Oriphus said:The only place you hear this in the video is when he is discussing about Jump point travel and how they want to be able to make it skillful and dynamic when required.
0:58
Q: What is the most challenging, recent thing you are working on?
A: How we can build a solar system, right now that is our biggest challenge because what we really need to do is to figure out what a formula is...
Then he goes on with more of nothing-saying about solar system and quantum travel.
I am not going to go through the entire interview, just watch and listen more carefully. He didn't say a single specific thing they worked through - they just need to figure out everything...
Yeah I hear it. I guess I just don't see it as a cause for concern perhaps I should! But I don't expect them to have every detail locked down then sit in a room and code it out for a few years.
"Trump is a blunt force, all-American, laser-guided middle finger to everything and everyone in Washington, D.C." - Wayne Allyn Root
Oriphus said: I guess I just don't see it as a cause for concern
There is nothing there but more development. The systemic layout of the whole SC's gameplay depends on several pieces of tech that for who follows the development knows that aren't yet available.
Hear by they can't work on any final design if they don't have the base to work with. This is not going to be on Alpha 3.0 either, i'd say once they have the solar system layout and gameplay fully fleshed out...
...will be decently close to the game release, or at least the beta.
Oriphus said: Yeah I hear it. I guess I just don't see it as a cause for concern perhaps I should! But I don't expect them to have every detail locked down then sit in a room and code it out for a few years.
"We need to figure out..." isn't a reference to specific quote or mechanics particularly but more of a tone and conclusion of entire interview.
Well, I do not consider those things a "detail". How you are going to move around is essential for setting up your infrastructure and underlying your game design on fundamental level.
Oriphus said: I guess I just don't see it as a cause for concern
There is nothing there but more development. The systemic layout of the whole SC's gameplay depends on several pieces of tech that for who follows the development knows that aren't yet available.
Hear by they can't finalize the design if they don't have the base to work with. This is not going to be on Alpha 3.0 either, i'd say once they have the solar system layout and gameplay fully fleshed out...
...will be decently close to the game release.
This is how I see it. Surely this is the only way working on an innovative game can be. It is much easier to plan things when they have been done before.
"Trump is a blunt force, all-American, laser-guided middle finger to everything and everyone in Washington, D.C." - Wayne Allyn Root
Well in 4 months when nothing they showed at gamescon will be in any stage of their 'alpha' we will be on to the next thing. And this stuff will be forgotten unless someone necros it to show they havent figured anything out even at that point.
For the most part most negative stuff is actually correct when its posted, because it eventually gets proven out every time there is a delay or something gets changed or scrapped completely. Yet by that time there is already something new to criticize and the old stuff that was criticized before is old news.
The whole narrative just becomes about some rudimentary thing these guys actually got to partially work, and not about the plethora of things they have conveniently forgotten even existed that they claimed would be in a playable form years ago, let alone months after they showed a concept video about them and claimed they were ready to go then.
Well, I do not consider those things a "detail". How you are going to move around is essential for setting up your infrastructure and underlying your game design on fundamental level.
What you hear seems to be 'we don't know wtf we are doing, we are winging it'
What I hear is 'now that some of the other mechanics are a bit more fleshed out and seem to be going well, we can now proceed to work on exactly how we want our other mechanics to be integrated'
"Trump is a blunt force, all-American, laser-guided middle finger to everything and everyone in Washington, D.C." - Wayne Allyn Root
Well, I do not consider those things a "detail". How you are going to move around is essential for setting up your infrastructure and underlying your game design on fundamental level.
What you hear seems to be 'we don't know wtf we are doing, we are winging it'
What I hear is 'now that some of the other mechanics are a bit more fleshed out and seem to be going well, we can now proceed to work on exactly how we want our other mechanics to be integrated'
What mechanics have been fleshed out and seem to be going well?
"We all do the best we can based on life experience, point of view, and our ability to believe in ourselves." - Naropa "We don't see things as they are, we see them as we are." SR Covey
What I hear is 'now that some of the other mechanics are a bit more fleshed out and seem to be going well, we can now proceed to work on exactly how we want our other mechanics to be integrated'
Yeah it's exactly what i was trying to say. They just recently got the first iteration of the tech that allowed the actual solar system to exist.
It's iteration by iteration, step by step. Means it finally got to the moment they have to start creating the full solar system, yet there is still tech to come on the future to allow the full design and layout to be achieved. Hence the figuring out.
