Maybe they were offered a sinful amount of money and got the chance to have the established industry leaders (Blizzard, Wargaming) on their CV ? ....
Have fun
And maybe they saw how disorganized the management and process was at CIG, and got their resumes out to find a better landing spot. And happily jumped ship.
My 'maybe' is based on talking to Origin employees who worked with Roberts. Yours?
If you are holding out for the perfect game, the only game you play will be the waiting one.
Maybe they were offered a sinful amount of money and got the chance to have the established industry leaders (Blizzard, Wargaming) on their CV ? ....
Have fun
And maybe they saw how disorganized the management and process was at CIG, and got their resumes out to find a better landing spot. And happily jumped ship.
My 'maybe' is based on talking to Origin employees who worked with Roberts. Yours?
Mine is based on what those people themselves said when they left.
Have fun
PS: I think we are getting more and more off topic here.
Maybe they were offered a sinful amount of money and got the chance to have the established industry leaders (Blizzard, Wargaming) on their CV ? ....
Have fun
And maybe they saw how disorganized the management and process was at CIG, and got their resumes out to find a better landing spot. And happily jumped ship.
My 'maybe' is based on talking to Origin employees who worked with Roberts. Yours?
Mine is based on what those people themselves said when they left.
Have fun
PS: I think we are getting more and more off topic here.
Because everyone who leaves a company says everything they really feel about the circumstances quite publicly.....
That said, the new guy they picked up, Dennis Crow, may help the development. Couldn't hurt much. He's got skins on the wall for sure.
As far as the development claims go, I am skeptical of any reports until it is verifiable by the folks on the test servers. I'm just not going to pipe in about that every day.
If you are holding out for the perfect game, the only game you play will be the waiting one.
really great AtV today. loved the Burn Down section and it's good to see that rotations and orbits are definitely in and the small snippets we saw of QA moonside were dope af. the MobiGlas section i really loved as well, it's great to see such attention going into the UI and making it contextual. the only thing that it needs to make me happy would be for your finger to actually select when you point the mouse at, you know for that extra immersion and the diegetic connection enhancement!
"Cherish the quiet...before my STORM!" For a $5/5000 in-game credit bonus for backing Star Citizen (MMO) or Squadron 42 (Single Player/Co-op) use my Referral code: STAR-3QDY-SZBG
Good video. Thanks for posting. I would still like to know what's going on with ships and what's being planned for the conventions. Also a mention on S42.
Questions. 3.0 is what percentage of alpha completion? When do people estimate beta will start?
"We all do the best we can based on life experience, point of view, and our ability to believe in ourselves." - Naropa "We don't see things as they are, we see them as we are." SR Covey
Good video. Thanks for posting. I would still like to know what's going on with ships and what's being planned for the conventions. Also a mention on S42.
Questions. 3.0 is what percentage of alpha completion? When do people estimate beta will start?
If your not paying attention to Chris Roberts and just watching the schedule report, they are looking at around mid/end of September/beginning of October for public a3.0 release.
A 'solid' play version of alpha 3.0 should be at the end of 2017(this year), Squadron 42 release/Star Citizen beta at the end of 2019 and full Star Citizen release in 2020. Yep, we're most of the way there, still got some to go.
Every time Goonsquad/SA/DS post salt on Star Citizen, I spend more money on it. Every time a mentally disturbed former backer or Elite CMDR toxic emo comments, I spend more money on it. Every time they refuse to answer why they spend so much time arguing about a game they don't even like, I spend more money on it. Want to watch the world burn because you can't have your way? You got whats coming to you.
Good video. Thanks for posting. I would still like to know what's going on with ships and what's being planned for the conventions. Also a mention on S42.
Questions. 3.0 is what percentage of alpha completion? When do people estimate beta will start?
no problem. we will find out more next week on ships i would assume when they send out an announcement.
as far as 3.0 if i had to guess i would say that 3.0 is one third of the final game as far as tech, then 4.o will be another third, then finally just filling out all the remaining content will be the other third. but the 3.0 seems to be the heaviest time wise as it's the most tech heavy. 4.0 and beta/release just build on it's foundation.
