Star Citizen Megathread - Fly FREE thru Dec 14th! Link in OP - Games

Who looks at Star Citizen and all the press it gets and says "yeah, this looks like a game anyone could easily jump into" like fuck dude. brutal.

Thing is I did look up videos of it - and it seemed totally fine. I saw plenty (and by plenty I mean an oversatured amount) of comparisons between Star Citizen and Elite: Dangerous. So me assuming the games would be similar isn't far-fetched. It's just further confirmation to me anyway that watching a video does not compare to actually playing the game itself. The experience is entirely different, and in this case it was so different it felt like it wasn't even the same game. I will return to this, but at another time. Maybe when I feel patient enough to deal with the key-mapping menus.

well you should have also noticed from the videos that the game is like 1/20th complete.

[QUOTE=Mbbird;48189306]well you should have also noticed from the videos that the game is like 1/20th complete.[/QUOTE] From an outside perspective it looks well-polished though. It doesn't [I]look [/I]like an alpha. It wasn't until I actually got into it myself that I realized it very much [I]feels [/I]like an alpha. Because it is, duh, but that's the difference. Looking at videos don't tell me the feel of the game, it just tells me what it looks like. Like for instance, seeing someone drive a car makes driving look super easy, but once you sit down in the seat yourself you realize there's so much to it.

there's a dogfight module, a few maps, and that's the entire game so far. that should tell you enough.

Okay, so let's move on from trying to figure out who's to blame, and instead let's pick up the pieces where we are now. The game you bought is in pre-alpha and everyone will agree that, as far as user-friendliness goes and being prepared for random fucks to just pick up and play, it has a [B]long[/B] way to go. But here you are. You can: 1) Drop it for now and come back at some future time, and this is pretty common. A lot of Kickstarter-era backers don't play the development builds and are just doing other shit with their lives until the game's much further along. No shame in this. Or, 2) Pull up your big girl panties and deal with it, and by that I mean take the game on as-is. [B]We will gladly help you[/B] with everything. I know you said you don't want to be taught, but, your expectations of being able to pick up and play with zero information didn't pan out. You're welcome to tough it out on your own, but this is possibly the friendliest thread on FP, overall, and most everyone will be glad to help. I suppose option 3 would be to get a refund, but I would hope that your first experience was not [I]so[/I] terrible that you're ready to give up entirely already. If you want to tackle the game as it stands now, there's no pressure to do it right now--tonight, this week, whatever. When you're ready, just ask. Advice, instruction, playing together, I'm sure this thread'll be happy to provide you with just as much help as you want.

[QUOTE=Mbbird;48189408]there's a dogfight module, a few maps, and that's the entire game so far. that should tell you enough.[/QUOTE] Like I said, you don't really see that in videos. It didn't tell me much of how much content was in it, I just saw cool dogfighting and space-flight. Didn't tell me about how much/little content there was or how the UI/menus worked. [editline]13th July 2015[/editline] [QUOTE=elixwhitetail;48189483]You can: 1) Drop it for now and come back at some future time, and this is pretty common. A lot of Kickstarter-era backers don't play the development builds and are just doing other shit with their life until the game's much further along. No shame in this. Or, 2) Pull up your big girl panties and deal with it, and by that I mean take the game on as-is. [B]We will gladly help you[/B] with everything. I know you said you don't want to be taught, but, your expectations of being able to pick up and play with zero information didn't pan out. You're welcome to tough it out on your own, but this is possibly the friendliest thread on FP, overall, and most everyone will be glad to help. I suppose option 3 would be to get a refund, but I would hope that your first experience was not [I]so[/I] terrible that you're ready to give up entirely already.[/QUOTE] As much as I would want a refund, I'm not gonna be a dick and ask for one. That's just the money saver in me regretting the purchase so early on. I've said I'll come back to it in the future [I]a fair amount of times now[/I]. So that's what I'll do.

in what way is this game hard to get into though? I don't know about joystick but default keyboard and gamepad setups are fine. literally all you have to do is take 5 seconds to work out how to open the menu -> arena commander -> gamemode and you're done a 5 second google provided [URL="https://www.reddit.com/r/starcitizen/comments/35me3o/request_thrustmaster_tflight_hotas_x_profile/"]multiple pre-made hotas X configs[/URL] the comparison to ED is baffling considering it has just as many keybinds and throws you into the world with even less direction, and the flight model is far more difficult to get to grips with