SC gameplay is set to be systemic, and that system itself will not be working on Alpha 3.0 either, to make the systems work they need as i said specially AI to kick it (as said 90% AI 10% players). Obviously they need to figure it out something they are still on R&D and are just releasing a first static iteration with 3.0.
Good point.
Still no decent AI planned for even 3.0?
"Trump is a blunt force, all-American, laser-guided middle finger to everything and everyone in Washington, D.C." - Wayne Allyn Root
No, also watched Brian Chambers interview he mentions this, the very basic AI will start to appear on 3.0, it will be on further iterations to it we should start to see the big role AI has on SC.
Things like a factory on a planet sending cargo ships to delivery points across the solar system with X resources that can be attacked by both players or AI, impacting the economy (prices of resources or its dependencies across the system) and then also generating missions for players (for example escort mission), etc...
That level of AI on my opinion is something we will not be seeing soon. But that's a challenge they have on solar system design.
What mechanics have been fleshed out and seem to be going well?
Things like being able to have a gun fight inside a ship while travelling at huge speeds through space engaged simultaneously in a dogfight with other ships firing projectiles at your future location which is hurtling towards a planetary surface would be amongst some of them. Or are you just being flippant?
"Trump is a blunt force, all-American, laser-guided middle finger to everything and everyone in Washington, D.C." - Wayne Allyn Root
Out of curiousity, how is that supposed to work? Clearly you can't be boarded while travelling at huge speeds through space so I'm assuming these people sneaked on while docked at a station. Does no one lock their front door or post a guard detail in this game?
Out of curiousity, how is that supposed to work? Clearly you can't be boarded while travelling at huge speeds through space so I'm assuming these people sneaked on while docked at a station. Does no one lock their front door or post a guard detail in this game?
Well some of the ships are pretty huge so yeah you could sneak on if people are not careful guarding the ship when it is stationary. However there should be numerous other ways to board, like sneaking in inside cargo containers if there are a large amount assigned to be loaded onto a cargo hold. There is also slated to be Electronic warfare, if you have a large enough fleet with the right tools you might be able to block the path of the large vessel preventing QD while at the same time preforming various types of EW, slowing the vessel and also hacking into the mainframe computer to try to open doors. Boarding a moving vessel should be possible without crippling it in that case. Then I guess there is also just straight up mutiny or double crossing. It will be sandbox type play, use your imagination!
I think they see the new dragonfly vehicle being used to help board in moving situations.
"Trump is a blunt force, all-American, laser-guided middle finger to everything and everyone in Washington, D.C." - Wayne Allyn Root
Oriphus said: Things like being able to have a gun fight inside a ship while travelling at huge speeds through space engaged simultaneously in a dogfight with other ships firing projectiles at your future location which is hurtling towards a planetary surface would be amongst some of them. Or are you just being flippant?
That isn't game mechanics, that is technology - design(mechanics) is telling what and how things should happen, technology is a layer that makes things happen.
Like MaxBacon, you seem not to understand the workflow behind development:
Designers -> Programmers, when approved by production, things are being made based on design requirements.
Like MaxBacon, you seem not to understand the workflow behind development:
Designers -> Programmers, when approved by production, things are being made based on design requirements.
You are who doesn't understand the workflow here.
Design / Idea / Plan > R&D, it is on the R&D the first design takes its final design and details get fleshed out, as the development starts on the specific feature or area of the game.
There is no final design before the R&D that will let you know what you can do and how will you do it. As what your design will likely change if during R&D you face both tech blockers or better ways to do it.
That isn't game mechanics, that is technology - design(mechanics) is telling what and how things should happen, technology is a layer that makes things happen.
Thank you for pointing it out, I am not in the trade so easy to use incorrect terminology when describing things, my understanding is pretty basic. If writing it again I would probably write tech / mech to cover all bases!
I also disagree with your idea of workflow here, you can't make final design decisions when the tech limitations are uncertain. Perhaps if this was another WoW clone you might have it right.
Perhaps it is the very idea of trying to push limitations that you are unfamiliar with that makes the development seem to be chaotic and uncomfortable for your experience in the field (if you have any?)
"Trump is a blunt force, all-American, laser-guided middle finger to everything and everyone in Washington, D.C." - Wayne Allyn Root
There is no "R&D" in the first place. This is all what designers do. Just listen to Pappy video when he is describing his job...
