Interesting news. It feels strange though. This doesn't seem to go well with their world design ideology.
In contrast to games like Elite Dangerous, SC opted for creating a smaller amount of areas, allowing for higher fidelity. Players will likely cluster in a few hot spots. Even with the planned procedural generation, I still assume there will be polished non-procedural "hubs" with scripted quest givers, shops, etc. At least that's what has been suggested so far.
What they are describing with dropping instances makes a lot of sense for situations like chasing someone through space, but seems completely unfeasible for cities/hubs.
I'm curious what the final solution will be. Perhaps a hybrid structure would make the most sense.
That is the thing that clashes with the design as the dev post talks about, is if too much people gather in the same place, that would cause issues, hence requires a solution. This on areas like landing zones like Arccorp that aren't scaled to handle many players even if the servers do so.
I can only superficially think of what GW2 did when it had to, overflow servers until it managed to merge the players again with the main instance.
But overall this indeed is one base core of the Life is Feudal MMO,
Its gameworld is handled by 49 different servers, once you approach borders you still see the things on the other side, players and so, and seamlessly move in-between. So that core compartmentalization of a single game world for SC is possible, but they will have to work on the edge cases.
Resume of the interview surrounding IS 2.0 from relay:
Summary
[What is Item system 2.0?] Item 2.0 has been thrown around as the fix for everything, but what item 2.0 is not an entity, but the technology that is coming up. What exists now is this very static logic block that does its job pretty well, but when you try to do additional things with that logic block that it wasn't designed for, it doesn't go very well. So Item 2.0 takes away the logic from those blocks and allows you to manipulate those blocks in a way that you can seperate different entities to be able to individually customize those. So instead of a ship being either On or Off when you board it, now you can sit in the cockpit and sit just there, instead of having it automatically turn on, or you could turn on just radar or etc.
Doors can be locked, lights can be turned on or off individually. Clothes can have useable pockets. This is more than just items, but rendering for planets and having a series of objects load differently because of how Item 2.0's tech is designed and can allow for more cores to be taken advantage of when it comes to stuff like that.
[Why didn't you just make Item system 2.0 in the first place?] CryEngine didn't have the systems that they have now and scaling was something that played a bit part to where you don't know the limits until you hit them. Iteration is something that happens many times during game development to where the first system will never look like the last system that is implemented. When they started the project the focus was just to start building stuff and figuring out what they need from there and then they can get an idea of what they need to work towards.
[Will Item system 2.0 finally allow us to lock our spaceships?] It does allow for that functionality to happen, but there's a little more involved to make that happen such as having a security system implemented to verify whose allowed in or not and the different ways to authorize people to have access to the interaction panel to get through said door.
This is a sneak peek of the revamp for the ship stats page and give you a better idea of what the ship is capable of.
Their goal is to keep the stats page up to date anytime there are changes to the ship that affect the page itself.
They've been talking about hypothetical scenario's with Item 2.0 being implemented such as diverting power from weapons to engines to allow you to escape an encounter or how fighting a ship now will be different because ships are mostly stock in game, whereas in 3.0 and beyond people will be able to kit out their ships in ways that can drastically change the characteristics.
[With Item 2.0 allowing us to hit buttons to access the various systems, will there be shortcut keys to the systems?] Yes and no. Interaction will be done mainly through the onscreen systems, but there will be some keys you can press to swap pages or focus on a certain element.
[What will gameplay be like with the new interaction with systems compared to now?] Well before things were either on or off and with Multi-crew ships there wasn't anything one could do except be in a turret really. Now players will be able to have a co-pilot that can manage power to shields or where to direct the focus of the shield if getting hit from a certain direction. Then there's the whole scenario of components getting damaged and having to repair them in a multi-crew ship to keep yourself alive in the fight or from the elements.
With the current system a connie can have four people inside, and 4 times the amount of enemies spawn, but those four players can't fully utilize the connie to its full potential and so the connie can't be all that it can be.
[Will we see the return of an indepth power system management] Yes
[Will all ships be converted to item system 2.0 for 3.0?] Yes, they have to be. There's no way to have the old and new system ingame at the same time so it's a big effort.
