I give up.

Shadow Reaper

Space Marshal
Jun 3, 2016
5,475
15,164
2,975
RSI Handle
Shadow Reaper
You can't measure progress without a clear definition of the end goal.
With Star Citizen the end goal is both undefined and constantly moving. If there is any progress, it is impossible to measure.
It's for this reason that I am constantly frustrated but not disappointed. When we all signed onto this project as supporters, it was because wwe were promised a game like no other. CIG has not yet failed to deliver on its promises. That can't happen until they go beta.

If when they go beta the game sucks by comparison to its competition, the market will sort it into oblivion, as well it should. The odds of this increase each year CIG extends, but we did indeed give them tacit permission to extend to whenever it takes to provide us with the promised. This--what is happening with delay after delay--always happens when you pay people in advance. This had to happen.

My suggestion is keep an eye on enough to grow in the lore, etc., and occupy yourself with something else. This game ain't gonna be ready for another 4-5 years.
 

Radegast74

Space Marshal
Oct 8, 2016
3,019
10,735
2,900
RSI Handle
Radegast74
Here's the game we would have gotten in 2015:
View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4xSOzEWsHOs


I'm thinking about how to run an online version of Traveller again.
Boy, that is a game I haven't heard anybody else mention in a looooong time. That was my fave RPG growing up, even more than D&D!

At this point, I'm not sure if I could handle a paper & pencil game anymore, but, I'd be willing to give it a try. I love taking out my old Traveller books and imagining that in an SC universe!

EDIT: As I watch the old video again, I have to say, I miss some of the older graphics and UI...it seems like CIG just keeps on re-arranging the same old chairs, over and over again...but at least we have planetary landings now! And less janky movement....
 

Lorddarthvik

Space Marshal
Donor
Feb 22, 2016
2,877
10,021
2,860
RSI Handle
Lorddarthvik
Here's the game we would have gotten in 2015:
View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4xSOzEWsHOs



Boy, that is a game I haven't heard anybody else mention in a looooong time. That was my fave RPG growing up, even more than D&D!

At this point, I'm not sure if I could handle a paper & pencil game anymore, but, I'd be willing to give it a try. I love taking out my old Traveller books and imagining that in an SC universe!

EDIT: As I watch the old video again, I have to say, I miss some of the older graphics and UI...it seems like CIG just keeps on re-arranging the same old chairs, over and over again...but at least we have planetary landings now! And less janky movement....
I enjoyed the hell out of that game if it was stable and worked as intended...

Regarding the looks:
It's something I've been feeling for a while now and even mentioned a couple of times: we had waaaaaaaaaay more actual geometry put into a lot of stuff, like ships. As it was mentioned in the old youtube shows, it was very very inefficient. Kinda blocky still and not so smooth and modern looking, and overall it might seem it lacked detail compared to the new stuff, but it was all there. Round buttons weren't just normal mapped boxes but actual geo. I miss that chunkyness.
It had it's charm but it had to go.
Also a huge part I see in the vid is how a lot of things ,like HUD, background (skybox), planets, the sun, was just faked in the already well understood traditional way and thus had brilliant art. Those had to go too for obvious reasons.


With all this "progress" of feature bloat, CiG basically created a trap for itself at first, which it seems to have embraced as The Way of doing things since. As they keep promising new stuff, we keep wanting even more newer stuff. Never ending circle unless they say enough is enough, here's what Done looks like and that's what you get.
 

Richard Bong

Space Marshal
Jul 29, 2017
2,370
6,607
2,850
RSI Handle
McHale
I enjoyed the hell out of that game if it was stable and worked as intended...

