"very blade-runner-esque"
You can say that again, I love it.
This game is looking more and more "next-gen" every time I see it.
Just give me that ss13 mechanics fidelity and this will be my gotyay
[URL="https://facepunch.com/showthread.php?t=1583681"]There's already a thread for Citizencon videos, just fyi.[/URL]
But yeah, it's pretty spiffy.
Damn, it's certainly come a long way from being a hangar sim. Still not convinced it'll be that compelling though.
[QUOTE=Scot;52843887]Damn, it's certainly come a long way from being a hangar sim. Still not convinced it'll be that compelling though.[/QUOTE]
Same boat, i am watching these videos in awe as they come out but then again as i am seeing this i am guessing that if you would fly towards one direction is that all the assets would obviously start to reappear so you would see the same thing again and again, big open but empty and repetitive world.
I got the feeling that anyone who wanted star citizen would have already gotten it so i wonder how much the release would change it.
Looks like a bunch of pretty landscapes with absolutely nothing to do.
[QUOTE=slapdown3;52843757]Just give me that ss13 mechanics fidelity and this will be my gotyay[/QUOTE]
I don't know that I can say that SC in any way satisfies "ss13 mechanics fidelity" in a general sense, there [I]is[/I] an atmospheric sim going on. If you watch any of the gameplay that shows the HUD, there's an Oxygen meter on the HUD and in the MobiGlas wearable device/"pause screen" (that isn't a pause screen, it's a diegetic interface visible in the world) brought up to show the solar system map there's a timer showing how much time's left on the suit's O2 supply.
Pressure volume simulation is also a thing, so a broken airlock will vent a ship's interior atmosphere into space, and CIG specifically made doors damageable to allow this. Suit punctures are also a thing in 3.0 so getting into EVA FPS gunplay is going to be extra spicy.
[QUOTE=darth-veger;52843918]I got the feeling that anyone who wanted star citizen would have already gotten it so i wonder how much the release would change it.[/QUOTE]
There are definitely a lot of fence-sitters who aren't convinced and are waiting for SC to actually launch (as more than a rough alpha) and not suck before they buy in.
I have no way of knowing how big these numbers are, though, so this could be anywhere between 5,000 sales and millions of sales. :v:
[QUOTE=Warborq;52843924]Looks like a bunch of pretty landscapes with absolutely nothing to do.[/QUOTE]
Based on this demo alone, you're not wrong, but the demo was mainly about showing off the procedural tech and the planetside areas that're coming to 3.x in 2018.
The Gamescom demo, on the other hand, had much more to do with gameplay.
[video=youtube;ZsXnFzYu10k]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZsXnFzYu10k[/video]
Warning, to show off the VoIP and expression scanning technology, the demo also features very bad scripted roleplay. :v:
2:42 people standing on the benches :v:
[QUOTE=Warborq;52843924]Looks like a bunch of pretty landscapes with absolutely nothing to do.[/QUOTE]
I am absolutely in [b]love[/b] with all of the technology going into the aesthetics of this game, such as these city-planets.
But I am absolutely [b]terrified[/b] of what the actual gameplay will be like. I honestly expect - at best - a Freelancer clone, just with fancier window dressing.
And seeing as I consider that, all things considered, Freelancer still looks really damn good for its age (other than character models...), all of that window dressing I feel is ultimately superfluous. If I feel like playing a Freelancer-esque game, I still just play Freelancer.
I'm eager to be proven wrong, but I am pretty certain I will be proven right.
[QUOTE=Gmod4ever;52844093]I am absolutely in [b]love[/b] with all of the technology going into the aesthetics of this game, such as these city-planets.
But I am absolutely [b]terrified[/b] of what the actual gameplay will be like. I honestly expect - at best - a Freelancer clone, just with fancier window dressing.
And seeing as I consider that, all things considered, Freelancer still looks really damn good for its age (other than character models...), all of that window dressing I feel is ultimately superfluous. If I feel like playing a Freelancer-esque game, I still just play Freelancer.
I'm eager to be proven wrong, but I am pretty certain I will be proven right.[/QUOTE]
There's gameplay so far, but it's currently just flying and on-foot combat.
Flying can be fun but I think it suffer from how hard CGI is jerking off to their physics simulation; you've got very realistic physics combined with silly starship designs, so everything feels weird, and usually not in a good way. If you're in one of the better designed ships like the 300i it can be pretty fun, but you still notice the weirdness.
On-foot combat is there, but [I]jank[/I] is the word of the game here; it makes ARMA pale in comparison. It's mechanically very complex but the end result doesn't feel very good.
I'm more concerned about how the gameplay will be in the open world; there's a huge amount of players pushing to turn it into a waiting and walking simulator that makes [I]Elite Dangerous[/I] look like an instant gratification mobile game, all while calling you a console peasant in the process for daring to question the vision of The Savior of PC Gaming, Chris Roberts ([url=http://i.imgur.com/T4RQT27.png]praise be[/url]).
If they can reign in the desire to turn it into a waiting simulator, it should be pretty fun.
Would love a big universe which was controlled mostly by AI in which you have free reign in, like disrupt trading routes, start trading stations, mine on your own on some planet, sell guns etc etc.
But i'm sure its going be both a big grind or demand more money for better ships.
[QUOTE=darth-veger;52844184]Would love a big universe which was controlled mostly by AI in which you have free reign in, like disrupt trading routes, start trading stations, mine on your own on some planet, sell guns etc etc.
But i'm sure its going be both a big grind or demand more money for better ships.[/QUOTE]
Well, actually... the background simulation, which ties into the economy as well as populating space with AI-piloted ships, is intended to have 10x the population of the playerbase, meaning the player population is outnumbered 10 to 1 and it's just as likely that the people you'll see outside of hub areas will be AI as they are players. The game won't actually be trying to retain millions of NPCs in memory at one time, obviously, but the background sim will update every 30min or whatever interval and if you fly into a region of space where the background sim says there are between 2 and 5 pirates (accounting for various threat levels), a ship or three will spawn on the game server and potentially detect you and intercept.
The idea of the players being a tiny minority of the population is so that players can't control the economy. However, it's intended that short-term disruption of economies will be possible but limited to temporary effects in local scale. For example, blockading a planet will be possible for short-term engagements, driving the price for materials and goods up on the surface. That shouldn't collapse the global economy for X resource, however.
Trading stations is potentially a thing, although at this point only on planetary surfaces with the new Pioneer outpost-building ship; player-owned space stations are, to my understanding, not a thing being planned. The devs want to avoid slipping into EVE in that respect. It's possible that players could set up ad-hoc trading in existing stations, basically squatting and appropriating game space for emergent gameplay, and CIG would love players taking initiative like that. For mining on planets, a ship coming in the 3.0 patch is intended to mine asteroids in space or planetary surfaces (although mining, the game mechanic, is not coming in 3.0, because Star Citizen).
Once the game enters beta, cash ship sales will stop, and this has been repeatedly confirmed by the devs for years. Sure, they could change their mind, but oh boy would they be in trouble for crossing their backers (aka the only reason they exist).
As for being a big grind, it [I]could[/I] be but Chris Roberts has stated he hates grinds in video games, and the point of the game isn't to have the biggest ship. Ships are tailored for certain roles, so the "best" ship for you is the ship that most suits what you want to do with the crew count (1-20+) you're able to field. Roberts is aware that some Freelancer fans played through their whole career in just their starter ship, and SC should offer content tailored to every level so it isn't just a race to the top. Additionally, bigger ships have higher running costs and greater crew demands. You can hire AI crew but affording crew that aren't drooling retards will be expensive, adding to the running costs by that much more. Capital ships are more intended for groups, and the enhanced organization and commitment required should be an effective balancing factor unless they just fuck everything up. But if we're assuming they're going to be evil then all bets are off.
[QUOTE=Saber15;52844117]There's gameplay so far, but it's currently just flying and on-foot combat.
Flying can be fun but I think it suffer from how hard CGI is jerking off to their physics simulation; you've got very realistic physics combined with silly starship designs, so everything feels weird, and usually not in a good way. If you're in one of the better designed ships like the 300i it can be pretty fun, but you still notice the weirdness.
On-foot combat is there, but [I]jank[/I] is the word of the game here; it makes ARMA pale in comparison. It's mechanically very complex but the end result doesn't feel very good.
I'm more concerned about how the gameplay will be in the open world; there's a huge amount of players pushing to turn it into a waiting and walking simulator that makes [I]Elite Dangerous[/I] look like an instant gratification mobile game, all while calling you a console peasant in the process for daring to question the vision of The Savior of PC Gaming, Chris Roberts ([url=http://i.imgur.com/T4RQT27.png]praise be[/url]).
