High End graphic in a game that will be designed as a MMO. (But basically there is a reason why you should avoid that) Oh wait ... EQ2 comes in mind ...
Really? For a developer yourself that's the definition of short-sighted lol (or heavily biased anyway)
Let's go compare their tech, backend and overall depth of systems to what other MMO's do and let's still claim SC is just the same but with better graphics lol
You're right SC is worse when you look at the backend and overall depth of systems. Unless of course you are judging systems that are not in game yet against completed games that have fun, meaningful gameplay?
High End graphic in a game that will be designed as a MMO. (But basically there is a reason why you should avoid that) Oh wait ... EQ2 comes in mind ...
Really? For a developer yourself that's the definition of short-sighted lol (or heavily biased anyway)
Let's go compare their tech, backend and overall depth of systems to what other MMO's do and let's still claim SC is just the same but with better graphics lol
You're right SC is worse when you look at the backend and overall depth of systems. Unless of course you are judging systems that are not in game yet against completed games that have fun, meaningful gameplay?
That's the problem with this game, all people can do is judge on systems that are not in game yet because let's face it if you judged it on what is available, well damn, maybe it would seem good if you haven't played a game in a couple of decades but otherwise nah.
That's the problem with this game, all people can do is judge on systems that are not in game yet because let's face it if you judged it on what is available, well damn, maybe it would seem good if you haven't played a game in a couple of decades but otherwise nah.
It's a game under development.
I find ridiculous the alpha / not in alpha argument to dismiss what is being developed here. One Sim MMO, such argument only exists because one playable Alpha is released, if SC, like the of majority MMO's did not release alpha access then this argument of "It's not released on the Alpha yet so it doesn't count" would not exist.
That's the problem with this game, all people can do is judge on systems that are not in game yet because let's face it if you judged it on what is available, well damn, maybe it would seem good if you haven't played a game in a couple of decades but otherwise nah.
It's a game under development.
I find ridiculous the alpha / not in alpha argument to dismiss what is being developed here. One Sim MMO, such argument only exists because one playable Alpha is released, if SC, like the of majority MMO's did not release alpha access then this argument of "It's not released on the Alpha yet so it doesn't count" would not exist.
The trouble is max they chose the wrong engine, they're 5 years in and some of the most basic generic things aren't implemented yet, and the backend is a mess.
A game like this needed a bespoke engine from the get go, not cryengine because it looks nice.
The trouble is max they chose the wrong engine, they're 5 years in and some of the most basic generic things aren't implemented yet, and the backend is a mess.
A game like this needed a bespoke engine from the get go, not cryengine because it looks nice.
Like one of the devs in Frankfurt said ... 3/4th of the Star Engine are not Cry Engine anymore. And that was one of the guys that developed the Cry Engine.
So a caveat on the website that says we will be wrong allows them to wipe their hands of any and all responsibility.
I want you to try that at your job. Go to your boss and tell them that you are going to seriously fuck up everything you do for the next month and when they fire you a week later try and use the excuse that you told your boss you would be screwing up so they can't fire you!
No, the caveats are there because they explain it, you want to ignore them to take and perceive those dates as something they were not.
In our office the scheduling for the teams is no different, they give always tight time frames that always slip and get pushed back, say while in management they estimate to the client it takes 2 months, they'll poke back the teams and say 1 month, that is a common practice because if you tell them 2 months from the start it's more likely the date slips past the 2 months than if you keep them working to deliver in 1 month; the problem arises when they push it back over 2 months (then yes, very unhappy boss) that is in a superficial way why aggressive scheduling is a thing.
CIG's mistake here was giving to the public the same dates their developers work with, causing people to get extra salty when they see weekly push backs, people took those dates more seriously than CIG did, at least now they seem to have realized that was a bad idea.
Ok so what happens when the boss tells the client 2 months and then 8 months later (like CR and CIG like to do) they might give you a scaled back version of what they originally promised?
Does that caveat still absolve them of the horrendous inability to plan out or estimate anything or is it still you don't understand game development but in a really long winded post?
Tell me how do you provide an estimate for something that's never been done before?
I don't know but when SC does something that's never been done before then you let me know.
Then why was SC impossible if it's doing stuff that's done on the daily?
Speaking to that point, though, the company I work for does plenty of stuff that's never been done before, and it's scheduled. How is it scheduled? I don't know. However, the results can come in the form of heavy delays all the way to projects being placed on hold indefinitely if technology simply isn't there yet.
