Welcome to Star Citizen Base

Register now to gain access to all of our features. Once registered and logged in, you will be able to contribute to this site by submitting your own content or replying to existing content. You'll be able to customize your profile, receive reputation points as a reward for submitting content, while also communicating with other members via your own private inbox, plus much more! This message will be removed once you have signed in.

Nova-Prime

100 systems no longer planned on release

76 posts in this topic
9 hours ago, AstroJak said:

1 - crowdfunding goal promised to players established at 100.

Valid complaint in that they said "At launch", but CIG has good reasons for this. That said, the 100 planets goal may be "pushed back" instead of abandoned, and is a goal from back in 2012 when the standard for game planets/sizes was minimal. Makes sense it would change.

9 hours ago, AstroJak said:

2 - PG an add on, not a main aspect of inital game i supported.

So you prefer to have 100 spaceports to visit on planets you can only explore in a limited sense? Because you won't see massive full-size planets you can explore or interact with unless you want them to manually create crap planets that also are a performance drain. PG allows them to do so much more with a lot less work necessary, so it improves the speed.

9 hours ago, AstroJak said:

3 - planet side ventures an add on and not part of the space sim we have been supporting

Planet side is a core component of creating a space sim universe to the scale they want. CIG didn't think they would be able to do it until the tech breakthrough, so you can either say "fuck the breakthrough, I want my limited scale with variety", or accept that CIG has decided to take the "in depth" part of the game to a new level. That said, people were wondering how to do things like creation of bases, and the idea of using space stations and spaceport zones wasn't good enough. A good solution is base building on large PG+ planets, right?

9 hours ago, AstroJak said:

4 - keeping 1.5 mil+++ players in a smaller overall play area which is designed for pve rather than pvp will lead to unsatisfactory gameplay for some groups.

First, these areas are HUGE. Second, there are instances in the game, so whether 1.5 mil people are all going to be inhabiting the same "small" space is completely unknown. Finally, PvP has always been a SECONDARY goal for the game, and could end up being a situation where if you want PvP, you do the competitive arena stuff instead. It's ALWAYS been the case that PvP would be minimal. Even if "some groups" get upset with how they do PvP, there's a ton of people who want nothing to do with PvP, but they don't have any chance to try PvE only yet because of how the modules have rolled out.

9 hours ago, AstroJak said:

5- current lore for game has at least 20-30 systems within the UEE which are regular destinations. So how do you explain why we cant go there? Because cig can build on systems released... Do they only want them released content complete? That's awsome in a perfect world but i think its a narrow point of view when taking into context of retaining players interest in supporting this game development.

Again, look back at your number 1. Personally, I wouldn't mind having 10 systems in the core worlds areas are ones where we know the action will be, and then have more systems added. We don't know how long it will take them to add in more. Could be 1 per month or entire sectors of 5-10 each time. That said, the complaint of 100 systems at launch is valid to an extent, but CIG has changed or eliminated ancient stretch goals before, so this is hardly new. At least they have a good reason for it.

9 hours ago, AstroJak said:

6- allow cig to casually roll back main game aspects for the sake of them adding more tech and geeking out to it is a bad presidence. Which wont stop here..

The more tech they add, the more they're able to accommodate the main goal of having large amounts of people able to do many things in the same universe. So are you saying you want them to ignore the tech they are able to use and make the game better, simply so you can have your 5+ year old version of the game? That seems a bit short-sighted, and also forgets that they have already withdrawn or modified certain stretch goals.

9 hours ago, AstroJak said:

7 - i supported the best damn space sim... Not the best damn world builder game!!!

Not sure I understand this? Part of a sim system is the ability to build things. That's something I know you've complained about before-the lack of being able to create things or craft things, and now they're allowing us to build bases on planets. Maybe it's not the same as crafting a ship, but it's a lot better than being able to do no creation at all, yes?

Basically, I can understand your complaints at the stretch goal, and definitely agree the lore bit makes it more annoying, but I think it's short sighted to complain about them making the game SO MUCH BETTER than it was going to be simply because they're not going to make a clone of E:D.

Lakota, Gremlich, Trophias and 2 others like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is all good info and im writting to say im have company in from Alberta so i cant take the time right now but will work tomorrow to reply.
Thanks for your comments i look forward to discussing this matter further.
Cheers

Sent from my LG-H812 using Tapatalk


Lakota likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, AstroJak said:

Thanks for your comments i look forward to discussing this matter further.

No worries, I can't guarantee I'll be able to respond, as I am prepping to head to California.

