I really don't want to see any more new ships for 2017, I want them to work on the game mechanics

LIVBOG

Posts: 13

Posted:
Posted: -
I really don't want to see any more new ships for 2017, I want them to work on the game mechanics, planets, A.I, Characters, and more complex and important aspects of the game. They can add new ships later on. They should be building the other solar systems. However I do think that they should build and release the old ships that they have sold as concept sales. They really need to focus on finish the game. I have said this before, if they don't release at least 2 solar systems this year and Squadron 42, it will cause concern for many backers.
you agree with the suggestions here?
  1. you agree with the suggestions here?103 votes
      Yes
      30.10%
    1. No
      69.90%
You'll Never Walk Alone
  • Catfish_Sam

    Posts: 326

    Posted:
    Posted:
    That's not how it works. The team(s) that make ships are not the same teams that make planets, people, or core game systems. If they stop making ships, it will not improve the speed of anything else. And the vast majority of programming tasks are not solved by just throwing more people at it. They just take time, regardless of the number of people on it. So no, that's not how it works at all.

    Also, two solar systems? We know for a fact that's going to be in 4.0, as announced. And there's a near-zero chance that 4.0 will be this year. I'd be shocked if we close out the year on anything greater than 3.1.
    E34XErr.png

    Referrals appreciated: STAR-5466-Q7W2
  • Eschatos

    Posts: 12840

    Posted:
    Edited: by Eschatos
    Posted:
    Edited:
    ^ Yep. Different teams. Not mutually exclusive. I'm not sure if that was the question.
    The Convoy™7Txqb5L.png est. 2943
    NOLI OBLIVISCI MIRABILIS ESSE
  • Greers

    Posts: 14715

    Posted:
    Posted:
    So, you like the painters to now do roofs?

    I hope you do realize that people do have different jobs because not every programmer who knows how to create a ship model can just be told: "Now program me an AI who is realistic and also do some work in developing a new routine so we get better pings in game".

    Also this forum is for questions about the game, not for suggestions. Suggestions go here: https://forums.robertsspaceindustries.com/categories/game-ideas
    Per aspera ad astra!
    Die by the very weapons you adore!
  • Midnight_Wolf

    Posts: 899

    Posted:
    Posted:
    We need lots of new ships in 2017. The more the merrier! :D
    Starfarer Gemini (x2) │ Andromeda │ Vanguard │ Gladius │ Freelancer MIS
  • MmmHmm

    Posts: 162

    Posted:
    Posted:
    Let the professionals work.




  • Jestunhi

    Posts: 13744

    Posted:
    Posted:
    How long do you believe it will take to train the ship modelers / concept artists in the other jobs? How many man hours would be lost be the people doing the teaching?

    People are not interchangeable. They each have their own skills. And training someone (or even just bringing them up to speed on that part of the project) takes time away from the actual work.


    Too many cooks spoil the broth.
    You can't produce a baby in one month by getting nine women pregnant.
    Etc, etc.
    CIG Calix Reneau:
    I think we could experiment with making decoupled aim and flight more available, but I don't expect that we'll be removing coupled aim+flight. I don't agree that any "arcadish FPS feel" is intrinsic to the control setup
  • Coren747

    Posts: 4142

    Posted:
    Posted:
    Spoken like someone who has no idea what the teams do.

    People who do ships don't work on anything else. It's not a question of priority it's a question of what the team does.
  • Sillia

    Posts: 1282

    Posted:
    Posted:
    developing core technologies for the game can not be rushed. They have enough people working on it that adding more would not speed things up. Ships are different. A new ship will become flight ready every couple of weeks and a new concept will be available every couple of months because the technology already exists to do that. they just need an artist to design it. Also artists dont code so the idea that the artists should stop designing ships and go code is nonsense.
    Before you spend money on the game, use a Referral Code to receive a free 5,000 UEC (in game money).

    Here is my own code if you do not have one, STAR-K9ZM-K5ZJ
  • KeithStorm

    Posts: 931

    Posted:
    Posted:
    I think how it works is people are good at different stuff. 3.0 is taking awhile because they don't necessarily have enough of the people who can make an impact on the net code and AI. In the real world once what you can do is finished with a project you have to go get a new job. Nothing lasts forever. Balancing the talent base with what is left to do is difficult. You don't want to lose someone before their stuff is done and you don't want to keep paying them once they can no longer help you.
  • Logical_Chimp

    Posts: 21957

    Posted:
    Posted:
    [hide]

    I think how it works is people are good at different stuff. 3.0 is taking awhile because they don't necessarily have enough of the people who can make an impact on the net code and AI. In the real world once what you can do is finished with a project you have to go get a new job. Nothing lasts forever. Balancing the talent base with what is left to do is difficult. You don't want to lose someone before their stuff is done and you don't want to keep paying them once they can no longer help you.

    It's not even that...