If they can reign in the desire to turn it into a waiting simulator, it should be pretty fun.[/QUOTE]
The walking and waiting simulator aspect is something that has kept me from investing in the game. I hate how boring Elite Dangerous is for this same reason.
looks absolutely lovely, but i'm increasingly convinced there's absolutely no game here
[QUOTE=darth-veger;52844184]Would love a big universe which was controlled mostly by AI in which you have free reign in, like disrupt trading routes, start trading stations, mine on your own on some planet, sell guns etc etc.
But i'm sure its going be both a big grind or demand more money for better ships.[/QUOTE]
That's pretty much X3: Terran Conflict, minus the planet parts.
They're working on a [url=https://www.egosoft.com/games/x4/info_en.php]new game[/url] that's looking awesome.
don't you need like a supercomputer to play this game with all that rendering
[QUOTE=Ignhelper;52844261]don't you need like a supercomputer to play this game with all that rendering[/QUOTE]
You pretty much need one right now even without the planets. :vs:
absolutely stunning but there's just never enough to do.
gives me some sort of nar shaddaa vibes too, could only imagine if these guys put this work into remaking a kotor game or some open world type rpg instead of an empty mmo
Have they fixed the terrible FPS (network issue they called it) in the non combat version of multiplayer yet?
I can't wait until we get advanced enough where those cities are actual cities with AI doing everything an actual city would do, not just simulate it, like actually have all the AI doing their own thing.
You know matrix shit.
[QUOTE=VIOLATION_SNG;52844275]absolutely stunning but there's just never enough to do.
gives me some sort of nar shaddaa vibes too, could only imagine if these guys put this work into remaking a kotor game or some open world type rpg instead of an empty mmo[/QUOTE]
They have been making sure the engine works before adding gameplay features to it. The profession system (or lack of) looks incredible, they have some serious plans for bringing the universe to life.
Give them time, for once.
[QUOTE=Trekintosh;52844224]The walking and waiting simulator aspect is something that has kept me from investing in the game. I hate how boring Elite Dangerous is for this same reason.[/QUOTE]
I'm hoping this ends up different than E:D for a few reasons: namely, there's just a much wider breadth of content to eventually get bored with grinding (for now). Ship types are more distinct, instead of just worrying about exploration/combat/trading there's more variety in ship roles, tasks, and activities. Having interiors is neat too, and already being able to walk around inside your ship or go EVA outside of it is nice. Plus, consider all the things from E:D that were just menus or windows that aren't in SC: repairs, missions, cargo loading, trading, exploration (literally go explore derelict stations), finding new jump lanes, etc etc. And since you're not in a rush right to the Anaconda/Python/Clipper/Corvette, you can take the time to really customize and tune your vessel and enjoy doing that in and of itself.
I think 3.0 is going to be a bit Elite Dangerous like, but it won't stay that way for too long. E:D is good but lacks breadth of content and hides a lot of stuff behind menus and boring activities that don't even try to be fun: SC is at least trying to make things fun and immersive.
Now if they just handle the fucky ship handling and physics, things could be perf
[editline]1st November 2017[/editline]
just please don't let the spacedads and people who call roberts "senpai" call the shots and it'll be good
[QUOTE=elixwhitetail;52843961]
[video=youtube;ZsXnFzYu10k]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZsXnFzYu10k[/video][/QUOTE]
Holy shit, when they can't get the land rover on the loading ramp and it just explodes was hilarious. @ 1:04:25
[QUOTE=Smoot;52844339]Have they fixed the terrible FPS (network issue they called it) in the non combat version of multiplayer yet?[/QUOTE]
some fixes are in place, overall it's not looking like it'll be completely ironed out yet
also for those rating it funny, it [i]is[/i] identifiably a networking issue, which is still weird but that's probably why it's taking some time to nail it down without breaking something else. You can(/could) use some trickery to load into an offline instance of port olisar and it runs smooth as butter, whereas an online instance, even one that seems to have just opened up and there's no other players, will still have lower framerates and odd hiccups. Same goes for the arena stuff, I'll get better performance playing the swarm gamemodes with a dozen ships firing around at me than I do in a freefly instance with one other player
I think the integration of lumberyard moving forward is going to sort out a lot of networking issues, given it's pretty well focused on multiplayer functionality at its core
[QUOTE=alexelgeco;52844002]2:42 people standing on the benches :v:[/QUOTE]
tick off "looks quickly away from a bug" on cig presentation bingo
One thing that always bugged me about this game was how floaty and molasses-like movement felt, especially when looking around at stuff.