LowZone likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To be honest this probably is just the first glimpse of "Ugly Hydra of reality showing one of its heads"

There is a big bubble of very optimistic peoples on reddit and official channels partly hyped by each other and just by sheer optimism. While I am not part of the naysayers who circle around SC like vultures waiting for it to die I have long since reduced my expectations especially around the loftier goals like amount of initial content and scope of the MMO experience (giant space battles of 100+ peoples). And even 3.0 will not be the holy grail like some initially thought there's just too many essentials that aren't in it but planned for later patches I really don't always want to be the Pessimist but that's just honestly how I currently feel.

I think we have to accustom ourselves to the possible reality that something coming close to the full vision of what was sold to us will only be possible years after release after countless updates/expansions maybe 10 years from now. That said even a slice of that like Sq42, 10 systems release and only fluid space battles with ~48 players max. could be an amazing success if they get it right. But even for that they still have a lot of work to do.

Major Dex, Jon1812, Masokas and 3 others like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Drastic considering many people have been pledging and waiting since 2012 and a lot of the promises from the start have changed. 

I could care less. Whatever brings the launch date closer I'm in for. They should stick with 10 systems and then continue to expand the universe after release. 

1,300,000 players in 10 systems? The universe will feel cramped but it will be alive. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That depends on how well they manage cities and growth on planets. Ten systems of four or five planets, each with a few (to possibly many) moons and we're at conservatively 135 fairly large places to explore, mine, salvage, settle, etc. Not to mention the stations in space and the still incredible distances between objects, and things like asteroid fields.

It's a matter of what's available to do. If it's a mile deep and only half a mile wide it's still more than Elite has managed.

Gremlich, Boildown, AstroJak and 1 other like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
54 minutes ago, GeraldEvans said:

That depends on how well they manage cities and growth on planets. Ten systems of four or five planets, each with a few (to possibly many) moons and we're at conservatively 135 fairly large places to explore, mine, salvage, settle, etc. Not to mention the stations in space and the still incredible distances between objects, and things like asteroid fields.

It's a matter of what's available to do. If it's a mile deep and only half a mile wide it's still more than Elite has managed.

There are two dozen places to go to in just one planet and orbiting moons in 2.6, I think that we'd be sitting at several hundred unique locations with a few systems and several thousand locations if you include duplicates (same wreck, same refueling station) with 5-10 systems.

 

If even 1/4 of backers are ever online at the same time that would be dozens of people in each location if they were spread out evenly. In some cases that would be great having plenty of people, but people aren't going to spread evenly and you'd end up with tons and tons of people in small areas, which would overload small stations like Olisar or GrimHex severely. 

 

I would love for CIG to compromise and give us 5-10 detailed, fully fleshed out and completed systems and another 10 or so "barren" systems with one or two detailed parts and mostly proc-gen areas for players to explore. Simpler and quicker to create, it would be easy for CIG to patch content into these systems to keep gameplay fresh while they focus on creating more complete ones. They could also give us some Vanduul systems which, aside from wreckage and a lot of hostile encounters, would likely not have any landing zones or super detailed stations. 

Boildown and Masokas like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As mentioned earlier GIC will use instances in the Universe. In one of the AtV''s Chris said they were hoping to get 50-100 players in a single instance. However it is uncertain what they can actually achieve with the high fidelity they are aiming for.

With the different instances in the universe it doesn't matter how many people will be online. Each instance will only accomodate a limited number of players anyway. So it don't think overcrowding will be an issue. We just need to wait and see how this will work out.

GeraldEvans likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Major Dex said:

As mentioned earlier GIC will use instances in the Universe. In one of the AtV''s Chris said they were hoping to get 50-100 players in a single instance. However it is uncertain what they can actually achieve with the high fidelity they are aiming for.

With the different instances in the universe it doesn't matter how many people will be online. Each instance will only accomodate a limited number of players anyway. So it don't think overcrowding will be an issue. We just need to wait and see how this will work out.

and there goes another promise that we will functional not have instances. 

Karmaslap likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Cincinnatus said:

and there goes another promise that we will functional not have instances. 

Did you really think there will be 2 million people in one place?! It would be unplayable in all kinds of ways. Imagine Dalaran in WoW (for example) having 7 million people in one place. SC will probably have lots of different servers and instances, because otherwise it will be impossible to render all ships and players.

GeraldEvans likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Mjölnir said:

Did you really think there will be 2 million people in one place?! It would be unplayable in all kinds of ways. Imagine Dalaran in WoW (for example) having 7 million people in one place. SC will probably have lots of different servers and instances, because otherwise it will be impossible to render all ships and players.

Do you remember CR's talk about dynamic servers changing instance sizes etc... ? I go with the promises of the person in charge of the project. Do you really want me to drag up that video? 

Karmaslap likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Size of the instances I believe referred to the volume of them, not the player capacity. A huge amount of empty space can be an instance, just like Arc Corp as we know it is an instance.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, GeraldEvans said:

Size of the instances I believe referred to the volume of them, not the player capacity. A huge amount of empty space can be an instance, just like Arc Corp as we know it is an instance.