Why would you assume Kefo claims the full scope is impossible based on them implementing the simple things successfully? I don't remember him saying that creating a cockpit was impossible, that having a hangar was impossible.. The full scope of the game seems to be what Kefo's claiming is impossible. What's been released so far does not prove, in any way, that CIG and Co will be able to complete the game per the full scope given, but you act as if it does in an attempt to refute Kefo.
The trouble is max they chose the wrong engine, they're 5 years in and some of the most basic generic things aren't implemented yet, and the backend is a mess.
A game like this needed a bespoke engine from the get go, not cryengine because it looks nice.
Like one of the devs in Frankfurt said ... 3/4th of the Star Engine are not Cry Engine anymore. And that was one of the guys that developed the Cry Engine.
It IS basically a bespoke engine nowadays.
Have fun
And one that is still having all kinds of issues with networking backend.
The trouble is max they chose the wrong engine, they're 5 years in and some of the most basic generic things aren't implemented yet, and the backend is a mess.
A game like this needed a bespoke engine from the get go, not cryengine because it looks nice.
Like one of the devs in Frankfurt said ... 3/4th of the Star Engine are not Cry Engine anymore. And that was one of the guys that developed the Cry Engine.
It IS basically a bespoke engine nowadays.
Have fun
Great, so they spent how long farting around ripping the guts out of cryengine then shoe horning stuff in when they should've built from the ground up, do you know how much easier it is to start from the ground up as opposed to modifying existing software to make it perform in a way that it was never meant to?
I get that the scope of the game changed, but the clown in charge, instead of pulling estimates out his arse and saying the scope wouldn't effect delivery should've been honest and told people that this would be drastically alter dev time and gone with a new engine.
Psychos1s said: do you know how much easier it is to start from the ground up as opposed to modifying existing software to make it perform in a way that it was never meant to?
Star Citizen started as a team of 7 people, they had no resources, neither in development neither in money to ever do their own engine to sustain one MMO FPS/Space Sim.
If they ever had the number of resources they ended up having years on day-1, they admittedly would have gone with their own built solution.
That's the problem with this game, all people can do is judge on systems that are not in game yet because let's face it if you judged it on what is available, well damn, maybe it would seem good if you haven't played a game in a couple of decades but otherwise nah.
It's a game under development.
I find ridiculous the alpha / not in alpha argument to dismiss what is being developed here. One Sim MMO, such argument only exists because one playable Alpha is released, if SC, like the of majority MMO's did not release alpha access then this argument of "It's not released on the Alpha yet so it doesn't count" would not exist.
The trouble is max they chose the wrong engine, they're 5 years in and some of the most basic generic things aren't implemented yet, and the backend is a mess.
A game like this needed a bespoke engine from the get go, not cryengine because it looks nice.
So you'd say that Amazon chose the wrong engine as well? As far as engines go, there are a couple things we know. This genre has had "bespoke" engines since the beginning of the genre. The one thing that's come of it is underwhelming graphics, to say the least. There are well known and acknowledged short-comings in some of these pre-fab engines, but the fact is that they are REALLY good at doing the graphics end of it. So the question becomes, "If I want to make an MMO that doesn't look like it just arrived from 1999, what should I do?" It's not a trivial decision, but the technology gap to solve "MMO" issues from something like Unreal or Cryengine backwards is probably less than solving graphical issues from a bespoke engine. Furthermore, that tech gap is actually made slightly less daunting now that Lumberyard (based on Cryengine) joins the fray, because they're specifically developing a number of games across multiple genres, including an MMO. So it'll actually be a pretty good time to be an MMO developer in a few years.
MadFrenchie said: that CIG and Co will be able to complete the game per the full scope given, but you act as if it does in an attempt to refute Kefo.
And says who that SC needs to ever achieve its full scope to be something that was never made before?
For that sake, 3.0 alone is that, and by a safe margin when comparing to what's available in the mmo genre.
And when 3.0 ever gets here we will judge it against other games but right now comparing 3.0 before it is released is about as meaningful as trying to catch a fart in the wind.
Chris Roberts bought the source version of CryEngine with his own money before the crowdfunding campaign started. He based this on a comparison of the current engines at the time. But it wouldn't had mattered if he had chosen Unreal Engine, for instance, since they'd have to develop their own support for 64-bit, zones, and other things not in any engine anyway.
