Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Around The Verse - Level Design

245

Comments

  • CrazKanukCrazKanuk Member EpicPosts: 6,130
    Kefo said:
    Babuinix said:

    What? They are indeed playing a game, one in active development which has multiple ongoing builds.
    What is released for public testing is just the tip of the iceberg of what they are developing.

    I understand gamers are eagerly awaiting for the release of Star Citize but you can't assemble a Video-Gaming company and make an ambitious game in a couple of years alone. Time is needed to assemble the team and to make the appropriated easements for it to work as a unity while building up the tools and the engine to make the ambitious game mechanics a possibility.

    Patience is key here while making an educated effort to understand star citizen game development unique requirements. 
    It always seems to come back to variations of "you don't understand game development"

    I get it that most of us aren't game devs but CIG isn't some mystical company where what they do is shrouded in mystery. Many of us have seen this before where a game dev produces some awe inspiring cinematic and tells you its all in game footage or this is what you can look forward to and then when the game releases its nothing like what was promised.

    The problem here is that CIG is showing off these awesome looking trailers and cinematics but at the end of the day most of it hasn't materialized into the game or if it has its been a pale shadow of what was originally promised. 

    Yes I realize its still (pre)alpha but you would think after showing off PG planets in engine and in real time 15ish months ago they would have something to put in for backers unless it was just a bullshot cinematic made to generate hype.




    It always seems to come back to people taking offence to the fact that they don't understand game development. :) 

    Honestly, I can, at very least, understand how you might raise questions regarding gameplay footage. I have those questions myself. I don't think that has much to do with not understanding game development. There ARE still arguments being made which are much more indicative of why you see this argument come out as often as it does.... and many times it is warranted. 

    It's comments like @rpmcmurphy with regards to professions, economy, etc. which are much more deserving of a "You don't understand" argument. I mean, fuck! They gave you a road map!!! You know this is going to be in 3.0. So, NO! it's not in the game right now.... because they didn't put it in the game. Problem is you can't argue about it because if it was in there then the argument would be "Really? You're putting in the economy? What about fixing everything else?" It's a hilarious argument that is mostly pointless and almost entirely baseless, unless someone has access to the CIG source code repository, lol. 

    HOWEVER! That said, it's an interesting compare and contrast thing. Again, with ED and SC being developed on the same timeline, we can draw a lot of comparisons. In this case, ED was released on a shorter timeline, with a limited feature set and then has simply extended their functionality through expansions.... which are continuing development to this day. Then we have SC who is attempting to do everything at once. PERSONALLY, I prefer the route that ED took because a staggered release is always more manageable. It's like if I asked you what you're doing today, you'd probably have a pretty good idea, but if I asked you what you were doing exactly 30 days from now, you'd probably have a tougher time telling me that. I am a big fan of smaller, incremental releases.

    Back to your point, it's interesting to see the reaction of fans to having to wait for a whole product, opposed to being fed small bits of a product. ED gets zero flak on here despite missing many promised features and gating other features behind expansions. Yet, SC constantly has to answer for delays which aren't outside the realm of expected for a game of this size. Mass Effect took 5 years and look at it! ED is still, effectively, in development 5 years later. The biggest issue is what you're eluding to here, just a general lack of gameplay. I wish I had an answer for that. However, if there's one thing that we know, it's that CR was VERY micro-managey, so if someone left him with some power to veto releases, that could definitely be a factor. 

    As far as showing something 15 months ago, I'd say that is more a matter of windows. If you show something at a conference or something, then you're typically looking at a window to push that out within the next 6-12 months. If you miss that target window, then it's entirely possible that this feature gets lumped back into a larger release. I think someone had said that up until an hour before this past years Citizencon, they had planned on showing SQ42. So that should tell you that it's close. We don't have masses of incomplete work. It's more likely glue that needs to be finished to bring stuff together. HOWEVER! Again! You miss that window and you get pushed back. I'm not a fan of it, but this shit does happen. However, that's COMPLETELY my opinion on it. Take it for whatever it's worth to you. 


    Crazkanuk

    ----------------
    Azarelos - 90 Hunter - Emerald
    Durnzig - 90 Paladin - Emerald
    Demonicron - 90 Death Knight - Emerald Dream - US
    Tankinpain - 90 Monk - Azjol-Nerub - US
    Brindell - 90 Warrior - Emerald Dream - US
    ----------------

  • KefoKefo Member EpicPosts: 4,229
    CrazKanuk said:
    Kefo said:
    Babuinix said:

    What? They are indeed playing a game, one in active development which has multiple ongoing builds.
    What is released for public testing is just the tip of the iceberg of what they are developing.

    I understand gamers are eagerly awaiting for the release of Star Citize but you can't assemble a Video-Gaming company and make an ambitious game in a couple of years alone. Time is needed to assemble the team and to make the appropriated easements for it to work as a unity while building up the tools and the engine to make the ambitious game mechanics a possibility.

    Patience is key here while making an educated effort to understand star citizen game development unique requirements. 
    It always seems to come back to variations of "you don't understand game development"

    I get it that most of us aren't game devs but CIG isn't some mystical company where what they do is shrouded in mystery. Many of us have seen this before where a game dev produces some awe inspiring cinematic and tells you its all in game footage or this is what you can look forward to and then when the game releases its nothing like what was promised.

    The problem here is that CIG is showing off these awesome looking trailers and cinematics but at the end of the day most of it hasn't materialized into the game or if it has its been a pale shadow of what was originally promised. 

    Yes I realize its still (pre)alpha but you would think after showing off PG planets in engine and in real time 15ish months ago they would have something to put in for backers unless it was just a bullshot cinematic made to generate hype.




    It always seems to come back to people taking offence to the fact that they don't understand game development. :) 

    Honestly, I can, at very least, understand how you might raise questions regarding gameplay footage. I have those questions myself. I don't think that has much to do with not understanding game development. There ARE still arguments being made which are much more indicative of why you see this argument come out as often as it does.... and many times it is warranted. 

