Although i believe that the title was uncalled for. There was no reason for the author to bring NMS into the picture. He should consider that in terms of financial means, technical assets and manpower the difference between the two games is astronomical in favor of SC.
Since then: they've taken it off rails, added PG, fleshed out the rest of the bazaar, added atmo flight (including entry animations), and probably a bunch of other BTS details.
You would think that after all the furore regarding NMS's hype publications would hold back a little seeing they are so complicit in perpetuating that hype, but no, they instantly go from one game to another and start the ball rolling all over again. What a bunch of tossers.
You would think that after all the furore regarding NMS's hype publications would hold back a little seeing they are so complicit in perpetuating that hype, but no, they instantly go from one game to another and start the ball rolling all over again. What a bunch of tossers.
That's what the gaming media is pretty much, not sure what's the point on having a go at NMS with this, after all these are completely different games. Unless the objective is just feed more controversy.
You would think that after all the furore regarding NMS's hype publications would hold back a little seeing they are so complicit in perpetuating that hype, but no, they instantly go from one game to another and start the ball rolling all over again. What a bunch of tossers.
That's what the gaming media is pretty much, not sure what's the point on having a go at NMS with this, after all these are completely different games. Unless the objective is just feed more controversy.
Controversy sells copies and garners clicks.
If everything were all hunky-dory they'd be out of a job. So it's hype and doom and gloom on the menu.
Since then: they've taken it off rails, added PG, fleshed out the rest of the bazaar, added atmo flight (including entry animations), and probably a bunch of other BTS details.
Well its been a year and (allegedly) 30 more million raised since they made that joke of a presentation. So it should be an improvement. But its still the same basic principles in effect. At least they short of showed to day what they tried to claim they did (could do) 11 months ago.
But thats one thing their presentations are getting much more polished. Although I did notice a few things that didnt look exactly right in some spots.
Even if today was 100% on the level and they can in fact implement it in game exactly as they show it, it is still a single mission (in how many do they claim now) on a single planet (out of how many they claim), involving a couple ships (how many do they claim to have and have sold?). It also still involved only 2 different players, on a closed system with who knows what for specs and what engine it was being played on.
But it did look good, so do a lot of other games in small situations but we all know what those end up looking like in the actual released game itself.
I am just pointing out that 12 months ago, almost to the day they showcased the video above and said it was ready to go. At least today they were giving themselves a much longer window, but still one way too close to be realistic.
It was basic hype to carry them 6 more weeks until they either put up or shut up with something on SQ 42, and what the present there better make what they did today look like something Derek Smart developed.
I am sorry to sound like a nay sayer, but with CIG I do not give a shit about demo's. A lot of what they show never makes it into the (alpha) game, but get postponed over and over again.
Push the hype when they actually deliver this 3.0 functionality as shown, everything else is just words and pretty pictures.
If their track record of delivering was better I would not take this stand, but they have failed to many times to follow up on their own hype train to deserve getting points before they actually deliver something.
I am sorry to sound like a nay sayer, but with CIG I do not give a shit about demo's. A lot of what they show never makes it into the (alpha) game, but get postponed over and over again.
Push the hype when they actually deliver this 3.0 functionality as shown, everything else is just words and pretty pictures.
There's a difference between one engine demo, that means something that wasn't implemented yet and it's not running in-game... and a demo of in-game gameplay, we saw that.
The big majority of what they did before was engine demos, expect SC's 2.0 demo last year that was pretty much the same thing they released some time later with SC 2.0.
If this was more engine footage of stuff that that looks nice but it's not in-game, then that would be another story.
I am sorry to sound like a nay sayer, but with CIG I do not give a shit about demo's. A lot of what they show never makes it into the (alpha) game, but get postponed over and over again.
Push the hype when they actually deliver this 3.0 functionality as shown, everything else is just words and pretty pictures.
If their track record of delivering was better I would not take this stand, but they have failed to many times to follow up on their own hype train to deserve getting points before they actually deliver something.
I work with a lot of prototypes in my trade.
Things don't always work out the way you originally envision them. You take what you learned and move on from there.
Last year we saw "Prototype PG Planet inside engine", today we saw In-Game PG Planet.
Far he mentioned this is some "v1 tech" that he would show the new version that wasn't ready yet at citizencon... So, more 20 days. For that and SQ42 ofc.
Although i believe that the title was uncalled for. There was no reason for the author to bring NMS into the picture. He should consider that in terms of financial means, technical assets and manpower the difference between the two games is astronomical in favor of SC.
I have to agree. He compares a newly released game to an alpha demo presentation.
"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
I am sorry to sound like a nay sayer, but with CIG I do not give a shit about demo's. A lot of what they show never makes it into the (alpha) game, but get postponed over and over again.
