Star Citizen Megathread v. procedurally-generated deadlines - Games

No offense to anyone here but a vote for anything but the Vulture is retarded. It's an entry level ship for a career that doesn't have one and will be much less labor intensive than either of the other two options. They are all going to be made eventually, you might as well get the one that could bring new players to the game or let people jump into alternate roles quickly. The Hawk sounds cool too. Shame you can't swap out the prisoner pod for something even as simple as some cargo but the idea of having a small ship that holds just enough for a loadout is neat.

all things considered they did a LOT of talking on the different concepts, seemed to be way more thought than "hey let's dream up stuff on the stream!" like they tried playing it off. This is probably going to end up being more of a poll over whether there's hype for any/all of them, and they'll decide to make the runner up or even all three, just in the order of popularity. Didn't they do that with whatever vote spawned the misc reliant?

Lot of drama about those netcode statements now, kind of makes me worried about the future and how CIG are going to go about getting 100+ players in the same vicinity. Can't wait for Friday's stream where we can hopefully get some clarity.

The community has nothing to do but generate drama right now, it keeps them busy while they impatiently wait for 3.0/PTU access to 3.0. People were generating drama over the fact that item wear and tear is still definitely a thing that's going to happen despite CIG talking about this for years -- and then they misunderstood how insurance is going to work and generated drama about that. People were even generating drama over the fact that the Kraken wasn't winning the vote and this was somehow the result of "uneducated" people picking the "objectively wrong" ship when it's almost guaranteed that CIG will make all of them and is taking the vote to decide which order to do them in. We haven't heard anything firm about StarNetwork 1.0 since 2016, and that was to be a more or less complete overhaul of the netcode. I'm expecting this to be something we hear about when CIG reveals the post-3.0 roadmap for 2018.

[QUOTE=Raidyr;52965865]No offense to anyone here but a vote for anything but the Vulture is retarded. It's an entry level ship for a career that doesn't have one and will be much less labor intensive than either of the other two options. They are all going to be made eventually, you might as well get the one that could bring new players to the game or let people jump into alternate roles quickly. The Hawk sounds cool too. Shame you can't swap out the prisoner pod for something even as simple as some cargo but the idea of having a small ship that holds just enough for a loadout is neat.[/QUOTE] actually there's a pretty compelling argument for the corsair too. as a competitor to the constellation there's literally no other ships that fill that 3-4 player multipurpose ship niche right now, ships that were supposed to be comparable like the caterpillar and 600i have both blown up in size to something completely different and I wager that 3-4 player groups will be a fairly significant dynamic in the game, and there's no other option at that size the kraken really is an awful meme though, we already have way more capital ships than necessary for the degree of use actual players will get out of them, and every time I read the term 'pocket carrier' I die a little inside

[t]https://robertsspaceindustries.com/media/y9clpjoa9mdlxr/source/ANVIL-HAWK-Sketch-05.jpg[/t] Hawk concept sketches, aka what could've been.

Oh shit, I didn't know that SC will have plot claiming and building management too. Looking forward to this game even more.

[QUOTE=krail9;52967784]actually there's a pretty compelling argument for the corsair too. as a competitor to the constellation there's literally no other ships that fill that 3-4 player multipurpose ship niche right now, ships that were supposed to be comparable like the caterpillar and 600i have both blown up in size to something completely different and I wager that 3-4 player groups will be a fairly significant dynamic in the game, and there's no other option at that size the kraken really is an awful meme though, we already have way more capital ships than necessary for the degree of use actual players will get out of them, and every time I read the term 'pocket carrier' I die a little inside[/QUOTE] Yeah, I probably went a bit far by saying anyone who didn't vote Vulture is retarded. Sorry about that.

>and every time I read the term 'pocket carrier' I die a little inside what about `pocket battleship` ? :) as something to cut that colony trade routes ...

How about pocket colonies? That way we can just drag colonies around as extra ordnance.

I only voted for the Kraken because I want to start a bounty hunting org, and I really can't expect us to be effective if we run around in short-range superiority fighters with no room for even a rifle, much less storage of body armour or cargo. The sort of organization I want to build requires a command ship that can double as a mobile base, and short of buying an Idris the only thing that really qualified was the idea behind the Kraken. IMO Star Citizen requires more 'pocket carrier' concepts. Every combat-oriented organization type would have their capabilities enhanced by one, especially given what we've learned about fuel constraints. Having said that, I do agree that it's really the last thing we need at this stage in development, when the game doesn't even have the netcode it requires to be playable.