    It's comments like @rpmcmurphy with regards to professions, economy, etc. which are much more deserving of a "You don't understand" argument. I mean, fuck! They gave you a road map!!! You know this is going to be in 3.0. So, NO! it's not in the game right now.... because they didn't put it in the game. Problem is you can't argue about it because if it was in there then the argument would be "Really? You're putting in the economy? What about fixing everything else?" It's a hilarious argument that is mostly pointless and almost entirely baseless, unless someone has access to the CIG source code repository, lol. 

    HOWEVER! That said, it's an interesting compare and contrast thing. Again, with ED and SC being developed on the same timeline, we can draw a lot of comparisons. In this case, ED was released on a shorter timeline, with a limited feature set and then has simply extended their functionality through expansions.... which are continuing development to this day. Then we have SC who is attempting to do everything at once. PERSONALLY, I prefer the route that ED took because a staggered release is always more manageable. It's like if I asked you what you're doing today, you'd probably have a pretty good idea, but if I asked you what you were doing exactly 30 days from now, you'd probably have a tougher time telling me that. I am a big fan of smaller, incremental releases.

    Back to your point, it's interesting to see the reaction of fans to having to wait for a whole product, opposed to being fed small bits of a product. ED gets zero flak on here despite missing many promised features and gating other features behind expansions. Yet, SC constantly has to answer for delays which aren't outside the realm of expected for a game of this size. Mass Effect took 5 years and look at it! ED is still, effectively, in development 5 years later. The biggest issue is what you're eluding to here, just a general lack of gameplay. I wish I had an answer for that. However, if there's one thing that we know, it's that CR was VERY micro-managey, so if someone left him with some power to veto releases, that could definitely be a factor. 

    As far as showing something 15 months ago, I'd say that is more a matter of windows. If you show something at a conference or something, then you're typically looking at a window to push that out within the next 6-12 months. If you miss that target window, then it's entirely possible that this feature gets lumped back into a larger release. I think someone had said that up until an hour before this past years Citizencon, they had planned on showing SQ42. So that should tell you that it's close. We don't have masses of incomplete work. It's more likely glue that needs to be finished to bring stuff together. HOWEVER! Again! You miss that window and you get pushed back. I'm not a fan of it, but this shit does happen. However, that's COMPLETELY my opinion on it. Take it for whatever it's worth to you. 


    I could be wrong but I don't think anyone is taking offence at being told you don't understand game dev but rather most of us are tired of being fed the same excuse. I'm sure some actual game developers have been fed that line by the fans.

    Being given a roadmap is fine but perhaps the you don't understand line should be directed at CIG instead because even with a roadmap and Chris giving "hopeful" dates of releases they still miss said window by a very large margin. Hoping to release 3.0 by end of year last year would imply that they were extremely close. You can argue that they ran into some horrible bug but is it even up on their timeline they post? If not that should be very telling of how well CR or CIG understands game dev. Also anyone who believed that they honestly thought they were still going to show off SQ42 an hour before it was supposed to go live is the perfect kind of sucker CIG likes to milk.

    General lack of gameplay is the issue here. How often can they promise features as coming soon and then it still be absent from the game months/years later. When it does show up it feels cobbled together like a high schooler does when they realize their project needs to be handed in in 2 hours and they haven't worked on it at all.

    I may not understand the nuances of game development but I think at this point in my life myself and others have been fed enough bullshit over the years by less then stellar devs that we can smell it in the air when it's tried to pass off as a diamond in the rough. When the lead devs are still talking about features for a major release as still in concept that the head honcho said they had hoped to release by end of last year then you be getting that very strong smell of shit in the air and start asking some questions of the company.


  • ArillixArillix Member UncommonPosts: 88
    edited March 2017
    Hmm, looks like it works to me.








    All you salty naysayers, please, by all means stay willfully blind.
    Reminds me of the old adage : Their are three kinds of people in this world, Those that say it can not be done, those that do, and the ones that wonder when that happened.
    Post edited by Arillix on
    Babuinix
  • MaxBaconMaxBacon Member LegendaryPosts: 7,650
    edited March 2017
    And beating the dead horse it is...

    I guess this forum can't be calm; there is a need to bait a thread into 20 pages of the same tired, beaten and circular discussion on every single place...
    Post edited by MaxBacon on
  • MensurMensur Member RarePosts: 1,262
    Around the verse! I love it- they have come a long way! it used to be 10 ships now its 200 ships! I want more ships..screw the game give em ships! ships! ships! I like turtles! 

    mmorpg junkie since 1999



  • CrazKanukCrazKanuk Member EpicPosts: 6,130
    Kefo said:


    I could be wrong but I don't think anyone is taking offence at being told you don't understand game dev but rather most of us are tired of being fed the same excuse. I'm sure some actual game developers have been fed that line by the fans.

    Being given a roadmap is fine but perhaps the you don't understand line should be directed at CIG instead because even with a roadmap and Chris giving "hopeful" dates of releases they still miss said window by a very large margin. Hoping to release 3.0 by end of year last year would imply that they were extremely close. You can argue that they ran into some horrible bug but is it even up on their timeline they post? If not that should be very telling of how well CR or CIG understands game dev. Also anyone who believed that they honestly thought they were still going to show off SQ42 an hour before it was supposed to go live is the perfect kind of sucker CIG likes to milk.

    General lack of gameplay is the issue here. How often can they promise features as coming soon and then it still be absent from the game months/years later. When it does show up it feels cobbled together like a high schooler does when they realize their project needs to be handed in in 2 hours and they haven't worked on it at all.

    I may not understand the nuances of game development but I think at this point in my life myself and others have been fed enough bullshit over the years by less then stellar devs that we can smell it in the air when it's tried to pass off as a diamond in the rough. When the lead devs are still talking about features for a major release as still in concept that the head honcho said they had hoped to release by end of last year then you be getting that very strong smell of shit in the air and start asking some questions of the company.




    Yeah, and this becomes a bigger problem because it is now viewed as an excuse. However, on the opposite side of the fence, there are actually really good answers given which go completely ignored. So, in my opinion, being a game developer has very little to do with arguing about SC, lol. 