So, some actual news. [URL="https://www.reddit.com/r/starcitizen/comments/3d2dca/sdcc_panel_notes/"]Info's coming back[/URL] from the (unrecorded as required by SDCC) panel today. The panel was mostly about lore and how the UEE is basically the Roman Empire in space, nothing we haven't heard before, but there were some interesting things dropped during the panel and then after in individual conversations. - The universe/economy simulation on the back end will contain [U]20 million[/U] NPCs, with the same goal of keeping players at 10% to keep them from taking over the economy. - Speculation from writer Dave Haddock: There may be in universe political elections to allow players to effect the direction of the story. - The Squadron 42 script is 670 pages long, not counting rewrites - A big announcement regarding SQ42 is coming at Gamescom - There are 35 characters on the ship you start on in SQ42 - A SQ42 plot point apparently involves [sp]a lost squadron in the Caliban system[/sp] If your lore is rusty, [sp]Caliban system is next door, Jump Point-wise, to the Orion system; Orion is home to Armitage, and is where our violent first contact with the Vanduul happened, as they used Armitage as a corner store of sorts. Orion is the one the UEE *DID* defend instead of Tiber, and when it fell, they pulled back to Caliban and mostly-fucked Tiber - Tiber is now one of the deadliest systems around, and is home to Grinder.[/sp] (This second spoiler block is public lore, but it refers to the real spoiler.) - After the panel, CR told someone in 1-on-1 conversation that they'll be announcing a new Large World free-flight test map at Gamescom, and that they are working internally on getting a bug report/tracker tool ready for public rollout - [URL="https://www.reddit.com/r/starcitizen/comments/3d2hzp/multi_crew_at_gamescom/"]CR also let slip[/URL] that Gamescom is going to have an AC2.0 multicrew demo, and it'll be ready "shortly after" - [URL="https://imgur.com/a/HkX8H"]The guy feeding Reddit these notes also took some pictures after the panel was over[/URL] And, show up to a SC event, get SC goodies. Another guy took a photo this, which he got when he talked to CIG before the start of the panel: [t]https://i.imgur.com/cZkAgIa.jpg[/t] A reminder that there will "hopefully" be an official HOTAS announcement at Gamescom, [URL="https://www.reddit.com/r/starcitizen/comments/3d2hzp/multi_crew_at_gamescom/ct19583"]as[/URL] "they stated that they managed to get the manufacturer to incorporate everything that they wanted into it." This's Sandi's job, not CR's, so I have a feeling she's been in there kicking ass when not doing mocap.

Man someones gonna shit their pants in abject terror if they try Rogue System. I wanted Star Citizen to be more hardcore, but thats a daft hope :v: Still loving flying around. The 300 series is a blast to fly and I really dig the HUD and electronics and stuff, but the aurora is also neat. Learning to use G-lock creatively really helped my flying, as did binding translation thrust to my hat switch

[QUOTE=Coyoteze;48188972]An alpha shouldn't have a price-tag of 37 dollars. 15 dollars, maybe. But I'd expect something a bit more polished for the price. I did get the 50-dollar one simply because apparently 37-dollar doesn't come with the actual alpha/beta. Which is, uh, weird. I get the whole "Pledge" ordeal, but it's still steep for something that isn't fully functional and won't be for what looks like another year. Regardless, while I didn't expect an arcade shooter I did expect something that didn't have this lack of user-friendliness. It took me an hour to navigate the menu and finally get something that resembled an "okay" joystick setup, and that includes trial and error in the tutorial. That's not fun. And you can call it an immersive space sim if you want to, but to me immersion does not equal frustration. I appreciate your offer, but no thanks. The problem is that you or anyone at all would need to "teach" me the controls. I'm done with school, I'm done with teachers. I don't want to sit down and have to "learn" the controls. That's what I mean with it feeling like a chore. It should be quick and easy and after a few minutes of looking I should be ready to go. Any issues I have should be easily fixed in the menu. This isn't the case here, by extension I don't find it fun.[/QUOTE] didn't you have to learn how to play FPSes it's 50 bucks because frankly they don't want people like you randomly going "oh this looks fun" and impulse buying without spending the 10 minutes it takes to understand that "yes this game is not unfinished"