"Cherish the quiet...before my STORM!" For a $5/5000 in-game credit bonus for backing Star Citizen (MMO) or Squadron 42 (Single Player/Co-op) use my Referral code: STAR-3QDY-SZBG
Good video. Thanks for posting. I would still like to know what's going on with ships and what's being planned for the conventions. Also a mention on S42.
Questions. 3.0 is what percentage of alpha completion? When do people estimate beta will start?
If your not paying attention to Chris Roberts and just watching the schedule report, they are looking at around mid/end of September/beginning of October for public a3.0 release.
A 'solid' play version of alpha 3.0 should be at the end of 2017(this year), Squadron 42 release/Star Citizen beta at the end of 2019 and full Star Citizen release in 2020. Yep, we're most of the way there, still got some to go.
Can you imagine getting the recommended 90 fps from Star Citizen?
While the UI might have been built with VR in mind, what about all the other no no's? Loss of character control, forced camera movements, bobbing etc.
Given that the human eye usually cannot see a meaningful difference beyond 24 fps (maybe 40 fps for extreme lateral movement), i do not see a need for 90 fps. 24 Hz is movie industry standard for a reason.
Can you imagine getting the recommended 90 fps from Star Citizen?
While the UI might have been built with VR in mind, what about all the other no no's? Loss of character control, forced camera movements, bobbing etc.
Given that the human eye usually cannot see a meaningful difference beyond 24 fps (maybe 40 fps for extreme lateral movement), i do not see a need for 90 fps. 24 Hz is movie industry standard for a reason.
Can you imagine getting the recommended 90 fps from Star Citizen?
While the UI might have been built with VR in mind, what about all the other no no's? Loss of character control, forced camera movements, bobbing etc.
Given that the human eye usually cannot see a meaningful difference beyond 24 fps (maybe 40 fps for extreme lateral movement), i do not see a need for 90 fps. 24 Hz is movie industry standard for a reason.
Everything must also be rendered twice (once for each eye) which is why most VR games... look the way they do.
"The simple is the seal of the true and beauty is the splendor of truth" -Subrahmanyan Chandrasekhar Authored 139 missions in VendettaOnline and 6 tracks in Distance
Can you imagine getting the recommended 90 fps from Star Citizen?
While the UI might have been built with VR in mind, what about all the other no no's? Loss of character control, forced camera movements, bobbing etc.
Given that the human eye usually cannot see a meaningful difference beyond 24 fps (maybe 40 fps for extreme lateral movement), i do not see a need for 90 fps. 24 Hz is movie industry standard for a reason.
That article doesn't say what you think it does. From the article:
“I think typically, once you get up above 200 fps it just looks like regular, real-life motion,” DeLong says. But in more regular terms he feels that the drop-off in people being able to detect changes in smoothness in a screen lies at around 90Hz. “Sure, aficionados might be able to tell teeny tiny differences, but for the rest of us it’s like red wine is red wine.”
Can you imagine getting the recommended 90 fps from Star Citizen?
While the UI might have been built with VR in mind, what about all the other no no's? Loss of character control, forced camera movements, bobbing etc.
Given that the human eye usually cannot see a meaningful difference beyond 24 fps (maybe 40 fps for extreme lateral movement), i do not see a need for 90 fps. 24 Hz is movie industry standard for a reason.
No, please, not this. Please, don't bring up this dead hoax.
If you have newer, relevant information - feel free to share.
If the information is in peer-reviewed scientific papers, even better.
If you have information that this article was a hoax article - i would be glad to hear it.
Have fun
In addition, there's another article I was able to find that supports the idea that, in modern displays, we can notice flicker artifacts at up to 500Hz.
Can you imagine getting the recommended 90 fps from Star Citizen?
