of the game talk the ambitious scope of the game seems to lessen. There have been a lot more deletions from the game than there have been additions despite continually (allegedly) 'raising' a few million dollars every month. You guys can debate the semantics of what isnt going to be in as opposed to what was promised way back when but thats the pro camp M.O. as well.
But really until they get a world/universe that doesnt reset/restart/disappear when the servers go down then it really isnt much of anything right now. Basically they cant even back up anything. So not sure what you guys want to call that or qualify that as. I know from what I remember they were supposed to have persistent universe module about a year and a half ago. They havent even got that yet. They havent gotten a persitent module of any kind actually. I assume that is what the first version of their persistent test bed area in this 'alpha' will be. They figured it would be a year after that before it would be considered 'workable' and another year or so after that before it integrated all the features necessary to be called a 'final' build. Pretty sure SQ will need a persistent universe, or at least they said it would. It will definitely need SOMETHING persistent. They have also said there will be no SQ 42 alpha. So not sure how that will work out for them since the hanger module has been out for about 2.5 years and its still buggy as hell. But whatever.
Like I said people are pretty naive if they think that they will suddenly get stuff they claimed would take two years to do (already a year + late) done and running in 8 months. And that is JUST the SQ 42 portion.
Basically they wont even have the first portion of the game released at the time they claimed the final portion that is actually called Star Citizen was to be launched.
So Tomato, Tomato I guess. You can say theyre making the game I can say theyre trying to make the game. Until SOMETHING gets made (that is backed up) I will say nothing is made yet.
This "new" back-end issue to which Roberts referred is a pretty substantial aspect that should have been considered before 2.0 tech demo. People complained CIG pushed that out to avoid refunds, but how wrong were they, if this very important coding wasn't done or even considered?
Now you're going to say, "Maybe they did consider it and maybe this is how game development works.".
They've had people putzing around for months in aps that could not, even had they the fondest dream or aspiration, do what CIG is "selling" the game to be able to do. This, limited by very real technological issues which had been addressed and dismissed as inconvenience.
And again this all goes back to the point that none of this can be proven until the game launches or fails do so. Which means everyone is free to spout any complete horse shit they feel like. And yes I include CIG and Chris Roberts in that statement as well.
So theyre basically relying on the ultimate straw man. It is or it isnt. Pretty minimalist for a guy who is still trying to get more money to make this game.
But I will leave what I have to say about that when he come out with another full court propaganda campaign to raise money. Right now he is simply planting the seeds and setting the foundation for that campaign.
But the game could have a persistent universe, it could have back up servers up and running and it could have a host of other things going for it, and I still wouldnt believe they will have SQ 42, let alone SC proper up and running any time soon. But the FACT, and yes those are indeed factual, those things do not exist yet is the most damning thing right now. Forget redoing the models (which I am sure theyre not close to finishing on the ones they started and who knows when they will be ready to start the ones they still want to change) they do not even have the basic foundation for the game (any portion of it) yet. Once they get that THEN we can start worrying about models, and textures, and all the other things they still have to work on.
I laid the outline out in another post a few days ago. Right now a lot of the stuff pro camp is defending and con camp is criticizing is stuff that might not even be implemented for a couple years. Which I guess makes the cons camp arguments easier, but still it does lead to the straw man argument you (and others) continue to offer. Which like I said is basically the definition of a straw man argument...it either happens or it doesnt. Kind of hard to argue against that or use that argue to refute anything other than it is or it isnt.
Was it this video or the other one where ChrisR talked about 'frame rates on the server'? Which leads to the obvious question (if you are a backend engineer) of 'WTF does a server need frame rates?'
Was it this video or the other one where ChrisR talked about 'frame rates on the server'? Which leads to the obvious question (if you are a backend engineer) of 'WTF does a server need frame rates?'
No one wants to discuss it. There's another thread about it here.
/shrug. I feel kinda bad for the "we defend SC" side, like I should go easy on them because they have a family member in the hospital. If they want to hide out from this one, it's ok.
I do not hide but I also do not need to discuss every little thing that the anti side brings up for discussion. I think this applies to some of the "pro" SC people. Mostly white knights will write rage posts or tell the author that he has no clue and needs to shut up. Applies also to black knights.
