Forget the drama, watch this vid and tell me you cant find something awesome about SC

sludgebeard

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_eTgk5Vc4vw

The Explosions, the atmosphere, the sci-fi screens and visuals inside the ships.

Seriously, if you saw this being played at a friends house, im sure you wouldnt just say "O kickstarter fraud" or whatever other connotations get tossed around about this game. You would think "holy crap that was awesome!" 

cerulean2012

yawn.  i will believe it when they finally release it.

Wizardry

Honest opinion 4/10.
The sound was good everything else was poor.
Example you really never see your player ,you see a thumb and a couple fingers,that can't be good.The solar panels are an oddity to put in there since i doubt you can actually blow them up so shooting them would look weird.

Space maps are always going to be boring,you don't have anything other than a  sphere pretending to be a planet and some star textures/asteroids.

The cockpit is boring,especially considering you pay for that.The HUD is really cheap looking,everyone looks the same with the same green print.

What it looks like to me is a budget game,don't pay attention to detail,no time or money for that,just make the outside of the ship look cool so we can sell it.

The insides of a station look good,your hangar will look about as  good as a hangar can get.However there will really be very limited interaction in this game and because 99 % is floating around in that ugly cockpit,i would need a lot more interaction to call the game fun and worth playing.

At the end the player floating to the ship looked glitchy.Also when the ship pulls up we see from the outside and can't see anyone in the ship,neither when it is opening either,then all a sudden a character comes out.

I might remind that you don't play the video you play the game,videos are just marketing gimmicks.

I'll show you a professional made video and you'll soon see the difference and look at this video as even less than a 4/10.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iBfIFgxf2sw  Now just imagine,we heard about all the troubles they had months working on some animation sequences imagine how tough it would be for that team to make a video of this quality.

bcbully

Pretty cool. Reading the youtube post, looks like there a lot of kinks to work out. Not bad though.

Hanthos

Wow...

Oldtimer72

Flying in SC is unrealistic and more like an arcade game in my opinion. Elite Dangerous is no better at it either. If I am going to play a space sim I want to feel like I am really flying.  If I want to move to the left I don't want it to feel like I am playing a game of breakout where you move so fast it makes it look fake in space. The graphics look nice though!

Shoko_Lied

Wizardry said:

Honest opinion 4/10.
The sound was good everything else was poor.
Example you really never see your player ,you see a thumb and a couple fingers,that can't be good.The solar panels are an oddity to put in there since i doubt you can actually blow them up so shooting them would look weird.

Space maps are always going to be boring,you don't have anything other than a  sphere pretending to be a planet and some star textures/asteroids.

The cockpit is boring,especially considering you pay for that.The HUD is really cheap looking,everyone looks the same with the same green print.

What it looks like to me is a budget game,don't pay attention to detail,no time or money for that,just make the outside of the ship look cool so we can sell it.

The insides of a station look good,your hangar will look about as  good as a hangar can get.However there will really be very limited interaction in this game and because 99 % is floating around in that ugly cockpit,i would need a lot more interaction to call the game fun and worth playing.

At the end the player floating to the ship looked glitchy.Also when the ship pulls up we see from the outside and can't see anyone in the ship,neither when it is opening either,then all a sudden a character comes out.

I might remind that you don't play the video you play the game,videos are just marketing gimmicks.

You seem to not be too interested in space sims in the first place. The worst space sim ever may just as well be the best as far as you might be concerned.

Shoko_Lied

bcbully said:

Pretty cool. Reading the youtube post, looks like there a lot of kinks to work out. Not bad though.

There's a buttload of kinks to work out. I have given up on trying to play for the time being as I can't play any longer than 5 minutes myself. It's still an unreleased tester build though, it can't even qualify as an early-alpha at this point.

Shoko_Lied

Oldtimer72 said:

Flying in SC is unrealistic and more like an arcade game in my opinion. Elite Dangerous is no better at it either. If I am going to play a space sim I want to feel like I am really flying.  If I want to move to the left I don't want it to feel like I am playing a game of breakout where you move so fast it makes it look fake in space. The graphics look nice though!

