CIG - The Challenges Of Making Game Demos

Kefo

MaxBacon said:

Acterius said:

He took money to create a game technology was there to create. Then it seems like we gave him way to much cash and he went bonkers. I just want the games I paid for him to make. 

Two sides of technology progressed: The development side as things progressed not only graphically but also on whole backends, different and better ways of doing things, as net code being the more complex cloud systems now followed by several developers, including CIG. And the side that is the one you mentioned that is things like DX12 / Vulkan that CIG is also keeping up with.

Who says it impossible is who doesn't want to take the risks to make it happen.

If they don't do that, here's the people throwing rocks at them screaming "It's outdated!".
Hence why they continue pushing it.

It's easy to take risks when it's not your money on the line. I'll take any risk you want me to as long as you keep throwing more money at me and I don't have to risk a single cent of my wealth. And if it fails I can just walk away saying the tech wasn't ready yet and be better off then when I started.

MaxBacon

dsmart said:

Good thing that people like you who don't lead projects, aren't leading projects.

Good thing that project leaders not only on CIG, but Frontier and others doing it... do not think like you, otherwise that would INDEED be decades away because nobody would take the risks to pull that off in a MMO.

JhiaPet

The advances that are really going to impress over time are things like the creation of module damage capabilities.



And as time goes on the granularity will improve.  This is the sort of iteration that people have been expecting for a long time but has been "impossible" before now.  This kind of "positional damage" and animation expands the concepts older ideas and adds a new chapter.

The more basic tech development includes things like the "64 bit" engine business.  Now that this has been achieved, everything else in the project is anchored and can move forward.  Things work together synergistically in project management, both in terms of dependencies on other teams and morale.  The attacks on the game were intended to destroy morale and confidence, but thankfully they seem to have failed. 

It's too bad Chris Roberts HAD to address the attacks, but when you are targeted like that there is no ignoring it and no way to come out looking good.  You get smeared in people's minds when a campaign of hate is aimed at you, even if you have done nothing.  This is due to the way crowds of people think.  That is the factor that social attackers count on to make themselves successful in personal destruction campaigns that work as preludes to takeovers.

It looks like everything is going well.  There is really no reason to worry at this point.

Kefo

JhiaPet said:

The advances that are really going to impress over time are things like the creation of module damage capabilities.



And as time goes on the granularity will improve.  This is the sort of iteration that people have been expecting for a long time but has been "impossible" before now.  This kind of "positional damage" and animation expands the concepts older ideas and adds a new chapter.

The more basic tech development includes things like the "64 bit" engine business.  Now that this has been achieved, everything else in the project is anchored and can move forward.  Things work together synergistically in project management, both in terms of dependencies on other teams and morale.  The attacks on the game were intended to destroy morale and confidence, but thankfully they seem to have failed. 

It's too bad Chris Roberts HAD to address the attacks, but when you are targeted like that there is no ignoring it and no way to come out looking good.  You get smeared in people's minds when a campaign of hate is aimed at you, even if you have done nothing.  This is due to the way crowds of people think.  That is the factor that social attackers count on to make themselves successful in personal destruction campaigns that work as preludes to takeovers.

It looks like everything is going well.  There is really no reason to worry at this point.

This is in response to your very last sentence but oh man I want to know what you're smoking. I know a few people who would benefit from it

dsmart

MaxBacon said:

dsmart said:

Good thing that people like you who don't lead projects, aren't leading projects.

Good thing that project leaders not only on CIG, but Frontier and others doing it... do not think like you, otherwise that would INDEED be decades away because nobody would take the risks to pull that off in a MMO.

Oh this is good. So I'll bite.

1. Star Citizen doesn't have a seamless space<->planet transition. It never did. Even their own hilarious demos, prove this.

2. ED doesn't have space<->planet transition. It never did. Because they don't have any atmospheric planets. 

Note to mention the fact that back (Mar 2015) when I made that comment, Star Citizen had no planetary tech. And they still don't; since it all exists as a tech-demo that's NOT running inside the current game engine. Just as they have CLEARLY stated - on the record.

Bonus point: Try actually read the ENTIRETY of what the op asked; not just the selectively quoted piece which you guys seemingly use - out of context - to tie to my response.

Extra points: Battlescape Infinity has had that engine for over a decade. They only this year, kickstarted a "game". Dual Universe was just - this year - unveiled; then kickstarted.

Your turn.

ps: here is the entire thread with specific comments; not the out-of-context one you conveniently posted in order to support a pointless argument.

MaxBacon

dsmart said:

1. Star Citizen doesn't have a seamless space<->planet transition. It never did. Even their own hilarious demos, prove this.

2. ED doesn't have space<->planet transition. It never did. Because they don't have any atmospheric planets. 

1. The proof is your opinion of what is the proof; not a factually proven fact over what you said / he said about it.

2. What's implied here is that you'd be able to simply go to the planet, land on it, walk on it more than it being an atmospheric planet; just the basic tech at least.


Here's one suggestion:
- You know that 1 Million Dollars you said to put from your own pockets for one audit to CIG?
Invest that money on your game to pull off such ambitious feature! That'd be put on good use.

dsmart

MaxBacon said:

dsmart said:

1. Star Citizen doesn't have a seamless space<->planet transition. It never did. Even their own hilarious demos, prove this.

2. ED doesn't have space<->planet transition. It never did. Because they don't have any atmospheric planets. 

1. Prove it on your own opinions of it, not as a factual situation.

2. What's implied here is that you'd be able to simply go to the planet, land on it, walk on it more than it being an atmospheric planet; just the basic tech at least.


Here's one suggestion:
- You know that 1 Million Dollars you said to put from your own pockets for one audit to CIG?
Invest that money on your game to pull off such ambitious feature! That'd be put on good use.

"implied".

I rest my case. Do carry on.

CrazKanuk

dsmart said:

MaxBacon said:

dsmart said:

1. Star Citizen doesn't have a seamless space<->planet transition. It never did. Even their own hilarious demos, prove this.

2. ED doesn't have space<->planet transition. It never did. Because they don't have any atmospheric planets. 

1. Prove it on your own opinions of it, not as a factual situation.

2. What's implied here is that you'd be able to simply go to the planet, land on it, walk on it more than it being an atmospheric planet; just the basic tech at least.


Here's one suggestion:
- You know that 1 Million Dollars you said to put from your own pockets for one audit to CIG?
Invest that money on your game to pull off such ambitious feature! That'd be put on good use.

"implied".

I rest my case. Do carry on.

FYI, I just wanted to say kudos for trying to remove yourself from any conversation surrounding SC (for real). I'd even give you an A for effort since I haven't see you on here recently at all. Honestly, I've been trying myself, also, and it's not simple. The thing is that what's on here now is, essentially, a whole lot of radicals with a sprinkling of logic here and there. I've been trying to do the same as you, but I inevitably find myself on here weekly, engaging in a baseless argument where there is no hope of changing someone's opinion. By definition, it's insanity. 

BTW, not claiming that I agree with you, because I don't, just empathizing. 

MaxBacon

dsmart said:

"implied".

I rest my case. Do carry on.

I'll quote this from your post on the last page: "That's MY personal opinion and belief..."
As you are free to post and say your opinions and believe as you do; so am I. I ain't going to contest that.

dsmart

CrazKanuk said:

dsmart said:

MaxBacon said:

dsmart said:

1. Star Citizen doesn't have a seamless space<->planet transition. It never did. Even their own hilarious demos, prove this.

2. ED doesn't have space<->planet transition. It never did. Because they don't have any atmospheric planets. 

1. Prove it on your own opinions of it, not as a factual situation.

2. What's implied here is that you'd be able to simply go to the planet, land on it, walk on it more than it being an atmospheric planet; just the basic tech at least.


Here's one suggestion:
- You know that 1 Million Dollars you said to put from your own pockets for one audit to CIG?
Invest that money on your game to pull off such ambitious feature! That'd be put on good use.

"implied".

I rest my case. Do carry on.

FYI, I just wanted to say kudos for trying to remove yourself from any conversation surrounding SC (for real). I'd even give you an A for effort since I haven't see you on here recently at all. Honestly, I've been trying myself, also, and it's not simple. The thing is that what's on here now is, essentially, a whole lot of radicals with a sprinkling of logic here and there. I've been trying to do the same as you, but I inevitably find myself on here weekly, engaging in a baseless argument where there is no hope of changing someone's opinion. By definition, it's insanity. 

BTW, not claiming that I agree with you, because I don't, just empathizing. 

Indeed. The thing is that no matter how hard we try to do that, we get pulled back in. I simply don't understand the logic associated with these guys consistently bringing my name into this farce. It's just mind-boggling.

MaxBacon

You might want to blame @rpmcmurphy for that, nobody was talking about that really. For me you are just irrelevant whatever SC is or is going to be, what is on my opinion just pursuing one agenda and obsession; I just joke around with some of it because I simply find it funny.

rpmcmurphy

MaxBacon said:

You might want to blame @rpmcmurphy for that, nobody was talking about that really. For me you are just irrelevant whatever SC is or is going to be; I just joke around with some of it because I simply find it funny.

Blame me for what?

MaxBacon

rpmcmurphy said:
Blame me for what?

Oh, when you brought his name into the discussion yesterday, I didn't had any intentions of going there but I replied; hence why Bloody Mary is summoned (disclaimer: it's a joke please don't sue me).