[QUOTE=loopoo;52844744]One thing that always bugged me about this game was how floaty and molasses-like movement felt, especially when looking around at stuff.[/QUOTE]
was largely due to their focus on linking animation/movement between first and third person, so instead of having a viewermodel instance and hiding the player model from the player's view, it was all the same assets visible. So from a gameplay side, you were basically dragging the playermodel around and it could end up fighting back a bit. Pretty sure they were moving away from that a bit, if they haven't already for 3.0
As blown-away I get by every demo and video, I'm still not convinced it's worth a purchase. It seems to be one of those games that are so ridiculously detailed and in-depth that it's practically a second life, all the drudgery and tedium included. And while that style of gameplay does appeal to a sizeable niche, gamers the likes of EVE players or fans of Battlecruiser-type games, I don't see how everyone else wouldn't end up being sick of it eventually.
Tech-wise though, again, holy shit...it's truly insane the amount of assets they've created just for this game.
[QUOTE=Dr. Fishtastic;52848805]As blown-away I get by every demo and video, I'm still not convinced it's worth a purchase. It seems to be one of those games that are so ridiculously detailed and in-depth that it's practically a second life, all the drudgery and tedium included. And while that style of gameplay does appeal to a sizeable niche, gamers the likes of EVE players or fans of Battlecruiser-type games, I don't see how everyone else wouldn't end up being sick of it eventually.
Tech-wise though, again, holy shit...it's truly insane the amount of assets they've created just for this game.[/QUOTE]
if it's any consolation, EvE has had to finally confront the NPE and degree of bullshit activities involved lately. they're trying (and kinda succeeding) to make things more engaging now, so maybe if things don't work well in SC they'll be wise enough to make the suitable gameplay revisions/changes
[editline]3rd November 2017[/editline]
like i know they say they don't want you to be able to just fly from planet to planet trading, to avoid you getting bored... but what if I get bored of constantly being interrupted or interdicted? the encounters will eventually get samey and predictable and the person looking to enjoy some space trucking doesn't want to get tangled in pvp encounters again and again and again
in eve, back when i used to do a lot of freighter trading/flying, i learned to take alternate routes both to exploit lucrative trades and to avoid running into suicide ganks and risky areas. i hope similar mechanisms (including things like blockade runners) exist in SC
[QUOTE=paindoc;52851607]like i know they say they don't want you to be able to just fly from planet to planet trading, to avoid you getting bored... but what if I get bored of constantly being interrupted or interdicted? the encounters will eventually get samey and predictable and the person looking to enjoy some space trucking doesn't want to get tangled in pvp encounters again and again and again
in eve, back when i used to do a lot of freighter trading/flying, [B]i learned to take alternate routes both to exploit lucrative trades and to avoid running into suicide ganks and risky areas. i hope similar mechanisms (including things like blockade runners) exist in SC[/B][/QUOTE]
AFAIK that's kind of the idea; following the well-travelled routes in an unpoliced system is begging to be interdicted and ganked, while taking your own safespot route in bizarre tangled hops should lead to less interdiction chances. I imagine the circumstances would have to be a bit narrow for that to slide to 'none' because nothing should be perfectly safe.
It's established that you will get pulled out of Quantum by [I]anything[/I] denser than space dust and ambient hydrogen. I can see this leading to some systems being pretty easy to jump through fairly uninterrupted (an uninhabited system behind a jump point you are the first to discover is the best-case scenario in practical terms) and others (Gurzil's protoplanetary disc says hi) being nearly un-QTable from being full of objects or traffic. A more populated system also means it's more likely that you'll fly close enough to another ship to get pulled out, and the criminality/security level of a system will determine the likelihood of if that ship is hostile, if it's an AI.
Designers have also mentioned that a method of interdicting ships is to deploy an interdiction bubble, which best as I can guess is a projected field of fine objects/matter or a force field, enough to pull a ship out of QT from proximity. Explode a big bag of flour across a 50km-diameter sphere in front of a trade lane, basically. :v:
The Drake Herald is also [I]sort of[/I] a blockade runner, but it carries information, not tangible cargo, and it's mainly built around a giant fuckoff engine rather than a ton of durability. I think there's a lore post that talks about using either Gladiator or Retaliator bombers as blockade runners for a planet that was under blockade during the dictatorship era of the backstory.
Just the video loading makes my PC run hotter than the Chernobyl nuclear reactor
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