While the UI might have been built with VR in mind, what about all the other no no's? Loss of character control, forced camera movements, bobbing etc.
Given that the human eye usually cannot see a meaningful difference beyond 24 fps (maybe 40 fps for extreme lateral movement), i do not see a need for 90 fps. 24 Hz is movie industry standard for a reason.
That article doesn't say what you think it does. From the article:
“I think typically, once you get up above 200 fps it just looks like regular, real-life motion,” DeLong says. But in more regular terms he feels that the drop-off in people being able to detect changes in smoothness in a screen lies at around 90Hz. “Sure, aficionados might be able to tell teeny tiny differences, but for the rest of us it’s like red wine is red wine.”
And if you continue to read the article you will see much more than that quote. Especially a discussion on the 24 Hz issue.
Even the NEXT sentence after the part you quoted reads: >>> "....Chopin looks at the subject very differently. “It’s clear from the
literature that you cannot see anything more than 20 Hz,” he tells me.
And while I admit I initially snorted into my coffee, his argument soon
began to make a lot more sense...." >>>>
You picked a small part out of a long article, which is not representative for the rest of the text.
Incidently i was sure beforehand that some people will pick EXACTLY that quote to reenforce their point. So predictable ;-)
Sandi (to Chris): "we're going to have to take another look at those benchmarks"
"The simple is the seal of the true and beauty is the splendor of truth" -Subrahmanyan Chandrasekhar Authored 139 missions in VendettaOnline and 6 tracks in Distance
Can you imagine getting the recommended 90 fps from Star Citizen?
While the UI might have been built with VR in mind, what about all the other no no's? Loss of character control, forced camera movements, bobbing etc.
Given that the human eye usually cannot see a meaningful difference beyond 24 fps (maybe 40 fps for extreme lateral movement), i do not see a need for 90 fps. 24 Hz is movie industry standard for a reason.
No, please, not this. Please, don't bring up this dead hoax.
If you have newer, relevant information - feel free to share.
If the information is in peer-reviewed scientific papers, even better.
If you have information that this article was a hoax article - i would be glad to hear it.
Have fun
In addition, there's another article I was able to find that supports the idea that, in modern displays, we can notice flicker artifacts at up to 500Hz.
As the definition improves, so does our ability to perceive changes in refresh rates.
Which is mentioned in the PC Gamer article
>>> .... But while we have trouble distinguishing the intensity of flashes of
light less than 10ms, we can perceive incredibly quick motion artefacts.
“They have to be very specific and special, but you could see an
artefact at 500 fps if you wanted to,” DeLong tells me. ... " >>>>
The key seems to me to be the difference in experience and effectiveness
>>>>"....The important thing here is that Chopin is talking about the brain
acquiring visual information which it can process and on which it can
act. He’s not saying that we can’t notice a difference between 20 Hz and
60 Hz footage. “Just because you can see the difference, it doesn’t mean you can be better in the game,”
he says. “After 24 Hz you won’t get better, but you may have some
phenomenological experience that is different.” There’s a difference,
therefore, between effectiveness and experience...." >>>>
>>> "....This article is about what framerates the human eye can perceive. The elephant in the room: how fast can we react to what we see? It's an important distinction between games and film worthy of another whole article.
So why can games feel distinctly different at 30 and 60 fps? There's more going on than framerate. Input lagis
the amount of time that elapses between inputting a command, that
command being interpreted by the game and transmitted to the monitor,
and the monitor processing and rendering the image. Too much input lag
will make any game feel sluggish, regardless of the LCD's refresh rate.
But
a game programmed to run at 60 fps can potentially display your inputs
more quickly, because the frames are narrower slices of time (16.6 ms)
compared to 30 fps (33.3 ms). Human response time definitely isn't that
fast, but our ability to learn and predict can make our responses seem much faster...." >>>>
Can you imagine getting the recommended 90 fps from Star Citizen?
