I’m pretty bummed they didn’t bother to show any SQ42 or Star Marine. Not that the PG demo wasn’t impressive or anything but I feel they missed a good chance to tease the now planet-sized elephant in the room.
I was just there on livestream for the tech reasons, so sq42 didnt bother me that much, but their planet tech can officially be said to be the best in the world so far. The only thing that can be criticized is the scale in comparison to outerra earth or battlescape, but it was good enough for realism, but never the less they have achieved all the necessary tech combined into a single planet with this much level of detail and visual quality at a decent framerate is a big achievement. key feature in the planet was volumetric clouds / weather system, crysis like level detail combined with their detailed structures, ships, vehicles and the respective mechanics alongside AI. Though the demo did glitched at the very end. I only watched it once, so i may need to rewatch the demo many times to get more clear picture of the missing details.
I’m largely disapointed by this citizenCon… too much blabla and not a word on SQ42… the tech demo is cool but compared to Gamescom … and so scripted, nothing serious…
I should have sleep.
At a presentation with their high end computers? And that doesn’t tell you something?
Optimization problems are not a huge deal, to be honest. It can be tackled later on, as long as the impact is not global.
What does bother me is the aggressive marketing plan that still goes on.
750$ for a ship you’ll probably get over a hundred or so hours of play? And for a game that’s not even yet released?
I still sincerly hope the game ships out with the best quality. But this kind of behavior makes me thing the due date won’t be anytime soon, maybe not even 2017 at this rate.
1 Like
The real reason behind not optimizing is because there’s always a drop in quality afterwards and low quality means less bling to impress: got to have game and ships looking as shiny and slick as possible - cha ching $$$! So yes, optimization will improve performance but the game will not be nearly as impressive visually. You got to give it to them - they know how to market! And yes, could’t agree more - prices will not justify gameplay in the end. And you are probably right on 2017 but 2018 wouldn’t surprise me. And to think I got the rabid fanboy inquisition for saying the game wouldn’t be out until 2016 at the earliest. lol.
The tech demo of the engine is pretty incredible… is it their own version of CryEngine ?
In the bottom left corner, we can see 10GB of loaded textures, isn’t it ?
4:05 I:B inspired 
1 Like
So stupid. Yeah compare cgi vs dev of course it’s the same thing… so honest…
Pretty funny. Thanks JonnyRedHed for showing us both sides of the divide.
I was also more interested into the tech / 3.0 details and their PP V2, so I was too very satisfied what was shown. That planetary part of the game is coming along good. There are some nice features and details in it (planetary details, objects on the surface, scripted weather, etc.). For those waiting for the single player SQ42 I was hoping there would have been shown a lot more, but hmm… It was interesting to see how Chris Roberts was trying to get around a timeline at the end of the SQ42 presentation part, I think he knows he can’t do that much longer with SQ42.
But I think those more waiting for the SC part can be satisfied what was shown, demowise and with roadmap details.
For one point I am on Zen’s and Tjafaas’ side, he ended with 4.0 Jump Point (which still does not have all features) in his roadmap, saying “this what we want to do in 2017” - this should make pretty clear that he focuses an a release at least in 2018 / not in 2017. I think no one should expect anything earlier.
Think so too atm, and I if I remember right it was 3.1 where they highlighted CPU and GPU optimizations as one of their main agenda points.Nonetheless details on their current demo-setup would be interesting. I think I read somewhere they are using a simple GTX 1080 / i6700K combination, which is of course on the high end side, but not a uncommon or completely unachievable setup.
Anyway lets see if they can get 3.0 released this year so that we can get our hands on the planetary part and see how well it really works on normal systems. I think 3.0 is what they were hoping to do at the end of 2016.
3 Likes
I think it was at Gamescom that CR said 3.0 was most likely early 2017, not this year for certain.
a2.6 still hasn’t reached the end of Evocati testing which means there is still PTU testing to be done. So November at the earliest.
I don’t know why but I cannot bear his voice and the way he talks
BoredGamer
The Open house - Special - Citizens conned - Derek Smart talking about Citcon - (Oct 11th)
*Caution, if your easily offended.
1 Like
How many times does Chris Roberts have to say it? He literally said during the presentation (and 200 other times),
“the one thing I do want to say though- I know this sometimes, is a bit of a debate or controversy: no one needs to get a big fancy spaceship or anything else. You spend 40 or 45 dollars- that’s all you need, but the way I look at it is… getting a corvette or a Constellation is really just supporting development… For me it should only be if someone is saying ‘You know what, I really like what these guys are doing. I want to support it. I love the process and I’m there and they’re giving me a cool ship in the process.’ That’s the way it should be, nothing more, nothing less. Because you will absolutely be able to earn everything in game play… thank you for everyone’s that’s bought a corvette because that’s what allows us to build the things that we’re doing and thank you to anyone that’s supporting whether you’ve gotten a tiny little thing or a really big thing- thank you very much.”
I feel like some of the responses from critics of CIG to a 750 dollar ship are like, “750 bucks? What a rip off. That’s not worth 750 bucks. The prices are ridiculous.” That’s like going to a cancer walk like Relay for Life and saying, “wow, these shirts are 30 bucks? They’re just white t-shirts. They’re not worth 30 bucks.” Completely missing the point. What’s actually happening is that you’re donating 750 bucks. A perk or a badge or a reflection of your donation is a ship. You’re not purchasing a product and expecting to get exactly what you paid out of it. You don’t go to a cancer walk and expect to get good deals on t-shirts. You don’t go to the ship store on RSI an expect to get a good deal on a ship. You’re supporting groundbreaking cancer research. You’re supporting groundbreaking game development. I don’t understand why this needs to be repeated ad nauseum.
1 Like