26 replies to this topic

[Besterino]

Man, I wish PGI could benefit from the lessons Chris Roberts learned with the CryEngine as apparently the makers of Kingdom Come: Deliverance will... *sigh* I mean, MWO also uses CryEngine 3, but I guess PGI has nothing "learned" that the Star Citizen Team might be interested in... https://robertsspace...ome-Deliverance

[cSand]

What are you talking about?

Edited by cSand, 18 February 2014 - 09:31 AM.

[Besterino]

I am talking about the partnership between the StarCitizen creators and the creators of Kingdom Come: Deliverance who are sharing tools, experience and whatnot for/with CryEngine 3 the different teams have originally developed for their own game but - apparently - found out is also useful for the respective other development team. Long story short: they are helping each other to get things done (and probably faster, more efficient and better than they could have done alone). Of course, you'd know what it's all about if you'd followed the link I posted...

Edited by Besterino, 18 February 2014 - 09:37 AM.

[Agent 0 Fortune]

I am sure that a "launched" game like MWO, could offer huge benefits to a startup company at the cost of their own development schedule, but I don't see an upside for PGI.

[Thorn Hallis]

Uhm...how could MWO benefit from "a robust character creation system"?

[Voidsinger]

Don't know about Kingdom Come: Deliverance, but sometimes I get reminded of Deliverance.

Is that banjos I hear?

[Reitrix]

Thorn Hallis, on 18 February 2014 - 12:14 PM, said:

Uhm...how could MWO benefit from "a robust character creation system"?

We could make some super sexy Pilots everyone else can see when (if) we (can ever) Eject from our dead 'Mechs?

[Khobai]

PGI could benefit from a publisher that doesnt take 70% of their revenue.

[xengk]

Voidsinger, on 18 February 2014 - 07:25 PM, said:

Don't know about Kingdom Come: Deliverance, but sometimes I get reminded of Deliverance.

Is that banjos I hear?

you got a pretty mouth.

[Navy Sixes]

Star Citizen...
Blown deadlines: Online.
3pv: Online.
Drastically scaled-back expectations after they've taken your money: Online.
All systems: Nominal.

[xhrit]

Tycho von Gagern, on 19 February 2014 - 02:20 AM, said:

Star Citizen...
Blown deadlines: Online.
3pv: Online.
Drastically scaled-back expectations after they've taken your money: Online.
All systems: Nominal.

And now they are reaching out to other developers for help because they will never be able to create what they promised.

[Sandpit]

xhrit, on 19 February 2014 - 04:48 AM, said:

they will never be able to create what they promised.

Which is exactly what people say on these forums. It's interesting to watch it play out for another game though, especially one so heavily touted by the detractors of this game. Notice you don't get the "SC is better because" or "Chris is a better dev because" threads anymore? Notice how you don't get the "SC will be so much better because" and "SC actually does it better and follows deadlines" anymore?

That tagline got real quiet after the first major missed deadline.....

[Voidsinger]

Sandpit, on 19 February 2014 - 01:03 PM, said:

Which is exactly what people say on these forums. It's interesting to watch it play out for another game though, especially one so heavily touted by the detractors of this game. Notice you don't get the "SC is better because" or "Chris is a better dev because" threads anymore? Notice how you don't get the "SC will be so much better because" and "SC actually does it better and follows deadlines" anymore?

That tagline got real quiet after the first major missed deadline.....

Okay, on an IGP forum, we can't really let rip at MWO. So confining this to Star Citizen:
- The initial miss is due to netcode. The initial slip was due to a decision the community agreed to to use the longer term inhouse developed code rather than the stock Crysis code.
- Star Citizen has modular design. Organisations are already in and improving. Hangar module is in. Next Great Starship competition proceeds.
- Communication with the community is still constant and two way.
- 3rd person view was never denied and was in every Wing Commander.
- Traget launch date is still November 2015, still 20 months away.
- Yes, the dogfight module has been a rather large miss (well, a couple of months at most). It is likely to have better quality because of delays.

It isn't a competition. My greatest hope would be that PGI/IGP suddenly metamorphosise, and start delivering on the things they initially promised. This year is off to a better start than last year, and I hope it gets rolling. However, experiences can be telling when done over more than a year. I've been wrong before, and want to be proved wrong on my feelings with regards to MWO (especially if they make achievements retroactive for those who played in the hope they would be on-time).