While the UI might have been built with VR in mind, what about all the other no no's? Loss of character control, forced camera movements, bobbing etc.
Given that the human eye usually cannot see a meaningful difference beyond 24 fps (maybe 40 fps for extreme lateral movement), i do not see a need for 90 fps. 24 Hz is movie industry standard for a reason.
That article doesn't say what you think it does. From the article:
“I think typically, once you get up above 200 fps it just looks like regular, real-life motion,” DeLong says. But in more regular terms he feels that the drop-off in people being able to detect changes in smoothness in a screen lies at around 90Hz. “Sure, aficionados might be able to tell teeny tiny differences, but for the rest of us it’s like red wine is red wine.”
Most people think that high frame rates only affect visuals but the main reason why players enjoy higher frame rates is the reduced input lag that makes games feel more responsive. No wonder we choose higher frame rates than our monitor can actually display. Espacially in online multiplayer games it is crucial to avoid low frame rates and occasional FPS drops that might result noticable input lag. Players with better network connection and higher frame rates have a clear advantage over the ones that suffer from these performance issues.
Well the game's UI is VR friendly, as they do project it in 3D space, that gives it the advantage of not having to do major stuff with the UI just for the sakes of support VR.
The rest is heavy on performance and a toned down first person experience, but I also think it's smart to wait up, the VR technology evolves quickly and see what's up then. I think there are things of more benefit to bring in first, like DX12/Vulkan.
Comments
My 'maybe' is based on talking to Origin employees who worked with Roberts. Yours?
If you are holding out for the perfect game, the only game you play will be the waiting one.
Have fun
PS:
I think we are getting more and more off topic here.
That said, the new guy they picked up, Dennis Crow, may help the development. Couldn't hurt much. He's got skins on the wall for sure.
As far as the development claims go, I am skeptical of any reports until it is verifiable by the folks on the test servers. I'm just not going to pipe in about that every day.
If you are holding out for the perfect game, the only game you play will be the waiting one.
Star Citizen Render to Texture Tech for Holographic Projections
Looks cool IMHO. Looks very much like a Squadron 42 scene to me.
Have fun
Texture Tech for Holographic Projections"
lmao seriousl?really great AtV today. loved the Burn Down section and it's good to see that rotations and orbits are definitely in and the small snippets we saw of QA moonside were dope af. the MobiGlas section i really loved as well, it's great to see such attention going into the UI and making it contextual. the only thing that it needs to make me happy would be for your finger to actually select when you point the mouse at, you know for that extra immersion and the diegetic connection enhancement!
"Cherish the quiet...before my STORM!"
For a $5/5000 in-game credit bonus for backing Star Citizen (MMO) or Squadron 42 (Single Player/Co-op) use my Referral code: STAR-3QDY-SZBG
Gonna take a while.
Questions. 3.0 is what percentage of alpha completion? When do people estimate beta will start?
"We all do the best we can based on life experience, point of view, and our ability to believe in ourselves." - Naropa "We don't see things as they are, we see them as we are." SR Covey
A 'solid' play version of alpha 3.0 should be at the end of 2017(this year), Squadron 42 release/Star Citizen beta at the end of 2019 and full Star Citizen release in 2020. Yep, we're most of the way there, still got some to go.
as far as 3.0 if i had to guess i would say that 3.0 is one third of the final game as far as tech, then 4.o will be another third, then finally just filling out all the remaining content will be the other third. but the 3.0 seems to be the heaviest time wise as it's the most tech heavy. 4.0 and beta/release just build on it's foundation.
no problem.
"Cherish the quiet...before my STORM!"
For a $5/5000 in-game credit bonus for backing Star Citizen (MMO) or Squadron 42 (Single Player/Co-op) use my Referral code: STAR-3QDY-SZBG
Not anymore they're not.