I have my own worries considering the network code/backend and the resulting max player / per ship / in a ship / in an instance. But I am no programmer and have no proper knowledge about these things and therefor do not play keyboard warrior/armchair developer. I will wait for the final product or at least beta to make my judgement!
What I find sad is when the anti side (which mostly dooms everything around SC) lumps together the SC supporters. Not all are white knights are a pure pro SC fan. But most of SC fans will raise an eyebrow when they see some of the criticism brought up by the anti side. Because most of the "arguments" have nothing to do with the topic as such but are means for purpose of hate/resentment or being a smartypants. It's quite similar as with grammar nazis who generally said are less agreeable persons with PD.
This does not apply to all anti people. But those people are likely not anti but just critical and can be convinced with the proper arguments. This applies to supporters of the project. With the proper arguments they can be convinced to be more critical and ask necessary questions.
Was it this video or the other one where ChrisR talked about 'frame rates on the server'? Which leads to the obvious question (if you are a backend engineer) of 'WTF does a server need frame rates?'
That's got to be a terminology screw-up. As the server gets loaded and IO starts getting reduced there's obviously additional latency which gets seen client side, they must be referring to this as server FPS.
Was it this video or the other one where ChrisR talked about 'frame rates on the server'? Which leads to the obvious question (if you are a backend engineer) of 'WTF does a server need frame rates?'
That's got to be a terminology screw-up. As the server gets loaded and IO starts getting reduced there's obviously additional latency which gets seen client side, they must be referring to this as server FPS.
Considering the state of the patch (How does delta patches work?), I'm pretty sure the server runs the game somewhat while the client does and it does a sync of some kind. Explains the jankiness of the PU.
Course there is also another question of 'how the heck do you take an existing 3d game engine and get characters drop through the floor?'
'Minimum viable product' - I wonder what this will be?
It means that the game WILL NOT be released as it was promised!!!!!! Stretch goals that were payed for and said to be in the game now will not be there at release.
Chris Roberts - "Not all stretch goals will be in the release"
He went and tried to cover his ass by saying well EvE and WoW do regular content updates so hey we can just do that too! Not even the same thing... not even close. People knew what they were buying when they got into EvE and WoW. It was a finished product and yeah, of course they would have expansions and stuff. Both of thoes games have evolved alot over the years
Star Citizen is not those games. It is publicly funded and there were goals laid out for dollar amounts earned during the funding campaign with the promise those features would be in the game at release. **EDIT** I wonder what's getting cut?
Surely some of you are starting to see how this is a big deal in a bad way?!
Comments
I feel you'd have to be extremely gullible to buy into that information feed with no questions asked.
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
I will gladly substitute another example if someone has anything easier to grasp to explain the concept.
This might work to understand why your posts get ridiculed and why people are always asking for evidence and proof: -
Nothing provided so far is BARD, C&C or even POE. Lots of allegations though but nothing to show for it.
Star Citizen – The Extinction Level Event
4/13/15 > ELE has been updated look for 16-04-13.
http://www.dereksmart.org/2016/04/star-citizen-the-ele/
Enjoy and know the truth always comes to light!
And yes being bad at project management and over promising and under delivering to the extent that Chris does it does make him a horrible manager. I think that would be the definition of one
Proof against God: war, diseases, crime, hatred, unfairness, painful deaths of innocents, corruption.
Even though the evidence is mountainous and in your face, most churchgoers find wacky explanations as to why it can be ignored - 'God knows exactly what he's doing! Look, it's all there on page 52'
this is why, from non-religious outsiders, SC looks like a religious organisation. Arguing with some of the SC backers is eerily reminiscent.
stop asking for evidence that you won't read. There is no evidence you would accept.
I dont even go as far as to call it an outright con. But when push comes to shove there is far more empirical evidence (or lack of evidence) that says there is more likely a chance NO game gets made (in any form beyond the broken mess that already exists) as there is to be one one (in any form).
Its the typical distract and diffuse is being used by the pro camp when it reality it should be being used by the anti camp.
EVERYTHING coming out of CiG and FROM them is the game is delayed or being redone or will be redone eventually. Not that anything is actually working as intended. The only thing they have managed to do is put about 10 or 12 ships (IMO I think its the same skeleton with 12 different skins thats why they dont all work right) into their broken tech demo theyre presenting as an alpha. A medium that isnt even permanent (persistent) but one that completely disappears and restarts whenever it goes down and comes back up. That is what is being called an 'alpha' after 4 (some would say closer to 5) years of development and who knows how many millions of dollars spent.
The cons really dont have to prove shit, (although they try to) all they need to do is sit back and watch this thing implode on itself. Or let time pass by and see the complete lack of anything pertinent coming from the studio.
The next RELEVANT release from CiG, Chris Roberts or any other entity related to this project will be the first. THAT just shows how meaningless everything they have delivered in relationship to this IP/title actually is.
People cant even answer just what that alpha/tech demo is. Is it related to Squadron 42 or the MMO proper? Both? Neither? Its a completely generic (broken) space sim that could be for any other space game. Other than the few advertisements in the graphics for CiG or Roberts space camp (or whatever its called). There is absolutely NOTHING that identifies this game as anything remotely related to Chris Roberts or Star Citizen. That is also something a lot of people dont touch on, because there is so much other stuff that is wrong with it the debates dont get that far, Same as the whole Pay to Win aspect of the game.
Even if the game gets made (eventually) there is going to be a lot of other things wrong with it it will be niche at best. PvP focused pay to win instanced games have never fared well. I doubt this one will be any different. If it gets made at all.
If you really and honestly believe that for example the "news from around the verse" where every studio talks about what they were doing the last week is scripted and the people on there can't talk free than your people knowledge might have some issues.
Maybe you are from SA and/or just troll here... That would be the less worried explanation.
How do we as pro SC people distract from there, as you say, being no game at all? Wanna tell us how stupid we are to not see the con or Ponzi scheme or scam but your intellect provides you with insight that we don't get because we are blinded by godly CR? Come on...
Saying that everything it's redone is a bad argument because not everything is redone. But if you would have followed some other games and their development process you would know that especially with new IPs that a lot of thing are redone, refined, trashed, etc. because that is how game development works. Even standard R&D works just like that. Trial and error.
You can call the SC alpha how you like... it doesn't change the fact that it proofed the doomsayers were wrong on some of their arguments (the tech is not there, they have no demo, smoke and mirrors). Alpha, tech demo, PU sneak peak, working prototype, testbed... It does not matter. It is what it is... some hate it and say it's broken, others have a lot of fun with it and use it as proposed. But it is there and it becomes more stable, receives constant visible and non visible updates.
And what did you say about the ships and the skeleton they use? Excuse me? Please educate yourself about the actual ship pipelines and how it has been before that.
You sound like someone who really wants to say "I told you so" because it fits your personality and we will look up and shout "Save us!"... and you'll whisper "no."
No no no... I think you are not like that because you just sound angry.
You can transfer the religious argument for example on Xbox vs PS, Apple vs Samsung, groupies...
If you think about how religion works and what it is then the religious aspect can be transferred to everything that you like and believe in. If someone has a different opinion than what do you do? You defend your opinion and believe.
The bad thing is that, whether you are for or against something, it can make you narrow minded if you have a tunnel view.
As I said... this applies to pro and con people. So please look into the mirror first if your believe is set right.
And I want to add that one pattern is always the same. Sometimes we get to the root of the discussion which I really like because people from both sides admit being not completely right, being ready for compromise and the topic gets discussed properly. Only one angry rant post is necessary to derail the honest conversation. This mostly only happens on the Internet because we do not talk to each other personally. We cannot look each other into the eyes to see how honest the argument is.
There always needs to be place for emotions but they don't get easily shut down gracefully on the Internet.
But I will correct you on one point, your first. Theyre not making a game, at best right now theyre TRYING to make a game. which ironically is 'proven' by all this so called transparency. Because, like I said, everything they release is half assed, half done, and nothing that really instills confidence in them. Your post itself pretty much shows that.
