Torval said: It's just not reasonable to suggest this would have slipped past them or they would give it a pass.
Fully agreeing there, a demo that was shown to many media individually presented them as well with the several devs playing the game in front of them. If anyone would have noticed that would be the journalists that were shown the demo in person.
So this is quite obsessive nit-picking here, but that is expect-able really seeing how some users are dedicated to post negativity in here that something would be used to attempt to justify it of being faked and lies, the usual deal.
Well how were they supposed to pull that off? That's just what @Sovrath mentioned before; it's not plausible that they interspersed, or mixed in, recorded footage with live action in front of an objective audience. To be sure some journalists will kiss up to a developer or publisher, but any one of them would love the recognition from breaking that story. It's just not reasonable to suggest this would have slipped past them or they would give it a pass.
Well they did something because even with me pointing out the cut points and splices people still wont accept it. Even with the completely different views where I say they occur that can now be looked at and played back over and over again and people can see where the hitches happen and the extreme changes that take place after those hitches and breaks and change in viewpoints occur.
What will journalists tell you that you cant see with your own eyes by simply watching that video?
those things I point out happen so fast and are 'covered' up by oohs and ahhs and clapping that the focus is totally taken away from the 'small' things. Even when I look for things I dont always notice them, thats why I have updated things I have seen as I go back and rewatch it a few times.
Another one I noticed was during the 'controversial' point where the avatar on the right screen moves before the guy 'playing' him moves any controls. The avatar clearly moves on the right screen, and even though they cut the screen away (always happens at these odd moments for some reason) the avatar on the left screen which is clearly visible standing there DOES NOT move, even though it looks like the avatar on the right screen waved its arm and even jumped. Again some people might claim lag but it would have to be something like a 2 second delay, which is unlikely.
Also go to 28:29 and you will see the exact same people in the exact same clothes playing the game on the exact same equipment.
Live as in any of the footage they were showing. Not the event itself dont be ridiculous.
Well how were they supposed to pull that off? That's just what @Sovrath mentioned before; it's not plausible that they interspersed, or mixed in, recorded footage with live action in front of an objective audience. To be sure some journalists will kiss up to a developer or publisher, but any one of them would love the recognition from breaking that story. It's just not reasonable to suggest this would have slipped past them or they would give it a pass.
Is breaking such a story worth not being invited to any future pre-screenings? Over a demo? I don't think so...
Many probably didn't see it as being that important as it was a demo which is about the same as a trailer. It doesn't show what they have accomplished as much as it shows what they plan on accomplishing.
"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
When not even DS is having a go at this and claiming the live demo was faked... If there's one person that would make a whole show about this, that'd be him.
When not even DS is having a go at this and claiming the live demo was faked... If there's one person that would make a whole show about this, that'd be him.
Yet here we are... O.o
DS doesn't know everything. You have to admit something is strange about how the wreckage is suddenly at the open hatch and the bike suddenly appears right in front of the door. I mean he looks out the hatch and see's a small bike about 100m away and nothing but debris and looks away for 1 second and the bike is right on front of him and the debris has turned into a space station.
at the end of the day if I wanted to spend half my gaming time doing mundane crap like landing my ship with "precision", going through decontamination chambers and all the other needlessly time consuming tasks this would be an amazing game for me, as it is, I could see myself getting bored.....FAST
"Well let me just quote the late-great Colonel Sanders, who said…’I’m too drunk to taste this chicken." - Ricky Bobby
at the end of the day if I wanted to spend half my gaming time doing mundane crap like landing my ship with "precision", going through decontamination chambers and all the other needlessly time consuming tasks this would be an amazing game for me, as it is, I could see myself getting bored.....FAST
Yea the amount of time wasted on such trivial details. Walking up to a kiosk to launch your ship. Then waiting for the ship to show up and slowly climbing into it. Yes give us a detailed world but please skip the menial tasks that make life boring.
Uhhh, you're doing it wrong. That's not how it works. If there was something with grounds to make such claim you'd bet he would be the first one to do it (and he makes such claims even without grounds so it's interesting to see all the nit-picking here about it).
Uhhh, you're doing it wrong. That's not how it works. If there was something with grounds to make such claim you'd bet he would be the first one to do it (and he makes such claims even without grounds so it's interesting to see all the nit-picking here about it).
There is no reason to bring him into this conversation at all. Bringing up Derek Smart's name every time that someone says something isn't right. He's not a good source of information or logical thinking. Why don't you give us your expert opinion about the obvious flaw in the presentation and help with the discussion instead of automatically assuming its bogus.
Did they show a vertical slice of gameplay? Yeah they did. Whether it was faked or not there it is. On that they called Derek's bluff. He said they couldn't do it.
Will this be playable by the end of the year? That is the question. They have bet the farm on getting 3.0 out by the end of the year so let's see.
Did they show a vertical slice of gameplay? Yeah they did. Whether it was faked or not there it is. On that they called Derek's bluff. He said they couldn't do it.
Will this be playable by the end of the year? That is the question. They have bet the farm on getting 3.0 out by the end of the year so let's see.
Star Marine was due last year. SQ42 is due before January. And 3.0 is due before January as well. Even the diehard backers don't believe this.
The thing about journalists and what they saw and what the live audience saw.
They more than likely didnt see any over the shoulder views, which contain the most 'damning' comparative issues as well as seeing the guy on the screen move before the controller appeared to touch anything. Or any simultaneous viewing of any of the multiple screens each controller was at. I am sure they saw one screen and one screem only.
That vantage point the youtube video gives from 1:19:10 to 1:19:30 isnt something I would imagine any journalist or anyone watching the 'live' feed saw. The ability to simultaneously see two screens (NOT in their controlled picture in picture aspect, but in a raw setting). If you look at the video again and look to the left above the guy wearing the hat the 'main' screen is simply showing what is on the left screen of the two over the shoulder screens.
So that Youtube shot shows that the right screen, supposedly the one that is inside the same ship and avatar as on the left screen is in, doesnt show the dragonfly at all for the 20 seconds of video we have the over the shoulder view. Which would be about 50 meters of closure for the dragonfly on the screen (from the 95 meters we saw on the UI from the left screen at the start of the 20 second time frame down to 45 meters we saw on the left screen at the end of the 20 sec time frame). The only excuse here is 'rendering' which doesnt fly at all. We see the everything associated with the freelancer including a very decent shot of the avatatr standing in it. Yet that avatar view cant see a dragonfly closing in from only 90 meters away to a mere 45? The same 45 that 1 second later after a change of perspective is in clear and HD quality where you see every little detail? And it just oh so coincidentally 'popped' into rendering view in that PRECISE moment of the perspective change? Along with having the starfarer that was no more than a blob that no one could identify at all also becomes a crystal clear ship where you can see everything on it in crystal clear quality? Ans even though the rendering improved (for some magical reason) all the debris we clearly saw the dragonfly going through also miraculously disappeared between the freelancer and the starfarer, because I dont see any.
That right screen we see from that shot also shows the avatar moving enough to cause the 'use' interface to come up on that right screen. You also see an arm (left it looks like to me) move around and the guy look totally weightless for at least 3 seconds. In the left video you can see the avatar of the guy who is supposedly standing there on the right screen. But that avatar doesnt not move at all in that time frame. Of course people can claim lag but 3 seconds of lag? And when they do come back (after a change of perspective and shutting down the over the shoulder view) to that view from the dragonfly, the avatar in the ship is still not moving like the movements on the right screen had suggested he did. He is 'backing up' and then they switch to the avatars views which shows him backing up. Which also begs the question if he moved for a full 3 seconds in the right video in an 'out of control' manner and its lag then why does it appear to be a near perfect synchronicity with him backing up when they switch views? In other words if it lagged for 3 seconds before why isnt there lag now?
But we also get to compare the view of the 'openspace' between the freelancer and the starfarer from inside the hanger from that over the shoulder view to the inside the hanger view at this vantage point. And as I have shown with no room for debate they are clearly not the same view, so different that theyre laughable.
WITHOUT that over the shoulder portion from 1:19:10 to 1:19:30 no such comparison would be available, nor would there be any "hey where is the ship on the right screen" question, nor would we be able to say "hey wait a minute the outside space from those two portions arent even close to the same", or "hey why does the avatar on the right screen move long before the controller touches anything (and even if you want to claim he hit WSAD or something else his left side doesnt move one iota, and the movement from the avatar is much more 'violent' than a simple key stroke to 'wake him up' or "he is moving on the right screen but not on the left screen" (at any point).
Basically what I am saying ifs the F-ed up. They werent supposed to show those two screens simultaneously. And I am 100% sure no one at the conference saw that during this presentation nor did any journalists ever see two screen simultaneously, at least not when they were controlled and viewing the same 'space'. But we do have it here, and ironically I think it was Chris Roberts fault. Because it happens when he says "hey can you look down and look around" @1:19:12. He is talking to the pilot of the dragonfly but the guy shooting the 'third person' video thinks he is talking to him so we get that third person view and all this footage in that small 20 second span which to me is clear cut proof these are not simultaneous views of the same in game footage, and basically shows they had multiple pre recorded portions to fill in gaps or make it look more impressive and seamless or give viewpoints that made it look like something it clearly wasnt.
And to think they wouldnt or couldnt do this because is too difficult, look at the past 5 years. Also look at every example of glitch or lag or whatever, they ALL happen during a change of perspective or change between first or third person or change from getting on or getting off a vehicle. Now those glitches and issues alone might not be enough to sway many people and most definitely not the hardcore supporters, but those issues in conjunction with that 20 seconds of 'outside' footage which show 3 or 4 MAJOR issues and inconsistencies should be. Also this footage is in a mission where the environment is going to be constant until acted upon by an avatar, so as long as they do the videos correctly everything should sync up and look good during a real time viewing, But if you go back and look at it in slow motion rewind and advance it you start to see things that arent lined up right.
Yeah I know 'another wall of text', but there is so much to talk about it takes that mush wording. I also have to explain everything out so people cant twist it or take it out of context so it almost has to be verbose.
I have made a clear and (not so concise) breakdown of the video I saw, the only rebuttal that pertained to anything I said was 'its the rendering', and I guess someone said 'its a buggy mess'. But overall the presentation was bug free other than the video bug with the DF disappearing, which is odd but can maybe be explained away. But they still never showed the avatar Danny point of view after it supposedly reappeared. Only the pilot view (one where it apparently never disappeared) so we will never know on that one.
No, it doesn't appear to be a fake, the appearance is quite real. You are certainly open to interpreting it any way that you want to, but there's also a limit to where that might be considered reasonable. There was a time when someone on here said that they were using the multiple companies in order to launder money. In my opinion, you're currently arriving at that level of reason.
Also, remember that this is, effectively, 2.7 at this point. 2.7 was renamed to 3.0 which makes me think that they probably made some good progress over the last quarter. It also means that these changes are pretty well through testing. Either that, or it's just another miss for CR and he ends up blowing it and misses his year-end date and really fucks it.
Either way, I don't think this is faked. It's entirely possible that it's scripted. In fact, I would be surprised if they just went off any ran all over the place without knowing where they were meant to go and not to go. I'd be surprised if they had anything but a short leash in order to explore live. However, that isn't unexpected.
Oooooooooo, I did a whole study on cognitive bias. Unfortunately, there's one for everybody. The only real solution is to program and machine to program itself. Humans are flawed by nature.
I watched the video and during the dragonfly landing sequence saw (or more correctly didnt see) something interesting. Maybe its my eyes but...
They do an outside shot of the two 'players' the guy on the left is piloting the dragonfly the guy on the right is on the freelancer. At around 1:19:15 or so they pull out and show both screens. The one on the left clearly shows the freelancer and him lining it up, the screen on the right shows just a bunch of debris. I dont see the dragonfly anywhere.
You should have your eyes checked. You can see the dragonfly on the left screen slide to the right, and on the right screen you see in the debris field the dragonfly clearly perform the maneuver.
I watched the video and during the dragonfly landing sequence saw (or more correctly didnt see) something interesting. Maybe its my eyes but...
They do an outside shot of the two 'players' the guy on the left is piloting the dragonfly the guy on the right is on the freelancer. At around 1:19:15 or so they pull out and show both screens. The one on the left clearly shows the freelancer and him lining it up, the screen on the right shows just a bunch of debris. I dont see the dragonfly anywhere.
You should have your eyes checked. You can see the dragonfly on the left screen slide to the right, and on the right screen you see in the debris field the dragonfly clearly perform the maneuver.
I commented on that movement, the problem with that is at that point (according to the UI from the left screen, the first person view FROM the dragonfly, is that it was at less than 95 meters when it made that move, so IF that was the dragonfly and during that 20 second segment of 'third party' viewing, why didnt we see the dragonfly get closer? We know (at least according to the UI from the post cut left screen view) that it went from those less than 95 meters to just about 45, but call it 50. Why doesnt that object you and others have circled get bigger or appear closer? Why isnt it until after a change of person view as well as a change of perspective (two actually) that it THEN appears in complete high definition and basically a full sized vehicle and not some dot on a screen (if that is what you want to contend is the dragonfly).
It still doesnt explain why the dragonfly AND the starfarer are both much larger and much clearer and appear to also be much closer.
Your screen shot is at 1:19:18, that would put that 'object' (if it were the dragonfly )at about 45 to 50 meters away from the camera view of the avatar. It then moves to about 25 meters from that camera view, so where is it on the right screen of that dual screen view?
When the views finish changing and we get that clear cut view that object, now completely visible and clearly identifiable, at maybe 20 meters, so people are trying to say that the 5 meters or less it moved between the 1.5-2 seconds time it took for those camera view switched to take place it became THAT much clearer and distinct? And again that doesnt take into account how much the starfarers appearance also changed in that 1-2 seconds.
Take a screen shot at 1:19:28 right before the camera moves on the right screen. Then take a screenshot of the first person view of (supposedly) that view at 1:19:31 and put them side by side in photo form and tell me thats the same view.
It wouldnt be the first time a stage " live " demo was completely fake. What game was it that had a group of people on stage " playing " and it turned out to all be fake? I cant remember the name. It wasnt Colonial Marines was it?
It wouldnt be the first time a stage " live " demo was completely fake. What game was it that had a group of people on stage " playing " and it turned out to all be fake? I cant remember the name. It wasnt Colonial Marines was it?
There have been MANY faked live demos, Even DX 11 demo made by INTEL was faked a few years ago. They played some car game and it was pretty sloppy. But similar to this one where stuff got shown that wasnt supposed to be seen. But they didnt even comment on it. Just like this wont be commented on either, because apparently no one wants to ask the questions.
As for this I dont think it was ALL fake. I think parts of it were. I know people said that is 'impossible' to do. But as I commented it isnt within a mission where everything is the same until its acted upon. And with so many changes of perspective, cuts back and forth, first and third person changes, mounting and dismounting, PiP views and all that it isnt hard to keep peoples eyes from the stuff that doesnt mesh. Like I said each time I watch it I see something else. But it isnt 'conclusive' enough to pass the inspection of the supporters here. So I only commented on te stuff that should be unquestionable. But even then they try and explain it away. But I notice they havent said much or tried to answer the questions I have asked so that means they dont have any answers.
Without that third person over the shoulder segment we wouldnt have nearly the stuff to compare. That 20 seconds has a lot of stuff in it, so that taken with the other stuff we can see and not see should raise flags for anyone who is being honest with themselves, especially the way this whole project has unfolded over th epast 5 years and all the other crap that has taken place.
A little comparison video. It shows guys going into the ship from space from a third person view.
While there are cut scenes here too this is also a pre alpha hype video and not a 'this will be in a game (in a couple months) we have raised 120 million and worked 4 years on' video.
Which also raised another point on the SC video. The people within the cargo hold with the door open are in zero G (floating) but in SC all player controlled avatar on the lancer is walking and running around like he is on Earth. even when the dragonfly 'bounces' it would in zero G more than likely spin and gyrate of control it certainly wouldnt bunny hp and then come to a safe landing inside a space barely big enough for it to fit.
At least in the shooter sequence on the starfarer they had mostly zero G stuff although the ease and speed at which he was able to hop back and forth in that 'shoot out' with that stock NPC was a little odd. The pirate NPC basically goes back and forth in a straight line facing the same direction but the shooter is dodging, retreating changing weapons.
Also the dragonfly isnt floating either. He opens the crate and it is just sitting there. As are a few boxes on the right. Now those might be placeholder scenery type things, but if this is supposed to be zero gravity in a 'gameplay' atmosphere then they should all be floating in zero G.
Also I now know that that video we have debated wasnt even shot on the gamescon floor or even in another room off the gamescon floor but it a whole separate venue which you also had to purchase a separate ticket for.
Also I now know that that video we have debated wasnt even shot on the gamescon floor or even in another room off the gamescon floor but it a whole separate venue which you also had to purchase a separate ticket for.
Wasn't even shown at GamesCom?
Incorrect.
Watch the gaming magazine journalists that DID watch the same intro mission in the RSI/CIG press booth at GamesCom. Timestamp 15:40 ish. The guy sitting on the right is one of the editors of "GameStar" magazine (largest German speaking PC gaming magazine)
Also I now know that that video we have debated wasnt even shot on the gamescon floor or even in another room off the gamescon floor but it a whole separate venue which you also had to purchase a separate ticket for.
Wasn't even shown at GamesCom?
Incorrect.
Watch the gaming magazine journalists that DID watch the same intro mission in the RSI/CIG press booth at GamesCom. Timestamp 15:40 ish. The guy sitting on the right is one of the editors of "GameStar" magazine (largest German speaking PC gaming magazine)
It wasnt in the same BUILDING. Again you play these semantics games. But if I wanted to play the semantics game going to Gamescon didnt get you access to the venue where this video was shown and they charged a fee, so by definition one could say that this video actually wasnt part of gamescon because of that. It wasnt in the same building and charged a separate fee. So how can that be part of something with those two very distinct and exclusive qualifications?
Just to break it down. Gamescon SC booth where they did the live streams and had the guys sit on camera for 5 days was in one building. The 'gameplay' video was shown in a completely separate building, which charged another admission fee to get into.
As another editorial comment/question, why couldnt they just play it on the set up the streamers were playing on?
Also I now know that that video we have debated wasnt even shot on the gamescon floor or even in another room off the gamescon floor but it a whole separate venue which you also had to purchase a separate ticket for.
Wasn't even shown at GamesCom?
Incorrect.
Watch the gaming magazine journalists that DID watch the same intro mission in the RSI/CIG press booth at GamesCom. Timestamp 15:40 ish. The guy sitting on the right is one of the editors of "GameStar" magazine (largest German speaking PC gaming magazine)
It wasnt in the same BUILDING. Again you play these semantics games. But if I wanted to play the semantics game going to Gamescon didnt get you access to the venue where this video was shown and they charged a fee, so by definition one could say that this video actually wasnt part of gamescon because of that. It wasnt in the same building and charged a separate fee. So how can that be part of something with those two very distinct and exclusive qualifications?
Just to break it down. Gamescon SC booth where they did the live streams and had the guys sit on camera for 5 days was in one building. The 'gameplay' video was shown in a completely separate building, which charged another admission fee to get into.
As another editorial comment/question, why couldnt they just play it on the set up the streamers were playing on?
You DO understand that GamesCom Day 1 is an industry day (including journalists) where the public has no access, do you not ?
You DO understand that the company press booth area IS part of the GamesCom, do you not ?
You DO understand that journalists saw the Alpha 3.0 gameplay demo already on Day 1, do you not? And that there was an embargo in place NOT to publish news until AFTER the CIG event was finished. And the press respected that embargo time.
The streamers were there to SPECIFICALLY show the version Alpha 2.4.1 that EVERYONE can play on the live server of Star Citizen for 5 days. They were NOT there to show an Alpha 3.0 gameplay vertical slice. They are not CIG employees, so i doubt they saw the Alpha 3.0 gameplay demo until Friday.
The CIG evening event on Friday was in a completely different building which was not part of GamesCom. You see the venue in the video (I posted the link already .. scroll up).
Also I now know that that video we have debated wasnt even shot on the gamescon floor or even in another room off the gamescon floor but it a whole separate venue which you also had to purchase a separate ticket for.
Wasn't even shown at GamesCom?
Incorrect.
Watch the gaming magazine journalists that DID watch the same intro mission in the RSI/CIG press booth at GamesCom. Timestamp 15:40 ish. The guy sitting on the right is one of the editors of "GameStar" magazine (largest German speaking PC gaming magazine)
It wasnt in the same BUILDING. Again you play these semantics games. But if I wanted to play the semantics game going to Gamescon didnt get you access to the venue where this video was shown and they charged a fee, so by definition one could say that this video actually wasnt part of gamescon because of that. It wasnt in the same building and charged a separate fee. So how can that be part of something with those two very distinct and exclusive qualifications?
Just to break it down. Gamescon SC booth where they did the live streams and had the guys sit on camera for 5 days was in one building. The 'gameplay' video was shown in a completely separate building, which charged another admission fee to get into.
As another editorial comment/question, why couldnt they just play it on the set up the streamers were playing on?
.
The streamers were there to SPECIFICALLY show the version Alpha 2.4.1 that EVERYONE can play on the live server of Star Citizen for 5 days. They were NOT there to show an Alpha 3.0 gameplay vertical slice. They are not CIG employees, so i doubt they saw the Alpha 3.0 gameplay demo until Friday.
Have fun
Why would CIG waste the money to fly all those streamers out there (and potentially give them stuff/pay them for their time, speculation only) if this is stuff that people are already streaming? Seems like a waste of backer money to me.
Comments
So this is quite obsessive nit-picking here, but that is expect-able really seeing how some users are dedicated to post negativity in here that something would be used to attempt to justify it of being faked and lies, the usual deal.
What will journalists tell you that you cant see with your own eyes by simply watching that video?
those things I point out happen so fast and are 'covered' up by oohs and ahhs and clapping that the focus is totally taken away from the 'small' things. Even when I look for things I dont always notice them, thats why I have updated things I have seen as I go back and rewatch it a few times.
Another one I noticed was during the 'controversial' point where the avatar on the right screen moves before the guy 'playing' him moves any controls. The avatar clearly moves on the right screen, and even though they cut the screen away (always happens at these odd moments for some reason) the avatar on the left screen which is clearly visible standing there DOES NOT move, even though it looks like the avatar on the right screen waved its arm and even jumped. Again some people might claim lag but it would have to be something like a 2 second delay, which is unlikely.
Many probably didn't see it as being that important as it was a demo which is about the same as a trailer. It doesn't show what they have accomplished as much as it shows what they plan on accomplishing.
"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
Yet here we are... O.o
Will this be playable by the end of the year? That is the question. They have bet the farm on getting 3.0 out by the end of the year so let's see.
They more than likely didnt see any over the shoulder views, which contain the most 'damning' comparative issues as well as seeing the guy on the screen move before the controller appeared to touch anything. Or any simultaneous viewing of any of the multiple screens each controller was at. I am sure they saw one screen and one screem only.
That vantage point the youtube video gives from 1:19:10 to 1:19:30 isnt something I would imagine any journalist or anyone watching the 'live' feed saw. The ability to simultaneously see two screens (NOT in their controlled picture in picture aspect, but in a raw setting). If you look at the video again and look to the left above the guy wearing the hat the 'main' screen is simply showing what is on the left screen of the two over the shoulder screens.
So that Youtube shot shows that the right screen, supposedly the one that is inside the same ship and avatar as on the left screen is in, doesnt show the dragonfly at all for the 20 seconds of video we have the over the shoulder view. Which would be about 50 meters of closure for the dragonfly on the screen (from the 95 meters we saw on the UI from the left screen at the start of the 20 second time frame down to 45 meters we saw on the left screen at the end of the 20 sec time frame). The only excuse here is 'rendering' which doesnt fly at all. We see the everything associated with the freelancer including a very decent shot of the avatatr standing in it. Yet that avatar view cant see a dragonfly closing in from only 90 meters away to a mere 45? The same 45 that 1 second later after a change of perspective is in clear and HD quality where you see every little detail? And it just oh so coincidentally 'popped' into rendering view in that PRECISE moment of the perspective change? Along with having the starfarer that was no more than a blob that no one could identify at all also becomes a crystal clear ship where you can see everything on it in crystal clear quality? Ans even though the rendering improved (for some magical reason) all the debris we clearly saw the dragonfly going through also miraculously disappeared between the freelancer and the starfarer, because I dont see any.
