******Official Star Citizen / Squadron 42 Thread******
- Thread starter Raumarik
- Start date
2.5 was far better that 3.23 so thats not a high bar is it.
And yes it has better perf but you forget , most are using computer are over double the performance than they was back then
Caporegime
- Joined
- 7 Apr 2008
- Posts
- 25,811
- Location
- Lorville - Hurston
Soldato
- Joined
- 14 Aug 2009
- Posts
- 3,381
It's just some basic stuff in space, it's hardly a place to learn and get better at "flying", shooting, interacting, etc.Hopefully it will get better later on as it would have been an ideal way to test locally the AI and other systems, ignoring the server performance issues.
Last edited:
Caporegime
- Joined
- 7 Apr 2008
- Posts
- 25,811
- Location
- Lorville - Hurston
Yea I agree that it should be better, but that's not what the op was asking.
With the above statement, you can do so in arena commander.
The pirate swarm and the pvp dog fight is actually a good way to learn and get better at flight combat.
That's literally how most skill pilots practise and learn.
It's by no means perfect, but it is pretty good for what you specifically want out of it and in this case, getting better at dog fighting and in tweaking your controls
Last edited:
I agree it would be better than just a load of open space but for testing controls it's ok.
I noticed when I clicked the drop down earlier I didn't see the PTU or whatever it's called. I only have live as an option. Do they randomly disable it or something
I noticed when I clicked the drop down earlier I didn't see the PTU or whatever it's called. I only have live as an option. Do they randomly disable it or something
Caporegime
- Joined
- 7 Apr 2008
- Posts
- 25,811
- Location
- Lorville - Hurston
Are you wave 1?
Anyways yea it could be better the arena commander but I think it is good for tweaking controls and practising dog fighting against ai or pvp
I don't know what that means lol. I paid the bare minimum in like 2013 I think or 2012.
Caporegime
- Joined
- 7 Apr 2008
- Posts
- 25,811
- Location
- Lorville - Hurston
PTU is the public test universe,
The patch cycle goes like this,
Evocadi test(approx 1000 people only allowed to test next patch)
Wave 1 PTU(subscribers and most active users) get to try the patch
Wave 2 PTU….
WAVE 3 ptu..
Wave 4 ….
Wave 5.. (anyone can try the next up and coming patch)
LIVE -> Hits the live servers and is the current released patch
I thought you was trying to test out the new up and coming patch 4.2 and that is why i asked if you are wave 1. It’s on wave 1 stage at the time of writing this
You forget , average back then was 80ish gig and recommanded a 500gig SSD to do the updates and what not. Prety sure my install is not over 3 terabyte however not looked. Only have a !tb drive so ....
So nice try and thanks for playing!
It does look better but not a vast amount, lets be honest here there are games today that on the whole look vastly better.
Soldato
- Joined
- 28 Oct 2011
- Posts
- 8,778
You forget , average back then was 80ish gig and recommanded a 500gig SSD to do the updates and what not. Prety sure my install is not over 3 terabyte however not looked. Only have a !tb drive so ....
So nice try and thanks for playing!
It does look better but not a vast amount, lets be honest here there are games today that on the whole look vastly better.
That's a brave, albeit foolhardy statement to make on this thread.
Caporegime
- Joined
- 7 Apr 2008
- Posts
- 25,811
- Location
- Lorville - Hurston
What game looks better than sc.You forget , average back then was 80ish gig and recommanded a 500gig SSD to do the updates and what not. Prety sure my install is not over 3 terabyte however not looked. Only have a !tb drive so ....
So nice try and thanks for playing!
It does look better but not a vast amount, lets be honest here there are games today that on the whole look vastly better.
Please go and view any sc screenshot thread and tell me another game that looks better.
Also, check what 2.0. Looks crap compared now lol
I am with you on this in that the stuff that was in 2.5 to what is in 4.0 doesn't look amazingly better. Ship geo has got better, materials have got better, characters are better but not by the margins you'd expect in 9yrs of development. At same time we didn't even have planets and animals and such to compare too.
There are lots of games that do visuals for cities or visuals for terrain better for sure. Horizon Forbidden West and A plagues Tale:Requiem for world/terrain side of things. , Vehicles out of race games such as latest F1, GT7, Assetto Corsa etc. Games that generally hit all of the things better but smaller scale are things like Senua's Saga: Hellblade 2, Black Myth:Wukong. But there are not that many really either considering.
We do realistically need to take scale into account though as you do have budgets for things like RAM usage and all that and as you noted above the size of the game file itself. (although it actually isn't that big in my view for the amount of content in game, a bit over 100GB I believe at min, compare that to 70GB for Helldivers as example which I don't feel is anything visually better). Go a step further and compare to the other space games on market and I would say for the genre then SC is by far the most visually complete and pleasing. Starfield had moments that were good for instance but just not managed to be consistent enough and the unique locations that did look wow just were so limited. SC tbf has only just got to point where the PoI feel unique and detailed and interesting and more to them than a basic bunker a million times too.
The NPCs and their jank in SC is still the largest letdown for SC and how it feels and plays visually in terms of being immersed.