    So the talk about roadmapping and "hopeful" dates and estimates gone awry is really where this "You don't know jack!" argument comes into play. This isn't a development issue, though, it's a project management issue, if it's an issue at all. Again, we go back to my example of estimating what I'll be doing today versus on the day exactly 30 days from now. A great example is that I have weekly prioritization meetings with my team where we schedule what we'll be doing for the next week. We're really good at that. However, there are still items which go unresolved for weeks, or months because of various reasons. Ultimately, it can be as complex as there are dependencies which are blocking us from getting our work done to something as simple as it wasn't as important as we thought it was, so it gets into a cycle being continuously back-burnered for higher-priority items. If you performed this exercise yourself, the I feel like you could at least grasp how things could be delayed or even back-burnered quite easily. 

    As far as a lack of gameplay, I can't comment......yet! However, I did just replace my main rig so I'm expecting I'll actually download the client again and actually see how it performs. 

    As far as features go, again, you can't say where something is. However, if we're talking about core features, it's likely that the base framework is already in place. You can think of a piece of software like a taco, there always need to be some sort of supporting underlying structure and then you simply add your toppings. It doesn't mean your taco won't look like shit, but it does mean that there is some basic layer supporting what your user is experiencing. SO!!! Their implementation of said toppings, or features, could be very simple, hence it could still be in a concept phase. What we DON'T know is how easy or difficult this implementation will be. If you have to go all the way down to the base framework it could be a nightmare, unless it's an island. Otherwise, a lot of work could already be done. The contradictions only lead me to believe that this is minor work. I mean it could be a whole UI rework, but as long as they don't need to gut their framework it's just work, not unknowns. 

    Questions SHOULD be asked. Problem is people would rather ask them on a forum than somewhere it matters, like live streams, etc. There was a livestream a bit back when there was speculation swirling about static animations over dynamic or something like that. I can't remember exactly. Anyway, it was like SAME DAY! So ultimate relevance. I suggested that someone ask the question about the animations. Did someone actually do it? NOPE! I was driving home or I would have myself. Anyway, I can appreciate that people might have questions and want answers, but don't complain about the answer you get if you don't go and ask the source, right? Go to gemba! 

    Crazkanuk

    ----------------
    Azarelos - 90 Hunter - Emerald
    Durnzig - 90 Paladin - Emerald
    Demonicron - 90 Death Knight - Emerald Dream - US
    Tankinpain - 90 Monk - Azjol-Nerub - US
    Brindell - 90 Warrior - Emerald Dream - US
    ----------------

  • MaxBaconMaxBacon Member LegendaryPosts: 7,650
    edited March 2017
    CrazKanuk said:
    stions and want answers, but don't complain about the answer you get if you don't go and ask the source, right? 
    They don't want the answers, when something is answered that they don't like or is not what they want to hear, it is dismissed. Once that happens, you just say "it's all lies!" and you say whatever you think instead.That's why I think the fact of having answers or not is totally irrelevant to what happens on this forum and besides the point.
    Post edited by MaxBacon on
  • BabuinixBabuinix Member EpicPosts: 4,000
    Kefo said:
    Babuinix said:
    Babuinix said:
    Yeah, course there's a problem. Just show the damn game rather than some animated concept art.

    Even CR eventually admitted putting a bunch of people to work on an Sq42 demo that never came to fruition was a complete waste of time.
    If people are placated by animated concept art instead of a real work-in-progress then they deserve all the shit that the bad side of crowdfunding can throw at them.
    But they are indeed showing the game, they are playing in a controlled build using the tech they develop to showcase game mechanics that we should expect in the game, it's called game a alpha vertical slice in game development. You can watch those gameplay slices all the way back to their first demo's, it's part of their ongoing development cycle of a game that is in active development.

    I don't know what "people" you are talking about but Star Citizen backers eagerly expect to be showcased said demos as per the very early stretch goals.

    No they are not playing the game, they are showing demos which feature components solely created for that demo's purpose, it's why these sort of vertical slices are regarded as a complete waste of time.

    http://www.pcgamer.com/five-reasons-game-marketing-can-be-misleading/

    It was the exact same issue they ran into with Star Marine, essentially they built a vertical slice on an engine and assets that were in heavy development and were surprised when it all backfired on them.

    You might think that backers eagerly await demos, yet there was more demand for seeing a functioning Squadron42 than there was for any bullshot demo. Why would you want to see some natty demo when you should be able to see the actual game, even if it is early wip?

    It's like E3 where they show off all these game demos and half the time the final product is some significant backtrack on what was shown. Why would you want to put yourself in the position again?

    What? They are indeed playing a game, one in active development which has multiple ongoing builds.
    What is released for public testing is just the tip of the iceberg of what they are developing.

    I understand gamers are eagerly awaiting for the release of Star Citize but you can't assemble a Video-Gaming company and make an ambitious game in a couple of years alone. Time is needed to assemble the team and to make the appropriated easements for it to work as a unity while building up the tools and the engine to make the ambitious game mechanics a possibility.

    Patience is key here while making an educated effort to understand star citizen game development unique requirements. 
    It always seems to come back to variations of "you don't understand game development"

    I get it that most of us aren't game devs but CIG isn't some mystical company where what they do is shrouded in mystery. Many of us have seen this before where a game dev produces some awe inspiring cinematic and tells you its all in game footage or this is what you can look forward to and then when the game releases its nothing like what was promised.

    The problem here is that CIG is showing off these awesome looking trailers and cinematics but at the end of the day most of it hasn't materialized into the game or if it has its been a pale shadow of what was originally promised. 

    Yes I realize its still (pre)alpha but you would think after showing off PG planets in engine and in real time 15ish months ago they would have something to put in for backers unless it was just a bullshot cinematic made to generate hype.
    Well that's where you are mistaken and CIG is right (and why they are in the business and you are posting in a forum).

    It's not about just putting "something in the backers hands to play", you can't put some planets without nothing meaningful to do there and tell them to go land there. For that you already have Elite Dangerous or NoManSky and the general consensus is that while it's impressive for the first time it gets boring fast. There must be some kind of meaningful and engaging gameplay besides just landing on barren planets with the odd colour variation.
  • BalmongBalmong Member UncommonPosts: 170
    Babuinix said:
    Kefo said:
    Babuinix said:
    Babuinix said:
    Yeah, course there's a problem. Just show the damn game rather than some animated concept art.

