this post was submitted on 26 Oct 2023
103 points (100.0% liked)

Gaming

30855 readers
23 users here now

From video gaming to card games and stuff in between, if it's gaming you can probably discuss it here!

Please Note: Gaming memes are permitted to be posted on Meme Mondays, but will otherwise be removed in an effort to allow other discussions to take place.

See also Gaming's sister community Tabletop Gaming.


This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Since I haven't seen anyone post this, I thought I'd share the new Star Engine demo video from Cloud Imperium Games.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] ISOmorph@feddit.de 29 points 1 year ago (9 children)

Ok, I know we love to shit on that "game", but that video in and of itself left me speechless.

load more comments (9 replies)
[–] Stillhart@lemm.ee 25 points 1 year ago (7 children)

I am in shock at the number of people upvoting positive comments about this scam project. Until they refund all the people they defrauded to get the project off the ground, they will continue to be dragged down by their own fucking karma.

Suckers want to spend money on it now, knowing everything we know now? That's on you. But plenty of us didn't know we were being conned at the time.

[–] Cagi@lemmy.ca 16 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Spending more than a basic access package is absolute stupidity and those that do it and regret it have no one to blame but themselves. I spent $45 dollars and play the exact same game and can buy most of those expensive ships with in game money after a few days of playing.

I have had hundreds of hours of great times in Star Citizen. Your anecdotal experience and very emotional hatred for this project because of your own bad financial choices doesn't make my good experience, the most common experience, untrue. The massive, growing number of active users trumps your loud minoroty's passionate hatered. Hatered 100% based on hot, salty tears because you wasted your own money on pretend spaceships like a spoiled child, not based on an objective look at things. You were 100% informed about the realities of this project, you just ignored it. I know this because I've been following it too and didn't spend buckets of money on a videogame that isn't even done yet. Because that would be really irresponsible of me.

This game keeps making money and keeps adding more users. This is because it is fun to play for more people than not. Otherwise they would be failing after this many years. Grow up, get a life, focus on games you like, ignore the ones you don't like a healthy adult. Don't spend money on speculative projects if you don't want the project to change, caveats have been everywhere saying as much since day one. The only person that lied to you was you.

[–] Yawnder@lemmy.zip 7 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I personally don't like the game at all. Some mechanics are interesting, but the game being pay to win and "shit on new players all you want, there is no consequences" just makes me never want to start it again. I really thought there would be some semblance of PvE possible, but you're always in a PvP setting.

That being said though, while I do hate the dev process, and find it disingenuous, it's not a scam at all.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Sivick314@universeodon.com 12 points 1 year ago

@Stillhart @SeaOfTranquility even if it comes out its gonna be pay to win garbage. They sold goddamned star destroyers for thousands of dollars, you think those won't have an advantage?

I can't believe there's people who still defend the amount of time and money that's gone into this. It boggles the mind.

[–] worsedoughnut@lemdro.id 9 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I will never let myself live down the stupidity and shame of falling for their bullshit not once, but twice. I'm ~$150 poorer thanks to my impressionable college-brain thinking their "complete in a few years" line back in 2014 was even remotely possible.

[–] interolivary 9 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Well, think of it so that you spent $150 on a class on media literacy and a crash course on the dangers of unethical business practices.

[–] Hadriscus@lemm.ee 5 points 1 year ago (1 children)

That's a constructive way to look at it

[–] interolivary 3 points 1 year ago

It's sort of how I try to view my past fuckups: I can't change the past by feeling like an idiot for making some mistake, but I can try to learn to not make the same mistakes again (and instead make new and exciting mistakes) and learn to "forgive myself" in a sense.

Fuckups are inevitable parts of life, and beating myself up over mistakes won't stop me from making new ones. I do need to learn from them when I make them, so I might as well do it in a way that's less unpleasant and doesn't require carrying around an ever-growing pile of memories labeled "I'm an idiot for doing […]"

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] atocci@kbin.social 21 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Oh, so they're like, actually making something with all that money, huh. Wow

[–] shrugal@lemm.ee 20 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Always have been, that's why calling it a scam has always been ridiculous. You can think about the feasibility of the project and quality of their decisions what you want, but they were always very honest and transparent about the work they are doing and the huge goal they are chasing.