Caporegime
- Joined
- 7 Apr 2008
- Posts
- 25,811
- Location
- Lorville - Hurston
Nope, it is my opinion.
Even 2.5, 4.1.1 and soon. to be 4.2 looks a lot better than 2.5
The lighting, animation, texture, details and scale are so much better than 2.5
2.5
4.1.1
And many games are approx 100gb ish nowadays with less depth/scale then SC such as Helldivers.
I think you need your eyes checked hehe.
There are much more pressing matters then how pretty the game looks(and does infact look very pretty)
Where was you when i and others moaned about the flight blades? Or when i moaned about CIG concentrating on polishing/stability instead of finishing the game by working on features instead?
Yea nowhere to be seen and instead you call be a fanboy
Last edited:
No need for the ******* contest right with things. Note I actually think its good they trying to stabilise what we have and clearly they are still bringing features to the game, the new content, missions, features for 4.1 and 4.2 actually been pretty solid whilst the game is more stable and that compared to 3.17/3.18 for most people on live.
The AI blades are dumb but more because they are unique blades per ship and task and not just blades for the task that could be used at least based on ship size like components where you have S1 to S5 or whatever. That is the dumb part. The selling of, honestly couldn't care as long as they come into game to purchase/earn etc in game accordingly.
Out of interest you notice the scopes worked in 2.5 as expected using PiP which can't do now as too taxing, things like the main structure textures for airlocks aren't really any better. Again this 9yrs on. The skybox is deffo worse in the new version of SC compared to the black of space 2.5 had and it makes the lighting feel off in space compared to prior. Hopefully they get full RT working in the PU in future proper and that resolves some of that but it feels a little soft and not harsh in terms of lighting and that makes things look more cartoonish compared to the older 2.5.
There are deffo swings and roundabouts. Look at the video at 24min for that 4.1 one you linked and it looks like a 2012 game with its awful textures, ground clutter and such. There are games for a decade that been so much better but that does come to a point about me talking about scale before. Trying to do Horizons or similar in an MMO isn't going to happen. But I do hope that Genesis fixes the textures and look of planets compared to what we have now when it comes online in a few years.
The lighting in Star Citizen looks very good, the materials are also very good, i don't think i have ever seen any game do materials better than Star Citizen.
But yes planet side expanses and foliage ecte can look very dated, a lot of it IS very dated, a lot of it is a decade old tech.
Planet tech V5 will improve it.
On a side note new locations in Pyro....
But yes planet side expanses and foliage ecte can look very dated, a lot of it IS very dated, a lot of it is a decade old tech.
Planet tech V5 will improve it.
On a side note new locations in Pyro....
Honestly the foliage is the same as we have now. It is just being spread about. That still looks super dated even compared to many older games. It is something when I spoke to Ali previous CitCon and on forums they basically said they are out of budget for them to get better though. Seems that isn't changing with Genesis updates. The foliage also very static and repetitive with a very low number of individual assets that don't appear to have any transform ability to provide variation.
Oddly enough games like Prehistoric Kingdom and Jurassic world evolution both do that extremely well where it is one asset with transform parameters that allow dozen if not hundreds of variation. Scaling parameters for their 9 rubber trees for instance would be good where they can be +/- 5% even. This means nothing is overstretched or gets broken but allows for greater variation. The trunk bases are all similar for scale of tree too so needing to have variation where modular could have been thought about. You get base trunk, mid trunk, top canopy as long as you conform to the shapes that can transform between one to another could have allowed much greater variation. To note for instance there is around 32 species of trees in UK forests alone. A lot of games do cover variation for such much better than SC does and really helps with the visuals of the environment.
Not saying not better with the new system they want with the spawning system, however it isn't greater asset coverage. Grass actually in SC is good, the ferns and such look really bad.
However one thing that will be excellent will be if they do genuinely get the seasons part in they showed. I am not sure how they are faking that data since we don't have orbital mechanic but I assume seasons are just done via a timing system instead of derived data from distance from sun. Also the fact that all planets rotate on a vertical axis at min unlike earth. So again assume planets will be fakes in that way. Not a bad thing just be interesting to see how it all goes and ties up in a couple of years from now when they get there with it.
The pop in and terrain detailing though yes looks much better for planets so that is a hope as that has been the headroom they have resolved there with the tiling. That will significantly improve how it feels at ground, the textures there though still don't look great but then they are using I believe Ali said only 480p ground textures to keep in that budget still and using it in other areas instead. Would like to see if they could at least use 1080p textures cause they do get muddy quick.
Sorry trying to keep replies short but there so much to all that and partially what I get involved in and why I end up writing so much. Oh and course again other games of scale still don't show the same LOD as SC, just SC can't compete with games that are 1km to 16km player spaces cause they have a much greater computational budget per m2 of player space you see.
Last edited:
Oh and to note rain being in etc, do note that the cloud generation is still what we had pre 4.2. They are not dynamically forming yet to Genesis data. It is dynamic rain, not dynamic weather. The sounds from the CitCon demo for rain and wind seem better than what in 4.2 and the audio stuff shown at CitCon isn't yet but would hopefully fix the rain sound where it just as loud in belly of a large ship compared to the bridge or similar.