That right screen we see from that shot also shows the avatar moving enough to cause the 'use' interface to come up on that right screen. You also see an arm (left it looks like to me) move around and the guy look totally weightless for at least 3 seconds. In the left video you can see the avatar of the guy who is supposedly standing there on the right screen. But that avatar doesnt not move at all in that time frame. Of course people can claim lag but 3 seconds of lag? And when they do come back (after a change of perspective and shutting down the over the shoulder view) to that view from the dragonfly, the avatar in the ship is still not moving like the movements on the right screen had suggested he did. He is 'backing up' and then they switch to the avatars views which shows him backing up. Which also begs the question if he moved for a full 3 seconds in the right video in an 'out of control' manner and its lag then why does it appear to be a near perfect synchronicity with him backing up when they switch views? In other words if it lagged for 3 seconds before why isnt there lag now?
But we also get to compare the view of the 'openspace' between the freelancer and the starfarer from inside the hanger from that over the shoulder view to the inside the hanger view at this vantage point. And as I have shown with no room for debate they are clearly not the same view, so different that theyre laughable.
WITHOUT that over the shoulder portion from 1:19:10 to 1:19:30 no such comparison would be available, nor would there be any "hey where is the ship on the right screen" question, nor would we be able to say "hey wait a minute the outside space from those two portions arent even close to the same", or "hey why does the avatar on the right screen move long before the controller touches anything (and even if you want to claim he hit WSAD or something else his left side doesnt move one iota, and the movement from the avatar is much more 'violent' than a simple key stroke to 'wake him up' or "he is moving on the right screen but not on the left screen" (at any point).
Basically what I am saying ifs the F-ed up. They werent supposed to show those two screens simultaneously. And I am 100% sure no one at the conference saw that during this presentation nor did any journalists ever see two screen simultaneously, at least not when they were controlled and viewing the same 'space'. But we do have it here, and ironically I think it was Chris Roberts fault. Because it happens when he says "hey can you look down and look around" @1:19:12. He is talking to the pilot of the dragonfly but the guy shooting the 'third person' video thinks he is talking to him so we get that third person view and all this footage in that small 20 second span which to me is clear cut proof these are not simultaneous views of the same in game footage, and basically shows they had multiple pre recorded portions to fill in gaps or make it look more impressive and seamless or give viewpoints that made it look like something it clearly wasnt.
And to think they wouldnt or couldnt do this because is too difficult, look at the past 5 years. Also look at every example of glitch or lag or whatever, they ALL happen during a change of perspective or change between first or third person or change from getting on or getting off a vehicle. Now those glitches and issues alone might not be enough to sway many people and most definitely not the hardcore supporters, but those issues in conjunction with that 20 seconds of 'outside' footage which show 3 or 4 MAJOR issues and inconsistencies should be. Also this footage is in a mission where the environment is going to be constant until acted upon by an avatar, so as long as they do the videos correctly everything should sync up and look good during a real time viewing, But if you go back and look at it in slow motion rewind and advance it you start to see things that arent lined up right.
Yeah I know 'another wall of text', but there is so much to talk about it takes that mush wording. I also have to explain everything out so people cant twist it or take it out of context so it almost has to be verbose.
I have made a clear and (not so concise) breakdown of the video I saw, the only rebuttal that pertained to anything I said was 'its the rendering', and I guess someone said 'its a buggy mess'. But overall the presentation was bug free other than the video bug with the DF disappearing, which is odd but can maybe be explained away. But they still never showed the avatar Danny point of view after it supposedly reappeared. Only the pilot view (one where it apparently never disappeared) so we will never know on that one.
Also, remember that this is, effectively, 2.7 at this point. 2.7 was renamed to 3.0 which makes me think that they probably made some good progress over the last quarter. It also means that these changes are pretty well through testing. Either that, or it's just another miss for CR and he ends up blowing it and misses his year-end date and really fucks it.
Either way, I don't think this is faked. It's entirely possible that it's scripted. In fact, I would be surprised if they just went off any ran all over the place without knowing where they were meant to go and not to go. I'd be surprised if they had anything but a short leash in order to explore live. However, that isn't unexpected.
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
----------------
Steam: Neph
Oooooooooo, I did a whole study on cognitive bias. Unfortunately, there's one for everybody. The only real solution is to program and machine to program itself. Humans are flawed by nature.
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
----------------
You should have your eyes checked. You can see the dragonfly on the left screen slide to the right, and on the right screen you see in the debris field the dragonfly clearly perform the maneuver.
It still doesnt explain why the dragonfly AND the starfarer are both much larger and much clearer and appear to also be much closer.