Yep or a small amount of space with 50-100 people that would dynamically size and if I remember correctly have a way to interact with other neighboring instances. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, AstroJak said:


 Maybe they should also stop reworking ships multiple times and finally just draw a line in tge sand and say thats good enough for release, otherwise it will be 2025 and we will still be waiting!!! 

Agree with you on this. With all the core tech still in development I was hoping GIC would focus more on this instead of working on improving visuals.

Karmaslap and AstroJak like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Different people, different skill sets.



Edit: those people working on networking are continuing to do so in the background, and Frankfurt (home of networking) is the largest single studio for CIG.

In the meantime, the vehicle artists and environment artists are working on making things prettier and less expensive (computationally). It's not wasted effort.
Revinix likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Perhaps because the ship pipeline is actually an effective way to build and iterate on a design until it's polished, easing the creation of ships which use shared final assets?

Or would we rather they built all of the ships to original Hornet or Freelancer standard and then had to remake every one of them? I mean I'd like to play with my Orion or Merchantman, or Reclaimer, but I'd prefer them looking AAA, rather than merely looking like Derek Smart's wet dream of an asset.

FoxChard and Masokas like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Fizzlefuse, I keep seeing people quote the backer number (luckily you're the one who got it right). I don't necessarily believe that this is a correct expectation to see 1.8 million people.

A) The 'backer' number is the number of RSI accounts, not the number of individual backers (which is less), nor the number of people who actually own copies of the game (still less)

B ) I don't expect more than a fraction of this number to even knows when the game drops or to participate early in release. 

C) If CIG's marketing team does spin up the backer and non-backer communities correctly, then CIG is going to have holy hell of a release tragedy. Even with servers backed up by Amazon, it doesn't bear thinking about how devastated the servers will be.

Its in their interest to do a soft launch directly from the end of the beta, just stop performing beta wipes at a point and let SC loose. Word of mouth is what carried this game this far, and if it turns out like we all expect it will, word of mouth will carry it forward even further. Look at how PUBG did. It earned is top spots by quality (though not of its anti-cheat features) of gameplay. SC needs to push this angle too.

Also, holy crap, we're at 1,847,176 backers already!? @Edenstar, got any intel on who backer #2,000,000 is?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, FoxChard said:

@Fizzlefuse, I keep seeing people quote the backer number (luckily you're the one who got it right). I don't necessarily believe that this is a correct expectation to see 1.8 million people.

Luck has nothing to do with it. Instead of pulling some random number out of my ass, I checked the website. :P
Well, obviously we wont all be in the same.. instance? bubble? whatever they'll call it.. its just not possible to render all those people in the same area. in that sense we will be spread out a bit but my point was that, because we'll have 1.8+ million people trying to play this game within 5 to 10 systems, we'll definitely see many people swarming and fighting over the POIs. Peacefull exploration is out the door untill we get enough systems so that people are spread out more.

If you think we'll see less then 1.8 million people swarm this game.. well, your guess is as good as mine. All I know is that Star Citizen has that many citizens so it's what I'm going with.

FoxChard and AstroJak like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm just saying that the number on the website only reflects the number of forum accounts on RSI-it doesn't translate at all to how many people have actually purchased the game.

But yeah. Even with 100 systems available the deep space exploration stuff will feel 'swarmed' if there are 1.8 million people. It'll be ridiculous to start with. I hope that perhaps they give us what is on the Starmap and everything else (extra jump points between known locations, new jump points to new systems) are more carefully managed in case the player base discovers things too quickly.

I would expect that they test our ability to find things in the verse when we get the correct exploration tools (hmm...crashed spacecraft on planets?) and see how quickly the community can double down on finishing off a task. 

AstroJak likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just read a very interesting article that goes into great detail explaining how going from an initial plan of 100 systems at launch to 5 - 10 with the current tech in place actually equates to 375,000 times the initial play area with nearly 10b sq/km to explore at a later date.

Read it here: https://relay.sc/article/star-citizen-astrometrics-going-deep

 

Masokas, GeraldEvans and Gremlich like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, Major Dex said:

True, but there are still a large number of ships in development. Why not work on those?

I agree. CIG is focusing on completing newer concept ships instead of building or finishing older ones backers have waited patiently for years to see in production. 

The Nox was complete on concept sale arrival, the Tumblir is being worked on already, the Terrapin is in late greybox/detail passes. I understand they are easier to make and get flyable, but CIG still has the Redeemer, Freelancer variants, crucible, Vanduul Blade, Reliant variants, and necessary reworks for several ships (300 series) used by thousands of entry level backers. That's not even mentioning the small capital sized craft. 

I sincerely hope that these new ships aren't being rushed ahead for use in SQ42- they have to feature lock it at some point. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now