Have fun
https://www.oneangrygamer.net/2017/08/star-citizens-star-map-will-be-the-in-game-equivalent-of-google-maps/37037/
Confirmation of VR:
https://www.roadtovr.com/star-citizen-vr-support-virtual-reality-oculus-rift-htc-vive/
Latest RSI newsletter:
http://mailchi.mp/cloudimperiumgames/meet-the-defender-of-the-banu-140469?e=1218cbe29f
... with sneak peak from Levski:
Viking
While the UI might have been built with VR in mind, what about all the other no no's? Loss of character control, forced camera movements, bobbing etc.
http://www.pcgamer.com/how-many-frames-per-second-can-the-human-eye-really-see/
Have fun
If the information is in peer-reviewed scientific papers, even better.
If you have information that this article was a hoax article - i would be glad to hear it.
Have fun
For VR, 75 fps minimum is recommended to avoid simulator sickness.
https://tinyurl.com/y96d3w4s (Oculus best practices pdf)
Everything must also be rendered twice (once for each eye) which is why most VR games... look the way they do.
"The simple is the seal of the true and beauty is the splendor of truth" -Subrahmanyan Chandrasekhar
Authored 139 missions in Vendetta Online and 6 tracks in Distance
“I think typically, once you get up above 200 fps it just looks like regular, real-life motion,” DeLong says. But in more regular terms he feels that the drop-off in people being able to detect changes in smoothness in a screen lies at around 90Hz. “Sure, aficionados might be able to tell teeny tiny differences, but for the rest of us it’s like red wine is red wine.”
https://www.nature.com/articles/srep07861
As the definition improves, so does our ability to perceive changes in refresh rates.
Especially a discussion on the 24 Hz issue.
Even the NEXT sentence after the part you quoted reads:
>>> "....Chopin looks at the subject very differently. “It’s clear from the literature that you cannot see anything more than 20 Hz,” he tells me. And while I admit I initially snorted into my coffee, his argument soon began to make a lot more sense...." >>>>
You picked a small part out of a long article, which is not representative for the rest of the text.
Incidently i was sure beforehand that some people will pick EXACTLY that quote to reenforce their point. So predictable ;-)
Have fun
Sandi (to Chris): "we're going to have to take another look at those benchmarks"
"The simple is the seal of the true and beauty is the splendor of truth" -Subrahmanyan Chandrasekhar
Authored 139 missions in Vendetta Online and 6 tracks in Distance
>>> .... But while we have trouble distinguishing the intensity of flashes of light less than 10ms, we can perceive incredibly quick motion artefacts. “They have to be very specific and special, but you could see an artefact at 500 fps if you wanted to,” DeLong tells me. ... " >>>>
The key seems to me to be the difference in experience and effectiveness
>>>>"....The important thing here is that Chopin is talking about the brain acquiring visual information which it can process and on which it can act. He’s not saying that we can’t notice a difference between 20 Hz and 60 Hz footage. “Just because you can see the difference, it doesn’t mean you can be better in the game,” he says. “After 24 Hz you won’t get better, but you may have some phenomenological experience that is different.” There’s a difference, therefore, between effectiveness and experience...." >>>>
>>> "....This article is about what framerates the human eye can perceive. The elephant in the room: how fast can we react to what we see? It's an important distinction between games and film worthy of another whole article.
So why can games feel distinctly different at 30 and 60 fps? There's more going on than framerate. Input lag is the amount of time that elapses between inputting a command, that command being interpreted by the game and transmitted to the monitor, and the monitor processing and rendering the image. Too much input lag will make any game feel sluggish, regardless of the LCD's refresh rate.
But a game programmed to run at 60 fps can potentially display your inputs more quickly, because the frames are narrower slices of time (16.6 ms) compared to 30 fps (33.3 ms). Human response time definitely isn't that fast, but our ability to learn and predict can make our responses seem much faster...." >>>>
Have fun
The rest is heavy on performance and a toned down first person experience, but I also think it's smart to wait up, the VR technology evolves quickly and see what's up then. I think there are things of more benefit to bring in first, like DX12/Vulkan.