    As a coder, the number of people you can have working efficiently in one area is - typically 1-2 coders. Any more than that, and you start to spend too much time coordinating what each people is doing, resolving merge conflicts, having to comment out other people stuff (that isn't quite working) so you can test your stuff (that isn't quite working), and so on.

    Note that by 'one area', I'm talking in terms of a single feature, or even single partial feature (if it is well encapsulated, etc). The problem comes when you get more than two people having to change the same file(s)... sometimes this is indicative of a sub-optimal design (a 'hot' file that too many systems reference), and sometimes it just means you have too many devs in one area.

    Yes, code tools can help to reduce the impact - but there is still an impact, and as the number of coders goes up, the impact increases exponentially, etc.

    So CIG could (potentially) have 10 people working on the 'network' (in different areas), but only 1-2 working on a specific issue or feature.
    I'm not a complete idiot. Some parts are missing.
  • LIVBOG

    Posts: 13

    Posted:
    Edited: by LIVBOG
    Posted:
    Edited:
    if 3.0 will be released at the end of 2017 means that the final game you being in 2025. Right?
    I'm tired just promises and lies

    I think this game you have played my kids :).
    the pace of development that I think we'll get older and you lasm him an inheritance to our children
    You'll Never Walk Alone
  • CaptMal

    Posts: 11946

    Posted:
    Posted:
    [hide]

    if 3.0 will be released at the end of 2017 means that the final game you being in 2025. Right?
    I'm tired just promises and lies

    Maybe. But that's also using the almost definitely wrong assumption that 3.0 won't come out until the end of 2017.
    MRU1IFH.png
         I swear by my pretty floral bonnet I will end you.    grafton is MVP!!!
  • GalenCrayn

    Posts: 265

    Posted:
    Posted:
    i would be happy if the release would be around 2020...
    krt_banner.jpg


  • LIVBOG

    Posts: 13

    Posted:
    Posted:
    if so it would not get money elsewhere then would apply another strategy to launch the game and then make further improvements.
      But while receiving money they have no interest to launch.
    How did the Elite Dangerous, which was launched and introduced new things along the way.
    BRAVO S passed so did not expect that the losers here a century you can play the game
    You'll Never Walk Alone
  • CaptMal

    Posts: 11946

    Posted:
    Posted:
    [hide]

    if so it would not get money elsewhere then would apply another strategy to launch the game and then make further improvements.
      But while receiving money they have no interest to launch.
    How did the Elite Dangerous, which was launched and introduced new things along the way.
    BRAVO S passed so did not expect that the losers here a century you can play the game

    Those words don't seem to make any sense in the order you put them.
    MRU1IFH.png
         I swear by my pretty floral bonnet I will end you.    grafton is MVP!!!
  • Third

    Posts: 13848

    Posted:
    Posted:
    No pixel sales = no money grab
    ht_zpsodwpasdc.jpg
  • The_Great_Gazoo

    Posts: 1216

    Posted:
    Posted:
    Not "century", more like "decade".
    VKzQuJ6.jpg
  • Gagarin

    Posts: 14339

    Posted:
    Edited: by Gagarin
    Posted:
    Edited:
    [hide]

    if so it would not get money elsewhere then would apply another strategy to launch the game and then make further improvements.
      But while receiving money they have no interest to launch.
    How did the Elite Dangerous, which was launched and introduced new things along the way.
    BRAVO S passed so did not expect that the losers here a century you can play the game

    Elite got away with it because they chose a route that I'm glad that CR didn't choose.

    They released the most bare-bones "game" possible, and are slowly adding actual game-content as time moves on.

    The engine is quite solid. It's nice.

    But at release, there really wasn't a lot to do.

    Now they're charging for "modules". Want to land on planets? Wait and pay up. Want to have engineering? Wait and pay up. Want to multi-crew? Wait and pay up.

    EVENTUALLY it will probably be an awesome game. But between time and money, most of the people I know in r/l moved on because there wasn't enough to capture their attention. And it left a stale taste in their mouth so even if the new stuff looks interesting, they don't want to return.

    CR, for better or for worse, is trying to launch the game with those features.

    Edit: Some of those "features" might be bundled together or free, but you get the point. At the very least, there is "wait" for each of them.
    Around 75% of my posts are from an iPhone / iPad and auto-correct stinks. So my spelling and grammar probably stink as well.
  • EremiticWolf

    Posts: 1414

    Posted:
    Posted:
    I pretty much have the fleet I want at launch but, the more ships we have the better. So keep making and selling those ships CIG.
    The game will continue being made whether they sale ships or not anyway.
    I NEVER LOSE, I either WIN or, I LEARN

    Use my referrel code and get 5,000 UEC - code: STAR-HJL9-N7RM
  • Gagarin

    Posts: 14339

    Posted:
    Posted:
    [hide]

    I pretty much have the fleet I want at launch but, the more ships we have the better. So keep making and selling those ships CIG.
    The game will continue being made whether they sale ships or not anyway.

