******Official Star Citizen / Squadron 42 Thread******

Halfmad said:
Adults can't be adults? I don't buy it. This wasn't just at the pitch, CR has consistently let the community down and the community has continually asked for more, thrown money at him like a top rate hooker and he's kept dancing. The blame isn't all on him because the community is so damn keen to keep that booty moving ;) The blame is shared.

Many in the community now seem to be at the "just focus on the current scope" mood with additional stuff being later well after release, there still some who want more added though.
Click to expand...
Crowds voted to throw their own country under the bus (brexit) and you expect them to make sound decisions when it comes to the game of their dreams? Especially when you have a really good salesman like CR. There is a reason why Germany banned referendums after ww2.

I can picture a few years down the line SC has failed to even become a proper game. CR comes on stage giving this "honest" speech of how he tried but the technology just wasn't there, people wanted too much, if only he had a bit more time... The community cheers for him while it gets ripped apart from blaming each other, everyone is responsible apart from the genuine, magical Chris Roberts. Meanwhile the rest of the world laughs and SC is memed for an eternity.

The End :/
 
Last edited:
humbug said:
Funny how all the naysayers are getting very loud now that 3.0 live testing has started.
Click to expand...

If you want to know what that looks like, it, well, aside from Leir III not being in the Stanton system (so this planet isn't in yet) it does look a lot like this.

 
rubberduck said:
I think this project will end worse than no man's sky did. At least I hope so.
Click to expand...

Why are you hoping something fails? Surely as gamers we want games to achieve their scope and to give us the next level of immersion? This all seems counter intuitive to say you want something to fail.

iamtheoneneo said:
what are you expecting SC to be exactly? because its essentially the same as elite but walking around areas - which Elite are getting to as part of their 10 year plan.
I love SC fanboys that knock elite, when they are both the same type of games. The only difference is elite seems to have made significantly more playable progress in its grand plan than SC.

but keep on drinking that Chris Roberts coolaid.
Click to expand...

Elite and SC are different animals offering very different experiences. But I have played Elite and found it boring. This was a while back and of course things are being added but there are key issues. Balance being the key as mentioned above, it is basically a spreadsheet with a skin on it now for trading unfortunately. You set up to do something, you leave it to do something and come back to credit.

But to give an idea to the differences that I am aware of as to date (as I try to keep up with elite in case something interesting is added I can get back into) are these:

Ships in Elite
  • Smaller scale (194m largest playable ship as far as I am aware)
  • No internals (currently, although suggesting will come in future)
  • modules for ships to update internal compartments such as shields and engines
  • hard points to external
  • 34 models total for game (currently with maybe a few noted for later)
  • variations for the 13 roles in Elite, although some feel a little flat and some

Ships in SC
  • Larger scale from 8m to 2800m at moment.
  • Over 100 individual ships and specialist variants
  • Fully custom modules for internals for switching the role of ships (medic bays, engineering, labs etc)
  • Lighting and VFX for damage states throughout
  • Derelict and damage states in greater detailing
  • modules for ships to update internal components such as shields and engines
  • More varied modules/internals; 20+ noted roles (basically the 13 from ED plus some more noted thus far), generally the basics of the key elements at least written in documents seem more fleshed out but we shall see.
I should say that I prefer some of the artistic styles to the cockpits in ED very often. They look much more futuristic and similar. However I am sure some ships in SC will go that way more than currently.

However overall I would say the ships in SC already offer the principle ideas gameplay significantly more than what ED does. 3.0 is the basis for this and it appears that this will be ramping up faster over the next 12 months now that core tech has been introduced such as item 2.0 which appeared the main stumbling point. We shall have to see.

Now add in the FPS aspect and fully explore-able planets including those with Atmosphere which again currently ED can't do I would say is significantly different. Ground vehicles, living economics that are not player driven but player influenced, aliens (significant more in that term also tbh).

I think ED has some excellent ideas in terms of story and gameplay but they are so empty in creating those into story arcs and giving gameplay from it seems more like the ability to explore what the Milky Way could be in terms of planets and system scales basically.
 
humbug said:
If you want to know what that looks like, it, well, aside from Leir III not being in the Stanton system (so this planet isn't in yet) it does look a lot like this.

Click to expand...

If they really are able to give that scale at that fidelity and it becomes playable by more than 24 players, I would be happy with 1000 people able to be in the same instance tbh then I am going to be happy exploring.

I have seen that there are only 7 or so noted outposts to explore per moon with more to find on the planets, I just hope they are varied enough. It also appears that going from moon to moon is a little frustrating, apparently you drop out of QT about 1000km from the moon which to me honestly seems a little far as you then have to QT to a closer point and then you have to fly at full speed for 5 mins to get to the surface from these points.

It seems that it would work better if we could QT much closer. Assuming the atmosphere is 50km then dropping out QT a few hundred km seems like a better idea. That means we are not travelling so long to get to these surfaces. It would be good that the more accurate you could QT means the closer to the moons/planets etc. I know this is first pass but that seems like an obvious annoyance if true.
 
Curlyriff said:
It seems that it would work better if we could QT much closer. Assuming the atmosphere is 50km then dropping out QT a few hundred km seems like a better idea. That means we are not travelling so long to get to these surfaces. It would be good that the more accurate you could QT means the closer to the moons/planets etc. I know this is first pass but that seems like an obvious annoyance if true.
Click to expand...

