He’s attempting to charge $15 a month for the broken husk of the game that survives, you tell me if he’s raving mad. There’s a reason im not using the full title. Cant help but use it for examples when this topic come up, it was a good experiment.
The only game i’ve ever played where it was recommended practice to kill the tutorial agent, butcher his carcass and use his skin to make a backpack… Shores was odd.
1 Like
I agree, with your overall assessments. And I even agree that Star Citizen is presently the ‘ultimate game’ - on paper. It’s one thing to fuel the imagination, it’s entirely another to produce the end product. And despite Star Citizen’s seamless landing, which I applaud despite the low quality graphics, how many will be able to play in one instance? Because as things stand, it is looking pretty shabby - if you can get on without it crashing. Again, lets not forget, CIG is great at producing trailers but actual gameplay - not so much. As for ship design? Yes, Star Citizen has some really nice ships, no question. But they have some really bad ones too. In fact, Battlescape ships are far better - the only thing that sets Star Citizen ships above Battlescape’s is being able to enter said ships and pilot them first person.
That said, landing on planets, planet interaction and first person gameplay is the future of gaming. Elite also knows this which is why they are heading in that direction; if they can hold out and keep on the path they set out, they will become the ultimate game. And if they can get at least 50~100 players in a system they will definitely have a massive advantage over Star Broken Citizen which is lucky to get 14 people on without crashing. Add Elite’s massive galaxy and a persistent universe? What possible reason would there be to go to another game? Of course Battlescape is going for higher quality visuals and more interesting gameplay with more players and that’s good. But this will not be enough to keep players engaged - in the long term.
That’s a strange, if not funny, definition of freedom. Whatever makes you happy as a (illusionnary) free man! I guess!
(throws mug of coffee at @Skyentist)
Ok, let me rephrase my idea. The thought was not to “neuter” gameplay" or “don’t hurt people’s feeling”. It’s rather “don’t let the new players be bullied and be disgusted early on of the game”.
I’m fine with people building up their dictature, empire or whatever as long as the new players are not heavily impacted by the top players.
If there’s an MMO side to your game, throw some dynamic events as well. These are the future of any decent MMO out there 
1 Like
Well i havent played any of the games, but i watch there gameplay videos a lot, and there are few replies to my comment, I’ll get back to them later, but I am just going to say this that If you take the seamless space and planet rendering tech of battlescape, scale of elite dangerous and ships / game play mechanics of star citizen, you can get independence from real life, thats how you will achieve freedom. 
I agree, do all those things and you can write your own ticket. But you should have at least the ability to have 100 players in a system and or instance, which makes the DEV’s mention of 1000 players impressive, most impressive. But I would have to add that Elite’s billions of stars and planets is an absolute waste of time and resources and doesn’t add to gameplay in any meaningful way, unless of course boredom is meaningful. A much smaller, compact universe would be much better and anything over 1000 stars and planets is overkill. Oh, and I played both games, watched endless videos and open my big mouth every chance I get…
Star Citizens Alpha 2.0 use of motion blur makes me sick … at least when watching on youtube.
Motion blur is always terrible in games, i don’t get why it’s always default on. It and usually DoF.
I really like the Motion Blur I-Novae did. It seems to only kick in at extremely high speeds and maybe even only for outside Objects and not the Cockpit or the gameworld.
4 Likes
Yeah, most of us turned off Star Citizen’s motion blur because it made us woozy. Also because it cut into PC performance big time.
“I kill you in the name of our lord the pirate king!”
“You call that a weapon? I kill you in the name of delicious!”
coffee-d
2 Likes
First thing I do when I boot up SC is type “r_motionblur 0” in the console 
It’s hard enough to cope with the wobbly head-mounted camera, let alone the blur on top of it.
Edit: More on the procedural elements on RtV recently with ex Crytek dev Sean Tracy…about the 30min mark. They want to aim for trees, forests, waterfalls etc. I’m a little scared but mostly excited of how hard they are swinging into this.
Yes.
1 Like
Procedural engine badge of pride? What? All games will eventually be procedural based. As far as I’m concerned all of the procedural engines look fairly similar, as far as demonstrations go - NMS is currently the most detailed working procedural engine that I’ve seen.
Depends what kind of games you have in mind.
If the location of your game or the general map matters a lot, then the procedural stuff will be limited to the indoors part. For instance, the last “Assassin’s Creed” will most certainly still focus on a set time period and town (I don’t see a “London in the 1800’s generated procedurally” ).
Also, when speaking about PvP oriented games, the procedural part is rather seen as a flaw or a disturbance at best.
But when speaking about exploration games, I definitely agree with you: procedural creation is the key feature.
1 Like
I think I-Novae will dispel that notion.
You’re thinking too macro; there are many systems that are currently based on pre-defined sets of algorithms that will eventually utilize procedural generation in many different ways. It is easier to think of procedural generation as the future for all gaming, since it will allow for much more realistic and believable experiences. We are only seeing the advent of procedural generation!
2 Likes
1 Like
I wish my PC could run it that smoothly D:
Looks nice but VERY limited number of players will be able to be on at the same time.