Star Citizen Happy Hour livestream with Sean Tracy! (youtube live link)

Turrican187

CrazKanuk

@Turrican187 , ask him how they plan to handle the limitations that will be created by static animations! IF it's an AMA, lol. That's a fucking great question. 

Someone ask when 3.0 is coming  

I'd ask, but if I can confirm that this memory leak is fixed then I hope to be commuting in 5 minutes, lol.

Kefo

CrazKanuk said:

@Turrican187 , ask him how they plan to handle the limitations that will be created by static animations! IF it's an AMA, lol. That's a fucking great question. 

Someone ask when 3.0 is coming  

I'd ask, but if I can confirm that this memory leak is fixed then I hope to be commuting in 5 minutes, lol.

3.0 specifics aren't even hammered out yet. So much for it supposed to be here late last year. I wouldn't expect 3.0 till end of this year since they don't even know everything that will be in it yet

MaxBacon

"TL;DR"

• Anti-Aliasing and the many forms of it will be supported, but they're leaving that to when they're doing polish down the line.
  
• The Delta patching system where you're not downloading gigabytes of data now has an internal build being tested. It's still in the early stages of testing and tweaking, but once it's ready, they'll deploy it internally as it affects them as much as it affects us, and once they're happy with it they'll deliver it out to us. No ETA on it at this time.
• People have been asking what the MegaMap is. It's not a large map, but rather a very small map that then streams in everything around the player. This allows the transition from singleplayer to multiplayer, level to level without loading screen, and a whole lot more. 
• The topic of Planet side racing came up and there's nothing official, but Sean talked about wanting players to make their own tracks and maybe giving them beacons or pylons to place to form their own tracks.

 
MegaMap is much clarified now, no loading screens anymore, just streams in all the assets necessary to what you are requesting after the first load.

Kefo said:

they don't even know everything that will be in it yet

Yup, as they didn't with 2.6, 2.5 ,2.4, and so on. Features will be cut from one release's scope if they do need more time, moving to the next one, that's why we don't hear them confirming any specifics.

Kefo

MaxBacon said:

"TL;DR"

• Anti-Aliasing and the many forms of it will be supported, but they're leaving that to when they're doing polish down the line.
  
• The Delta patching system where you're not downloading gigabytes of data now has an internal build being tested. It's still in the early stages of testing and tweaking, but once it's ready, they'll deploy it internally as it affects them as much as it affects us, and once they're happy with it they'll deliver it out to us. No ETA on it at this time.
• People have been asking what the MegaMap is. It's not a large map, but rather a very small map that then streams in everything around the player. This allows the transition from singleplayer to multiplayer, level to level without loading screen, and a whole lot more. 
• The topic of Planet side racing came up and there's nothing official, but Sean talked about wanting players to make their own tracks and maybe giving them beacons or pylons to place to form their own tracks.

 
MegaMap is much clarified now, no loading screens anymore, just streams in all the assets necessary to what you are requesting after the first load.

Kefo said:

they don't even know everything that will be in it yet

Yup, as they didn't with 2.6, 2.5 ,2.4, and so on. Features will be cut from one release's scope if they do need more time, moving to the next one, that's why we don't hear them confirming any specifics.

Cherry picking part of my argument doesn't do you any good you know

MaxBacon

Kefo said:

Cherry picking part of my argument doesn't do you any good you know

It's the fact, they do not confirm details of the next updates, even within 2.6 it wasn't fully confirmed Star Marine was on it, there was even the whole drama SM wasn't on the PTU

We already have knowledge of what is the planned feature set of 3.0; the specifics are being shared with who follows the development (like the ATV about cargo on 3.0).

rpmcmurphy

So what's the new ETA for 3.0?

Kefo

rpmcmurphy said:

So what's the new ETA for 3.0?

There isn't one. They were meeting this week to start to finalize the features they want in 3.0. 

Turrican187

rpmcmurphy said:

So what's the new ETA for 3.0?

First there will be 2.6.1
then 2.6.2 (as mentioned in the recent CR newsletter)
after this we know more

MaxBacon

By the way it was confirmed for 2.6.2 now, with the MegaMap there will be region servers.

Aussies rejoice! There's very few MMO's that actually provide OCE servers, but ofc under AWS is much easier to do so. 

rpmcmurphy

Kefo said:

rpmcmurphy said:

So what's the new ETA for 3.0?

There isn't one. They were meeting this week to start to finalize the features they want in 3.0. 

Do you mean to say those slides he showed off at Citizencon 3 1/2 months ago weren't the finalised features?
I wonder why he would show them on stage as if they were finalised when they haven't even had a sit down yet.

Turrican187 said:

rpmcmurphy said:

So what's the new ETA for 3.0?

First there will be 2.6.1
then 2.6.2 (as mentioned in the recent CR newsletter)
after this we know more

So later rather than sooner
Looks like yet another case of CR overpromising and underdelivering...

MaxBacon

rpmcmurphy said:

Do you mean to say those slides he showed off at Citizencon 3 1/2 months ago weren't the finalised features?