Or listen to the studio development reports and you'll see the flow. Features like ongoing Cargo, the others as Shopping and PG were and it's on the reports started with R&D, then prototyping it, then implementing it.
Yup, no, definitely, just on Elwin's note, I mean part of the development process is making something, trying out different techniques for it, and find out whether it works. So we do a lot of R&D into different ways to do it. Some methods make the cut, some don't.
That process is where the design will change, specially when doing something that depends on tech that is or just coming online or still in development, not knowing yet what will you have to work with and how will it limit (or not) your Design.
I also disagree with your idea of workflow here, you can't make final design decisions when the tech limitations are uncertain. Perhaps if this was another WoW clone you might have it right.
But he is correct. I try to explain as civil and simple as possible:
Technology depends on the design and not vice versa. It "serves" it. You name your requirements and pass it to developement to lay foundations for your game, the mechanics or whatever you want. The R&D-phase that MaxBacon mentioned is indeed there - to be clear (!!!) - but it is usually a short evaluation period after design has passed to developement. Basically you ask your programmers if it is possible and within their team they will pool their skills and knowledge to say "yes we can do that with software X which we have experience in" or "yea we have a physic-specialist for our highspeed-travel with gun-shooting in a ship" and pass it back to design - reiterate the design if something can't be done or requires skills you dont have or is simply to expensive.
But here is something important: good design-documents are rarely static. On a _basic level_ they usually incorporate "have-to's" (things that the design dictates it definetly needs for a working base) and "nice to have's" (things they just mention for developement to know that mechanic or function "X" is currently not planned but might be wanted for during developement - the dreamy stuff). The latter is important for both organs - designers and developers - so they have some breathing room together: developers can consider the "nice to have's" in their coding as well as software architecture and designers can make decisions mid-developement.
I think the complaint that is named here mainly is that the video apparently shows that there are still essential things which even in the stage of an "alpha" - in case of "Design" that needs "Technology" - have not been figured out yet. Sure you can make developement a living thing and just reiterate and reimplement as you go but that depends on the scope of your project. No one will complain on a mobile app with 1 hour of gameplay if you figure out things on the go, but if you have a game on the proposed scale of Star Citizen people expect more foresight in terms of design and when people see someone telling them "oh yea we have this solar system but we kinda dont know yet how to move it" it implies a lot of things for people familiar with game- or software-developement in general: mainly a (even if partial) disconnect between organs, a design-department that is unexperienced and can't itself pinpoint its vision or is unable to relay it correctly to developement. At least that is what it looks like on the surface and what I also got from it. Surfaces are surfaces of course
Post edited by Cellarkid88 on
Winning a discussion is not what it's about. If you could pass insight to someone or learn something from it in return - noone can really loose, can they?
Cellarkid88 said: The R&D-phase that MaxBacon mentioned is indeed there - to be clear (!!!) - but it is usually a short evaluation period after design has passed to developement.
This is not much on the case of SC, they go through R&D to figuring out what they can do, on areas that they have design but the design is nothing if they don't go ahead and start experimenting if it will work out or not, as several times they are talking about un-tested ideas, what they did with PG up to what they are now doing with Netcode.
It was R&D to figure out what they could do, the whole Stretch Goal of PG was R&D to figure out what they could do, they did so and days ago saw a demo of it at Gamescon.
They did setup the R&D team on FQ42 Germany last year, they did their job and they ended up making something possible that went beyond the Design of this game. That was not meant to have PG Planets, neither Atmospheric flight, and so on.
The R&D PG Stretch Goal back then to what we saw days ago, is by itself proof of how that phase of development changes the final design.
Oriphus said: Perhaps it is the very idea of trying to push limitations that you are unfamiliar with that makes the development seem to be chaotic and uncomfortable for your experience in the field (if you have any?)
No.
It is the unfamiliarity with the process that makes it seem about tech limitations, being chaotic and uncertain.
It couldn't be more far away from truth, on the contrary software development is very organized and disciplined. The uncertainty in software development does not come from technology limitations, the process of making or it's result but interaction - that somewhere in those millions of lines of code there are 2 pieces that interfere with each other in undesired manner, bugs.
This is very difficult to catch in the process of making and usually comes out once the work is done.
