Star Citizen, Roberts Space Industries - Chris Roberts' life support and retirement fund [2012-]

[eastmen]

nothing is impossible with time and money. Roberts was lucky people kept giving money otherwise they would have withered on a vine. There are more parts of the story coming

 

[Deleted member 11852]

nothing is impossible with time and money.

 

[eastmen]

what do you mean

 

[Deleted member 11852]

what do you mean

Lots of things are impossible even with time and money.

 

[eastmen]

Lots of things are impossible even with time and money.

like what ?

 

[Deleted member 11852]

like what ?

Writing code that works how you want isn't just a product of time, money or will. I work in a server farm and we've had to abandon so many projects because they just weren't viable with current technology. That's the risk with ambitious goals.

 

[tongue_of_colicab]

Isnt that where the time part comes in?

 

[Jupiter]

If you're not notice all from the outset in the architecture its hard to bring some features later without catch from the front to. It's logical that Chris Roberts wants to make it rather right. Unless you accept just the lowest common denominator or build a backpack on the other which makes the software more error-prone and unmaintainable and then generally only works undercooked.

To fil the most of it in a late DLC is often difficult or impossible. It would be a mistake to add large core features later.


EDIT:

What I do not like about the article is that Roberts is presented as the evil overlord who has to control everything. That might be relevant if it would damage the project.
In principle, it's about Roberts' game which he wants to make as good as possible. And the fact that a lot of individuals in a team don't like this is nothing new.

The tone of the article comes quite negative for many people. Which is mainly because of the prominently placed and often negative quotes from 'sources'. This is a shame because I am still convinced that the gaming industry desperately needs such visionary and ambitious projects. Currently, the AAA industry stagnated considerably and occurs for some time on the same spot. With a few exceptions.

I miss the appreciation of the done work. Those who try to create something unprecedented, with completely new team, staff shortages and developing tools and methods should earn respect.

 

[Deleted member 11852]

Isnt that where the time part comes in?

That depends if technology progresses in a way that solves the problem, often it doesn't as when we saw CPU core frequencies reach a plateau and multicore was the solution to increasing theoretical performance, which is great if you can go parallel but you can't if you're dealing with very long linear equations.

 

[eastmen]

Writing code that works how you want isn't just a product of time, money or will. I work in a server farm and we've had to abandon so many projects because they just weren't viable with current technology. That's the risk with ambitious goals.

So that falls into the time issue doesn't it. With enough time future tech becomes current tech and the issue would disappear .

Money and time

 

[eastmen]

If you're not notice all from the outset in the architecture its hard to bring some features later without catch from the front to. It's logical that Chris Roberts wants to make it rather right. Unless you accept just the lowest common denominator or build a backpack on the other which makes the software more error-prone and unmaintainable and then generally only works undercooked.

To fil the most of it in a late DLC is often difficult or impossible. It would be a mistake to add large core features later.


EDIT:

What I do not like about the article is that Roberts is presented as the evil overlord who has to control everything. That might be relevant if it would damage the project.
In principle, it's about Roberts' game which he wants to make as good as possible. And the fact that a lot of individuals in a team don't like this is nothing new.

The tone of the article comes quite negative for many people. Which is mainly because of the prominently placed and often negative quotes from 'sources'. This is a shame because I am still convinced that the gaming industry desperately needs such visionary and ambitious projects. Currently, the AAA industry stagnated considerably and occurs for some time on the same spot. With a few exceptions.

I miss the appreciation of the done work. Those who try to create something unprecedented, with completely new team, staff shortages and developing tools and methods should earn respect.

I can tell you from personal conversations I've had with past CIG employees esp one that is well known to the early community of the game and has went on to have his own sucesfull kickstarter that this was his view of chris


The problem isn't the visionary and ambitious project , the issue is that it became that after he took money from people claiming it was a more simple project. This game may become the most expensive game ever made at this point . That is not a shake up to AAA gaming

 

[Nammo]

That might be relevant if it would damage the project.
In principle, it's about Roberts' game which he wants to make as good as possible. And the fact that a lot of individuals in a team don't like this is nothing new.

An unhappy team sounds awfully damaging.

Talented people leave easily. Gripe about arrogant prima donnas all you want, but the competition will beg and bribe and promise better conditions - every week. Talented people don't want to waste their talents on a vision they disagree with. So if they don't like conditions on the team, they just leave. Often quietly with no hard feelings.

Less talented people have fewer options, so they don't leave. They might be unmotivated and angry, so they spread discontent and anonymous interviews, which we're seeing. It's a steady productivity and morale drag on the team, but they aren't always easy to ferret out. Others who fully buy into an ambitious vision are too inexperienced to see the icebergs ahead. That makes it very hard to save the project once you realize the ship is sinking.

I'm not saying any of that is happening over at RSI, but that's why a boss who doesn't listen to his talent is a villain. Glorious vision or no, if your team doesn't like it, you'll fail.

 

[Jupiter]

Yes, but the anonymous "nay sayers" wreren't right. CIG has already developed the most techniques which the sources claimed were impossible to do. Even the article says that CIG has just managed it.This shows rather that the not so talented developers or individuals are gone.

What I don't like about the article is that he continues to let anonymous sources attack Roberts.without coming to an end. In my point of view this "dirty laundry" in personal level should not be in a clean journalistic article.

How many sources were interviewed?
Did they also interviewed sources that have gone out of thier own initiative?
Comparable projects?
How are statements of former employees to evaluate, particulary in the context that CIG does not deny the Problems (something that a serious journalist would have perceived as extremely remarkable because it quite clear statements of disgruntled ex-employees rather exhausted).


Roberts said to Gamers Nexus what they will Show at Citizencon in two weeks

"CitCon will be showing an Earth like planet demonstrating V2 of their procedural planet tech with forest, canyons, deserts etc."

“Sean [Tracy] is working hard on it with a bunch of talented people, so that's [how] we're showing off the potential of V2 planets and some of the cool stuff and play action that can happen in 3.0. We're […] taking one of the missions that's in Squadron 42 and showing how that would feel, from the briefing, to the ship, to taking off, to the mission, and the combination of flying and FPS stuff, so those are the two things we're going to show. We're going to show full-focus this is what V2 planets can do for you, then this is what Squadron 42 is going to feel like and play like, and this is the experience of a mission in SQ42.

"This is the first time we will show more complete gameplay. We showed last year at CitizenCon the walking around, talking character stuff, but it was very early. Our character tech has come on -- if you look at that and quality of characters compared to last year, it's night and day. I truly feel like our character stuff that we're showing is best in class at the moment. We're going to show a more complete: Here you are, you wake up on the ship, you get your briefing, do your mission. This is what one sequence of events, or what we call 'chapters,' of the game would feel and look like.”

Also

"The team is also working on planetary clouds and weather systems, from what both Tracy and Roberts have told us. Planetary clouds will be generated and mapped via a full weather simulation, and the team has axed its flow maps in favor of a more artist-driven weather ecosystem. Timelapses of planets, we're told, will eventually show full weather systems taking place on the surface below."

Source: http://www.gamersnexus.net/gg/2613-...-citizen-procedural-planets-alpha3-citizencon

 

[xz321zx]

An unhappy team sounds awfully damaging.

Talented people leave easily. Gripe about arrogant prima donnas all you want, but the competition will beg and bribe and promise better conditions - every week. Talented people don't want to waste their talents on a vision they disagree with. So if they don't like conditions on the team, they just leave. Often quietly with no hard feelings.

Less talented people have fewer options, so they don't leave. They might be unmotivated and angry, so they spread discontent and anonymous interviews, which we're seeing. It's a steady productivity and morale drag on the team, but they aren't always easy to ferret out. Others who fully buy into an ambitious vision are too inexperienced to see the icebergs ahead. That makes it very hard to save the project once you realize the ship is sinking.

I'm not saying any of that is happening over at RSI, but that's why a boss who doesn't listen to his talent is a villain. Glorious vision or no, if your team doesn't like it, you'll fail.

Exceptionally well said,

"Less talented people have fewer options, so they don't leave. They might be unmotivated and angry, so they spread discontent and anonymous interviews, which we're seeing. "
They might be simply more of an extrovert afterall (than perfectionists), and the "more talented" might be more of a perfectionist who have their _own_ ways about perfectionism- introverts. And compared to their own way , the glorious vision the company sells might seem bamboozling, or even subjugating, introverts will keep their opinion, and the extroverts will speak out.

 

[eastmen]

we just keep getting later and later on the game at this point. They are showing SQ42 at the start of Oct but what does that mean. Will they show a few minutes of game play ? IS the rest of the game ready to launch tho ? We are running up to the end of 2016 which is a long time from the end of 2014

 

[Jupiter]

By far the worst thing CIG could do whatever would be a half-baked version of Star Citizen prematurely posting as Final 1.0 only to give peace for the players and critics. That would be publisher tactics. And that is what we don't want from CIG.

CIG should release Squadron 42 once that is polished. Then they should continue to work on Star Citizen until it actually includes all those features. A lot of features, which are in many cases for the first time ever technically possible in a video game.

Years ago Roberts described that real rotating planets (not that fake thing that other games do) as a technically extremely challenging thing. And now there doing it. The reason why it comes it that CIG seems to found a way to cope with these extreme challenge. And that is what makes Star Citizen later a greater game as a whole idea.