All spacecraft are controlled through thrusters that adjust to allocate and give real time thrust-vector to the directions you give input for the ship to steer. It's realistic from a mechanical standpoint. It's unrealistic in the sense that no such spacecraft actually exists in reality with such thrusters and powerful output. We don't have warp drives or live to be 150 years old either, so the point of realism is slightly moot.

I'd wager a few dimes that the handling of spacecraft in this game is as realistic if-not-more realistic than the next closest "realistic" sim in the idea of how we believe futuristic sci-fi spacecraft would behave if we were, well, in a real future space age and not a fiction-y  game.

rpmcmurphy

It looks nice but I don't really get anything else from it, which is kind of annoying seeing I have money laid down. I'm hoping it's because I've told myself I'm not interested in the PU and am only in it for SQ42, it would piss me off if the game just doesn't appeal to me at all.

Erillion

To the OP :  +1   I like .... very nice video


@Wizardry

Are you REALLY comparing a cinematic Final Fantasy Render video made by a full production team - where every single picture is most likely the work of several hundred hours rendering time ... EACH - with a fan made in game engine Star Citizen video captured in real time from an early Alpha build ? You mention that CIG had troubles with an animation sequence ... its called "developing your own performance capturing and animation engine based on real Class AAA actors", not "troubles". And I imagine how much tough it would be for them ... and my answer is "not tough, cause now they have the technology" (and yes, if they use hundreds of hours to render one picture, those would look even greater too !).

>>> you really never see your player ,you see a thumb and a couple fingers,that can't be good >>> At the push of a button you can see your own player, IF you want. And everything you order him to do you can see in real time.

>>> The solar panels are an oddity to put in there >>> Gee, solar panels on a space station. Who would have EVER done that ?  Non destructible ? Not yet. Still .... explosions on the panels look very nice IMHO.

>>>Space maps are always going to be boring,you don't have anything other than a  sphere pretending to be a planet and some star textures/asteroids.>>>

... if you forget that one of the stretch goals is to created a procedurally generated method to land on those "spheres pretending to be a planet". And those "asteroid textures" ... they can be mined ... there are enough pictures about the mining station and huge spider mining robots floating around in the net  (its from SQ42, John Rhys Davies plays the boss of the mining station). Mining is also discussed in this weeks "10 for the Chairman 71".

>>>The HUD is really cheap looking,>>>> Because its not finished yet, surprise !!  There are plenty of videos about HUD development floating around ... and they look pretty awesome. Now combine that with the external programm "Voice Attack" and an "Oculus Rift" and you have that Iron Man feeling par excellence.

>>> don't pay attention to detail   >>>  Some critics say they are paying TOO MUCH attention to detail, now you say they pay NO attention to detail.  Make up your minds, will ya ....

>>> because 99 % is floating around in that ugly cockpit >>> this will very much depend on playing style, will it not ?  For instance i plan to be an engine tuner (like i was a shipwright in Star Wars Galaxies). I expect 90 % of my time being spend in my workshop, interacting with players and their gear, being the best tuner there can be in SC.

>>>At the end the player floating to the ship looked glitchy.Also when the ship pulls up we see from the outside and can't see anyone in the ship,neither when it is opening either,then all a sudden a character comes out.>>>  THAT i can agree with. Room for improvement.

>>>I might remind that you don't play the video you play the game,videos are just marketing gimmicks.>>> That was NOT a video. That was the game. And rescuing a player stranded in space IS the game, as much as any pre-generated mission. Show me another game where you can go and fly to a stranded player, giving him a ride in your cockpit hot seat !   (PS:  I forsee that there WILL be players that then take out a pistol, shoot their rescuer in the head and steal the ship ... THAT is possible too in SC ;-)


Have fun

Kyleran

Such criticism here, OP asked everyone to find something they like about the video or game, not every single thing they hate about both.