However, both games can co-exist. Many people back multiple projects (even developers). Star Citizen forums do have quite a few embittered MWO refugees. I'd like them to be able to return to MWO. The games are however 2 very different Genres. From the old pen and paper point of view, to me Star Citizen is Traveller, MWO Battletech. If both take up huge chunks of shelf space on my bookcases, why can't they both be on my computer?

#freeCN9-AH

[CrashieJ]

kinda obligatory

[Sandpit]

Voidsinger, on 19 February 2014 - 02:19 PM, said:

Okay, on an IGP forum, we can't really let rip at MWO. So confining this to Star Citizen:
- The initial miss is due to netcode. The initial slip was due to a decision the community agreed to to use the longer term inhouse developed code rather than the stock Crysis code.
- Star Citizen has modular design. Organisations are already in and improving. Hangar module is in. Next Great Starship competition proceeds.
- Communication with the community is still constant and two way.
- 3rd person view was never denied and was in every Wing Commander.
- Traget launch date is still November 2015, still 20 months away.
- Yes, the dogfight module has been a rather large miss (well, a couple of months at most). It is likely to have better quality because of delays.

No different than any other game ever developed. Point being no different than here and defending them as "different" just points to holding double standards.
Notice how you don't see people jumping up and down pointing to SC as the "perfect" example of what to do now? That's what I was getting at

[Voidsinger]

Sandpit, on 19 February 2014 - 06:29 PM, said:

No different than any other game ever developed. Point being no different than here and defending them as "different" just points to holding double standards.
Notice how you don't see people jumping up and down pointing to SC as the "perfect" example of what to do now? That's what I was getting at

No game has ever been "perfect".

However, at the time it was so highly being touted as such, CIG did have far superior communication with their players (and still do) than PGI/IGP did at that time. PGI/IGP do seem to be improving a great deal, all though there are a few numbbrain "what were they thinking?" moments. That said, CIG had a few of those (initial Freelancer cockpit view?).

I was surprised at the complete lack of fanfare with which the Griffin was added for C-bills yesterday. Then again, I don't get on the best with Griffins.

People who aren't willing to tout the flaws as well as the high points in games are too stuck in fanthink mode. There needs to be grievances, and the ability to express grievances, so games don't stray too far from the path. Having masses of players point out where a game is really going wrong, maysave that game from obscurity, or a place on Youtube's "Worst game ever" list.

[mekabuser]

am lolrotf at many of the delusional posts here.

[Sandpit]

Voidsinger, on 19 February 2014 - 07:38 PM, said:

No game has ever been "perfect".

However, at the time it was so highly being touted as such, CIG did have far superior communication with their players (and still do) than PGI/IGP did at that time. PGI/IGP do seem to be improving a great deal, all though there are a few numbbrain "what were they thinking?" moments. That said, CIG had a few of those (initial Freelancer cockpit view?).

I was surprised at the complete lack of fanfare with which the Griffin was added for C-bills yesterday. Then again, I don't get on the best with Griffins.

People who aren't willing to tout the flaws as well as the high points in games are too stuck in fanthink mode. There needs to be grievances, and the ability to express grievances, so games don't stray too far from the path. Having masses of players point out where a game is really going wrong, maysave that game from obscurity, or a place on Youtube's "Worst game ever" list.

agreed although
"PGI sucks"
"I can do it better"
"This would be easy to change"
"My idea is the best and only one that should be considered because it benefits myself and players like me regardless of how it would affect the rest of the population"

Are NOT feedback

[Tigreen]

You all are trying to compare apples and oranges. PGI has never produced a AAA game, where Chris Roberts has not only produced many, he has started ( or been a founding member ) of 2 successful development companies. PGI is using IP from another company where Chris Roberts basically started the space sim genre and created his own amazing IP.

You mention Cloud Imperium ( CI ) missing a single goal, A SINGLE GOAL. CI openly stated why and explained how this would effect the critical path of the over all project. Which, is to save time and money in the long run and will not extend the launch date. When PGI missed any of their goals many missed goals, did they explain as to why? Did any of them seem to save time for future updates? Much less money? Or as to what their critical path actually is? PGI gives vague goals and promises, telling us NOTHING ( we have no clue as to what any of this is impacting) and still misses. CI gives open dialog and listens to their fans. Time will tell if they are better or worse then PGI but with Chris Roberts history I think it will turn out OK.

I'll take the fish bowl style of development CI any day of the week. When they have a staff change they tell you about it on their WEEKLY video blog. PGI has to be asked weeks later ( where is the community mod )?