[QUOTE=Coyoteze;48188784]And see I have a bit of a problem with that because I play games to have [I]fun[/I], not to spend hours learning how the game works. I like being able to jump in and just within a very short time span figure out how everything works. Bonus points if the game works with whatever controllers I set out to use. And by "jump in" I don't mean what this game does with literally just throwing you into the game with absolutely no direction. It's like it assumes you know everything from the get go. "Elite: Dangerous" is brilliant because not only are the vanilla controls totally plug-and-play with the TS Hotas X, but there aren't thirty thousand different buttons that do twenty million things. Hyperbole aside, if the key mapping menu makes me go "What the fuck is this" or "How do I even do that" even once, then it goes from being a game to being a chore. And I'd prefer not doing chores before I can have fun. I'll pick this up again tomorrow when I'm not cranky from being tired, but right now this just isn't fun for me.[/QUOTE] If you aren't interested in learning how to play something, and aren't registering the fact that what's essentially a playable tech demo doesn't have a lot of polish yet, my advice to you is to forever more avoid any new games. Play only the ones you know and love. Star Citizen isn't your cup of tea. As for a fifteen dollar alpha for a game like Star Citizen, that'd be a fair price - If you only had access to that alpha and had to buy the finished product again once it was released, wouldn't you agree?

Theres a halfway decent tutorial ingame you know. Did you try it? also my joystick worked out of the box, and theres even in-game curve options. But uh, one of the main differences you might not have expected is roll on the twist axis in star citizen, elite obviously barely has yaw so they do the plane style yaw on twist axis thing rather than roll. If your use to a stick in ED, playing SC (or any other space game that actually has yaw) is going to mean a big re-learning curve.

[QUOTE=Mattk50;48192060]roll on the twist axis in star citizen[/QUOTE]IMO this is dumb and wrong.

[QUOTE=Squeegy Mackoy;48194238]IMO this is dumb and wrong.[/QUOTE] Why? Roll on its own is inherently a "weak" axis as you cannot alter your heading with it. Many space games default to Yaw and Pitch on the X/Y axis. You generally don't require much precision with roll except for when docking, so it can go on the inherently less precise twist axis whereas Yaw requires more precision, ergo it goes on the X axis. In games where all three axis are equally powerful at turning, roll-based controls are awkward to aim with (see also: Planetside 2), especially the craft are already stupidly maneuverable as they are in Star Citizen. Now if everyone had a set of aircraft pedals, yeah roll on the X axis would make more sense.

re-map that immediately holy shit also why even bitch about having to learn new keybindings, all you need to start off is: basic movement (don't forget strafing) targeting nearest enemy or cycle enemies middle mouse, click to lock missiles/hold to fire caps lock turns off 'plane in space' mode if you're confident in movement skills flares/chaff Everything else is more than you should really care about in the basic dogfighting junk

it's simply a question of priorities imo. if we assume the twist axis is less accurate or at least more annoying to use, we should bind it to the least important axis of rotation roll is meaningless in space. baring ships that are specifically designed to function poorly in some way (elite dangerous) then yaw should behave exactly as pitch does. I'm pretty sure even the physiological g-force limits are similar? so in star citizen, pitch/yaw controls are simply [I]better[/I] than pitch/roll, aside from personal preference, flight sim familiarity etc

[QUOTE=Squeegy Mackoy;48194238]IMO this is dumb and wrong.[/QUOTE] NASA is wrong then i guess, you should phone them about it. On planes it makes sense because yaw is very weak on planes. ED has weak yaw too so it works there. But in space, pitch and yaw are your two most relevant control axis, roll is important but you dont need the same precision, which is why SC's is a better setup, and also more realistic if you care about that. It's the setup on the space shuttle. Not that roll is useless in SC, if you arent using roll you are playing wrong. Its great for presenting a smaller target, managing gforces, and making optimal use of different thrustert configs on some ships (for example, on aurora and gladius vertical strafe is much stronger than horizontal) But it doesn't need to be so precise.