[–] Cagi@lemmy.ca 14 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

We've been trying to tell y'all this for years, we just want you to have fun and not listen to horrendous "journalists" that smear Star Citizen for clicks. But you don't create multiple offices across the world with over 1000 full time employees and dozens of third party contractors if you're trying to scam your fans. You also can't create a AAA studio from the ground up in just a few years. This studio started with 8 people in a basement and it grew slowly, because you have to. Only so many people are looking for work at a time and only so many of them are hirable. It took them 10 years just to have as many devs as other AAA studios, but they knew they had the budget to go AAA from early on. So for a long time there weren't enough people to deliver a game of this scope in a reasonable time. They knew it, we knew it, it was part of the plan. They were hiring like mad across the world for years and years because the payoff in the end will be a well supported AAA game like no other. Now that they are chugging along at full speed, people are starting to see what the rest of us have been trying to show you. Yes, Chris Roberts wants to be a billionaire CEO. But he also wants to build a rad game in good faith and has the money to do so.

So yeah, it's taken a while and will be a while still, but it's a genuinely fun game to play, even now. If it goes belly up tomorrow I've already got my money's worth of enjoyment out of it. Every quarter, new massive updates drop. Once Squadron 42 is launched and running smoothly I think it will change a lot of hearts and minds. Just play SC during a free fly week. It's janky as early access games always are, but genuinely a fun time.

You should all be angry at the shitty hit pieces that deprived you guys of quality online scifi shenanigans by lying to you about this game and remember gaming news isn't always good journalism, sometimes reputable sites will post tabloid garbage because there are no rules, only shareholders and click quotas.

[–] optissima@possumpat.io 10 points 1 year ago (1 children)

A AAA game company needs to release a AAA game to be one, so while they may be poised to be one in the future, they haven't reached that label yet.

[–] Cagi@lemmy.ca 7 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I suppose, if you want to argue symantics. Their intention is to build a AAA game is my meaning.

[–] optissima@possumpat.io 4 points 1 year ago

You're right, but I think its important to recognize that important distinction, otherwise some, such as myself in the past, have been lead to believe that they had previously released a successful game

[–] stagen@feddit.dk 16 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Star Citizen 4.0 ?! Can we have Star Citizen 1.0 first maybe?

[–] t3rmit3 6 points 1 year ago (1 children)

It's alpha 4.0

They're currently on 3.21

[–] stagen@feddit.dk 7 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I think my point still holds. :D

[–] t3rmit3 7 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I mean, no? Version numbers don't dictate the release readiness of something.

You want them to just call what they have now 1.0, before they implement the Alpha 4.0 features shown there? Because that's the gist of what you said.

[–] stagen@feddit.dk 7 points 1 year ago (3 children)

Conventional version numbering (afaik) lead up to 1.0 as the release candidate.

[–] Cagi@lemmy.ca 4 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Most often in gaming, yeah, but there are no rules. PURE CHAOS, BABY!!!

[–] JohnEdwa@sopuli.xyz 3 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Usually yes if you use only numbers, but when you use alpha/beta/release cycles etc, it's not that uncommon to have them start from 1.0 as well.

As an example, the fifth phase of minecraft dev started with "Minecraft Alpha v1.0.0" and once it got to v1.2.6, the next was "Minecraft Beta v1.0.0". The proper Minecraft 1.0 came after Beta 1.8.1.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Sivick314@universeodon.com 11 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)
[–] Cagi@lemmy.ca 8 points 1 year ago (1 children)

The moon landing was fake!

[–] Sivick314@universeodon.com 6 points 1 year ago (1 children)

@Cagi you could have built a real rocket with the money they spent

[–] Cagi@lemmy.ca 5 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Revenue is not the same as money spent. They have raked in enough money to build to build a rocket, so have many games. That's a good thing. All you are doing is calling them successful.

[–] ChairmanMeow@programming.dev 7 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I like the person casually walking into the fire at 19:05. I also noticed reflections in the water near the edges of the screen don't show properly, most noticeably at the end of the video.

Amazing tech demo, but I wonder if they're focusing on the right things. Physics-based nosebleeds are cool, but not as noticeable as getting reflections right.

[–] barsoap@lemm.ee 6 points 1 year ago (2 children)

I also noticed reflections in the water near the edges of the screen don’t show properly,

It's called screen-space reflections: Things that aren't on screen don't reflect because, well, they're not rendered. The alternative is either not having reflections, having the "screen" not be a rectangle but the inside of a sphere, or, and that's even more expensive, raytracing.

It's a bog-standard technique and generally people don't notice, which is why it's good enough. Remember the rule #1 of gamedev: Even if not in doubt, fake it. It's all smoke and mirrors and you want it like that because the alternative is 1fps.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›