The kraken fills a niche that doesn't exist, and compared to the not really a salvager salvage ship(its just cargo with hand salvage, who would go for this?) and the connie clone it's a much better choice. there arent any carriers that can serve small groups of players without also being a huge combat capital ship like the idris or being rediculous like the bengal. For combat oriented groups a dedicated carrier with room for 4-8 fighters is basically perfect for a squadron and their spare fighters, and is likely to actually be playable unlike the 120 fighter Bengal or 80 Pegasus or similar.

[QUOTE=elixwhitetail;52967900][t]https://robertsspaceindustries.com/media/y9clpjoa9mdlxr/source/ANVIL-HAWK-Sketch-05.jpg[/t] Hawk concept sketches, aka what could've been.[/QUOTE] this is the only real winner out of that whole sheet [img]https://i.imgur.com/lKV48qg.png[/img] but also this and a few around it have way too much profile crossover with the vanduul fighters, would feel a bit weird. Final design still feels sleek but also still decidedly anvil

[QUOTE=dai;52969591]this is the only real winner out of that whole sheet [img]https://i.imgur.com/lKV48qg.png[/img] this and a few around it have way too much profile crossover with the vanduul fighters though[/QUOTE] some of them look like the newly redesigned slasher in eve online: [t]https://eve-online-com.ru/images/slasher-ship-guide.jpg[/t] or, at least those big panels in the image you snipped remind me of it. they fold forward in warp too, iirc

[t]https://i.cubeupload.com/PE1Hg7.jpg[/t] but these are the best

Not a fan of any of those, tbh. Most of the designs look more Drake than Anvil. I think the silhouette we got in the end was the best - especially because of its bird-like appearance when landed.

[IMG]https://i.imgur.com/zrWIJE5.png[/IMG] I kind of like 1, but given the fact that the Reliant already exists, it'd look a little too similar of a design and people would complain. Also, between the wings and the huge disc plate in the middle, that's a simply massive cross-section to shoot at for a dedicated bounty-hunting fighter. I like 2, because it's just so goofy and adorable. I don't think it'd actually make a good design for the Hawk, but it'd be cool if it turns up in art and lore pieces as a ship that the UEE/UNE used to have in circulation like 400 years ago. In fact, CIG has hundreds if not thousands of rejected basic ship design concepts from these first-step variation sheets that they could use for historical ships that won't ever actually be built into 3D models. 3 almost looks like a mini Redeemer, which is kind of cool. And can we talk about how 4 is a Herald with an inverted back end? Instead of the Herald's cockpit, small interior cabin, and [I]dat ass[/I], it goes cockpit, front intake structure, wings, and then extended anorexia mode.

[QUOTE=dai;52969591]this is the only real winner out of that whole sheet [img]https://i.imgur.com/lKV48qg.png[/img] but also this and a few around it have way too much profile crossover with the vanduul fighters, would feel a bit weird. Final design still feels sleek but also still decidedly anvil[/QUOTE] [t]https://lparchive.org/Wing-Commander-III-Standoff/Update%2031/4-crossbow.jpg[/t] wing commander 2 crossbow