Yaw on X axis is objectively better because it gives more control to the axis that has more authority in ship movement. Having roll on the X axis is wasteful because flying like a plane isn't important, wastes time (eventually fuel too), and requires you to coordinate 3 axes in order to accurately aim at something versus 2. If some ship were designed that could roll far better than it could yaw, then the argument could be made that that specific ship should be flown the traditional method, but until that happens its yaw on X. I've been playing flight sims for as long as I've been playing video games and I have no problem going back and forth between the two. They're totally different things in my mind. It's just a coincidence that they both use the joystick. As an aside though, I think it would be neat if Star Citizen blended yaw and roll. A great many of the classic space sims do this to make turning more interesting than just flatly spinning in place like a top. For example in Freespace and X-Wing, when you held the stick to the left, you would both yaw left and roll counter clockwise. It would be wasteful fuel-wise for all the reasons I mentioned before, and wouldn't really serve much of a purpose aside from the feel of things, but it's a thought I've had for a while. When I work on my own hobby project space sims I usually do this because I like the way it feels and looks.

[QUOTE=Why485;48194760]As an aside though, I think it would be neat if Star Citizen blended yaw and roll. A great many of the classic space sims do this to make turning more interesting than just flatly spinning in place like a top. For example in Freespace and X-Wing, when you held the stick to the left, you would both yaw left and roll counter clockwise. It would be wasteful fuel-wise for all the reasons I mentioned before, and wouldn't really serve much of a purpose aside from the feel of things, but it's a thought I've had for a while. When I work on my own hobby project space sims I usually do this because I like the effect it has.[/QUOTE] Coupled mode use to have a very minor "roll into yaw" function, it might still have it actually. I usually fly in decoupled mode but i remember back in the earlier versions that roll into yaw thing really fucked with aim, it was annoying. Elite dangerous has this as an option in their controls menu, i dont see why it couldnt be there in SC as an option for people who want it but personally i'd make sure it was off.

[QUOTE=Mattk50;48194860]Coupled mode use to have a very minor "roll into yaw" function, it might still have it actually. I usually fly in decoupled mode but i remember back in the earlier versions that roll into yaw thing really fucked with aim, it was annoying. Elite dangerous has this as an option in their controls menu, i dont see why it couldnt be there in SC as an option for people who want it but personally i'd make sure it was off.[/QUOTE] I don't recall it ever having one because I remember thinking this ever since the release of Arena Commander. I'm not talking about doing it like Elite Dangerous either. The way Elite does it gives you either yaw or roll. It doesn't blend them through the entire range of inputs like Freespace or X-Wing did. The way they've written it in Elite I find very awkward to use and aim with because you're constantly switching between yaw and roll.

[QUOTE=Mattk50;48194860]Coupled mode use to have a very minor "roll into yaw" function, it might still have it actually. I usually fly in decoupled mode but i remember back in the earlier versions that roll into yaw thing really fucked with aim, it was annoying.[/quote] I think this was before they rewrote how the RCS thrusters work. Thrusters used to have to spin to a new position, so ships were really unstable in turns. AFAIK, now the thrusters instantly rotate to their new orientation - or at least, the physical force rotates instantly while the thrust model still animates. The vast majority of ships have unbalanced thrusters so they end up turning a bit weirdly when going into turns. IIRC, the Hornet has more thrusters above its center-of-mass so it ends up rolling a bit when yawing while under thrust.

[URL="https://forums.robertsspaceindustries.com/discussion/271731/comm-link-schedule-week-of-july-13th"]Weekly Comm-Link schedule.[/URL] CR is back home and next week will be a 10FTChris. CIG is still trying for a 1.1.5 PTU by the end of the week. [QUOTE]Monday, July 13th - 10 for the Producers Tuesday, July 14th - Meet the Devs: Adam Wieser Wednesday, July 15th - Bugsmashers! Episode 06 - Jump Point Rerun - Vault Update Thursday, July 16th - Around the Verse: Episode 53 Friday, July 17th - Reverse the Verse - FPS Update – Week of July 13th - Jump Point[/QUOTE] [URL="https://www.reddit.com/r/starcitizen/comments/3d2dca/sdcc_panel_notes/ct1iipe?context=3"]Smartphone video of the SDCC panel[/URL], but the link's fucked right now from too much traffic. [URL="https://i.imgur.com/beRIvnp.jpg"]Poohead took a goon's word at face value[/URL], that is all.