Regarding the looks:
It's something I've been feeling for a while now and even mentioned a couple of times: we had waaaaaaaaaay more actual geometry put into a lot of stuff, like ships. As it was mentioned in the old youtube shows, it was very very inefficient. Kinda blocky still and not so smooth and modern looking, and overall it might seem it lacked detail compared to the new stuff, but it was all there. Round buttons weren't just normal mapped boxes but actual geo. I miss that chunkyness.
It had it's charm but it had to go.
Also a huge part I see in the vid is how a lot of things ,like HUD, background (skybox), planets, the sun, was just faked in the already well understood traditional way and thus had brilliant art. Those had to go too for obvious reasons.


With all this "progress" of feature bloat, CiG basically created a trap for itself at first, which it seems to have embraced as The Way of doing things since. As they keep promising new stuff, we keep wanting even more newer stuff. Never ending circle unless they say enough is enough, here's what Done looks like and that's what you get.
They are trying to build on a foundation of shifting sand.

To make matters worse, they insist on reinventing the wheel.
 

NaffNaffBobFace

Space Marshal
Donor
Jan 5, 2016
12,275
45,144
3,150
RSI Handle
NaffNaffBobFace
They are trying to build on a foundation of shifting sand.

To make matters worse, they insist on reinventing the wheel.
I understand your frustration and that you have come to the end of your patience, none of us are enjoying the wait for progress and compltion and i think it may be worse for those who work in the software industry.

In regard to reinventing wheels, potentially some of the tech they are making/remaking will be a licenceable revenue source meaning we wont need a subscription or other agressive funding streams in futre. Thats what I've been suspecting for years now as some of the things SC can do just aren't a thing in other games which, for example, attempt maps at such scale.

That and apparently most focus is on s42 to push it over the line to a marketable product on a shelf, which we are intentionally kept in the dark about, and there may be much more shifting below the surface than outward indications suggest... may...

I understand though that once that spark of hope is extinguished things can get very dark indeed. I hope soon progress will be made and your wildest expectations will be surpassed, reigniting your interest in thr project. Thank you for your interest and contribution to this point, you and your help are appreciated.

Don't be a stranger, TEST'll be here if and when you need to chat some jolly old nonsense :-)
 
Last edited:

Richard Bong

Space Marshal
Jul 29, 2017
2,370
6,607
2,850
RSI Handle
McHale
I understand your frustration and that you have come to the end of your patience, none of us are enjoying the wait for progress and compltion and i think it may be worse for those who work in the software industry.

In regard to reinventing wheels, potentially some of the tech they are making/remaking will be a licenceable revenue source meaning we wont need a subscription or other agressive funding streams in futre. Thats what I've been suspecting for years now as some of the things SC can do just aren't a thing in other games which, for example, attempt maps at such scale.
Mapping is one of the reinventing the wheel things.

(I ran QA for the last two, in fact Bryce 7 is from 2011. IIRC Carrara 8 was 2012)

These are the current versions but the software has been capable of planet mapping that makes what Star Citizen is doing with planets obsolete before 2011. Astrosynthesis was designed to feed into Fractal Terrains. Fractal Terrains was designed to feed into Bryce. Bryce's output was pretty proprietary but the height maps were easy to output to Carrara in 2011.

Astrosynthesis builds your star systems, and produces the connections between them. In fact, it will take NASA star maps, and build out those systems if you prefer. It then passes the terrestial planets off to Fractal Terrains, which mapps them and passes the results to Bryce which creates height maps. No human intervention required, other than a couple of mouse clicks. Carrara then imports the height maps and allows you to create planets including defined biomes and a instancing tool, LODs and Mip-mapping so you can go from orbit to ant level.

This render is from January 2012. The fog is volumetric, the roads, trees, plants, leaves on the ground, etc. is the result of the instancing and scatter tools in use, in multiple layers.

Recon-Patrol-1.jpg


The output is specifically licensed to be used in games. No additional licensing required.

The first three allows you to have 100 systems in less than a month, to include all of the terrestial bodies height map generated, using one or two people to oversee and adjust the output.

Carrara has a learning curve and is scriptable, if you prefer automated, but allows a small team to turn out finished systems in weeks instead of years.
 