Oriphus said:
I also disagree with your idea of workflow here, you can't make final design decisions when the tech limitations are uncertain.
How else could it work?
The technical limitations are there only if you are unable to describe properly and in detail your intentions. That is why you make design first - so programmers can build technology to support your intentions.
R&D PG Stretch Goal. It's there, it was done and its outcome had a big impact on the design of the game.
They have not designed PG planets or any of that first, they actually R&D the technology to see what they could achieve, and they achieved something that changed the Design of the game.
Cellarkid88 said: mainly a (even if partial) disconnect between organs, a design-department that is unexperienced and can't itself pinpoint its vision or is unable to relay it correctly to developement.
Yes I did pick up a hint of that being a possibility from it, not unusual from what I have seen from CIG. The structure seems very....loose...I guess would be the word, helpful for a relaxed creative atmosphere, not so great for streamlined manufacturing.
Post edited by Oriphus on
"Trump is a blunt force, all-American, laser-guided middle finger to everything and everyone in Washington, D.C." - Wayne Allyn Root
The technical limitations are there only if you are unable to describe properly and in detail your intentions. That is why you make design first - so programmers can build technology to support your intentions.
I think Max' example about PG is a very clear example. I doubt it is the only example of what we are talking about either. It was never a guaranteed or perhaps even desired feature for the game, it was only the pace and strides made with the tech that incorporated the feature. So the questions were - what is the best quality we can we get from this tech in the time frame allowed? will it be good enough to meet the standards for the rest of the game?
Surely they wouldn't know the answers to this until it had been worked on for a decent period of time and following a success then the knock on implications to the design are quite large?
"Trump is a blunt force, all-American, laser-guided middle finger to everything and everyone in Washington, D.C." - Wayne Allyn Root
Comments
"Trump is a blunt force, all-American, laser-guided middle finger to everything and everyone in Washington, D.C." - Wayne Allyn Root
Hear by they can't work on any final design if they don't have the base to work with. This is not going to be on Alpha 3.0 either, i'd say once they have the solar system layout and gameplay fully fleshed out...
...will be decently close to the game release, or at least the beta.
"Trump is a blunt force, all-American, laser-guided middle finger to everything and everyone in Washington, D.C." - Wayne Allyn Root
For the most part most negative stuff is actually correct when its posted, because it eventually gets proven out every time there is a delay or something gets changed or scrapped completely. Yet by that time there is already something new to criticize and the old stuff that was criticized before is old news.
The whole narrative just becomes about some rudimentary thing these guys actually got to partially work, and not about the plethora of things they have conveniently forgotten even existed that they claimed would be in a playable form years ago, let alone months after they showed a concept video about them and claimed they were ready to go then.
What I hear is 'now that some of the other mechanics are a bit more fleshed out and seem to be going well, we can now proceed to work on exactly how we want our other mechanics to be integrated'
"Trump is a blunt force, all-American, laser-guided middle finger to everything and everyone in Washington, D.C." - Wayne Allyn Root
"We all do the best we can based on life experience, point of view, and our ability to believe in ourselves." - Naropa "We don't see things as they are, we see them as we are." SR Covey
It's iteration by iteration, step by step. Means it finally got to the moment they have to start creating the full solar system, yet there is still tech to come on the future to allow the full design and layout to be achieved. Hence the figuring out.
Still no decent AI planned for even 3.0?
"Trump is a blunt force, all-American, laser-guided middle finger to everything and everyone in Washington, D.C." - Wayne Allyn Root
Things like a factory on a planet sending cargo ships to delivery points across the solar system with X resources that can be attacked by both players or AI, impacting the economy (prices of resources or its dependencies across the system) and then also generating missions for players (for example escort mission), etc...
That level of AI on my opinion is something we will not be seeing soon. But that's a challenge they have on solar system design.
"Trump is a blunt force, all-American, laser-guided middle finger to everything and everyone in Washington, D.C." - Wayne Allyn Root
I think they see the new dragonfly vehicle being used to help board in moving situations.
"Trump is a blunt force, all-American, laser-guided middle finger to everything and everyone in Washington, D.C." - Wayne Allyn Root
Like MaxBacon, you seem not to understand the workflow behind development:
Designers -> Programmers, when approved by production, things are being made based on design requirements.