    Even CR eventually admitted putting a bunch of people to work on an Sq42 demo that never came to fruition was a complete waste of time.
    If people are placated by animated concept art instead of a real work-in-progress then they deserve all the shit that the bad side of crowdfunding can throw at them.
    But they are indeed showing the game, they are playing in a controlled build using the tech they develop to showcase game mechanics that we should expect in the game, it's called game a alpha vertical slice in game development. You can watch those gameplay slices all the way back to their first demo's, it's part of their ongoing development cycle of a game that is in active development.

    I don't know what "people" you are talking about but Star Citizen backers eagerly expect to be showcased said demos as per the very early stretch goals.

    No they are not playing the game, they are showing demos which feature components solely created for that demo's purpose, it's why these sort of vertical slices are regarded as a complete waste of time.

    http://www.pcgamer.com/five-reasons-game-marketing-can-be-misleading/

    It was the exact same issue they ran into with Star Marine, essentially they built a vertical slice on an engine and assets that were in heavy development and were surprised when it all backfired on them.

    You might think that backers eagerly await demos, yet there was more demand for seeing a functioning Squadron42 than there was for any bullshot demo. Why would you want to see some natty demo when you should be able to see the actual game, even if it is early wip?

    It's like E3 where they show off all these game demos and half the time the final product is some significant backtrack on what was shown. Why would you want to put yourself in the position again?

    What? They are indeed playing a game, one in active development which has multiple ongoing builds.
    What is released for public testing is just the tip of the iceberg of what they are developing.

    I understand gamers are eagerly awaiting for the release of Star Citize but you can't assemble a Video-Gaming company and make an ambitious game in a couple of years alone. Time is needed to assemble the team and to make the appropriated easements for it to work as a unity while building up the tools and the engine to make the ambitious game mechanics a possibility.

    Patience is key here while making an educated effort to understand star citizen game development unique requirements. 
    It always seems to come back to variations of "you don't understand game development"

    I get it that most of us aren't game devs but CIG isn't some mystical company where what they do is shrouded in mystery. Many of us have seen this before where a game dev produces some awe inspiring cinematic and tells you its all in game footage or this is what you can look forward to and then when the game releases its nothing like what was promised.

    The problem here is that CIG is showing off these awesome looking trailers and cinematics but at the end of the day most of it hasn't materialized into the game or if it has its been a pale shadow of what was originally promised. 

    Yes I realize its still (pre)alpha but you would think after showing off PG planets in engine and in real time 15ish months ago they would have something to put in for backers unless it was just a bullshot cinematic made to generate hype.
    Well that's where you are mistaken and CIG is right (and why they are in the business and you are posting in a forum).

    It's not about just putting "something in the backers hands to play", you can't put some planets without nothing meaningful to do there and tell them to go land there. For that you already have Elite Dangerous or NoManSky and the general consensus is that while it's impressive for the first time it gets boring fast. There must be some kind of meaningful and engaging gameplay besides just landing on barren planets with the odd colour variation.
    As a matter of fact, they did do that. They released ArcCorp, and there is absolutely nothing to do there due to lack of mechanics. Especially after the "Buggy Death Wars" that happened when it first came out.
  • KefoKefo Member EpicPosts: 4,229
    CrazKanuk said:
    Kefo said:


    I could be wrong but I don't think anyone is taking offence at being told you don't understand game dev but rather most of us are tired of being fed the same excuse. I'm sure some actual game developers have been fed that line by the fans.

    Being given a roadmap is fine but perhaps the you don't understand line should be directed at CIG instead because even with a roadmap and Chris giving "hopeful" dates of releases they still miss said window by a very large margin. Hoping to release 3.0 by end of year last year would imply that they were extremely close. You can argue that they ran into some horrible bug but is it even up on their timeline they post? If not that should be very telling of how well CR or CIG understands game dev. Also anyone who believed that they honestly thought they were still going to show off SQ42 an hour before it was supposed to go live is the perfect kind of sucker CIG likes to milk.

    General lack of gameplay is the issue here. How often can they promise features as coming soon and then it still be absent from the game months/years later. When it does show up it feels cobbled together like a high schooler does when they realize their project needs to be handed in in 2 hours and they haven't worked on it at all.

    I may not understand the nuances of game development but I think at this point in my life myself and others have been fed enough bullshit over the years by less then stellar devs that we can smell it in the air when it's tried to pass off as a diamond in the rough. When the lead devs are still talking about features for a major release as still in concept that the head honcho said they had hoped to release by end of last year then you be getting that very strong smell of shit in the air and start asking some questions of the company.




    Yeah, and this becomes a bigger problem because it is now viewed as an excuse. However, on the opposite side of the fence, there are actually really good answers given which go completely ignored. So, in my opinion, being a game developer has very little to do with arguing about SC, lol. 

    So the talk about roadmapping and "hopeful" dates and estimates gone awry is really where this "You don't know jack!" argument comes into play. This isn't a development issue, though, it's a project management issue, if it's an issue at all. Again, we go back to my example of estimating what I'll be doing today versus on the day exactly 30 days from now. A great example is that I have weekly prioritization meetings with my team where we schedule what we'll be doing for the next week. We're really good at that. However, there are still items which go unresolved for weeks, or months because of various reasons. Ultimately, it can be as complex as there are dependencies which are blocking us from getting our work done to something as simple as it wasn't as important as we thought it was, so it gets into a cycle being continuously back-burnered for higher-priority items. If you performed this exercise yourself, the I feel like you could at least grasp how things could be delayed or even back-burnered quite easily. 

    As far as a lack of gameplay, I can't comment......yet! However, I did just replace my main rig so I'm expecting I'll actually download the client again and actually see how it performs. 

    As far as features go, again, you can't say where something is. However, if we're talking about core features, it's likely that the base framework is already in place. You can think of a piece of software like a taco, there always need to be some sort of supporting underlying structure and then you simply add your toppings. It doesn't mean your taco won't look like shit, but it does mean that there is some basic layer supporting what your user is experiencing. SO!!! Their implementation of said toppings, or features, could be very simple, hence it could still be in a concept phase. What we DON'T know is how easy or difficult this implementation will be. If you have to go all the way down to the base framework it could be a nightmare, unless it's an island. Otherwise, a lot of work could already be done. The contradictions only lead me to believe that this is minor work. I mean it could be a whole UI rework, but as long as they don't need to gut their framework it's just work, not unknowns. 

    Questions SHOULD be asked. Problem is people would rather ask them on a forum than somewhere it matters, like live streams, etc. There was a livestream a bit back when there was speculation swirling about static animations over dynamic or something like that. I can't remember exactly. Anyway, it was like SAME DAY! So ultimate relevance. I suggested that someone ask the question about the animations. Did someone actually do it? NOPE! I was driving home or I would have myself. Anyway, I can appreciate that people might have questions and want answers, but don't complain about the answer you get if you don't go and ask the source, right? Go to gemba! 
    If answers are given that satisfy my questions I tend to shut up about them since it's been answered. Sometimes I go on about it because the answer was a non answer or explained in such a poor way that it just added confusion.

    Trust me I know all about weekly meetings and daily meetings and frigging meetings where we plan things that will take place in 7-10 months. If there are issues that come up then the smart thing to do would be to tell your backers we hit a brick wall and are dead in the water/fixing it now/brainstorming ideas. They go radio silent and let the community start coming up with worst case scenarios and it takes off from there. Your analogy does work in that 30 days from now I might not be able to hit my target for whatever project I happen to be assigned/working on but you can bet that as soon as I smell trouble I inform my boss that something came up and this is what I am doing to fix the issue or here's the new timeline. I don't wait until they come to me asking me where is the thing i said I would deliver 3 months ago.

    You're right I can't comment on features or where they are especially if they don't exist in the game but as some pretty in engine demo made to drum up hype. You however can't make the same claim about core features and them being in place if you can't actually see/play them. CIG can tell you they exist until they are blue in the face but history has shown they are not to be trusted regarding a lot of info they put out there. 

    Regarding live streams you you will see people asking hot topic questions and many people will be asking it to get the devs attention and you know what happens a lot of times? They are ignored. The 10ftc was no better as it always seemed to be the safe answers or Chris would just start rambling after about a minute and never answer the question in a meaningful way. Many have tried the GEMBA approach but when you are ignored it kinda puts a hard stop on anything and back to speculation.
  • KefoKefo Member EpicPosts: 4,229
    Babuinix said:
    Kefo said:
    Babuinix said:
    Babuinix said:
    Yeah, course there's a problem. Just show the damn game rather than some animated concept art.

    Even CR eventually admitted putting a bunch of people to work on an Sq42 demo that never came to fruition was a complete waste of time.
    If people are placated by animated concept art instead of a real work-in-progress then they deserve all the shit that the bad side of crowdfunding can throw at them.
    But they are indeed showing the game, they are playing in a controlled build using the tech they develop to showcase game mechanics that we should expect in the game, it's called game a alpha vertical slice in game development. You can watch those gameplay slices all the way back to their first demo's, it's part of their ongoing development cycle of a game that is in active development.

    I don't know what "people" you are talking about but Star Citizen backers eagerly expect to be showcased said demos as per the very early stretch goals.

    No they are not playing the game, they are showing demos which feature components solely created for that demo's purpose, it's why these sort of vertical slices are regarded as a complete waste of time.

    http://www.pcgamer.com/five-reasons-game-marketing-can-be-misleading/

    It was the exact same issue they ran into with Star Marine, essentially they built a vertical slice on an engine and assets that were in heavy development and were surprised when it all backfired on them.

    You might think that backers eagerly await demos, yet there was more demand for seeing a functioning Squadron42 than there was for any bullshot demo. Why would you want to see some natty demo when you should be able to see the actual game, even if it is early wip?

    It's like E3 where they show off all these game demos and half the time the final product is some significant backtrack on what was shown. Why would you want to put yourself in the position again?

    What? They are indeed playing a game, one in active development which has multiple ongoing builds.
    What is released for public testing is just the tip of the iceberg of what they are developing.

    I understand gamers are eagerly awaiting for the release of Star Citize but you can't assemble a Video-Gaming company and make an ambitious game in a couple of years alone. Time is needed to assemble the team and to make the appropriated easements for it to work as a unity while building up the tools and the engine to make the ambitious game mechanics a possibility.

    Patience is key here while making an educated effort to understand star citizen game development unique requirements. 
    It always seems to come back to variations of "you don't understand game development"

    I get it that most of us aren't game devs but CIG isn't some mystical company where what they do is shrouded in mystery. Many of us have seen this before where a game dev produces some awe inspiring cinematic and tells you its all in game footage or this is what you can look forward to and then when the game releases its nothing like what was promised.

    The problem here is that CIG is showing off these awesome looking trailers and cinematics but at the end of the day most of it hasn't materialized into the game or if it has its been a pale shadow of what was originally promised. 

    Yes I realize its still (pre)alpha but you would think after showing off PG planets in engine and in real time 15ish months ago they would have something to put in for backers unless it was just a bullshot cinematic made to generate hype.
    Well that's where you are mistaken and CIG is right (and why they are in the business and you are posting in a forum).

    It's not about just putting "something in the backers hands to play", you can't put some planets without nothing meaningful to do there and tell them to go land there. For that you already have Elite Dangerous or NoManSky and the general consensus is that while it's impressive for the first time it gets boring fast. There must be some kind of meaningful and engaging gameplay besides just landing on barren planets with the odd colour variation.
    @Balmong brought up a perfect example so thanks for that. I honestly wasn't sure how to respond to your post of "you're wrong and im(CIG) is right" but thankfully someone did it for me lol
  • BalmongBalmong Member UncommonPosts: 170
    Kefo said:
    Babuinix said:
    Kefo said:
    Babuinix said:
    Babuinix said:
    Yeah, course there's a problem. Just show the damn game rather than some animated concept art.

    Even CR eventually admitted putting a bunch of people to work on an Sq42 demo that never came to fruition was a complete waste of time.
    If people are placated by animated concept art instead of a real work-in-progress then they deserve all the shit that the bad side of crowdfunding can throw at them.
    But they are indeed showing the game, they are playing in a controlled build using the tech they develop to showcase game mechanics that we should expect in the game, it's called game a alpha vertical slice in game development. You can watch those gameplay slices all the way back to their first demo's, it's part of their ongoing development cycle of a game that is in active development.

    I don't know what "people" you are talking about but Star Citizen backers eagerly expect to be showcased said demos as per the very early stretch goals.

    No they are not playing the game, they are showing demos which feature components solely created for that demo's purpose, it's why these sort of vertical slices are regarded as a complete waste of time.

    http://www.pcgamer.com/five-reasons-game-marketing-can-be-misleading/

    It was the exact same issue they ran into with Star Marine, essentially they built a vertical slice on an engine and assets that were in heavy development and were surprised when it all backfired on them.

    You might think that backers eagerly await demos, yet there was more demand for seeing a functioning Squadron42 than there was for any bullshot demo. Why would you want to see some natty demo when you should be able to see the actual game, even if it is early wip?

    It's like E3 where they show off all these game demos and half the time the final product is some significant backtrack on what was shown. Why would you want to put yourself in the position again?

    What? They are indeed playing a game, one in active development which has multiple ongoing builds.
    What is released for public testing is just the tip of the iceberg of what they are developing.

    I understand gamers are eagerly awaiting for the release of Star Citize but you can't assemble a Video-Gaming company and make an ambitious game in a couple of years alone. Time is needed to assemble the team and to make the appropriated easements for it to work as a unity while building up the tools and the engine to make the ambitious game mechanics a possibility.

    Patience is key here while making an educated effort to understand star citizen game development unique requirements. 
    It always seems to come back to variations of "you don't understand game development"

    I get it that most of us aren't game devs but CIG isn't some mystical company where what they do is shrouded in mystery. Many of us have seen this before where a game dev produces some awe inspiring cinematic and tells you its all in game footage or this is what you can look forward to and then when the game releases its nothing like what was promised.

    The problem here is that CIG is showing off these awesome looking trailers and cinematics but at the end of the day most of it hasn't materialized into the game or if it has its been a pale shadow of what was originally promised. 

    Yes I realize its still (pre)alpha but you would think after showing off PG planets in engine and in real time 15ish months ago they would have something to put in for backers unless it was just a bullshot cinematic made to generate hype.
    Well that's where you are mistaken and CIG is right (and why they are in the business and you are posting in a forum).

    It's not about just putting "something in the backers hands to play", you can't put some planets without nothing meaningful to do there and tell them to go land there. For that you already have Elite Dangerous or NoManSky and the general consensus is that while it's impressive for the first time it gets boring fast. There must be some kind of meaningful and engaging gameplay besides just landing on barren planets with the odd colour variation.
    @Balmong brought up a perfect example so thanks for that. I honestly wasn't sure how to respond to your post of "you're wrong and im(CIG) is right" but thankfully someone did it for me lol
    It was a learning lesson for them. By the time they had decided they were ready to release Port Ollisar they had learned from the launch of ArcCorp. They ensured, how ever limited it was, that there was stuff for us to go and do, things to be explored, fights to get into. Completely different from the ArcCorp launch. 

    I would rather them populate the maps they plan to release with things to see and do, as opposed to having a whole slew of ArcCorp's in the game.
  • BabuinixBabuinix Member EpicPosts: 4,000
    edited March 2017
    Balmong said:
    Babuinix said:
    Kefo said:
    Babuinix said:
    Babuinix said:
    Yeah, course there's a problem. Just show the damn game rather than some animated concept art.

    Even CR eventually admitted putting a bunch of people to work on an Sq42 demo that never came to fruition was a complete waste of time.
    If people are placated by animated concept art instead of a real work-in-progress then they deserve all the shit that the bad side of crowdfunding can throw at them.
    But they are indeed showing the game, they are playing in a controlled build using the tech they develop to showcase game mechanics that we should expect in the game, it's called game a alpha vertical slice in game development. You can watch those gameplay slices all the way back to their first demo's, it's part of their ongoing development cycle of a game that is in active development.

    I don't know what "people" you are talking about but Star Citizen backers eagerly expect to be showcased said demos as per the very early stretch goals.

    No they are not playing the game, they are showing demos which feature components solely created for that demo's purpose, it's why these sort of vertical slices are regarded as a complete waste of time.

    http://www.pcgamer.com/five-reasons-game-marketing-can-be-misleading/

    It was the exact same issue they ran into with Star Marine, essentially they built a vertical slice on an engine and assets that were in heavy development and were surprised when it all backfired on them.

    You might think that backers eagerly await demos, yet there was more demand for seeing a functioning Squadron42 than there was for any bullshot demo. Why would you want to see some natty demo when you should be able to see the actual game, even if it is early wip?

    It's like E3 where they show off all these game demos and half the time the final product is some significant backtrack on what was shown. Why would you want to put yourself in the position again?

    What? They are indeed playing a game, one in active development which has multiple ongoing builds.
    What is released for public testing is just the tip of the iceberg of what they are developing.

    I understand gamers are eagerly awaiting for the release of Star Citize but you can't assemble a Video-Gaming company and make an ambitious game in a couple of years alone. Time is needed to assemble the team and to make the appropriated easements for it to work as a unity while building up the tools and the engine to make the ambitious game mechanics a possibility.

    Patience is key here while making an educated effort to understand star citizen game development unique requirements. 
    It always seems to come back to variations of "you don't understand game development"

    I get it that most of us aren't game devs but CIG isn't some mystical company where what they do is shrouded in mystery. Many of us have seen this before where a game dev produces some awe inspiring cinematic and tells you its all in game footage or this is what you can look forward to and then when the game releases its nothing like what was promised.

    The problem here is that CIG is showing off these awesome looking trailers and cinematics but at the end of the day most of it hasn't materialized into the game or if it has its been a pale shadow of what was originally promised. 

    Yes I realize its still (pre)alpha but you would think after showing off PG planets in engine and in real time 15ish months ago they would have something to put in for backers unless it was just a bullshot cinematic made to generate hype.
    Well that's where you are mistaken and CIG is right (and why they are in the business and you are posting in a forum).