NaffNaffBobFace

Space Marshal
Donor
Jan 5, 2016
12,275
45,144
3,150
RSI Handle
NaffNaffBobFace
Mapping is one of the reinventing the wheel things.

(I ran QA for the last two, in fact Bryce 7 is from 2011. IIRC Carrara 8 was 2012)

These are the current versions but the software has been capable of planet mapping that makes what Star Citizen is doing with planets obsolete before 2011. Astrosynthesis was designed to feed into Fractal Terrains. Fractal Terrains was designed to feed into Bryce. Bryce's output was pretty proprietary but the height maps were easy to output to Carrara in 2011.

Astrosynthesis builds your star systems, and produces the connections between them. In fact, it will take NASA star maps, and build out those systems if you prefer. It then passes the terrestial planets off to Fractal Terrains, which mapps them and passes the results to Bryce which creates height maps. No human intervention required, other than a couple of mouse clicks. Carrara then imports the height maps and allows you to create planets including defined biomes and a instancing tool, LODs and Mip-mapping so you can go from orbit to ant level.

This render is from January 2012. The fog is volumetric, the roads, trees, plants, leaves on the ground, etc. is the result of the instancing and scatter tools in use, in multiple layers.

View attachment 23554

The output is specifically licensed to be used in games. No additional licensing required.

The first three allows you to have 100 systems in less than a month, to include all of the terrestial bodies height map generated, using one or two people to oversee and adjust the output.

Carrara has a learning curve and is scriptable, if you prefer automated, but allows a small team to turn out finished systems in weeks instead of years.
Many thanks for your experience, that's fascinating. I can see why you are so bummed out as in this particular example it has been a huge part of your profession where you have spent years helping to make something which is used in loads of properties.

If I could ask a question on this if I am not being awkward, I am a total layman:

How do these existing systems you worked on in the past handle persistent user generated terrain deformation, which will remain deformed permanently based on user actions like dropping a bomb and making a crater or dropping a settlement on a certain space? I recall in one of the SC YouTube videos a while back they showed work on deformation with a dev blasting a crater in the ground with the grenade launcher.... I can only assume the image height mapping may be a part of being able to keep that changed state permanently as the image would be edited, updated and referenced going forth to generate the height and features...?

Assumptions but it's the only way I can think they could keep all those changes and user generated features of the terrain without it being a huuuuge database of coordinates and inputs...?
 

Richard Bong

Space Marshal
Jul 29, 2017
2,370
6,607
2,850
RSI Handle
McHale
Many thanks for your experience, that's fascinating. I can see why you are so bummed out as in this particular example it has been a huge part of your profession where you have spent years helping to make something which is used in loads of properties.

If I could ask a question on this if I am not being awkward, I am a total layman:

How do these existing systems you worked on in the past handle persistent user generated terrain deformation, which will remain deformed permanently based on user actions like dropping a bomb and making a crater or dropping a settlement on a certain space? I recall in one of the SC YouTube videos a while back they showed work on deformation with a dev blasting a crater in the ground with the grenade launcher.... I can only assume the image height mapping may be a part of being able to keep that changed state permanently as the image would be edited, updated and referenced going forth to generate the height and features...?

Assumptions but it's the only way I can think they could keep all those changes and user generated features of the terrain without it being a huuuuge database of coordinates and inputs...?
The end result is 3D mesh, like most in game objects. Deformation would, generally, be handled in engine. I can do the deformation in Carrara, just like I could do river flow, or wind in the trees, but having the game engine read it would, likely be painful, high overhead and it definitely wouldn't be dynamic. I can't speak, directly, to Cryengine/Lumberyard/OD3E, but Unity and Unreal used to handle it back when I looked at compatibility for Carrara 8.5 and DazStudio..
 