Really, REALLY!

It boggles my mind reading through the forums that people still have faith in PGI. I for one do not, but still play the game as it is fun even with all the amazingly bad elements ( not to mention the large sum of money I've spent ).

This game has the most amazing dichotomy of coding/functionality. The actual game play is off the charts fun. But the UI (mechlab, ect.) is the single worst UI I have ever seen in a successful product ( not game, product ). And I'm not going to start i the silly bad meta game.

Lets look at a few of the easy issues that could lower frustration, shall we?

• can't mark ready except from one location
  
• cant mark ready if you are in the mechlab ( no changes made )
  
• can't mark ready if you are in the skill tree ( no changes made )
  
• can't launch until you mark ready ( if I hit launch don't you think I am ready? )
  
• have to leave the load out screen to strip your mech ( I love this feature )
  
• mech data is not consistent. (module information is on the inventory list screen of a mech but not in the mechlab mech info )
  
• after selecting a skill tree item you have to click through another notification telling you that your selection is selected. ( once selected the skill changed color and displays different, not needing another fricken click)

I can continue, but whats the point? If the UI person doesn't even understand the basics of click efficiency, process flow or intuitive design the how can we expect any of it to make sense? Or to have the more difficult issues working / fixed. Does the UI person/team (is there more then one person working on the UI?) get a bonus for the number of clicks to accomplish any single task? Does PGI get a penny a click or something? It's a running joke in my group of friends about the number of clicks to get in to a game. Its like that wan't to frustrate us all in to quitting.

How many times did the community have to scream SMURFY before they started to listen? How long will it take for them to realize that their player base is full of geeky people that will design the crap of the UI for them? I'm a 20+ year programmer and PM and I can't imagine I'm the only one watching this train wreck thinking, well if they allowed modding I would help fix this. How many other MMO type games allow modding to basically scavenge ideas ( think about it )?

Here is why we are all here posting/reading. We see the potential that this game can be and are dreaming of a day when we will get that game we all wan't. The founders gave PGI 5 million dollars sight unseen. 5 MILLION DOLLARS!!!! That is faith, giving a company that has never worked on a project of this scope a butt load of cash with no proof of ability. What have they done with that faith? They created a game with AMAZING FUN mech combat and at the same time stomped all over that faith.

I know I'll get the "Then just leave if your not happy" silliness... and to that I say, why? I'm having fun playing MWO with friends. Not to mention we all like to watch a train wreck.

One last note. As of today 394,252 people have given CI $38,949,882 and all we get is a hanger. A hanger! Comparing PGI and CI is foolish they are in different leagues.

[Sandpit]

ok.........

so because they explained why they missed a deadline that makes it ok and somehow different from every other deadline ever missed. Gotcha

Sooooooooooooooo
you're saying that it's ok for SC to have 38million for a hangar and then not deliver their deadlines

You're also suggesting that a company should tell its customers every time there's a staff change? Interesting. How many times do other companies make sure to randomly announce every time an employee is hired or fired or resigns (unless it's the CEO position of a large company or some sort of scandal)? That has absolutely nothing to do with the game or us as customers. Since when is it expected for a company to run their staffing decisions by it's customers? That's really not a good example of anything.

This is just another in a long list of posts that basically says "SC is better because they explained the missed deadline so that makes it ok. Nevermind that they're completely blowing past deadlines like every other game ever developed because that's the nature of the business most times. I'll just hold PGI to a double standard because it's not cool to say anything bad about SC"

It's exactly the same thing. A missed deadline is a missed deadline no matter the reason. Hell we had forum rage here because a staff member had a family emergency (which they announced AND explained so your example really holds no validity in this case) and had to push some hitbox adjsutments back by a couple of weeks.

You complain that PGI doesn't communicate and then complain about the new UI issues. Yet, they announced WEEKS prior to launch what issues the new UI would have and that they would patch and fix as they go (which they have done every single patch since its launch), so they did EXACTLY what you're saying they don't do and yet saying it's ok for SC to miss a deadline because they explained it. It's not ok, for whatever reason, that PGI did the exact same thing though.

If you want to hold them to a different or higher standard that's cool but don't expect those that aren't and that are more of a middle of the road type to not see it for what it is. I've never said a bad thing about SC, I'm looking forward to it. It looks like a fun game. The forum rage over there is increasing just like it did here and will continue to rise as deadlines are missed and adjustments are made that a select few forum trolls don't like and start doing exactly what's done here.