[What is the Room system?] It's a generic way for designers to layout volumes to designate areas. It's a way to simplify things for designers gameplay wise. An example is atmosphere and what rooms have it and what happens when you open a door to another room, does it have atmosphere too? If not what happens? etc.
The hangar is having work done on it to make it expandable with the room system tech, but it's not high on the priority list at the moment.
They're talking about the stamina system and how it's not static in what your character is capable of, but what your environment allows. So it works on the oxygen in your blood and some planets may allow you to run farther or perhaps not run as far because the atmosphere is thin. The system doesn't just support oxygen, but also other gases.
[Are there incompatibilities planned between components for item 2.0?] The first iteration won't have those because they're getting the system online and want to make it sure functions correctly, but they'll put some restrictions down the line and look at the components and how they're used and see if it's within the boundaries they want to see.
[Will replacing a damaged shield module bring a shield down or is their a redundancy?] That depends on the ship, but that won't be something you'll encounter now as live swapping won't be in the first iteration.
[In Item 2.0 how will stackable and variable items be handled] That's been handled by another developer, but they're not sure how much they can talk about it, but Kirk says they are working on a system to have stackable items in containers and etc.
"What we are doing is taking the Lumberyard engine from being a purely entity driven engine to being a componentized system, meaning you can share components between different items or entities so you don’t have to write bespoke code for every single entity."
Some updated info on the Power Triad for 3.0, Engines/Shields/Weapons:
CIG Calix Reneau@CIGCalixReneau Today at 08:41 am
Allocating power to shields increases max shield health and regen rate.
Allocating power to engines increases acceleration.
Allocating power to weapons increases rate of fire and reload time.
Power allocation is generally a compromise between system performance and heat. Full damage output can only be achieved at the cost of shield health and maneuverability, etc.
Shield damage mitigation is directly related to shield face health, so strong power and shield management can have very potent effect on combat. This is available to single seaters, but the level of attention it can require means that multi-crew is where you'll see the most benefit from this.
When presented with a scenario of a multi-crew ship going in a straight line and thus diverting power to only shields and weapons after reaching top speed:
All of the ships are currently operating at 100% engine power, 100% shield power, and 100% weapon power. This will no longer be possible without significant overclocking, which will have the heat and wear & tear consequences you've described. Overclocking is not expected to be in this first release, but shouldn't be too exceptionally hard to add after.
So, you will indeed be able to push power to bring engines to 100%, which will bring you up to top speed as expected, but you had to drop weapons and shields to 15% to do it (for example). Your shields use power to maintain shield health, so your shields quickly drop to 15% health, which is better than nothing, but only just. So now you are at top speed, and you no longer need power assigned to engines. Great, now you can allocate it again, probably bringing shields to 100% as a direct trade. Shields require twice additional power to charge health, and even then it takes time to do so. But you have time, so you are now at 100% shield health and top speed. Feels good.
And if your only goal is flying in a straight line then you're in for some smooth sailing - you don't need to maneuver. As soon as that is no longer the case, such as arriving at you're destination, you'll want to allocate again, otherwise it will take 7x longer than normal to come to a stop. You could do it faster than that, but only by sacrificing shield health or weapons ready - at some power level, systems begin to shut down completely, after which they must go through a startup sequence before they can be used again. None of this accounts for the possibility of combat, which complicates things further.
As for top speed, if it scaled with engine power it would take the same amount of time to get to top speed, just a different top speed. This means it also takes the same amount of time to come to a stop, so you have exactly the same maneuverability at any power level. Additionally, power level is a powerful tool for stealth, as low power items produce less EM and IR signals.
So this explains the most fundamental change to ships when IS 2.0 is fully implemented, the current default of 100% engine/shield/weapon power will no longer be possible.
This adds one interesting layer of gameplay, if there might be some degree of "Moonwalking" and how will they deal with it on the animation front, if new animations or ways to slow them down.
Whenever i see a video it looks like some amateur studio tossing out some updated Asteroids advert. If all i have to look forward to is empty land mass with generated textures and ugly boring space zones with stars and rock chunks to look forward to,i would fall asleep at the keyboard.