Last edited:

Bambooza

Space Marshal
Donor
Sep 25, 2017
5,785
18,322
2,875
RSI Handle
MrBambooza
The end result is 3D mesh, like most in game objects. Deformation would, generally, be handled in engine. I can do the deformation in Carrara, just like I could do river flow, or wind in the trees, but having the game engine read it would, likely be painful, high overhead and it definitely wouldn't be dynamic. I can't speak, directly, to Cryengine/Lumberyard/OD3E, but Unity and Unreal used to handle it back when I looked at compatibility for Carrara 8.5 and DazStudio..
I'd like to add that deformation of terrain is applied after the terrain asset is fetched then the modifications are fetched from the database and applied. Unlike voxel with each polygon stored and fetched here it's a pre rendered object that is applied at a specific cord and scaler. This would then add on and hollow out the original mesh as well as allow for easily remove the object. It's the same tech they use to create caves and place buildings.
 

Richard Bong

Space Marshal
Jul 29, 2017
2,370
6,607
2,850
RSI Handle
McHale
I'd like to add that deformation of terrain is applied after the terrain asset is fetched then the modifications are fetched from the database and applied. Unlike voxel with each polygon stored and fetched here it's a pre rendered object that is applied at a specific cord and scaler. This would then add on and hollow out the original mesh as well as allow for easily remove the object. It's the same tech they use to create caves and place buildings.
Yes. I would expect, for the cave example, the ground, the cave and a destructible opening cover to be modeled in a modeler, like 3DS MAX, Maya, Carrara, etc. be three separate objects and the combination and destruction, to happen in engine. The cave to be streamed in only as needed.

Oh, and I would never recommend the Carrara modeller to be used for things other than plants, trees, terrain and similar if you have another modeler. :) it is very good for those, but suboptimal for guns, clothing, people, ships, etc.
 
Last edited:

KuruptU4Fun

Admiral
Dec 10, 2021
297
692
700
RSI Handle
KuruptU4Fun68
So you've been going off that you're leaving Star Citizen then go, makes sense you'd do the same with TEST and if you're leaving, just leave. You've spent the past 3 days defending your opinion, if you're simply trying to convince others of your decision and your belief it's a valid one then I'll validate your opinion and encourage the follow thru. Stop playing the victim when you knew what you were getting into in the first place.
 

NaffNaffBobFace

Space Marshal
Donor
Jan 5, 2016
12,275
45,144
3,150
RSI Handle
NaffNaffBobFace
The end result is 3D mesh, like most in game objects. Deformation would, generally, be handled in engine. I can do the deformation in Carrara, just like I could do river flow, or wind in the trees, but having the game engine read it would, likely be painful, high overhead and it definitely wouldn't be dynamic. I can't speak, directly, to Cryengine/Lumberyard/OD3E, but Unity and Unreal used to handle it back when I looked at compatibility for Carrara 8.5 and DazStudio..
Aha, so to have deformation to change and update for all players on the server I take it there would have to be some reinvention to get it to communicate those changes to the model globally...? Or have I misinterpreted?
 

Bambooza

Space Marshal
Donor
Sep 25, 2017
5,785
18,322
2,875
RSI Handle
MrBambooza
Aha, so to have deformation to change and update for all players on the server I take it there would have to be some reinvention to get it to communicate those changes to the model globally...? Or have I misinterpreted?
While this is typically applied to the server game world state its also communicated to the player like all world state changes as a object id and scaler information. (X,y,z, rotation and scale) and then the clients game graphic engine would apply it as part of the render pipeline. It's similar to what happens when a player actor moves.in the world or a ship.