Its as if some folks are really going to be happier to see it fail, so they can say I told you so, rather than see it succeed.

I know I'm a critic of their never ending funding model, and I have doubts whether money is being spent efficiently, but I in no way want this title to fail, we need some new, good games so I'm pulling for it to succeed.

sayuu

Shoko_Lied said:

Oldtimer72 said:

Flying in SC is unrealistic and more like an arcade game in my opinion. Elite Dangerous is no better at it either. If I am going to play a space sim I want to feel like I am really flying.  If I want to move to the left I don't want it to feel like I am playing a game of breakout where you move so fast it makes it look fake in space. The graphics look nice though!

All spacecraft are controlled through thrusters that adjust to allocate and give real time thrust-vector to the directions you give input for the ship to steer. It's realistic from a mechanical standpoint. It's unrealistic in the sense that no such spacecraft actually exists in reality with such thrusters and powerful output. We don't have warp drives or live to be 150 years old either, so the point of realism is slightly moot.

I'd wager a few dimes that the handling of spacecraft in this game is as realistic if-not-more realistic than the next closest "realistic" sim in the idea of how we believe futuristic sci-fi spacecraft would behave if we were, well, in a real future space age and not a fiction-y  game.

realism. . .

. . . space explosions produce sound (0:58) in a vacuum, other ships sound like jet fighters in the atmosphere (1:26) and finally the swirls of dust being constantly generated by the ship's thrust (3:00) behaving like it is in an atmosphere, not to mention the constant never-ending dust being generated.


So real. 

Elsabolts

More game less Pledges

Fdzzaigl

All of it *looks* awesome.
Awesome enough to even buy a new PC for.

However, that's also the problem, it's all looks so far. The meat & bones of the game haven't even been shown yet. There has been no continuous gameplay in the persistent universe, just demo's that are carefully staged.

When they release something substantial and good, I will buy it. But so far they haven't.

sayuu

Erillion said:

 That was the game. And rescuing a player stranded in space IS the game, as much as any pre-generated mission. Show me another game where you can go and fly to a stranded player, giving him a ride in your cockpit hot seat !   (PS:  I forsee that there WILL be players that then take out a pistol, shoot their rescuer in the head and steal the ship ... THAT is possible too in SC ;-)


Have fun

Ark:survival evolved for one.

Erillion

sayuu said:

realism. . .

. . .but space explosions produce sound in the video. . .

just lol.

There is actually an in-game explanation for the sound.

The spacecraft manufacturers found out that translating sensory data into input for all senses - not only the visual - makes it easier to relay information to the pilot without sensory overload and therefore loss of data. So - while there are no actual sound waves in space  (which can be debated, as there ARE plasma waves in space) - the acustical signal generated from sensor data help the pilot in generating situational awareness ... e.g. different sounds for different weapon classes hitting your shields or armor, different sounds for enemy ships passing by at various distances and directions.

There are real world equivalents for this (google "Bitching Betty" ;-) for in flight warnings based on sensory data).


Have fun

PS:
>>>>finally the swirls of dust being constantly generated by the ship's thrust (3:00) behaving like it is in an atmosphere, not to mention the constant never-ending dust being generated.>>>>

The space dust (or stars streaking by) is an old trick in space games to generate a feeling of speed. Without SOMETHING as a visual clue how fast you are people constantly over-shoot. Its also the age old discussion about engine trails visible behind spaceships. Without engine trails its very hard to visually get an idea what direction the ship is travelling.

sayuu

Erillion said:

sayuu said:

realism. . .

. . .but space explosions produce sound in the video. . .

just lol.

There is actually an in-game explanation for the sound.

The spacecraft manufacturers found out that translating sensory data into input for all senses - not only the visual - makes it easier to relay information to the pilot without sensory overload and therefore loss of data. So - while there are no actual sound waves in space  (which can be debated, as there ARE plasma waves in space) - the acustical signal generated from sensor data help the pilot in generating situational awareness ... e.g. different sounds for different weapon classes hitting your shields or armor, different sounds for enemy ships passing by at various distances and directions.