Or i maybe i am wrong and you do have something to actually back your statements. Like some "research" you made or "interviews" with "actual" developers showing that the whole CIG thing is just a staged charade. You see, these are the types of arguments you people rely on in order to enforce your views. Nothing but hot air, speculation, exaggeration, hyperbole and in many cases lies. Not even semi-intelligent ones but rather of the sort a 6 year old would come up with.
As a backer all the proof i need is on my SDD. You and the rest can twist facts and try to alter reality as much as you can. They are making a game, a very ambitious one. And the development process is by far the most transparent i've ever seen for a crowdfunded project.
Sorry for the OT, but it's hard to pass up a good strawman.
Whether you're a rationalist or an empiricist, I think it's important to look at what CIG has done so far when considering whether or not to pledge.
"The simple is the seal of the true and beauty is the splendor of truth" -Subrahmanyan Chandrasekhar
Authored 139 missions in Vendetta Online and 6 tracks in Distance
Also the transcripts of the LATEST interviews from Roberts, which are reading more and more like poster comments here, with little defiance and more apprehension and capitulation that theyre not proceeding as wished and they need more skilled people in certain positions. I guess you guys will refute that as well.
There is the typical rainbows and butterflies smoke up the ass hyperbole, but there is also more and more REALISTIC discussions of what is and is not being done and why and why it isnt getting done.
But keep using that key word...'ambitious'. It is the catch all for the denial and excuses pro camp wants to spew. But the irony is every time the makers of the game talk the ambitious scope of the game seems to lessen. There have been a lot more deletions from the game than there have been additions despite continually (allegedly) 'raising' a few million dollars every month. You guys can debate the semantics of what isnt going to be in as opposed to what was promised way back when but thats the pro camp M.O. as well.
But really until they get a world/universe that doesnt reset/restart/disappear when the servers go down then it really isnt much of anything right now. Basically they cant even back up anything. So not sure what you guys want to call that or qualify that as. I know from what I remember they were supposed to have persistent universe module about a year and a half ago. They havent even got that yet. They havent gotten a persitent module of any kind actually. I assume that is what the first version of their persistent test bed area in this 'alpha' will be. They figured it would be a year after that before it would be considered 'workable' and another year or so after that before it integrated all the features necessary to be called a 'final' build. Pretty sure SQ will need a persistent universe, or at least they said it would. It will definitely need SOMETHING persistent. They have also said there will be no SQ 42 alpha. So not sure how that will work out for them since the hanger module has been out for about 2.5 years and its still buggy as hell. But whatever.
Like I said people are pretty naive if they think that they will suddenly get stuff they claimed would take two years to do (already a year + late) done and running in 8 months. And that is JUST the SQ 42 portion.
Basically they wont even have the first portion of the game released at the time they claimed the final portion that is actually called Star Citizen was to be launched.
So Tomato, Tomato I guess. You can say theyre making the game I can say theyre trying to make the game. Until SOMETHING gets made (that is backed up) I will say nothing is made yet.
Now you're going to say, "Maybe they did consider it and maybe this is how game development works.".
They've had people putzing around for months in aps that could not, even had they the fondest dream or aspiration, do what CIG is "selling" the game to be able to do. This, limited by very real technological issues which had been addressed and dismissed as inconvenience.
But I will leave what I have to say about that when he come out with another full court propaganda campaign to raise money. Right now he is simply planting the seeds and setting the foundation for that campaign.
But the game could have a persistent universe, it could have back up servers up and running and it could have a host of other things going for it, and I still wouldnt believe they will have SQ 42, let alone SC proper up and running any time soon. But the FACT, and yes those are indeed factual, those things do not exist yet is the most damning thing right now. Forget redoing the models (which I am sure theyre not close to finishing on the ones they started and who knows when they will be ready to start the ones they still want to change) they do not even have the basic foundation for the game (any portion of it) yet. Once they get that THEN we can start worrying about models, and textures, and all the other things they still have to work on.
I laid the outline out in another post a few days ago. Right now a lot of the stuff pro camp is defending and con camp is criticizing is stuff that might not even be implemented for a couple years. Which I guess makes the cons camp arguments easier, but still it does lead to the straw man argument you (and others) continue to offer. Which like I said is basically the definition of a straw man argument...it either happens or it doesnt. Kind of hard to argue against that or use that argue to refute anything other than it is or it isnt.