CrazKanuk

dsmart said:

CrazKanuk said:

dsmart said:

MaxBacon said:

dsmart said:

1. Star Citizen doesn't have a seamless space<->planet transition. It never did. Even their own hilarious demos, prove this.

2. ED doesn't have space<->planet transition. It never did. Because they don't have any atmospheric planets. 

1. Prove it on your own opinions of it, not as a factual situation.

2. What's implied here is that you'd be able to simply go to the planet, land on it, walk on it more than it being an atmospheric planet; just the basic tech at least.


Here's one suggestion:
- You know that 1 Million Dollars you said to put from your own pockets for one audit to CIG?
Invest that money on your game to pull off such ambitious feature! That'd be put on good use.

"implied".

I rest my case. Do carry on.

FYI, I just wanted to say kudos for trying to remove yourself from any conversation surrounding SC (for real). I'd even give you an A for effort since I haven't see you on here recently at all. Honestly, I've been trying myself, also, and it's not simple. The thing is that what's on here now is, essentially, a whole lot of radicals with a sprinkling of logic here and there. I've been trying to do the same as you, but I inevitably find myself on here weekly, engaging in a baseless argument where there is no hope of changing someone's opinion. By definition, it's insanity. 

BTW, not claiming that I agree with you, because I don't, just empathizing. 

Indeed. The thing is that no matter how hard we try to do that, we get pulled back in. I simply don't understand the logic associated with these guys consistently bringing my name into this farce. It's just mind-boggling.

My guess, the problem stems from looking for logic associated with the arguments. 

Honestly, my biggest problem with you was with the personal attacks, and I know you'd had some of those yourself due to all of this, which is shitty, but that's the next biggest waste of time. Hopefully this means you're looking at turning the other cheek and going against the infamy that is DS. 

Honestly, I don't think that there is a single person on here who hasn't been caught up in the moral underground at some point or another. The moral high road is just too boring, I think. 

At any rate, I think you could provide some valuable insight, if you can ever decouple yourself from being the master of all that is evil in the SC community. I think that the Vegas line on that happening before SC ships would be pretty tempting. :awesome:

dsmart

MaxBacon said:

You might want to blame @rpmcmurphy for that, nobody was talking about that really. For me you are just irrelevant whatever SC is or is going to be, what is on my opinion just pursuing one agenda and obsession; I just joke around with some of it because I simply find it funny.

Actually it wasn't him as I recall. If you go back 2-3 pages, you will see who it was that evoked the reference to me; which is what prompted me to respond.

rpmcmurphy

MaxBacon said:

rpmcmurphy said:
Blame me for what?

Oh, when you brought his name into the discussion yesterday, I didn't had any intentions of going there but I replied; hence why Bloody Mary is summoned (disclaimer: it's a joke please don't sue me).

So you want to blame for your lack of self control?
Get out of here man

JhiaPet

But that's just it.  Derek Smart has not "recused himself", he started a campaign of hate and then stepped back and worked in the shadows popping up from time to time to stir the pot.  This is a typical pattern for anti-socials. 

Didn't he himself say that "very bad things happen" to people who don't give in to his demands?

MaxBacon

dsmart said:

Actually it wasn't him as I recall. If you go back 2-3 pages, you will see who it was that evoked the reference to me; which is what prompted me to respond.

He questioned me about the poor you and hate you get, that is what added you to the conversation and I responded simply with my opinion of why. You take the provocative approach, from "Shitizens" to seeing the whole situation as a WAR you need to win... I don't see any initiative from your side to reduce the level of aggressivity and attacks you complain about; instead, it this hit>reaction game that is ongoing.

rpmcmurphy said:

So you want to blame for your lack of self control?
Get out of here man

hahaha, this time it was you asking the question. Don't run, get on the cross I'll get the nails! :awesome:

JhiaPet

Derek Smart doesn't have any expertise in making games.  I'm not sure why people take his opinion seriously.

dsmart

JhiaPet said:

But that's just it.  Derek Smart has not "recused himself", he started a campaign of hate and then stepped back and worked in the shadows popping up from time to time to stir the pot.  This is a typical pattern for anti-socials. 

Didn't he himself say that "very bad things happen" to people who don't give in to his demands?

See what I mean guys? Writing opinions are now "campaign of hate". I don't even....

dsmart

JhiaPet said:

Derek Smart doesn't have any expertise in making games.  I'm not sure why people take his opinion seriously.

You should ask yourself why you feel that I need to be injected into this discussion. Aside from the fact that since you registered to post (12 so far), you've spent more time posting about me, than about the subject. But I don't matter though; so please carry on talking about how I don't matter.