    I've had "my fleet" since Jan 2015, and that was just to add a Mustang to it. I've been a double-Concierge for a long time now.

    Now, if a ship really catches my eye I might get it... but I'll melt some other ships for it that I have lukewarm feelings about.
    Around 75% of my posts are from an iPhone / iPad and auto-correct stinks. So my spelling and grammar probably stink as well.
  • Cocatox

    Posts: 76

    Posted:
    Edited: by Cocatox
    Posted:
    Edited:
    there is double-Concierge ?

    time to spend more money ;-)
  • Gagarin

    Posts: 14339

    Posted:
    Posted:
    [hide]

    there is double-Concierge ?

    time to spend more money ;-)

    Lol. I meant Just concierge twice over. As in 2 accounts with concierge
    Around 75% of my posts are from an iPhone / iPad and auto-correct stinks. So my spelling and grammar probably stink as well.
  • EremiticWolf

    Posts: 1414

    Posted:
    Posted:
    [hide]

    [hide]

    I pretty much have the fleet I want at launch but, the more ships we have the better. So keep making and selling those ships CIG.
    The game will continue being made whether they sale ships or not anyway.

    I've had "my fleet" since Jan 2015, and that was just to add a Mustang to it. I've been a double-Concierge for a long time now.

    Now, if a ship really catches my eye I might get it... but I'll melt some other ships for it that I have lukewarm feelings about.
    Took me awhile to figure out what I wanted to do. I have 16 ships ranging from fighters/bombers, cargo hauler/trader, refueler, repairer, salvage, npc/player transport and, science/exploration. Most other ships I'll get in game.
    I NEVER LOSE, I either WIN or, I LEARN

    Use my referrel code and get 5,000 UEC - code: STAR-HJL9-N7RM
  • Capt_Jik

    Posts: 737

    Posted:
    Posted:
    [hide]

    ^ Yep. Different teams. Not mutually exclusive. I'm not sure if that was the question.

    z2mnk0yh.gif
  • Debido

    Posts: 5576

    Posted:
    Posted:
    These guys are so good and so well resourced they can do both game mechanics and new ships at the same time.
  • GreySix

    Posts: 380

    Posted:
    Posted:
    [hide]

    I really don't want to see any more new ships for 2017, I want them to work on the game mechanics, planets, A.I, Characters, and more complex and important aspects of the game. They can add new ships later on. They should be building the other solar systems. However I do think that they should build and release the old ships that they have sold as concept sales. They really need to focus on finish the game. I have said this before, if they don't release at least 2 solar systems this year and Squadron 42, it will cause concern for many backers.

    Can't it be both?

    ?u=https%3A%2F%2Ftse2.mm.bing.net%2Fth%3
    html>
  • Dangerous_Dave

    Posts: 441

    Posted:
    Posted:
    [hide]

    if 3.0 will be released at the end of 2017 means that the final game you being in 2025. Right?
    I'm tired just promises and lies

    I think this game you have played my kids :).
    the pace of development that I think we'll get older and you lasm him an inheritance to our children

    I'm hoping for a 2020 release as not being too optimistic as I've never known a big IT/Software development project to come in on the original time or budget estimates ever.

    If its 2025, that's fine as it will coincide with my potential retirement so I'll have lots of time to play :)
  • NuTrinOs

    Posts: 23

    Posted:
    Posted:
    2025? I just retired. I may not be around in 2025 :(
    Oh well, at least I can play Elite Dangerous in VR right now.
    ED in VR is awesome. Especially in my Pimax 4K VR HMD.
  • Dangerous_Dave

    Posts: 441

    Posted:
    Posted:
    [hide]

    2025? I just retired. I may not be around in 2025 :(
    Oh well, at least I can play Elite Dangerous in VR right now.
    ED in VR is awesome. Especially in my Pimax 4K VR HMD.

    4K VR HMD! I assume you have at least a Cray to run it. My Titan Pascal X only just copes with the HTC Vive with high detail etc on. ED in VR is brilliant though, I'll agree with that wholeheartedly.
  • 420-AlphaDoobie

    Posts: 514

    Posted:
    Posted:
    The guy who paints a car is likely not able to do fix the engine vice and versa.
    Knowledge to design a ship is already a skill to develop. knowledge to design a ship in Star Citizen is exponential and well beyond standard creativity and designing because you have strong guideline and limitation (physics+manufacturer style+ship's use and intention)
    Meanwhile the game mechanics is again encompassing more than 1 job. The guy making the GUI (little sticker of incoming missile for example) is a different job than the one coding how the missile should behave from pre-launch to post launch and all variables.

    It goes well beyond what is said here but what is important to retain is that there is no 1 man does it all. Even Generalist in design (someone who can concept on paper, build 3D, do some rigging then animation) is a dying bread.
    XR3VowQ.gifmNI6pM7.gifwbx2stO.gif
Sign In or Register to comment.