[URL="https://www.scribd.com/document/367101474/Crytek-v-CIG"]Crytek has filed a complaint against CIG alleging breach of contract[/URL] over CIG's decisions to switch to Lumberyard (and not use Crytek logos on the copyrights splash screen) and to sell Squadron 42 as a separate title (their complaint alleges that they licensed the engine to CIG for [U]one[/U] game) and other things. Without being able to read the terms of the contract, it's impossible to know how valid Crytek's claims are, but CIG very clearly moved to Lumberyard knowing the terms of their Crytek contract, and Lumberyard has provided them with benefits Crytek couldn't provide, so they may have considered it worth it. Meanwhile, Crytek has been struggling badly and just announced their own cryptocurrency. Whether they have a valid case against CIG or not, Crytek's clearly flailing about for money. Especially since CIG's big year-end sales event just ended. :thinking: [editline]aa[/editline] CIG has issued a statement to [URL="http://massivelyop.com/2017/12/13/crytek-sues-star-citizen-developer-cloud-imperium-alleging-copyright-infringement/"]gaming press covering the story.[/URL] [QUOTE]We are aware of the Crytek complaint having been filed in the US District Court. CIG hasn’t used the CryEngine for quite some time since we switched to Amazon’s Lumberyard. This is a meritless lawsuit that we will defend vigorously against, including recovering from Crytek any costs incurred in this matter.[/QUOTE] Crytek waited a year after CIG officially announced they weren't using CE anymore. Also, CIG has been consistently discussing how they were going to publish the Squadron 42 trilogy and before the package split made part 1 a separate cost, part 2 and 3 were always going to be separate charges for everyone except the earliest-era backers who got in on the "part 2 for free" stretch goal reward (they still will have to buy the last episode), and the package split happened almost two years ago, and only now does Crytek care.

Looks like CiG agree'd to be locked to using the cryengine which they breached by swapping engine. Reading that document it really looks like Crytek were trying to use CiG as a marketing platform for their engine

Can't really blame Crytek for this one after reading over everything, seems like CIG wanted to cut off Crytek after they realized how hard they were falling, but legal contracts take precedent over poor or questionable business practices in a court of law. Although there's a lot of people who have a misconception about CIG's use of Lumberyard, and the big one being that they believe Crytek can prevent CIG from using the engine because it contains [I]some[/I] code from Cryengine. Too bad they don't actually own the engine itself. [quote]Amazon Lumberyard is free, with no seat licenses, royalties, or subscriptions required. With Amazon Lumberyard, developers only pay standard AWS fees for the AWS services they choose to use.[/quote] It would be a smarter business decision to throw Crytek under the bus and take a financial hit by breaching the contract, than sticking with them as they fail and lose their staff to CIG in the process. I'm expecting CIG to lose a few million for the breach of contract, but since they aren't using Cryengine anymore, there's really nothing Crytek can do to prevent CIG from continuing development on Lumberyard. That's how I see it anyway, I'm surely no lawyer but it's the most plausible explanation I can think of. [editline]13th December 2017[/editline] Now I'm curious about what would happen if Crytek staff filed a class action lawsuit against Crytek for not being paid for the entirety of 2017 at the same time.

The amount of effort people go to just to try and ruin this game pisses me the fuck off. If you think it's a scam, or you're unhappy with what it is, there's literally no reason to make such an effort to ruin it for others. Same goes with people with refunds, you know damn well that you're putting money into a game that may or may not even get completed, let alone completed to the same kind of idea you form in your head when you hear the design pitch for it. How utterly fucking hard is it to comprehend that [i]anything[/i] you put towards this game is an investment, and that you may or may not even see a return for it. All these news articles about people wanting to get a refund for their $25,000 or so are bullshit, if you're not smart enough to realise what you're putting your money towards, maybe it's better off in CIG's hands anyway. To add to that,why should your stupid financial decisions have to suddenly effect not only a large game development company, but also every single person that has ever put a cent towards the project? I'm seriously hoping this whole lawsuit is sorted out quickly, and in CIGs favor, to me this game is the only thing that really gives me hope for the future of gaming, and is the game that I always hoped would come to be. Why does Crytek have to try and shit on my dreams. :(

now imagine if Amazon counter sues CryTek for selling them CryEngine 3.8 in bag then pulling CryEngine 5 after ;) i still think that Amazon grab of StarCitizen was form of payback for what CryTek pulled

Yeah CIG is probably in the wrong (but we haven't heard their side of the story yet), but I really just want Crytek to finally die now as they're just dragging everything down. They're still holding onto the Timesplitters license as well ffs.