Did you think one demo of some features actively under development were the finalized thing? lol

There was no 3.0 shown at Citizencon btw.

sgel

rpmcmurphy said:

Kefo said:

rpmcmurphy said:

So what's the new ETA for 3.0?

There isn't one. They were meeting this week to start to finalize the features they want in 3.0. 

Do you mean to say those slides he showed off at Citizencon 3 1/2 months ago weren't the finalised features?
I wonder why he would show them on stage as if they were finalised when they haven't even had a sit down yet.

1. He's incompetent
2. They had a jpeg sale after the show and needed to get the buyers excited
3. All of the above

pick one

MaxBacon

Star Citizen is so bad but SO BAD, the developers develop features without knowing what features are they developing. They have no roadmaps, they have no milestones, they have no production pipeline, they have no design.

They don't know how to develop a game or what they are doing at any given moment. The devs just develop features randomly, then they talk and plan how to develop the features.

Source: what people say on internet forums about it

rpmcmurphy

MaxBacon said:

Did you think one demo of some features actively under development were the finalized thing? lol

There was no 3.0 shown at Citizencon btw.

Do you think giving people accurate information so that they can make informed decisions about their purchases is the right thing to do, yes or no?

Edit: I was talking about the slides that they showed, in fact I specifically mentioned the slides shown at Citizencon. There was no mention of the demo.
Please read before knee-jerking.

sgel said:

1. He's incompetent
2. They had a jpeg sale after the show and needed to get the buyers excited
3. All of the above

pick one

I'm picking option 2.
This has happened far too many times now to fall under the remit of bungling incompetency.

rpmcmurphy

MaxBacon said:

Star Citizen is so bad but SO BAD, the developers develop features without knowing what features are they developing. They have no roadmaps, they have no milestones, they have no production pipeline, they have no design.

They don't know how to develop a game or what they are doing at any given moment. The devs just develop features randomly, then they talk and plan how to develop the features.

Source: what people say on internet forums about it

How about just discussing the game and its development, both the positive and negative instead of trying to derail things with diva meltdowns.

MaxBacon

rpmcmurphy said:

Do you think giving people accurate information so that they can make informed decisions about their purchases is the right thing to do, yes or no?

Sure, what they have shown and released the planned features for 3.0 is what it stands. If you want to take one informed decision you consider:
a) the shared list of planned features for 3.0, are what they plan for it, nobody guaranteed all of it will be there
b) the release date was again another estimate, remember the "hopefully"!

Then that means you take things with a grain of salt because they are not guaranteed.
Saves a lot of crying about it later.

rpmcmurphy said:

How about just discussing the game and its development, both the positive and negative instead of trying to derail things with diva meltdowns.

Positive? Nope, all is and shall forever be bad and negative. On this forum at least.

rpmcmurphy

MaxBacon said:

rpmcmurphy said:

Do you think giving people accurate information so that they can make informed decisions about their purchases is the right thing to do, yes or no?

Sure, what they have shown and released the planned features for 3.0 is what it stands. If you want to take one informed decision you consider:
a) the shared list of planned features for 3.0, nobody guaranteed all of it will be there
b) the release date was again another estimate, remember the "hopefully" word

Then that means you take things with a grain of salt because they are not guaranteed.

If you release a bunch of slides 2 months before an ETA most people would not expect that list to change too dramatically. In fact it would be perfectly reasonable to believe they have been in code freeze for quite some time and are working through bug testing.

If it is open developement, transparent and honest and all the rest why should we have to take things with grains of salt?

If CR had simply been a bit more honest and said "these are the features we are hoping to incorporate into 3.0 which we expect to deliver in Q3 2017" then we wouldn't need people, such as yourself, apologising for them when they fail to deliver on all counts, which would mean far less forum arguments....

MaxBacon

rpmcmurphy said:

Edit: I was talking about the slides that they showed, in fact I specifically mentioned the slides shown at Citizencon. There was no mention of the demo.

What they have shown at citizencon was the tech demo of that new version of PG; for all I remember that version was not even meant to be apart of 3.0. I think they did clarify back then what you would see is what it was shown at Gamescon, that "v1" stuff. 

That could have changed by now but reality is that, nobody said it was part of the 3.0 update, very much the contrary.

MaxBacon

rpmcmurphy said:

If it is open developement, transparent and honest and all the rest why should we have to take things with grains of salt?

Because they are not guaranteed. A thing is when it is something just stated, it's coming by X date and that's it, another is we hope, we estimate, etc... As we're used to.

BUT that is why the Production Report is such a good idea, ends this nebulous dates and focus on the weekly report the update status. So I'm quite interested in checking out when 3.0 is added to it.

rpmcmurphy

MaxBacon said:

rpmcmurphy said:

Edit: I was talking about the slides that they showed, in fact I specifically mentioned the slides shown at Citizencon. There was no mention of the demo.

What they have shown at citizencon was the tech demo of that new version of PG; for all I remember that version was not even meant to be apart of 3.0. I think they did clarify back then what you would see is what it was shown at Gamescon, that "v1" stuff. 

That could have changed by now but reality is that, nobody said it was part of the 3.0 update, very much the contrary.