This team is going to have to step it up 500% to show me something that looks like something exciting to play.So far it is boring eye candy or a lack of eye candy and boring camera's behind ships,like what is this game going to give us after 3/4/5 years?
To me the analogy is like a donut.Take a plain round donut and add some real yummy cream filling ,it can turn boring into yummy,however it is like SC is taking that same round boring donut and adding boring icing sugar on top,it still ends up boring to look at ,boring to eat,so yeah boring.
Never forget 3 mile Island and never trust a government official or company spokesman.
The main CIG Engineer who develops PG clarifies questions about Earth-like planets and gravity:
Hi all, regarding questions about earht-like planets and animations: the planet tech is exactly the same (system) used for planets and moons, in fact from the tech point of view they are exactly the same, there isn't any difference. They differ in some of the base parameters (size, gravity for instance...) and of course ecosystem distribution and procedural objects distribution; moons have moons-like rocks scattering, surfaces and effects shown in the recent ATVs, earth-like planets will have procedural distribution of trees, vegetation etc. Arccorp will have scattered buildings and so on...
About the animations: for the firt 3.0 release, the gravity on moons is set lower than on earth-like planets, just enough that you would feel a difference when walking, driving vehicles, jumping off slopes etc. but not too low, because as somone already mentioned, it would otherwise require a new set of "low-gravity" animations. I think this might probably be looked into by the animation team after the initial 3.0 release.
Spectrum 0.3.5 has released with a bunch of improvements and optimization to its functionality and forum speed, more possible to customize how you want stuff to be displayed as you browse it.
You have a reputation with the NPC itself that falls on: > Failing or succeeding the missions it gives you. > Choosing to take on a mission in a way that is not what he asked you (say return a stolen piece of cargo to the client instead of him). > Your player reputation determines you getting lawful or unlawful missions from him. > "Last Chance" showing you can grow negative rep to one point the NPC won't talk to you anymore.
The NPC is also neutral, it can go both ways, hence it might try to propose unlawful players lawful missions and vice-versa.
"Mission completed by someone else", this interesting bit if the NPC might be giving unique missions to players, or missions that if a player takes too long another one will be able to get the same mission or it simply expires after a while.
Missions that were able to be seen on the translated dialog:
Breakout. Rescue a criminal from a security post. (UNLAWFUL. A security post.)
Breakout (UNLAWFUL. A prison [hard].)
Investigate. Could be sent to dangerous locations. Information is collected. (LAWFUL)
Bounty (LAWFUL. Kill criminal)
Contract (UNLAWFUL. Kill innocent or rival criminal)
Recover (LAWFUL. Recover stolen cargo guarded by criminals.)
Steal (UNLAWFUL)
The breakout mission, they may do stuff like some prison station in space/planet players need to breach into and the NPC rescue actually has to physically reach X location while you defend. I guess missions will grow in variety and complexity as more mechanics get in place.
The whole pass in skinning now shows the improvement in how the body deforms to fit animation better, one of the main issues with realistic animations is how much clipping of clothing/armor through the body is going on (as we know so well from playing MMO's),
"Those SERIALIZED_METADATA_BEGIN/SERIALIZED_METADATA_MEMBERVAR/SERIALIZED_METADATA_END macros are actually how we extend the serialization system. For example, a variable for a 3D co-ordinate may be made from a C++ class called Vec3, which stores 3 values, x, y and z. To allow our system to recognize Vec3 we only need to add a block of macros like this...
This creates the "meta data" for the Vec3 class. We only need to create the meta data for Vec3 once and we can then use that class with as many serialized variables as we want. Meta data can also be used inside the meta data for other C++ classes, so using these macros we can very easily extend our serialization system to handle new C++ classes that it has never seen before.
As night55 said, the variables themselves are a runtime object built from a templated wrapper around the class you want to serialize. So, let's say we want our entity to have a member variable, which also happens to be a serialized variable, that stores its position. We want the variable to use the Vec3 class, because it's already choc-full of all the 3D co-ordinate goodness we need. In C++ adding the new variable looks like this:
CSerializedVariable position;
The only other thing we need to do is register this variable with the entity it belongs to. Registration is also when we say whether a serialized variable is networked, persistent, part of save game data, or any combination of those three.
Coherency and volatility go hand-in-hand. What we want to avoid is updating only some of the variables on an entity. That could lead to situations where the replica of an entity on a client has some combination of values in its variables that never actually existed on the server. That way lies desync madness. Instead for any single entity we will either, send all of its previously unsent changes (latest values only), or send nothing at all. This is the eventual consistency guarantee often discussed when networking real-time interactive systems. Eventual consistency buys us a lot of flexibility, and allows the netcode to choose exactly when, and how often, it wants to send updates for each individual entity. We're yet to take advantage of this fully, but it's definitely on the schedule.
You have a reputation with the NPC itself that falls on: > Failing or succeeding the missions it gives you. > Choosing to take on a mission in a way that is not what he asked you (say return a stolen piece of cargo to the client instead of him). > Your player reputation determines you getting lawful or unlawful missions from him. > "Last Chance" showing you can grow negative rep to one point the NPC won't talk to you anymore.
The NPC is also neutral, it can go both ways, hence it might try to propose unlawful players lawful missions and vice-versa.
"Mission completed by someone else", this interesting bit if the NPC might be giving unique missions to players, or missions that if a player takes too long another one will be able to get the same mission or it simply expires after a while.
Missions that were able to be seen on the translated dialog:
Breakout. Rescue a criminal from a security post. (UNLAWFUL. A security post.)
Breakout (UNLAWFUL. A prison [hard].)
Investigate. Could be sent to dangerous locations. Information is collected. (LAWFUL)
Bounty (LAWFUL. Kill criminal)
Contract (UNLAWFUL. Kill innocent or rival criminal)
Recover (LAWFUL. Recover stolen cargo guarded by criminals.)
Steal (UNLAWFUL)
The breakout mission, they may do stuff like some prison station in space/planet players need to breach into and the NPC rescue actually has to physically reach X location while you defend. I guess missions will grow in variety and complexity as more mechanics get in place.
So they use behaviour trees at the moment until their subsumption is ready?
When you have cake, it is not the cake that creates the most magnificent of experiences, but it is the emotions attached to it. The cake is a lie.
So they use behaviour trees at the moment until their subsumption is ready?
It's hard to tell, the 3.0 schedule claims the branch has already completed: "Subsumption Base Functionality - This is the initial release of the foundation technology that drives all of the AI, mission, dynamic content, and conversation logic. The mission content previously created with FlowGraph has been replaced and the implementation time to achieve a desired effect has been cut dramatically."
I think 3.0 is a static implementation of AI from what they said, but seems it already lies on what they call basic subsumption.
Nah, height is going to be limited, on one side it's too much animation to even make it viable.... in the other from their discussion they hint hairy space people that's not going to happen and if it does is future stuff. In the future, everyone shaves.
We will be dressed up anyway, I think they already have enough headaches to work through with hair + 0g + physics.
So they use behaviour trees at the moment until their subsumption is ready?
The last ATV confirmed this in this bit. The entire setup is under subsumption.
The way the missions seem to be tagged with the npc name under subsumption, I guess they can then spawn and de-spawn missions impacting the missions available at one time.
Comments
I can only superficially think of what GW2 did when it had to, overflow servers until it managed to merge the players again with the main instance.
But overall this indeed is one base core of the Life is Feudal MMO,
Its gameworld is handled by 49 different servers, once you approach borders you still see the things on the other side, players and so, and seamlessly move in-between. So that core compartmentalization of a single game world for SC is possible, but they will have to work on the edge cases.
Summary
[What is Item system 2.0?] Item 2.0 has been thrown around as the fix for everything, but what item 2.0 is not an entity, but the technology that is coming up. What exists now is this very static logic block that does its job pretty well, but when you try to do additional things with that logic block that it wasn't designed for, it doesn't go very well. So Item 2.0 takes away the logic from those blocks and allows you to manipulate those blocks in a way that you can seperate different entities to be able to individually customize those. So instead of a ship being either On or Off when you board it, now you can sit in the cockpit and sit just there, instead of having it automatically turn on, or you could turn on just radar or etc.
[Why didn't you just make Item system 2.0 in the first place?] CryEngine didn't have the systems that they have now and scaling was something that played a bit part to where you don't know the limits until you hit them. Iteration is something that happens many times during game development to where the first system will never look like the last system that is implemented. When they started the project the focus was just to start building stuff and figuring out what they need from there and then they can get an idea of what they need to work towards.
[Will Item system 2.0 finally allow us to lock our spaceships?] It does allow for that functionality to happen, but there's a little more involved to make that happen such as having a security system implemented to verify whose allowed in or not and the different ways to authorize people to have access to the interaction panel to get through said door.
They've been talking about hypothetical scenario's with Item 2.0 being implemented such as diverting power from weapons to engines to allow you to escape an encounter or how fighting a ship now will be different because ships are mostly stock in game, whereas in 3.0 and beyond people will be able to kit out their ships in ways that can drastically change the characteristics.
[With Item 2.0 allowing us to hit buttons to access the various systems, will there be shortcut keys to the systems?] Yes and no. Interaction will be done mainly through the onscreen systems, but there will be some keys you can press to swap pages or focus on a certain element.
[What will gameplay be like with the new interaction with systems compared to now?] Well before things were either on or off and with Multi-crew ships there wasn't anything one could do except be in a turret really. Now players will be able to have a co-pilot that can manage power to shields or where to direct the focus of the shield if getting hit from a certain direction. Then there's the whole scenario of components getting damaged and having to repair them in a multi-crew ship to keep yourself alive in the fight or from the elements.
[Will we see the return of an indepth power system management] Yes
[Will all ships be converted to item system 2.0 for 3.0?] Yes, they have to be. There's no way to have the old and new system ingame at the same time so it's a big effort.
[What is the Room system?] It's a generic way for designers to layout volumes to designate areas. It's a way to simplify things for designers gameplay wise. An example is atmosphere and what rooms have it and what happens when you open a door to another room, does it have atmosphere too? If not what happens? etc.
They're talking about the stamina system and how it's not static in what your character is capable of, but what your environment allows. So it works on the oxygen in your blood and some planets may allow you to run farther or perhaps not run as far because the atmosphere is thin. The system doesn't just support oxygen, but also other gases.
[Are there incompatibilities planned between components for item 2.0?] The first iteration won't have those because they're getting the system online and want to make it sure functions correctly, but they'll put some restrictions down the line and look at the components and how they're used and see if it's within the boundaries they want to see.
[Will replacing a damaged shield module bring a shield down or is their a redundancy?] That depends on the ship, but that won't be something you'll encounter now as live swapping won't be in the first iteration.
"What we are doing is taking the Lumberyard engine from being a purely entity driven engine to being a componentized system, meaning you can share components between different items or entities so you don’t have to write bespoke code for every single entity."
CIG Calix Reneau@CIGCalixReneau Today at 08:41 am
Allocating power to shields increases max shield health and regen rate.
Allocating power to engines increases acceleration.
Allocating power to weapons increases rate of fire and reload time.
Power allocation is generally a compromise between system performance and heat. Full damage output can only be achieved at the cost of shield health and maneuverability, etc.
Shield damage mitigation is directly related to shield face health, so strong power and shield management can have very potent effect on combat. This is available to single seaters, but the level of attention it can require means that multi-crew is where you'll see the most benefit from this.
When presented with a scenario of a multi-crew ship going in a straight line and thus diverting power to only shields and weapons after reaching top speed:
All of the ships are currently operating at 100% engine power, 100% shield power, and 100% weapon power. This will no longer be possible without significant overclocking, which will have the heat and wear & tear consequences you've described. Overclocking is not expected to be in this first release, but shouldn't be too exceptionally hard to add after.
So, you will indeed be able to push power to bring engines to 100%, which will bring you up to top speed as expected, but you had to drop weapons and shields to 15% to do it (for example). Your shields use power to maintain shield health, so your shields quickly drop to 15% health, which is better than nothing, but only just. So now you are at top speed, and you no longer need power assigned to engines. Great, now you can allocate it again, probably bringing shields to 100% as a direct trade. Shields require twice additional power to charge health, and even then it takes time to do so. But you have time, so you are now at 100% shield health and top speed. Feels good.