Heard about this in one of BoredGamers videos on youtube and he mentioned Erin Roberts actually making a comment on how CIG did a "outright buyout of the engine" so I had to look it up for myself and this might just poor wording but if it's true then CryTek might not have legal grounds for that accusation(not counting the accusations regarding sharing source code and such, however this deal they made might have included the restrictions CryTek mention in their lawsuit but I doubt CIG would knowingly fuck up that badly?) [t]http://i.imgur.com/3hx9knG.png[/t]

Everyone keep in mind that all we've seen so far is Crytek's complaint. At the complaint phase, Crytek is going to throw everything it has against the wall in hopes of making as many things as possible stick by the time the case ends. CIG could very well come back with a response that demolishes most of the claims. I can't help but think there's a connection between the timing of the lawsuit and the fact that CIG promised to give us the roadmap to Squadron 42 release on the anniversary livestream next week -- considering one of the complaints Crytek has is that they allegedly only licensed CryEngine to CIG for [I]one[/I] title and selling SQ42 separately makes it count as a separate title. [video=youtube;2Piy-ibiq1M]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2Piy-ibiq1M[/video] [video=youtube;Ru3zwjVMP3A]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ru3zwjVMP3A[/video] [URL="https://robertsspaceindustries.com/comm-link/spectrum-dispatch/16325-AREMIS-POST-DAY-627-THE-JOURNEY-ENDS"]This week's lorepost is a continuation of the series of posts following a squad of recruits through Navy boot camp and training, and the culmination of their training:[/URL] A simulated wargame secretly rigged to make them fail, effectively their Kobayashi Maru.

Is that reveal of SQ42 this month still going to happen?

[QUOTE=nightlord;52977356]Is that reveal of SQ42 this month still going to happen?[/QUOTE] CIG hasn't cancelled it yet. [editline]aa[/editline] [IMG]https://i.imgur.com/eST6pwK.png[/IMG] CIG just sent this out, doubling down on the SQ42 reveal. This picture was included as a sneak peek. [t]https://robertsspaceindustries.com/media/zrwn40hid35pfr/source/Sneak_peak_AV.jpg[/t]

This is new, right? [video=youtube;uQTcf2bnRhY]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uQTcf2bnRhY[/video]

[t]https://i.imgur.com/8g3Ep8t.png[/t] [URL="https://robertsspaceindustries.com/squadron42"]The Squadron 42 newsletter signup has gone live today.[/URL] The above picture is included as a 4K .tif wallpaper when you guess who the A-list mocap actor silhouette is. [t]https://i.imgur.com/RWRcHYt.png[/t] [URL="http://www.ign.com/articles/2017/12/20/squadron-42-see-mark-hamill-in-action-in-star-citizens-space-combat-spin-off-a-ign-first"]IGN's two-minute preview of SQ42, starring Steve "Old Man" Colton, Mark Hamill's character, is up.[/URL] [highlight]Reminder![/highlight] Tomorrow at noon PST/8pm UTC the holiday livestream, featuring SQ42, is on! [t]https://robertsspaceindustries.com/media/0df24fxoeeqsrr/source/TMBL_HeavyTank_ShotE_PJ02-Squashed.jpg[/t] [URL="https://robertsspaceindustries.com/comm-link/transmission/16342-Tumbril-Goes-Nova"]The new Tumbril vehicle has entered Concierge-only day-ahead presale, and it's a muhfuckin' tank.[/URL] Full concept sale with all materials will happen tomorrow, presumably during or after the livestream, but here's the lore blurb: [QUOTE]Tumbril Land Systems is proud to reintroduce a legendary warrior to the modern age. Initially introduced during the Second Tevarin War, the Nova battle tank has been a staple of ground warfare operations ever since. This versatile weapon platform can still be found in service with the UEE Army to this day. With the acquisition of Tumbril Land Systems by the DevCo Group, the Nova has now been updated for the modern age. The same durable and devastating tank has been updated for the 30th century. Featuring a staggering array of both offensive and defensive abilities, the Nova is a fully comprehensive battlefield equalizer, equally capable of engaging targets on both the ground and the air. With the reintroduction of this armored defender, Tumbril is also releasing a pair of environmental paintjobs: the Badland and Snowblind. Perfect for desert or arctic operations respectively, these skins will help disrupt the vehicle’s silhouette at distance, keeping your crew safer for longer.[/QUOTE] $95 warbond, $105 non-warbond, includes two of the three skins. LTI obviously included. There are vehicle combo packs for considerably more that give you a Nox, Ursa, X1, etc. and include all of the tank skins, and an even more expensive vehicle combo pack that includes all of the current ground vehicles and their special (even "warbond-only") skins.