Just for semantics warping in at this altitude (in reality) would almost certainly get you killed every time due to your lack of horizontal velocity and close proximity to a large mass the gravity would easily pulll you in. And if we take earth for an example 300km and you would be well within the very thinnest of the thin section of out outer atmosphere.

However this said, I entirely appreciate that this is one of those things developers need to "get wrong" for the fun of the game, it's not like he's building a hyper realistic space flight simulator.
 
harry5522 said:
Just for semantics warping in at this altitude (in reality) would almost certainly get you killed every time due to your lack of horizontal velocity and close proximity to a large mass the gravity would easily pulll you in. And if we take earth for an example 300km and you would be well within the very thinnest of the thin section of out outer atmosphere.

However this said, I entirely appreciate that this is one of those things developers need to "get wrong" for the fun of the game, it's not like he's building a hyper realistic space flight simulator.
Click to expand...
Pickle Rick!!!

Wubba lubba dub dub man!
 
Sorry if this has already been covered somewhere. I've not played SC since a couple of updates ago...

However, is the maximum number of players on a server going to increase with 3.0? Last time I played I believe it was somewhere in the 20-24 region
 
Spuddy said:
Sorry if this has already been covered somewhere. I've not played SC since a couple of updates ago...

However, is the maximum number of players on a server going to increase with 3.0? Last time I played I believe it was somewhere in the 20-24 region
Click to expand...

It's been 24 for a while, I don't think this is due to change with 3.0
 
Spuddy said:
Oh, well thats a massive shame! I was hoping for at least 100 players so it made the vast open world feel a little more alive.
Click to expand...

I think there are a few small issues blocking this from happening at the moment. Of course im not evocati myself so one can only speculate.
 
harry5522 said:
Just for semantics warping in at this altitude (in reality) would almost certainly get you killed every time due to your lack of horizontal velocity and close proximity to a large mass the gravity would easily pulll you in. And if we take earth for an example 300km and you would be well within the very thinnest of the thin section of out outer atmosphere.

However this said, I entirely appreciate that this is one of those things developers need to "get wrong" for the fun of the game, it's not like he's building a hyper realistic space flight simulator.
Click to expand...

Yeah I know but that was my point. We are playing a game where planets and moons are 1/4 to 1/6 scale and thus atmosphere is too. So the atmosphere is around 50km thick for a plaent at 1/6.

The game has to be enjoyable and the the distance we could QT would be hugely depenant on the real tech. For instance if the dampening field created by the ship was that much stronger than the gravity well creates by earth as an example and thus no affect is created to the occupants on board we could theoretically QT just abpve atmosphere.

But yeah that's how I believe it should work, that we end up around the atmosphere after QT unless we choose otherwise. Just cause that to me makes most sense gameplay wise.

If we want to jump direct to station and be within 50km of the ATC being reachable that would also be good in my opinion.
 
Spuddy said:
Oh, well thats a massive shame! I was hoping for at least 100 players so it made the vast open world feel a little more alive.
Click to expand...

Aye tbh I would suggest we are not likely to have more than 24 people till the mext major network update which is slated for after the 3.X series of updates at moment. I would say maybe we get a jump if things go well with 48 or 64 players around 3.2.

Getting over that at moment seems a long way off to what they have been working on.
 
Frontier seemed to introduce the idea of hyperspacing into a system and still being an annoyingly massive distance away, and having to Torus [or whatever the term was in that game] your way in for quite some time. it seemed overkill to me, the distance in the original Elite was about right, obviously you should have some travel time as a game mechanic to provide potential interaction w/ other NPCs/aliens/asteroids for mining etc etc.
 
Curlyriff said:
Star Marine is still a part of it and always will be in the longer term. It is basically like chucking in COD multiplayer as a side game (they are suggesting in lore it is what the UEE use for training their soldiers) and it could also be a recreational sport similar to us having laser tag, paintball & airsoft. There are a few other games as well then which all play into it.
Click to expand...
i'm out hte loop on this, do you mean it's being incorporated purely AS a game w/in the game? i thought all the FPS elements were playable as the actual universe stuff, ie you could use all that mechanic as a method of attaking ships/places/people etc?
 
wolfie138 said:
i'm out the loop on this, do you mean it's being incorporated purely AS a game w/in the game? i thought all the FPS elements were playable as the actual universe stuff, IE you could use all that mechanic as a method of attacking ships/places/people etc?
Click to expand...

So Star Marine in itself is the multiplayer 12v12 or whatever it ends up. There is talk of having maps with vehicles also like battlefield multiplayer.

The lore is that the UEE use this to train with. I am hoping that they will add the ability to have:
  • Marine vs Marine
  • Marine vs Vanduul
  • Vanduul vs Vanduul
That is the FPS in game within a game that we currently enter via main menu. The idea being that you enter the Star Marine via a terminal at a port to enter a game or via your mobiglass whilst you are QTing to a planet for instance.

However I also hope they have the ability to enter the Star Marine like we do now just via the home menu splash screen so we don't have to be in the PU to have a quick game. It could be a bit like casual and ranked in Rainbow Six Siege where casual is from the main menu and you just jump in to play but to play ranked you have to log into the PU and travel to the correct station for tournaments and similar. You can almost make it as if you are playing an E-sport in the PU. That was my understanding.

With that there is still the FPS mechanics in the PU. It just isn't the 12v12 or similar. It is as you say so that we have the ability to raid, piracy etc. within the universe. So it is all playable in both, they are just not removing Star Marine like was being stated previous.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom