1443 replies to this topic

[Heffay]

CompproB237, on 20 November 2014 - 02:17 PM, said:

The HSR is even pretty spot on perfect.

You mean the client authorized hit detection.

Which will have to be fixed eventually, of course. For reasons I'm sure you won't need explained to you...

[CompproB237]

Heffay, on 20 November 2014 - 02:24 PM, said:

You mean the client authorized hit detection.

Which will have to be fixed eventually, of course.

You sure it's not because it's HSR done right? I'm not specifically referring to weapon fire. Just for your information.

Edited by CompproB237, 20 November 2014 - 02:29 PM.

[Heffay]

CompproB237, on 20 November 2014 - 02:29 PM, said:

You sure it's not because it's HSR done right? I'm not referring to weapon fire. Just for your information.

Yes. I'm sure.

[CompproB237]

Heffay, on 20 November 2014 - 02:30 PM, said:

Yes. I'm sure.

Oh and I will concede that Arena Commander's initial module release was delayed all the way until June 4th, 2014. That's longer than 60 to 90 days but at least there was an apology posted about it. Although, this delay was stated 90 days and then they delayed it much longer but they continuously provided explanations. Obviously they had a working pre-alpha that was being used in many of the PAX events and previews/livestreams they had running to show the progress. When they announced the v.8 delay on May 28th, 2014 they thoroughly explained why. I respect that, and this is why I did not take issue with the delays.

Granted those posts do show shifting in production deadlines, they've consistently been very open about why. Again, I don't have a problem with a delay so long as it's explained. The amount of detail they've given as to the reasons for delay have also been really appreciated.

[Heffay]

A working pre-alpha... Do you know where the phrase "this is bull ****!!" Comes from?

[CompproB237]

Heffay, on 20 November 2014 - 03:20 PM, said:

A working pre-alpha... Do you know where the phrase "this is bull ****!!" Comes from?

Can someone help explain to him the difference between Pre-Alpha and other stages of development?

Edited by CompproB237, 20 November 2014 - 03:25 PM.

[Heffay]

No, I get it. You have a double standard.

[CompproB237]

Oh ya, just found where that came from. The PAX East preview in March that showed a preview of Arena Commander Multiplayer Dogfighting. Chris was suffering from one of the Blockers that was outlined in the delay announcement. It's a good thing they squashed that bug. That's why pre-alpha exists. Finding and squashing those bugs that are game breaking.

Heffay, on 20 November 2014 - 03:28 PM, said:

No, I get it. You have a double standard.

Besides attempting to insult me, what are you trying to say here? I mean, if you're trying to drag the narrative away from Star Citizen, again, then I know what you're talking about. If that's not the case then you're going to need to explain it to me in a way that conforms to the rules stated previously by a moderator.

Edited by CompproB237, 20 November 2014 - 03:59 PM.

[Roadbeer]

Heffay, on 20 November 2014 - 03:28 PM, said:

No, I get it. You have a double standard.

Careful, it appears that those who would moderate rebuttals to your blatant trollbait, have left the building.

[CompproB237]

Roadbeer, on 21 November 2014 - 01:30 AM, said:

Careful, it appears that those who would moderate rebuttals to your blatant trollbait, have left the building.

He doesn't need a moderator for people that rebut him. His arguments stand on their own merits. Right?

[DEN_Ninja]

Roadbeer, on 21 November 2014 - 01:30 AM, said:

Careful, it appears that those who would moderate rebuttals to your blatant trollbait, have left the building.

To be fair Roadbeer he does have a point that its a bit of bull term. Pre-Alpha is Indev which is hardly even close to minimally viable. I can NOT call any sort of game that is Indev even close to being a viable game like Comppro is trying to argue.

You can't just excuse the delays because there is a even less than minimally viable product in existence. When it is in the hands of consumers then I would say so.

Arena/DFM is out now so this entire point is just trivial arguing over who can try to prove which game is totally not at fault without admitting that both are at fault for not making deadlines. How about them planetary things and stuff and the walking around and exploring.

[Heffay]

Tichorius Davion, on 21 November 2014 - 08:02 AM, said:

Arena/DFM is out now so this entire point is just trivial arguing over who can try to prove which game is totally not at fault without admitting that both are at fault for not making deadlines. How about them planetary things and stuff and the walking around and exploring.

The good news is that 2014 has been all about hitting deadlines for PGI. CIG is learning to stop issuing deadlines, but it was a rough road for them until that happened. It's just... quiet over there. Which is definitely the right thing for them to do. They can't let the hype get away from them, because when they inevitably have to pull back from some of the stretch goals, the fallout will be far worse.

They've at least laid the foundation for that, saying that not all stretch goals will be in the game for release. Which is good, but it's still going to be future forum flamewar when some grand admirals find out that the stretch goal that made them spend $5k on the game is one of them that won't be in until 2019. They should define the scope of the game for v1.0. They need to establish *now* what they will consider a minimally viable product, so people can start girding their loins for what they'll see in 2016 when the PU (hopefully) goes live.