Which leads to the obvious question (if you are a backend engineer) of 'WTF does a server need frame rates?'
Original - http://forums.somethingawful.com/showthread.php?threadid=3748466&userid=0&perpage=40&pagenumber=4551#post462019951 (paywall)
http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2016-07-15-through-gritted-teeth-star-citizen-developer-gives-player-whopping-usd2500-refund
CIG is sued by Crytek
https://www.polygon.com/2017/12/14/16776300/crytek-star-citizen-lawsuit-cig-rsi
EX-Backer StreetRoller sues Chris Roberts
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ojx7VcbowYQ
http://forums.mmorpg.com/discussion/449017/10-for-the-chairman-episode-81-star-citizen#latest
/shrug. I feel kinda bad for the "we defend SC" side, like I should go easy on them because they have a family member in the hospital. If they want to hide out from this one, it's ok.
I have my own worries considering the network code/backend and the resulting max player / per ship / in a ship / in an instance. But I am no programmer and have no proper knowledge about these things and therefor do not play keyboard warrior/armchair developer. I will wait for the final product or at least beta to make my judgement!
What I find sad is when the anti side (which mostly dooms everything around SC) lumps together the SC supporters. Not all are white knights are a pure pro SC fan. But most of SC fans will raise an eyebrow when they see some of the criticism brought up by the anti side. Because most of the "arguments" have nothing to do with the topic as such but are means for purpose of hate/resentment or being a smartypants. It's quite similar as with grammar nazis who generally said are less agreeable persons with PD.
This does not apply to all anti people. But those people are likely not anti but just critical and can be convinced with the proper arguments. This applies to supporters of the project. With the proper arguments they can be convinced to be more critical and ask necessary questions.
That's got to be a terminology screw-up. As the server gets loaded and IO starts getting reduced there's obviously additional latency which gets seen client side, they must be referring to this as server FPS.
Course there is also another question of 'how the heck do you take an existing 3d game engine and get characters drop through the floor?'
Original - http://forums.somethingawful.com/showthread.php?threadid=3748466&userid=0&perpage=40&pagenumber=4551#post462019951 (paywall)
http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2016-07-15-through-gritted-teeth-star-citizen-developer-gives-player-whopping-usd2500-refund
CIG is sued by Crytek
https://www.polygon.com/2017/12/14/16776300/crytek-star-citizen-lawsuit-cig-rsi
EX-Backer StreetRoller sues Chris Roberts
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ojx7VcbowYQ
https://robertsspaceindustries.com/comm-link/transmission/15287-10-For-The-Chairman
02:58 – Built in Starmap
04:43 – Ship Trials
05:42 – Future of Go Live
07:35 – EVA While Moving
10:13 – Repairing on the Fly
11:54 – Catapult System
14:59 – Cataclysmic Events
16:32 – Forward with Concept/Designs
19:51 – Bigger Hangars
23:31 – Stage a Terrorist Attack
Transcript:
http://imperialnews.network/2016/04/10-for-the-chairman-episode-82/
Have fun
https://robertsspaceindustries.com/comm-link/transmission/15299-10-For-The-Chairman
01:38 – Ship Power
07:35 – Individual Engine Controls
10:00 – Reedeemer
11:09 – Reputation System
14:14 – Persistence
18:30 – Launch Party
18:56 – Issue Council
21:26 – Monitor Views
23:08 – After Star Cittizen
26:46 – Pets
Transcript
http://imperialnews.network/2016/04/10-for-the-chairman-episode-83/
Have fun
Chris Roberts - "Not all stretch goals will be in the release"
He went and tried to cover his ass by saying well EvE and WoW do regular content updates so hey we can just do that too! Not even the same thing... not even close. People knew what they were buying when they got into EvE and WoW. It was a finished product and yeah, of course they would have expansions and stuff. Both of thoes games have evolved alot over the years
Star Citizen is not those games. It is publicly funded and there were goals laid out for dollar amounts earned during the funding campaign with the promise those features would be in the game at release. **EDIT** I wonder what's getting cut?
Surely some of you are starting to see how this is a big deal in a bad way?!