[QUOTE=elixwhitetail;48197822] [URL="https://i.imgur.com/beRIvnp.jpg"]Poohead took a goon's word at face value[/URL], that is all.[/QUOTE] [url=https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/lv?key=0Ag42gMGK9WrwdDlkdUM2NEhudW42MkNfWDhJYmhFSVE&f=true&noheader=true&gid=0]that spreadsheet[/url] for those interested, it's just SA's roster of people putting down their ships/user. That Bill Zabub dude spent 11k, jesus

Since it hasn't been posted yet (as far as I've seen, anyway), I'd like to share something wonderful with you - Some of Derek Smart's previous dealings with LowTax. [url=http://www.somethingawful.com/game-reviews/completely-libelous-review/1/]Completely Libelous Review of Universal Combat[/url] Read that review first. So then Derek Smart threatened to sue Lowtax in a long and droning letter, which he began by stating that he understood parody, and promptly proceeded to demonstrate the opposite in the rest of the letter. [quote][B]And there is parody and then their is libel. Stating as fact that I was convicted of bank fraud, is NOT funny - and I can 100% guarantee you, is not within the legal guidelines of fair use parody. Especially since you clearly describe the topic as an intent to libel. I am asking you nicely to please remove or rephrase it in your article. [/B] And just so you don't go and - once again - type up shit that I didn't say, I have bcc'ed several third parties on this email. [B]Look, I know some of you think you're above the law because you are on the net, but I never have and never will take legal action against ANYONE in the media. But if you bastards make me set an example, it won't be a good one. And trust me - I don't think any of you have enough pennies to rub together to outspend me. So whatever you do, don't test my resolve. I'm NOT taking this shit anymore. You will not get another email from me about this. Just remember that I did send it. [/B] DS [/quote] Lowtax's reply, of course, was pure gold. [quote]From: [email]lowtax@somethingawful.com[/email] To: Derek Smart Sent: Wednesday, March 03, 2004 4:19 PM Subject: Re: UC parody review on SA Dear Doctor Smart, As per your request, I have changed the offending remark. "When he was convicted of bank fraud in 1994" has been altered to: "When he was convicted of bank fraud and raping an entire petting zoo in 1994" I hope this is satisfactory. - Dr. Richard Kyanka, PHD [/quote]

[QUOTE=elixwhitetail;48197822] [URL="https://i.imgur.com/beRIvnp.jpg"]Poohead took a goon's word at face value[/URL], that is all.[/QUOTE] you're new title should be "ask me about my Derek Smart Fetish"

[QUOTE=krail9;48194657] roll is meaningless in space. [/QUOTE] Not quite. 1) your up/down thrusters may be more powerful than your left/right thrusters, which would enable you to fly tighter turns up/down than left/right. 2) more importantly, you as a pilot will resist g-forces pushing you into your seat much better than the ones pushing you left or right. I use twist to roll as well, but I find it very important to align my ship like I would an airplane as I go into tight turns. It makes it less disorienting and afaik also reduces blackouts. Btw, I play flight sims too, and I still find yaw/pitch on x/y much better in SC than traditional airplane controls, because I can't aim for shit if my two important axes for aiming are spread over two different inputs (move my hand and twist my hand).

Maybe they don't make joysticks like they used to, but my twist controls are buttery smooth. I'm also a grumpy old man who wants everything to steer like its a war bird from the 40's. Onto my other niggle: Those newfangled maneuvering thrusters are too damn strong.

I'm actually pretty sure humans resist left/right g-forces much netter than down and wayyy better than up. This is even modeled in the game.

You know, I had been pretty ambivalent towards Smart at first. But I want you to take a moment to look up some of his games on Steam. Basically anything developed by "3000AD". Not a single one of his games has a positive review score, with most of them being "Mostly negative" or even "Overwhelmingly negative." Almost every reviewer brings up the exact same thing. That he created a sub-standard, poorly optimized, glitchy game, then met every suggestion from the community to improve said game with flaming and vague legal threats. Makes his motivations for fucking with RSI so much more transparent, doesn't it? This is jealousy, straight up. He's envious that they're more competent developers, that people [I]like[/I] them more, and completely fails to see that the main reason for their success is that they're, quite objectively, better than him in almost every way. They've got a pretty solid company structure, they're in touch with their community, and they use shrewd business-minded thinking. Most importantly, they've got thick skins, and don't waste their time threatening everyone who looks at them sideways. I hope he stumbles so hard this time he breaks something.