That they are no longer satisfied with "That's impossible" dogmen, but questioned. They tear down supposedly insurmountable walls and doing technical miracles, of which even real engine devs previously thought they would be absolutely impossible to implement in any engine.

There is a good saying

"Always everyone said something is impossible. Until one came who did not know that and made it"

CIG is doing revolutionary pioneering work inside the code. Many people will see what that means for the future of gaming worlds in the next decades. CIG developed not only their own thing. They are a pioneer and guide for technology that makes game worlds much more credible and real.

As for Engine Development, Software Engineering, and all the "boring" backbone stuff. CIG is not only at the forefront. They have repeatedly broken new ground, repeatedly done things that no one believed that it would be possible at all. That means also that the CIG developers now have arrived the stage where they have to evaluate the whole implications of this "it can be done!" and then determine "When A works, then takes B should also work"

 

[Rodéric]

...
CIG should release Squadron 42 once that is polished. Then they should continue to work on Star Citizen until it actually includes all those features. A lot of features, which are in many cases for the first time ever technically possible in a video game.

Which features are for the first time ever technically possible in a video game ?

Years ago Roberts described that real rotating planets (not that fake thing that other games do) as a technically extremely challenging thing. And now there doing it. The reason why it comes it that CIG seems to found a way to cope with these extreme challenge. And that is what makes Star Citizen later a greater game as a whole idea.

Not sure what you are takling about but seamless space-planet transition was already shown on youtube (for at least one other title) back in 2006.
Rotating a planet is trivial.

That they are no longer satisfied with "That's impossible" dogmen, but questioned. They tear down supposedly insurmountable walls and doing technical miracles, of which even real engine devs previously thought they would be absolutely impossible to implement in any engine.

I have no idea what they deemed impossible, I've seen nothing that blew my mind or seemed "magical".

CIG is doing revolutionary pioneering work inside the code.

Such as ?

They are a pioneer and guide for technology that makes game worlds much more credible and real.

Again what are they pioneer in ?
What did they do that noone ever did ?

They have repeatedly broken new ground, repeatedly done things that no one believed that it would be possible at all.

Again, any exemple ?

 

[Jupiter]

I am shure you will not find a game with 1/4 of that
-seamless transition between high quality areas from space to a town on a planet surface (areas are even more detailed than in linear games; Elite Dangerous stutters and loads if you want to land on a moon --> not as seamless)
-rotating planets, mostly the sun moves in games, not the planet itself
-real physical 3d sun, not a 2D fake sun like in No Nan's Sky which can never reached
-Item System 2.0 will allow full functioning spaceship and space Stations systems where componets have realistic tasks
-full walkable space stations and km long capital ships with up to hundrets of detailed rooms (more detailed as Alien: Isolation in an open galaxy game)
-full walkable planets (even city planets like Coruscant are planned)
-volumetric clouds in an open galaxy game with full walkable planets --> there are even a few linear games with volumetric clouds
-volumetric gas clouds in space
-planetary weather systems (not just one per planet, multiple ones)
-unified first and third person (just a few games like ARMA have it)
-physically based EVA with procedural driven animations
-64-bit coordinate system
-Localized physics grid (walking inside and onside completly free moving objects)
-Physically-based weapon damage (most games just use HP)
-extremly detailed characters in a massive multi player game where even the lowest one is comparable to Marius Ryse in an open galaxy game (ex developers told that would only be possible in linear singleplayer games)
-complex character customization
-Grabby-hands (the player can carry objects with his hands - no floating object)
-two layered shader tech for stepless wearing of objects like armor, guns etc.
-the HUD can be seen for all players
-Procedural damage (not seen in other CRYENGINE games)
-very complex AI (they explained it, look a few sites back)

No game will have such realistic worlds like Star Citizen.

 

[Rodéric]

In all that list there's very little that hasn't already be done elsewhere. Accumulating existing tech is by no mean pioneering or breaking ground...

Anyway the physically based weapon damage and th fully walkable stations and ships are the ones I'm unaware any games did. (They are not outstanding though, computing kinetic energy isn't exactly difficult and making modules for stations isn't unheard of. That said I applaud the amount of efforts put into making things look great.)
Not sure about grabby-hands, I remember a couple games that have done that in FPS.

(Ah yes, not sure what the dynamic weather system implies, if it includes having storm clouds seen from space and everything it will be unheard of, if it's just snow/rain... it's nothing new.)

 

[Jupiter]

Some of the things are done only by a few games. Like this grabby-hands or unified first and third person rig. Other elements are completely new.

In my point of view there is a lot pioneer work. Most AAA games just do a little new stuff compared to this. Moreover, it is hard to bring it all together in one game with this scale and a good performance.

We'll see more on Sunday in two weeks.