In CIG's case they pre rendered the planet as a mesh and then stream in the modifications like pos, rivers and things like trees and rocks are procedural place which technically should be rendered on everyone's screen the same way but can glitch slightly due to floating point errors
 

Zeoran

Lieutenant
Oct 20, 2022
1
7
75
RSI Handle
Zeoran
I understand the frustration. I originally pledged in 2014 but my PC at the time couldn't even run the hangar module, so I just kept my eye on it over the years. About 6 months ago, I finally upgraded my PC to the point where I could try it out again. There's something about Star Alpha that is unique to the game. I used to play Elite Dangerous, but they lost me after they completely fubar'd the Odyssey launch. I waited until after we got fleet carrier interiors but enough was enough. I do wish mining in SC was the same as ED. Blowing up asteroids from the inside-out never got old.

But looking at Star Alpha and how far it's come in just the last 2 years, it's clear that development is ramping up. I'm not making excuses for CIG. They are in dire need of being more honest & transparent. CR's ambition was a large reason why development seemed to stall for so many years. But any developer will also tell you how many years it takes to make an engine from scratch. The fact that they're also creating two different games at the same time isn't helping. But they've also been on a hiring spree over the last 18-24 months, which will hopefully make things go quicker. The stupid Covid restrictions also hit the team hard and slowed things to a crawl. Now that things are back to normal and they're even moving into bigger/better facilities should help speed things up.

I'm optimistic. The fact remains that this IS the most ambitious game ever attempted. And for reasons I can't honestly explain, this game provides something that no other game does. It's not just "immersion", although that is a big part of it. But there's something about the game that keeps us coming back to Star Alpha, no matter how many times the game screws us over, deletes our ships full of armor/equipment/vehicles, or how many times we're killed by elevators.

I have a feeling that within 2 years, Star Alpha will be in a much better place and SQ42 should be either done or very close to done at that point. I'm projecting a late 2024 or early 2025 release for SQ42 and once that game is done, full development shifts to the PU for more ships/systems.

The game definitely requires a high level of patience/tolerance. But it does have a lot of unique things to offer.

~Z
 

Bambooza

Space Marshal
Donor
Sep 25, 2017
5,785
18,322
2,875
RSI Handle
MrBambooza
I understand the frustration. I originally pledged in 2014 but my PC at the time couldn't even run the hangar module, so I just kept my eye on it over the years. About 6 months ago, I finally upgraded my PC to the point where I could try it out again. There's something about Star Alpha that is unique to the game. I used to play Elite Dangerous, but they lost me after they completely fubar'd the Odyssey launch. I waited until after we got fleet carrier interiors but enough was enough. I do wish mining in SC was the same as ED. Blowing up asteroids from the inside-out never got old.

But looking at Star Alpha and how far it's come in just the last 2 years, it's clear that development is ramping up. I'm not making excuses for CIG. They are in dire need of being more honest & transparent. CR's ambition was a large reason why development seemed to stall for so many years. But any developer will also tell you how many years it takes to make an engine from scratch. The fact that they're also creating two different games at the same time isn't helping. But they've also been on a hiring spree over the last 18-24 months, which will hopefully make things go quicker. The stupid Covid restrictions also hit the team hard and slowed things to a crawl. Now that things are back to normal and they're even moving into bigger/better facilities should help speed things up.

I'm optimistic. The fact remains that this IS the most ambitious game ever attempted. And for reasons I can't honestly explain, this game provides something that no other game does. It's not just "immersion", although that is a big part of it. But there's something about the game that keeps us coming back to Star Alpha, no matter how many times the game screws us over, deletes our ships full of armor/equipment/vehicles, or how many times we're killed by elevators.

I have a feeling that within 2 years, Star Alpha will be in a much better place and SQ42 should be either done or very close to done at that point. I'm projecting a late 2024 or early 2025 release for SQ42 and once that game is done, full development shifts to the PU for more ships/systems.

The game definitely requires a high level of patience/tolerance. But it does have a lot of unique things to offer.

~Z
A bit optimistic but not a bad time line.

The thing that is questionable is how much of the art assets are complete and how much of the game features are flushed out. The engine seems very capable and the general story flow seems to be finalized. But it really comes down to the artwork and how much is left.
 
Forgot your password?