Slide list from Citizencon here http://imgur.com/gallery/MV2PM

But the pertinent one is this one which was meant to be 2 months away at that time.

MaxBacon said:

rpmcmurphy said:

If it is open developement, transparent and honest and all the rest why should we have to take things with grains of salt?

Because they are not guaranteed. A thing is when it is something just stated, it's coming by X date and that's it, another is we hope, we estimate, etc... As we're used to.

BUT that is why the Production Report is such a good idea, ends this nebulous dates and focus on the weekly report the update status. So I'm quite interested in checking out when 3.0 is added to it.

As I said, if something was 2 months away when announced at Citizencon then the feature list should already be guaranteed.
Why would you be showing people stuff that isn't guaranteed and that you don't plan to deliver for well over 6 months, and make out that they are guaranteed and will be delivered in just over 2 months?

That's just dishonest, of course having a sale conicide with the super positive outlook makes it look even worse.

MaxBacon

rpmcmurphy said:

As I said, if something was 2 months away when announced at Citizencon then the feature list should already be guaranteed.

Not even Star Marine was guaranteed for 2.6, even during the first PTU waves for it!
It is quite clear said on this that features might be cut from one update to other if they see necessary. It is why they do not guarantee any specifics on the updates.

The same thing can happen with 3.0. They can cut features to release it sooner unless what gets delayed is fundamental for the update to happen.

It's always good to have that in mind when it comes to expectations.

rpmcmurphy

MaxBacon said:

rpmcmurphy said:

As I said, if something was 2 months away when announced at Citizencon then the feature list should already be guaranteed.

Not even Star Marine was guaranteed for 2.6, even during the first PTU waves for it!
It is quite clear said on this that features might be cut from one update to other if they see necessary. It is why they do not guarantee any specifics on the updates.

The same thing can happen with 3.0. They can cut features to release it sooner unless what gets delayed is fundamental for the update to happen.

Then they need to stop announcing things they are unsure of, only tell backers what is definitely making the cut instead of presenting stuff that is months and months away from even being determined if it is viable or not.

I'm curious why you want to defend or make excuses for this sort of behaviour, it's not good from the developer's standpoint because it makes them look incompetent and/or grasping and neither is it good from the fan's standpoint because of expectations and disappointment.

Most other companies manage this, it seems that after 4 years of practice CIG should also be able to manage this...

MaxBacon

rpmcmurphy said:

Then they need to stop announcing things they are unsure of, only tell backers what is definitely making the cut instead of presenting that is months and months away from being determined if viable or not.

I'm not defending his behavior with release dates, I'm against it, so are the backers who have on recent times made a stand to ask him to stop giving dates.

Now you need to live on today, and on today there's no more of this, hopefully, he won't do it again after the backlash he got for it.

The backers are not demanding any release dates from him, that's why I defend they should keep all date matters to the production reports and let the production of the game transpire how close or far away X update is.

rpmcmurphy

MaxBacon said:

rpmcmurphy said:

Then they need to stop announcing things they are unsure of, only tell backers what is definitely making the cut instead of presenting that is months and months away from being determined if viable or not.

I'm not defending his behavior with release dates, I'm against it, so are the backers who have on recent times made a stand to ask him to stop giving dates.

Now you need to live on today, and on today there's no more of this, hopefully, he won't do it again after the backlash he got for it.

The backers are not demanding any release dates from him, that's why I defend they should keep all date matters to the production reports and let the production of the game transpire how close or far away X update is.

Sure you are. You keep saying things like Star Marine might not have made the cut for 2.6 despite them repeatedly saying it would be in 2.6 and that's why people should take everything with a pinch of salt.

People have been against CR giving dates (or ETAs) ever since he fumbled AC's release and yet he persists in doing so, that is not listening to the will of your backers. That is trolling them
I see no reason he will stop now but people shouldn't encourage him or enable it by supporting that type of behaviour.

People are demanding dates, they just want them via the release schedule now.

What I would like to see is a company that says 3.0 will include X,Y,Z, it will be delivered in June and they hit that target, I would like to see a company that lays off the announcement "sales" and I would like to see a company that doesn't clam up about 3.0 and start talking about 4.0 instead. By all means talk about 4.0 after you've delivered 3.0.

MaxBacon

rpmcmurphy said:

Sure you are. You keep saying things like Star Marine might not have made the cut for 2.6 despite them repeatedly saying it would be in 2.6 and that's why people should take everything with a pinch of salt.

You're twisting this, they did not guarantee Star Marine on 2.6 over announcing that it was planned for it, part of 2.6's scope. It's the planned feature-set for that update.

It is on the current, it was on 2.6's report: "Tasks that delay beyond our target dates might cause the release of 2.6 to be delayed, or might be excluded from 2.6 if appropriate to maintain the release date target."

It was not guaranteed for it, SM was not cut, but features like the MegaMap were and they were as plans for 2.6 as SM was. We had back then whole features cut from the release during its PTU phase, like when the current EVA was implemented. That is simply the fact.

That doesn't actually imply grains of salt, just that you fully consider what is stated there and what it can imply on what and when.