There are real world equivalents for this (google "Bitching Betty" ;-) for in flight warnings based on sensory data).


Have fun

2 down, one to go. . . gimmick lore away the dust  and i'll change my opinion

Erillion

sayuu said:

Ark:survival evolved for one.

Any spaceships amongst those dinosaurs  ?

I am not talking about someone giving a ride on his wolf or moose or perodactyl.  I had multi player surface transports in Star Wars Galaxies 10 years ago.


Have fun

Erillion

*** gimmick lore away the dust  and i'll change my opinion ***

>>>>finally the swirls of dust being constantly generated by the ship's thrust (3:00) behaving like it is in an atmosphere, not to mention the constant never-ending dust being generated.>>>>

The space dust (or stars streaking by) is an old trick in space games to generate a feeling of speed. Without SOMETHING as a visual clue how fast you are people constantly over-shoot. Its also the age old discussion about engine trails visible behind spaceships. Without engine trails its very hard to visually get an idea what direction the ship is travelling.

And by the way ... if you go fast enough (relativistic speeds) , space dust ... the REAL space dust
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cosmic_dust
... becomes a problem. It sand-blasting away your forward hull. Better to use it as fuel via a Bussard Ram-Jet engine
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bussard_ramjet


Have fun

sgel

Erillion said:

sayuu said:

Ark:survival evolved for one.

Any spaceships amongst those dinosaurs  ?

I am not talking about someone giving a ride on his wolf or moose or perodactyl.  I had multi player surface transports in Star Wars Galaxies 10 years ago.


Have fun

It's exactly the same thing, just instead of a surface "level", it's a space "level".
The only thing that changes is the theme.

Erillion

sgel said:

It's exactly the same thing, just instead of a surface "level", it's a space "level".
The only thing that changes is the theme.

People usually do not suffocate and die an agonizing ("perma"-) death if you do not pick them up with your riding moose.


Have fun

sgel

Erillion said:

sgel said:

It's exactly the same thing, just instead of a surface "level", it's a space "level".
The only thing that changes is the theme.

People usually do not suffocate and die an agonizing ("perma"-) death if you do not pick them up with your riding moose.

Yeah feel free to ridicule other games to advance your white knight agenda.
My point still stands, it's the same gameplay mechanic ust a different theme.

DXSins

Ark is one of few pushing boundaries like SC is doing... idk why you would make it sound bad. 

http://cdn.segmentnext.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/10/Ark-Survival-Evolved.jpg

These things allow almost everything you can a ship in SC does, maybe more and less in certain area's. 
Flight - check
Base building / crafting onboard - check
Multi-crew - check
Mountable turrets - check
Destruction - check
(like i said Ark is another promising game in development just like SC)

Erillion

sgel said:

Yeah feel free to ridicule other games to advance your white knight agenda.
My point still stands, it's the same gameplay mechanic ust a different theme.

I do not ridicule anything. I have two dozen other MMO games installed and playing one third of those actively. I am simply stating facts w.r.t. Arc:Survival. Again ... other games had multi-player "vehicles" (or riding animals or flying animals) on/over the surface for a decade already. That is nothing new. But NOT picking up players there had no other consequences then them taking longer to get back (either walking or swimming).

If you do not pick up a player in space he dies of lack of oxygen. And in a game with a version of "perma-death" that has considerable consequences.

Thats a very different gameplay mechanic, no matter the theme.


Have fun

Erillion

MrSyn said:

These things allow almost everything you can a ship in SC does, maybe more and less in certain area's. 
Flight - check
Base building / crafting onboard - check
Multi-crew - check
Mountable turrets - check
Destruction - check
(like i said Ark is another promising game in development just like SC)

Star Wars Galaxies (10 years ago)

Flight - check
Base building / crafting onboard - check
Multi-crew - check
Mountable turrets - check
Destruction - check

We have to go beyond that ... both in Ark:Survival and in Star Citizen.


Have fun