[DEN_Ninja]

Heffay, on 21 November 2014 - 08:11 AM, said:

The good news is that 2014 has been all about hitting deadlines for PGI. CIG is learning to stop issuing deadlines, but it was a rough road for them until that happened. It's just... quiet over there. Which is definitely the right thing for them to do. They can't let the hype get away from them, because when they inevitably have to pull back from some of the stretch goals, the fallout will be far worse.

They've at least laid the foundation for that, saying that not all stretch goals will be in the game for release. Which is good, but it's still going to be future forum flamewar when some grand admirals find out that the stretch goal that made them spend $5k on the game is one of them that won't be in until 2019. They should define the scope of the game for v1.0. They need to establish *now* what they will consider a minimally viable product, so people can start girding their loins for what they'll see in 2016 when the PU (hopefully) goes live.

Personally I want Chris Roberts to TAKE HIS FREAKING TIME. The fault of a lot of gaming development has been taking either too much time or too little time allocated to hard development cycles. They have a lot of stuff on their plate that I understand they can do and their R&D is jumping by leaps and bounds pushing Cryengine to a real limit.

People won't be happy with a minimally viable product when it comes to Star Citizen. This is what Hype does. Its a great vehicle to garner a focused community but there needs to by a stern follow up. They need to put up a really strong showing when they hit release. Doesn't need perfect but it can not have any major hiccups especially if the persistent universe does automatically turn into an Eve rush for control.

[CompproB237]

Heffay, on 21 November 2014 - 08:11 AM, said:

The good news is that 2014 has been all about hitting deadlines for PGI.

Was this line necessary? Especially when you take in to account this:

Egomane, on 20 November 2014 - 01:35 PM, said:

Heffay, what I said goes for you as well! Please stop the discussion about MWO and PGI!

Tichorius Davion, on 21 November 2014 - 08:02 AM, said:

To be fair Roadbeer he does have a point that its a bit of bull term. Pre-Alpha is Indev which is hardly even close to minimally viable. I can NOT call any sort of game that is Indev even close to being a viable game like CompproB* is trying to argue.

That is precisely what I was not trying to argue. Also, I wanted to mention Perpetual Beta. There's examples in a lot of games that show that they're in a Perpetual Beta. Now, interim releases are a completely different thing (think security fixes, small bug fixes, minor application fixes). I do not want to argue over what stage of development Star Citizen is in since it is really subjective and it's already been stated by Chris that the game is still in Pre-Alpha and the released modules are Alpha.

Edited by CompproB237, 21 November 2014 - 01:41 PM.

[Helmer]

Please stay on topic everyone.


Thanks!



Cheers.

[Gremlich Johns]

Citing the fact that CIG said the Arena Module would be out at the "end of 2013 no matter what" is disingenuous considering that CIG asked the pledgers/backers in late 2013 if they would like the Arena Commander module released as is at the end of 2013 or give it a few months in order to deliver a better experience.

Guess what, the Community overwhelmingly said in so many words "Wait until it's a better experience"

[redacted, offtopic]

Edited by Catalina Steiner, 26 November 2014 - 07:05 AM.

[Roburn Bliss]

Quote

something wholly different is going on in the game world. It's called, appropriately, gaming the system. And there are many levels of it. Example? Elite: Dangerous. No offline version. Why? They really can't make any money off of an offline version so they say they won't support it. I don't care what the president of that firm says - there's money to be had and it ain't there.

?

Frontier cut a secondary goal (offline) so they can put all of their resources behind the primary goal (online). It's that simple.

[CompproB237]

Heffay, on 22 November 2014 - 08:45 AM, said:

I'm pointing out the hypocrisy of those who point to "lies" told by PGI in comparison to the "lies" told by PGI. They aren't lies. It is just their position at that time.

But for some reason your reaction to them is completely different. There is no difference. Both games have changes as they get developed from previously identified plans. And it's perfectly ok in *BOTH* cases.

Really, what is with you and consistently driving the narrative towards other people's opinions of PGI or about comparing MWO/PGI to Star Citizen/CIG? This is the Star Citizen thread. If you wanted to talk about that you can easily have a discussion about it in another thread. This one is for talking about Star Citizen.

Gremlich Johns, on 22 November 2014 - 11:30 AM, said:

I still advise you to carefully present your arguments/stances, you'll see a change in the way people respond to you.

See? This guy gets it.

Ahem
Back on topic:
I'm glad to see them letting everyone test the 300-series ships even if you don't have one of them. It allows for some people that otherwise couldn't provide feedback to actually be able to. I hope they do that for other ship series in the future.

Edited by CompproB237, 22 November 2014 - 01:25 PM.

[ShinVector]

Hows that flight controls nowadays ?

I feel that I only want to start playing it more when Single Player is out... Referring to SQ24.
Not too interested in that FPS stuff...

[Punkass]

ShinVector, on 23 November 2014 - 12:13 AM, said:

Hows that flight controls nowadays ?

I feel that I only want to start playing it more when Single Player is out... Referring to SQ24.
Not too interested in that FPS stuff...

The flight model feels a lot smoother. It's still a little jittery with fine input, but it's a lot better than it was a few months ago.