And if your only goal is flying in a straight line then you're in for some smooth sailing - you don't need to maneuver. As soon as that is no longer the case, such as arriving at you're destination, you'll want to allocate again, otherwise it will take 7x longer than normal to come to a stop. You could do it faster than that, but only by sacrificing shield health or weapons ready - at some power level, systems begin to shut down completely, after which they must go through a startup sequence before they can be used again. None of this accounts for the possibility of combat, which complicates things further.
As for top speed, if it scaled with engine power it would take the same amount of time to get to top speed, just a different top speed. This means it also takes the same amount of time to come to a stop, so you have exactly the same maneuverability at any power level. Additionally, power level is a powerful tool for stealth, as low power items produce less EM and IR signals.
So this explains the most fundamental change to ships when IS 2.0 is fully implemented, the current default of 100% engine/shield/weapon power will no longer be possible.
https://robertsspaceindustries.com/spectrum/community/SC/forum/50259/thread/in-3-0-what-will-be-the-gravity-and-atmosphere-den
This adds one interesting layer of gameplay, if there might be some degree of "Moonwalking" and how will they deal with it on the animation front, if new animations or ways to slow them down.
If all i have to look forward to is empty land mass with generated textures and ugly boring space zones with stars and rock chunks to look forward to,i would fall asleep at the keyboard.
This team is going to have to step it up 500% to show me something that looks like something exciting to play.So far it is boring eye candy or a lack of eye candy and boring camera's behind ships,like what is this game going to give us after 3/4/5 years?
To me the analogy is like a donut.Take a plain round donut and add some real yummy cream filling ,it can turn boring into yummy,however it is like SC is taking that same round boring donut and adding boring icing sugar on top,it still ends up boring to look at ,boring to eat,so yeah boring.
Never forget 3 mile Island and never trust a government official or company spokesman.
https://robertsspaceindustries.com/spectrum/community/SC/forum/50259/thread/in-3-0-what-will-be-the-gravity-and-atmosphere-den/235337
So when it gets to gravity set low enough for moonwalking in 3.0 won't be a thing due to the need for a new animation set to fit such specific need.
https://robertsspaceindustries.com/comm-link/transmission/15951-Monthly-Studio-Report-May-2017
Spectrum 0.3.5 has released with a bunch of improvements and optimization to its functionality and forum speed, more possible to customize how you want stuff to be displayed as you browse it.
https://robertsspaceindustries.com/spectrum/community/SC/forum/1/thread/spectrum-0-3-5-release-notes
Concept & ATV footage:
https://www.reddit.com/r/starcitizen/comments/6hj7bc/miles_eckhart_pu_voice_lines/
Relevant bits:
> Failing or succeeding the missions it gives you.
> Choosing to take on a mission in a way that is not what he asked you (say return a stolen piece of cargo to the client instead of him).
> Your player reputation determines you getting lawful or unlawful missions from him.
> "Last Chance" showing you can grow negative rep to one point the NPC won't talk to you anymore.
Missions that were able to be seen on the translated dialog:
The breakout mission, they may do stuff like some prison station in space/planet players need to breach into and the NPC rescue actually has to physically reach X location while you defend. I guess missions will grow in variety and complexity as more mechanics get in place.
https://gfycat.com/QuarrelsomeJoyousHadrosaurus
Females & Hair:
- The female model can have long hair.
- They are working on how helmets will work with long hair.
- Research to happen so hair will be weighted for physics too, zero g, ragdoll.
- There will be dresses.
- They have worked on beards for in game.
- They are looking forward to show off the improved Bishop Speech.
- They haven’t worked on other body hair
Other bits:When you have cake, it is not the cake that creates the most magnificent of experiences, but it is the emotions attached to it.
The cake is a lie.
I think 3.0 is a static implementation of AI from what they said, but seems it already lies on what they call basic subsumption.
You stay sassy!
We will be dressed up anyway, I think they already have enough headaches to work through with hair + 0g + physics.
The way the missions seem to be tagged with the npc name under subsumption, I guess they can then spawn and de-spawn missions impacting the missions available at one time.
Take a photo of the monitor for true 4K HD resolution.
Loved those engine trails and the reworked cutlass.