Push the hype when they actually deliver this 3.0 functionality as shown, everything else is just words and pretty pictures.
If their track record of delivering was better I would not take this stand, but they have failed to many times to follow up on their own hype train to deserve getting points before they actually deliver something.
I'm inclined to agree with the track record comment, but the fact that they got 2.0 launched (which was a big step in the right direction) right on the schedule they wanted, has me having some hope of it being on time. Time will tell though.
I'm inclined to agree with the track record comment, but the fact that they got 2.0 launched (which was a big step in the right direction) right on the schedule they wanted, has me having some hope of it being on time. Time will tell though.
When it comes to dates there's reasons to be skeptical even after seeing this running in-game, 3.0 is set to be one massive update and it's more than possible even if they release it this year that several things might be pushed further.
So it's kinda if they want 3.0 really this year they'll push things that won't make it to future updates, or if they want to release it with all the stuff intended they'll push it to 2017.
Or we might just be up for a long PTU late this year like 2.0.
Since then: they've taken it off rails, added PG, fleshed out the rest of the bazaar, added atmo flight (including entry animations), and probably a bunch of other BTS details.
Well its been a year and (allegedly) 30 more million raised since they made that joke of a presentation. So it should be an improvement. But its still the same basic principles in effect. At least they short of showed to day what they tried to claim they did (could do) 11 months ago.
But thats one thing their presentations are getting much more polished. Although I did notice a few things that didnt look exactly right in some spots.
Even if today was 100% on the level and they can in fact implement it in game exactly as they show it, it is still a single mission (in how many do they claim now) on a single planet (out of how many they claim), involving a couple ships (how many do they claim to have and have sold?). It also still involved only 2 different players, on a closed system with who knows what for specs and what engine it was being played on.
But it did look good, so do a lot of other games in small situations but we all know what those end up looking like in the actual released game itself.
I am just pointing out that 12 months ago, almost to the day they showcased the video above and said it was ready to go. At least today they were giving themselves a much longer window, but still one way too close to be realistic.
It was basic hype to carry them 6 more weeks until they either put up or shut up with something on SQ 42, and what the present there better make what they did today look like something Derek Smart developed.
I think a better comparison for this one, instead of the Nyx video that was also shown, was the mini-pu they showed off. That was another one that they said was fairly close to release, and for once lived up to the statement.
Everything at this point is groundwork. If they only have 10-15 missions available, each testing out a different mechanic of the system, it would become a much easier process to release new batches of missions using what works.
The closed network part is where i'm dubious, having played around a fair amount of time in the PU, the netcode is just bad. For that one we'll have to wait and see if the revisions are as effective as they hope.
I'm inclined to agree with the track record comment, but the fact that they got 2.0 launched (which was a big step in the right direction) right on the schedule they wanted, has me having some hope of it being on time. Time will tell though.
My post history will also show that when they deliver, I give them credit. I just had to get that off my chest, be course I feel they are a bit loose with what they "announce" and then pull back on. Now if they did it for insiders or in weekly streams, then fair enough. People involved with the project knows how this works. But they do this in the trade shows, and in that context it is not ok.
(How come they still do not live up to their own promise that the backers "would be the first to know" and they still keep it all hidden from them until they can make big PR pushes? If I had put money in this I would be pissed about how closed they are about progress towards backers, but alas I have not, so, meh...)
(How come they still do not live up to their own promise that the backers "would be the first to know" and they still keep it all hidden from them until they can make big PR pushes?
What have they kept hidden ?
Scroll back to my older comments in threads of the last weeks, with predictions what CIG will show at GamesCom.
They showed EXACTLY that:
PG planetary surfaces, free landing, new bases, Alpha 2.6 and 2.7 (now 3.0) outlook. Better AI etc.
If you are a backer that follows the development of SC closely you ARE in the loop.
I'm inclined to agree with the track record comment, but the fact that they got 2.0 launched (which was a big step in the right direction) right on the schedule they wanted, has me having some hope of it being on time. Time will tell though.
When it comes to dates there's reasons to be skeptical even after seeing this running in-game, 3.0 is set to be one massive update and it's more than possible even if they release it this year that several things might be pushed further.
So it's kinda if they want 3.0 really this year they'll push things that won't make it to future updates, or if they want to release it with all the stuff intended they'll push it to 2017.
Or we might just be up for a long PTU late this year like 2.0.
I'd count it hitting public PTU as them meeting the deadline, at that point it's still very rough around the edges, but available to backers.
I'm inclined to agree with the track record comment, but the fact that they got 2.0 launched (which was a big step in the right direction) right on the schedule they wanted, has me having some hope of it being on time. Time will tell though.
My post history will also show that when they deliver, I give them credit. I just had to get that off my chest, be course I feel they are a bit loose with what they "announce" and then pull back on. Now if they did it for insiders or in weekly streams, then fair enough. People involved with the project knows how this works. But they do this in the trade shows, and in that context it is not ok.
(How come they still do not live up to their own promise that the backers "would be the first to know" and they still keep it all hidden from them until they can make big PR pushes? If I had put money in this I would be pissed about how closed they are about progress towards backers, but alas I have not, so, meh...)
Disco Lando had confirmed a lot of what we were going to see, there were still some surprises though. didn't think the Dragonfly even registered on the priority scale.
I also like to use these streams as a bit of a roadmap, it may not work out in the time frame they want it too, but it tells us what they are working on.
When it comes to SQ42 I get why they're doing it the way they want to. We get to see (and use) a lot of the assets that are used in that game, but it's under wraps for story line purposes. There was an article about a year and a half back that quoted Chris on SQ42 plot when he was supposed to be off the record, he was pretty pissed about that.
Comments
Although i believe that the title was uncalled for. There was no reason for the author to bring NMS into the picture. He should consider that in terms of financial means, technical assets and manpower the difference between the two games is astronomical in favor of SC.
What a bunch of tossers.
If everything were all hunky-dory they'd be out of a job. So it's hype and doom and gloom on the menu.
But thats one thing their presentations are getting much more polished. Although I did notice a few things that didnt look exactly right in some spots.
Even if today was 100% on the level and they can in fact implement it in game exactly as they show it, it is still a single mission (in how many do they claim now) on a single planet (out of how many they claim), involving a couple ships (how many do they claim to have and have sold?). It also still involved only 2 different players, on a closed system with who knows what for specs and what engine it was being played on.
But it did look good, so do a lot of other games in small situations but we all know what those end up looking like in the actual released game itself.
I am just pointing out that 12 months ago, almost to the day they showcased the video above and said it was ready to go. At least today they were giving themselves a much longer window, but still one way too close to be realistic.
It was basic hype to carry them 6 more weeks until they either put up or shut up with something on SQ 42, and what the present there better make what they did today look like something Derek Smart developed.
Push the hype when they actually deliver this 3.0 functionality as shown, everything else is just words and pretty pictures.
If their track record of delivering was better I would not take this stand, but they have failed to many times to follow up on their own hype train to deserve getting points before they actually deliver something.
The big majority of what they did before was engine demos, expect SC's 2.0 demo last year that was pretty much the same thing they released some time later with SC 2.0.
If this was more engine footage of stuff that that looks nice but it's not in-game, then that would be another story.
Things don't always work out the way you originally envision them. You take what you learned and move on from there.
"Be water my friend" - Bruce Lee
Far he mentioned this is some "v1 tech" that he would show the new version that wasn't ready yet at citizencon... So, more 20 days. For that and SQ42 ofc.
"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
I'm inclined to agree with the track record comment, but the fact that they got 2.0 launched (which was a big step in the right direction) right on the schedule they wanted, has me having some hope of it being on time. Time will tell though.
So it's kinda if they want 3.0 really this year they'll push things that won't make it to future updates, or if they want to release it with all the stuff intended they'll push it to 2017.
Or we might just be up for a long PTU late this year like 2.0.
Everything at this point is groundwork. If they only have 10-15 missions available, each testing out a different mechanic of the system, it would become a much easier process to release new batches of missions using what works.
The closed network part is where i'm dubious, having played around a fair amount of time in the PU, the netcode is just bad. For that one we'll have to wait and see if the revisions are as effective as they hope.
(How come they still do not live up to their own promise that the backers "would be the first to know" and they still keep it all hidden from them until they can make big PR pushes? If I had put money in this I would be pissed about how closed they are about progress towards backers, but alas I have not, so, meh...)
Scroll back to my older comments in threads of the last weeks, with predictions what CIG will show at GamesCom.
They showed EXACTLY that:
PG planetary surfaces, free landing, new bases, Alpha 2.6 and 2.7 (now 3.0) outlook. Better AI etc.
If you are a backer that follows the development of SC closely you ARE in the loop.
Have fun
I also like to use these streams as a bit of a roadmap, it may not work out in the time frame they want it too, but it tells us what they are working on.
When it comes to SQ42 I get why they're doing it the way they want to. We get to see (and use) a lot of the assets that are used in that game, but it's under wraps for story line purposes. There was an article about a year and a half back that quoted Chris on SQ42 plot when he was supposed to be off the record, he was pretty pissed about that.
It's just the 2.5 leaving PTU, 2.6 updates giving SM and further iteration on AC and then 3.0, so only change was on the terminology of the update.
They said 3.0 will be released before the end of the year. That gives them less than 4 1/2 months
"Be water my friend" - Bruce Lee
Not as amazing as some people say (some of the gameplay was really boring) but I can see the opportunities.
Any news on when we'll be able to earn ships in game?
..Cake..