    It's not about just putting "something in the backers hands to play", you can't put some planets without nothing meaningful to do there and tell them to go land there. For that you already have Elite Dangerous or NoManSky and the general consensus is that while it's impressive for the first time it gets boring fast. There must be some kind of meaningful and engaging gameplay besides just landing on barren planets with the odd colour variation.
    As a matter of fact, they did do that. They released ArcCorp, and there is absolutely nothing to do there due to lack of mechanics. Especially after the "Buggy Death Wars" that happened when it first came out.
    ArcCorp was released to showcase how a landing area would look and feel like (showcasing shops, bars, quest hubs etc) while replacing the "invite a friend to your hangar feature" to allow people to join up and interact (chat, dance, ride buggy's etc) before Crusader arrived.
  • MaxBaconMaxBacon Member LegendaryPosts: 7,650
    edited March 2017
    Arccorp was relevant by the time it was the "Social Module".
    Those were the HUB places for hang out (hence the name) missions, shops, etc. With focus on modules dropped and 2.0 happening, the massive design direction that PG planets brought just did "overwrite" the social module.

    @Balmong, I don't think they have "learned" with Arccorp, I think the game has reached the stage they focus a lot more on content and gameplay (and people expect just that).
    Post edited by MaxBacon on
  • BalmongBalmong Member UncommonPosts: 170
    MaxBacon said:
    Arccorp was relevant by the time it was the "Social Module".
    Those were the HUB places for hang out (hence the name) missions, shops, etc. With focus on modules dropped and 2.0 happening, the massive design direction that PG planets brought just did "overwrite" the social module.

    @Balmong, I don't think they have "learned" with Arccorp, I think the game has reached the stage they focus a lot more on content and gameplay (and people expect just that).
    I feel they have, especially with the release of our other landing area, Grim Hex. That area feels a lot more vibrant than ArcCorp. And it looks like an even bigger step will be taken when we get Nyx. When the Social Module first launched, they didn't even have the mechanics in place to go shopping. It was pretty much a 3D chat room.
  • MaxBaconMaxBacon Member LegendaryPosts: 7,650
    edited March 2017
    Balmong said:
    I feel they have, especially with the release of our other landing area, Grim Hex. That area feels a lot more vibrant than ArcCorp. And it looks like an even bigger step will be taken when we get Nyx. When the Social Module first launched, they didn't even have the mechanics in place to go shopping. It was pretty much a 3D chat room.
    What I would say is that, there was a big design direction change on the game within the timeframes where all this happened, Arccorp, Nyx (very close to release back then, it didn't and then shown integrated within PG instead), them moving away from the Modular development (Star Marine kept being pushed back), showing off 2.0 at Gamescon, release it, up until PG Planets were announced.
  • rpmcmurphyrpmcmurphy Member EpicPosts: 3,502
    edited March 2017
    I woz here
  • PigozzPigozz Member UncommonPosts: 886
    Arillix said:

    All you salty naysayers, please, by all means stay willfully blind.
    Reminds me of the old adage : Their are three kinds of people in this world, Those that say it can not be done, those that do, and the ones that wonder when that happened.
    Wow

    Such a wise words

    CIG trully are guys pushing boundaries

    Burning through 140M so you can visit 3 stations and fly 5 ships

    Hell even If I outsourced 10M to India my game would be years ahead of this sluggish development

    There is currently simply no excuse for the lack of content considering time and finances available

    I think I actually spent way more time reading and theorycrafting about MMOs than playing them

  • ErillionErillion Member EpicPosts: 10,254
    edited March 2017
    Pigozz said:
    Arillix said:

    All you salty naysayers, please, by all means stay willfully blind.
    Reminds me of the old adage : Their are three kinds of people in this world, Those that say it can not be done, those that do, and the ones that wonder when that happened.
    Wow

    Such a wise words

    CIG trully are guys pushing boundaries

    Burning through 140M so you can visit 3 stations and fly 5 ships

    Hell even If I outsourced 10M to India my game would be years ahead of this sluggish development

    There is currently simply no excuse for the lack of content considering time and finances available
    We are waiting patiently for your proof that CIG has "burned through 140 M". 

    Furthermore you are mistaken that one can only fly 5 ships. It is significantly more than that (see ship thread in this subforum). 

    Feel free to start your own 10M Kickstarter project. As you are much better than CIG, you can amaze us with your 2 year project that clearly blows Star Citizen out of the water. I will gladly play it if it is as good as you say. 


    Have fun
    Post edited by Erillion on
  • rpmcmurphyrpmcmurphy Member EpicPosts: 3,502
    edited March 2017
    Edit: Actually I'm not going to get involved.
  • CrazKanukCrazKanuk Member EpicPosts: 6,130
    Pigozz said:
    Arillix said:

    All you salty naysayers, please, by all means stay willfully blind.
    Reminds me of the old adage : Their are three kinds of people in this world, Those that say it can not be done, those that do, and the ones that wonder when that happened.
    Wow

    Such a wise words

    CIG trully are guys pushing boundaries

    Burning through 140M so you can visit 3 stations and fly 5 ships

    Hell even If I outsourced 10M to India my game would be years ahead of this sluggish development

    There is currently simply no excuse for the lack of content considering time and finances available

    Ok, so for some context here, ED has relatively the same budget as SC, very similar feature set (maybe a little lighter on the graphics), almost identical timelines,  and they are still releasing features which are considered core features in SC. 

    The lack of content is a product of the desire to release a full game, opposed to a model of releasing chunks over time. Also, can you quantify "lack of content"? What is it that you're not finding in the game right now that you'd like to see? 

    As far as expenses go, I would challenge you to make an 8-bit MMO using outsourcing for 10 million. Albion online was made for 10 million like a decade ago in Russia. Fun fact! Outsourcing isn't as inexpensive as you think it is. For one, everyone thinks that outsourcing is easy. Secondly, outsourcing is now a growth industry that everyone is doing so it's become a supply and demand industry, which means it's getting incrementally more expensive to do.

    Your best chance of making an MMO with 10 million dollars is taking the money, going to Vegas and trying to roll that 10 million into 70 million, lol.