Design / Idea / Plan > R&D, it is on the R&D the first design takes its final design and details get fleshed out, as the development starts on the specific feature or area of the game.
There is no final design before the R&D that will let you know what you can do and how will you do it. As what your design will likely change if during R&D you face both tech blockers or better ways to do it.
I also disagree with your idea of workflow here, you can't make final design decisions when the tech limitations are uncertain. Perhaps if this was another WoW clone you might have it right.
Perhaps it is the very idea of trying to push limitations that you are unfamiliar with that makes the development seem to be chaotic and uncomfortable for your experience in the field (if you have any?)
"Trump is a blunt force, all-American, laser-guided middle finger to everything and everyone in Washington, D.C." - Wayne Allyn Root
Or I can also quote: That process is where the design will change, specially when doing something that depends on tech that is or just coming online or still in development, not knowing yet what will you have to work with and how will it limit (or not) your Design.
But he is correct. I try to explain as civil and simple as possible:
Technology depends on the design and not vice versa. It "serves" it. You name your requirements and pass it to developement to lay foundations for your game, the mechanics or whatever you want. The R&D-phase that MaxBacon mentioned is indeed there - to be clear (!!!) - but it is usually a short evaluation period after design has passed to developement. Basically you ask your programmers if it is possible and within their team they will pool their skills and knowledge to say "yes we can do that with software X which we have experience in" or "yea we have a physic-specialist for our highspeed-travel with gun-shooting in a ship" and pass it back to design - reiterate the design if something can't be done or requires skills you dont have or is simply to expensive.
But here is something important: good design-documents are rarely static. On a _basic level_ they usually incorporate "have-to's" (things that the design dictates it definetly needs for a working base) and "nice to have's" (things they just mention for developement to know that mechanic or function "X" is currently not planned but might be wanted for during developement - the dreamy stuff). The latter is important for both organs - designers and developers - so they have some breathing room together: developers can consider the "nice to have's" in their coding as well as software architecture and designers can make decisions mid-developement.
I think the complaint that is named here mainly is that the video apparently shows that there are still essential things which even in the stage of an "alpha" - in case of "Design" that needs "Technology" - have not been figured out yet. Sure you can make developement a living thing and just reiterate and reimplement as you go but that depends on the scope of your project. No one will complain on a mobile app with 1 hour of gameplay if you figure out things on the go, but if you have a game on the proposed scale of Star Citizen people expect more foresight in terms of design and when people see someone telling them "oh yea we have this solar system but we kinda dont know yet how to move it" it implies a lot of things for people familiar with game- or software-developement in general: mainly a (even if partial) disconnect between organs, a design-department that is unexperienced and can't itself pinpoint its vision or is unable to relay it correctly to developement. At least that is what it looks like on the surface and what I also got from it. Surfaces are surfaces of course
Winning a discussion is not what it's about. If you could pass insight to someone or learn something from it in return - noone can really loose, can they?
It was R&D to figure out what they could do, the whole Stretch Goal of PG was R&D to figure out what they could do, they did so and days ago saw a demo of it at Gamescon.
The R&D PG Stretch Goal back then to what we saw days ago, is by itself proof of how that phase of development changes the final design.
It is the unfamiliarity with the process that makes it seem about tech limitations, being chaotic and uncertain.
It couldn't be more far away from truth, on the contrary software development is very organized and disciplined. The uncertainty in software development does not come from technology limitations, the process of making or it's result but interaction - that somewhere in those millions of lines of code there are 2 pieces that interfere with each other in undesired manner, bugs.
This is very difficult to catch in the process of making and usually comes out once the work is done.
How else could it work?
The technical limitations are there only if you are unable to describe properly and in detail your intentions. That is why you make design first - so programmers can build technology to support your intentions.
They have not designed PG planets or any of that first, they actually R&D the technology to see what they could achieve, and they achieved something that changed the Design of the game.
"Trump is a blunt force, all-American, laser-guided middle finger to everything and everyone in Washington, D.C." - Wayne Allyn Root
http://www.valvesoftware.com/company/Valve_Handbook_LowRes.pdf
....a very DIFFERENT way of working creatively.
Have fun
Surely they wouldn't know the answers to this until it had been worked on for a decent period of time and following a success then the knock on implications to the design are quite large?
"Trump is a blunt force, all-American, laser-guided middle finger to everything and everyone in Washington, D.C." - Wayne Allyn Root