I don't agree that it'd be better and/or faster to build their own engine from scratch. Then they wouldn't have many tools, assets, and more, to start developing. As software development is an iterative process, where stone is built upon stone, it'd take a long time to even build the groundwork with a custom engine built from scratch. It's my belief that the project would've been farther from release if they'd done that. Besides, they wouldn't have gotten the wizards from Crytek they have now.
Or are they? We know that CIG was/is working with Amazon, so what does that mean? Maybe is there some doubling of effort going on? Sharing? Who knows.
I was thinking that it's possible that there's a back and forth between Amazon and CIG if they would contribute the code they develop back to LY. It's one standard licensing thing as well.
MadFrenchie said: that CIG and Co will be able to complete the game per the full scope given, but you act as if it does in an attempt to refute Kefo.
And says who that SC needs to ever achieve its full scope to be something that was never made before?
For that sake, 3.0 alone is that, and by a safe margin when comparing to what's available in the mmo genre.
So is the PU going live in 3.0 and allowing the massively part of the multiplayer to finally come to fruition? That would be required to submit that they're offering something not seen in the MMO genre, wouldn't it?
I mean, EQ Next had stuff "not seen" in the genre before... And we, the consumers, never actually got to play an MMO called EQ Next. So did they really offer something "not seen"?
So is the PU going live in 3.0 and allowing the massively part of the multiplayer to finally come to fruition? That would be required to submit that they're offering something not seen in the MMO genre, wouldn't it?
I mean, EQ Next had stuff "not seen" in the genre before... And we, the consumers, never actually got to play an MMO called EQ Next. So did they really offer something "not seen"?
It's a game under development, it's just one step in a ladder and no the MMO network is not there yet. EQ Next was doing something that also wasn't done before, it didn't get to happen because it was canceled.
And repeating myself: I find ridiculous the alpha / not in alpha argument to dismiss what is being developed here. One Sim MMO, such argument only exists because one playable Alpha is released, if SC, like the of majority MMO's did not release alpha access then this argument of "It's not released on the Alpha yet so it doesn't count" would not exist; that is the argument you're transmitting: that it doesn't count because the MMO network is not there yet. --'
If that is the case good for them (and for the fans). Forgive my comment.
Well the network still has to be dealt with and from what is seen is the last major thing they have to do in core tech to get the final setup in.
But indeed at this moment the graphics aren't driving the problem but the increasing amount of mechanics add more overhead to the game servers is, 3.0 is releasing without the final network setup so there's still a placeholder backend they need to tackle in.
So is the PU going live in 3.0 and allowing the massively part of the multiplayer to finally come to fruition? That would be required to submit that they're offering something not seen in the MMO genre, wouldn't it?
I mean, EQ Next had stuff "not seen" in the genre before... And we, the consumers, never actually got to play an MMO called EQ Next. So did they really offer something "not seen"?
It's a game under development, it's just one step in a ladder and no the MMO network is not there yet. EQ Next was doing something that also wasn't done before, it didn't get to happen because it was canceled.
And repeating myself: I find ridiculous the alpha / not in alpha argument to dismiss what is being developed here. One Sim MMO, such argument only exists because one playable Alpha is released, if SC, like the of majority MMO's did not release alpha access then this argument of "It's not released on the Alpha yet so it doesn't count" would not exist; that is the argument you're transmitting: that it doesn't count because the MMO network is not there yet. --'
If you don't want it to be ridiculous then stop comparing features that don't exist yet to completed games. If you want to say it's alpha/pre alpha and use that as an excuse that's fine but you also can't turn around and say that these mechanics are better then anything out there when the mechanics don't exist for backers to play.
So is the PU going live in 3.0 and allowing the massively part of the multiplayer to finally come to fruition? That would be required to submit that they're offering something not seen in the MMO genre, wouldn't it?
I mean, EQ Next had stuff "not seen" in the genre before... And we, the consumers, never actually got to play an MMO called EQ Next. So did they really offer something "not seen"?
It's a game under development, it's just one step in a ladder and no the MMO network is not there yet. EQ Next was doing something that also wasn't done before, it didn't get to happen because it was canceled.
And repeating myself: I find ridiculous the alpha / not in alpha argument to dismiss what is being developed here. One Sim MMO, such argument only exists because one playable Alpha is released, if SC, like the of majority MMO's did not release alpha access then this argument of "It's not released on the Alpha yet so it doesn't count" would not exist; that is the argument you're transmitting: that it doesn't count because the MMO network is not there yet. --'
If that is the case good for them (and for the fans). Forgive my comment.
Well the network still has to be dealt with and from what is seen is the last major thing they have to do in core tech to get the final setup in.
But indeed at this moment the graphics aren't driving the problem but the increasing amount of mechanics add more overhead to the game servers is, 3.0 is releasing without the final network setup so there's still a placeholder backend they need to tackle in.
Right... Which, whether you want to admit it or not, is still a possibility for SC.
And you can call it asinine all you want, crowdfunding is what brought this on, and you'd be foolish to expect anything less when you reach out directly to consumers to fund your project, specifically to the tune of 100+ million.
Until it's released and scaled up, the fame isn't doing anything unseen in the MMO genre because it's not providing an MMO experience. Considering there's already issues with backend and the full gameplay systems aren't even close to complete, it would be more presumptuous of us to act as if it has changed anything in the MMO genre until it provides an actual MMO experience. I believe it was Vanguard that had a lot of "never before seen" in it, too. Look what happened there.
Battlefield 1 is great, but there's a reason it has a player cap. As such, Battlefield 1 brings nothing "unseen" to the MMO genre. It's not providing an MMO experience. Until it does, it is about as groundbreaking to the MMO genre as the SC alphas sans any massively multiplayer features being yet implemented.
Right... Which, whether you want to admit it or not, is still a possibility for SC.
Battlefield 1 is great, but there's a reason it has a player cap. As such, Battlefield 1 brings nothing "unseen" to the MMO genre. It's not providing an MMO experience. Until it does, it is about as groundbreaking to the MMO genre as the SC alphas sans any massively multiplayer features being yet implemented.
When GW2 was announced years before it released and they started talking the game, I said the same thing: Something that was never done before. They had one different approach on things that as it released especially the dynamic events driven game-world with cut questing was something that indeed was never done in the genre before.
That was what they were developing, not what they had released, just as SC. So I'm not going to pretend like you and @Kefo that SC is not one MMO under development because the Alpha release doesn't have the necessary network yet.
It's ridiculous for me to stand by that, that's like saying Ashes of Creation is NOT one MMO under development because it's not released yet! No no, I'm taking your logic even further: Ashes of Creation is Vaporware, is nothing, because it's not released yet!
This silly argument only exists because SC has one Alpha released; if SC like most MMO's did not release one Alpha early access phase you wouldn't even bring this up.
Do you want a more relevant example? When Elite Dangerous released its Alpha, it had NO multiplayer, its whole network setup was still being developed.
So what you're trying to say is they're ATTEMPTING to do something groundbreaking, but have yet presented a working MMO product (MVP, alpha, whatever) that presents anything groundbreaking?
So what you're trying to say is they're ATTEMPTING to do something groundbreaking, but have yet presented a working MMO product (MVP, alpha, whatever) that presents anything groundbreaking?
Because it is in development.
For anyone who backed SC, who backed Ashes of Creation, Crowfall and so forth, the games do not exist until they do, it's the nature of it, same was for Elite Dangerous that also pitched since KS things that were not done before. One can't discredit AoC, SC or Crowfal as not MMO's just because their MMO setup is still to be presented/delivered.
SC is one MMO type of game as SQ42 is a SP Campaign type of game. The game being developed here, is one Space Sim, FPS MMO, as stated here.
Well the studios producing those other games don't go round blowing their trumpet about BDSSE, best 1st person shooter and all that bullcrap. CIG can't manage to get shit working with their 400+ staff and $155 million so they can't really be held in the same light as small studios with their meagre budgets.
Comments
I find ridiculous the alpha / not in alpha argument to dismiss what is being developed here. One Sim MMO, such argument only exists because one playable Alpha is released, if SC, like the of majority MMO's did not release alpha access then this argument of "It's not released on the Alpha yet so it doesn't count" would not exist.
A game like this needed a bespoke engine from the get go, not cryengine because it looks nice.
It IS basically a bespoke engine nowadays.
Have fun
Your post is a red herring.
For that sake, 3.0 alone is that, and by a safe margin when comparing to what's available in the mmo genre.
I get that the scope of the game changed, but the clown in charge, instead of pulling estimates out his arse and saying the scope wouldn't effect delivery should've been honest and told people that this would be drastically alter dev time and gone with a new engine.
Star Citizen started as a team of 7 people, they had no resources, neither in development neither in money to ever do their own engine to sustain one MMO FPS/Space Sim.
If they ever had the number of resources they ended up having years on day-1, they admittedly would have gone with their own built solution.
Crazkanuk
----------------
Azarelos - 90 Hunter - Emerald
Durnzig - 90 Paladin - Emerald
Demonicron - 90 Death Knight - Emerald Dream - US
Tankinpain - 90 Monk - Azjol-Nerub - US
Brindell - 90 Warrior - Emerald Dream - US
----------------
Though I think even Amazon is struggling with the network because LY still lies mostly in the same netcode as CE that CIG is gutting and replacing.
I don't agree that it'd be better and/or faster to build their own engine from scratch. Then they wouldn't have many tools, assets, and more, to start developing. As software development is an iterative process, where stone is built upon stone, it'd take a long time to even build the groundwork with a custom engine built from scratch. It's my belief that the project would've been farther from release if they'd done that. Besides, they wouldn't have gotten the wizards from Crytek they have now.
Viking
Or are they? We know that CIG was/is working with Amazon, so what does that mean? Maybe is there some doubling of effort going on? Sharing? Who knows.
Crazkanuk
----------------
Azarelos - 90 Hunter - Emerald
Durnzig - 90 Paladin - Emerald
Demonicron - 90 Death Knight - Emerald Dream - US
Tankinpain - 90 Monk - Azjol-Nerub - US
Brindell - 90 Warrior - Emerald Dream - US
----------------
I mean, EQ Next had stuff "not seen" in the genre before... And we, the consumers, never actually got to play an MMO called EQ Next. So did they really offer something "not seen"?
And repeating myself: I find ridiculous the alpha / not in alpha argument to dismiss what is being developed here. One Sim MMO, such argument only exists because one playable Alpha is released, if SC, like the of majority MMO's did not release alpha access then this argument of "It's not released on the Alpha yet so it doesn't count" would not exist; that is the argument you're transmitting: that it doesn't count because the MMO network is not there yet. --'
Well the network still has to be dealt with and from what is seen is the last major thing they have to do in core tech to get the final setup in.
But indeed at this moment the graphics aren't driving the problem but the increasing amount of mechanics add more overhead to the game servers is, 3.0 is releasing without the final network setup so there's still a placeholder backend they need to tackle in.
And you can call it asinine all you want, crowdfunding is what brought this on, and you'd be foolish to expect anything less when you reach out directly to consumers to fund your project, specifically to the tune of 100+ million.
Until it's released and scaled up, the fame isn't doing anything unseen in the MMO genre because it's not providing an MMO experience. Considering there's already issues with backend and the full gameplay systems aren't even close to complete, it would be more presumptuous of us to act as if it has changed anything in the MMO genre until it provides an actual MMO experience. I believe it was Vanguard that had a lot of "never before seen" in it, too. Look what happened there.
Battlefield 1 is great, but there's a reason it has a player cap. As such, Battlefield 1 brings nothing "unseen" to the MMO genre. It's not providing an MMO experience. Until it does, it is about as groundbreaking to the MMO genre as the SC alphas sans any massively multiplayer features being yet implemented.
That was what they were developing, not what they had released, just as SC. So I'm not going to pretend like you and @Kefo that SC is not one MMO under development because the Alpha release doesn't have the necessary network yet.
It's ridiculous for me to stand by that, that's like saying Ashes of Creation is NOT one MMO under development because it's not released yet! No no, I'm taking your logic even further: Ashes of Creation is Vaporware, is nothing, because it's not released yet!
This silly argument only exists because SC has one Alpha released; if SC like most MMO's did not release one Alpha early access phase you wouldn't even bring this up.
Do you want a more relevant example? When Elite Dangerous released its Alpha, it had NO multiplayer, its whole network setup was still being developed.
Thanks for clarifying.
For anyone who backed SC, who backed Ashes of Creation, Crowfall and so forth, the games do not exist until they do, it's the nature of it, same was for Elite Dangerous that also pitched since KS things that were not done before. One can't discredit AoC, SC or Crowfal as not MMO's just because their MMO setup is still to be presented/delivered.
SC is one MMO type of game as SQ42 is a SP Campaign type of game. The game being developed here, is one Space Sim, FPS MMO, as stated here.