    Crazkanuk

    ----------------
    Azarelos - 90 Hunter - Emerald
    Durnzig - 90 Paladin - Emerald
    Demonicron - 90 Death Knight - Emerald Dream - US
    Tankinpain - 90 Monk - Azjol-Nerub - US
    Brindell - 90 Warrior - Emerald Dream - US
    ----------------

  • HeraseHerase Member RarePosts: 993
    edited March 2017
    Pigozz said:
    Arillix said:

    All you salty naysayers, please, by all means stay willfully blind.
    Reminds me of the old adage : Their are three kinds of people in this world, Those that say it can not be done, those that do, and the ones that wonder when that happened.
    Wow

    Such a wise words

    CIG trully are guys pushing boundaries

    Burning through 140M so you can visit 3 stations and fly 5 ships

    Hell even If I outsourced 10M to India my game would be years ahead of this sluggish development

    There is currently simply no excuse for the lack of content considering time and finances available
    I would disagree, because we don't know how long or how much a project like this should take.

    Could say, well look at elite, but in truth that game is pretty much still in development.

    Also take in consideration, starting the company from scratch, that the money was accumulated over the course of 5 years, not up front like most projects. Also they pretty much rebuilt the engine they're using and to top it off the overall project was deemed impossible from the start by many heads in the industry.

    So in reality, we have no clue how long it should take. If this was a standard themepark mmo, then would 100% agree, but it isn't, we both know it isn't. So what should we compare it to? How do we know it should take x amount of time or content should be there now? These are honest questions becuase we get posts like this alot.

    I just find it weird that we all know this is a very very ambitious project, yet people are expecting it to move and grow in the same time frame as a standard MMO.

  • rpmcmurphyrpmcmurphy Member EpicPosts: 3,502
    Elite does not have the same budget. Frontier has ~80 people working on the game, CIG has 400 people (split over 2 games) but a lot of interlap with what is produced.

    The lack of content has nothing to do with a desire to release a full game. They've already stipulated they will be releasing an MVP and have also been quite clear that a lot of the stretch goals will be implemented post release, ie they have intimated that there won't be 100 systems at launch, that will be a figure they build up to.

    The lack of content comes down to an non-fixed budget and bad planning, repeated redesigns to incorporate new tech etc.
  • MaxBaconMaxBacon Member LegendaryPosts: 7,650
    edited March 2017
    The lack of content has nothing to do with a desire to release a full game. They've already stipulated they will be releasing an MVP and have also been quite clear that a lot of the stretch goals will be implemented post release, ie they have intimated that there won't be 100 systems at launch, that will be a figure they build up to.
    If they release what they planned up to the Alpha 4.0, with a few systems and call that SC's MPV, that will be a game with more content and depth than ED's MVP ever offered.

    It takes delusion to keep pointing the time SC has already taken on development to be somehow inadmissible when you compare it to other MMO's as GW2, ESO or SWTOR and their scope/depth.

    And not even talking about the SP Campaign over it. Setbacks during development are part of it, if established companies behind publishers and solid budgets go through them, much more would a new company developing its first MMO.
  • CrazKanukCrazKanuk Member EpicPosts: 6,130
    Elite does not have the same budget. Frontier has ~80 people working on the game, CIG has 400 people (split over 2 games) but a lot of interlap with what is produced.

    The lack of content has nothing to do with a desire to release a full game. They've already stipulated they will be releasing an MVP and have also been quite clear that a lot of the stretch goals will be implemented post release, ie they have intimated that there won't be 100 systems at launch, that will be a figure they build up to.

    The lack of content comes down to an non-fixed budget and bad planning, repeated redesigns to incorporate new tech etc.

    No, CIG doesn't have 400 people working on the game. They might have a staff of 350, but those are not all developers, the exact same way that you're claiming that Frontiers only has 80 people working on a game from an office of 300 people with very little in the way of support or other projects going on...... Mmmmmmmk! 

    Secondly, ED raised around $100 million in IPO funding at the EXACT time that they started development of ED, they hired 50 additional staff around the same time, and they have ZERO other games in development, it's all sustaining projects which require very few resources. So, yes, their budget for ED is VERY similar to SC. 

    Yeah, but their MVP contains a feature set equivalent to or great than ED, right? Mmmm, yeah, K. Why not just be truthful? ED isn't a feature-complete game yet either. So, yes, they're still developing the game. Have they gone into sustaining? NOPE!!! Otherwise, why haven't we seen them slash the 50 dev jobs they specifically hired for additional ED development resources? 

    I'm really sorry, you can say that the funding is going wherever you want, but when you raise $100 million and have zero other games under development, that means ED is now the primary focus, which means that the office resources (300 employees) are primarily focused on delivering and supporting ED at the moment. So $20 million of their $25 million expenses are ED-focused. Roll that over a 5-year period and BAM! You're up over $100 million, and they're not done yet. Right? They aren't feature complete yet, correct? 

    You are right on your last point, though. Partly. It's been mentioned time and time again that they are shipping an MVP.... FUCK! You just said that yourself! So, yes, while they have NOT released that MVP at the moment, the contents of that MVP will be more feature-rich than ED. So ED has some catching up to do. Maybe another paid expansion will do it :) So the lack of content comes directly from the fact that they haven't reached their MVP, which is now set via roadmap, yes? That is available to public? HOWEVER, I will concede that there has been a great deal of bad planning, redesigns, and poor project management/micro-management. HOWEVER, to say that they should have shipped something Loooooong ago as the poster did is a vastly inaccurate statement since, again, ED has yet to deliver an equivalent feature set in a game that is of lower graphical fidelity and has the same number of resources. However, it's WILDLY inaccurate to say that ED has 80 people while CIG has 400. Sorry, that's simply untrue. 

    Crazkanuk

    ----------------
    Azarelos - 90 Hunter - Emerald
    Durnzig - 90 Paladin - Emerald
    Demonicron - 90 Death Knight - Emerald Dream - US
    Tankinpain - 90 Monk - Azjol-Nerub - US
    Brindell - 90 Warrior - Emerald Dream - US
    ----------------

Sign In or Register to comment.