Your screen shot is at 1:19:18, that would put that 'object' (if it were the dragonfly )at about 45 to 50 meters away from the camera view of the avatar. It then moves to about 25 meters from that camera view, so where is it on the right screen of that dual screen view?
When the views finish changing and we get that clear cut view that object, now completely visible and clearly identifiable, at maybe 20 meters, so people are trying to say that the 5 meters or less it moved between the 1.5-2 seconds time it took for those camera view switched to take place it became THAT much clearer and distinct? And again that doesnt take into account how much the starfarers appearance also changed in that 1-2 seconds.
Take a screen shot at 1:19:28 right before the camera moves on the right screen. Then take a screenshot of the first person view of (supposedly) that view at 1:19:31 and put them side by side in photo form and tell me thats the same view.
As for this I dont think it was ALL fake. I think parts of it were. I know people said that is 'impossible' to do. But as I commented it isnt within a mission where everything is the same until its acted upon. And with so many changes of perspective, cuts back and forth, first and third person changes, mounting and dismounting, PiP views and all that it isnt hard to keep peoples eyes from the stuff that doesnt mesh. Like I said each time I watch it I see something else. But it isnt 'conclusive' enough to pass the inspection of the supporters here. So I only commented on te stuff that should be unquestionable. But even then they try and explain it away. But I notice they havent said much or tried to answer the questions I have asked so that means they dont have any answers.
Without that third person over the shoulder segment we wouldnt have nearly the stuff to compare. That 20 seconds has a lot of stuff in it, so that taken with the other stuff we can see and not see should raise flags for anyone who is being honest with themselves, especially the way this whole project has unfolded over th epast 5 years and all the other crap that has taken place.
A little comparison video. It shows guys going into the ship from space from a third person view.
While there are cut scenes here too this is also a pre alpha hype video and not a 'this will be in a game (in a couple months) we have raised 120 million and worked 4 years on' video.
Which also raised another point on the SC video. The people within the cargo hold with the door open are in zero G (floating) but in SC all player controlled avatar on the lancer is walking and running around like he is on Earth. even when the dragonfly 'bounces' it would in zero G more than likely spin and gyrate of control it certainly wouldnt bunny hp and then come to a safe landing inside a space barely big enough for it to fit.
At least in the shooter sequence on the starfarer they had mostly zero G stuff although the ease and speed at which he was able to hop back and forth in that 'shoot out' with that stock NPC was a little odd. The pirate NPC basically goes back and forth in a straight line facing the same direction but the shooter is dodging, retreating changing weapons.
Also the dragonfly isnt floating either. He opens the crate and it is just sitting there. As are a few boxes on the right. Now those might be placeholder scenery type things, but if this is supposed to be zero gravity in a 'gameplay' atmosphere then they should all be floating in zero G.
Also I now know that that video we have debated wasnt even shot on the gamescon floor or even in another room off the gamescon floor but it a whole separate venue which you also had to purchase a separate ticket for.
Incorrect.
Watch the gaming magazine journalists that DID watch the same intro mission in the RSI/CIG press booth at GamesCom. Timestamp 15:40 ish. The guy sitting on the right is one of the editors of "GameStar" magazine (largest German speaking PC gaming magazine)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=922&v=M4hdRXOdfWg
Have fun
Just to break it down. Gamescon SC booth where they did the live streams and had the guys sit on camera for 5 days was in one building. The 'gameplay' video was shown in a completely separate building, which charged another admission fee to get into.
As another editorial comment/question, why couldnt they just play it on the set up the streamers were playing on?
You DO understand that the company press booth area IS part of the GamesCom, do you not ?
You DO understand that journalists saw the Alpha 3.0 gameplay demo already on Day 1, do you not? And that there was an embargo in place NOT to publish news until AFTER the CIG event was finished. And the press respected that embargo time.
The streamers were there to SPECIFICALLY show the version Alpha 2.4.1 that EVERYONE can play on the live server of Star Citizen for 5 days. They were NOT there to show an Alpha 3.0 gameplay vertical slice. They are not CIG employees, so i doubt they saw the Alpha 3.0 gameplay demo until Friday.
The CIG evening event on Friday was in a completely different building which was not part of GamesCom. You see the venue in the video (I posted the link already .. scroll up).
Have fun