Star Citizen New Procedural Planets v2 Trailer

Falls down to 30-ish FPS in many places, but mostly it's 45 to 55. Still not as bad as Mafia 3 though. But not very good either.

So I wonder what the setup is to get 120FPS on this game?

 

Try checking again. It only dips three times because of physics based animations. When the player drives off there are a couple of flags. Behind the ambush rocks there's a large piece of cloth flapping in the wind forcing down the framerate. Once you approach the wreck with the sand storm in the background: another dip. Even the worm in the end won't make it drop under 65. The average over 30 minutes is probably over 70 fps.

 

Instead of wasting time making useless videos, try finishing the game for use. Four years and a lot of bllsht promises later nada. You can build a car in a day, make a Marine in three months, send people to the Moon in a week, fly to Mars in a year, but you can't make a game in four years? lol Money scammers!!:flip2: $100 AND ALL I CAN DO IS FLY AROUND EMPTY SPACE AND REPEAT THREE STUPID MISSIONS OVER AND OVER AND OVER AND OVER AGAIN,IN FOUR YEARS????:finger::flip::moon::booty::mad2::tool::eek2::cussing::eatme::bang:

 

Dude, if you don't like the game just don't comment - this post makes you look like you're twelve.

 

Lol dat tearing though? Guy does a demo of a game, doesn't limit FPS or turn v-sync on lol. How he can handle the tearing is beyond me, it's horrid.

 

Thats some impressive work.

I really want this title to be successful, and shall victims on No Man's Sky can rejoice in this game.

 

Setup is to let developers finish game first.

 

Are you for real? ; - ) This is totally top notch graphics, I mean... the only one real next gen game out there on the horizon. So I think I will forgive them few fps drops considering the fact its even not finished yet.

Please dont compare it to pricey indie bad quality dated products like Mafia 3

 

One game you mention is a fully released game with a piece of crap PC port

Another is a game utilizing a heavily modified beyond its spec crytek engine, with procedural generation that isn't even in alpha yet and built to take advantage of top end hardware that is available in future, on PC.

Hardly a comparison you can or should make.

 

That is unfair to twelve year olds.. I have personally met twelve year olds with more sense and logic than this person displays.

 

Say what you want, his point is valid. They have very little accomplished and I to was hopeful and spent money on a Ford Pinto of a spacecraft that doesn't allow me to do much.

Its great if your a Chris Roberts fan but this dev time is simply not acceptable. I know many that will wait as their love of space/flying is timeless. I just hope they will be alive to enjoy the game.

Another boring video of a planet, amazing!

 

Yep agree!

P.S Didnt we do procedural already and it's more or less a fail?

From what I make of "procedural" stuff it's more or less a way of saving you time and effort (and therefore money) so you dont have to create the stuff yourself.

We all know tailor made is better than generic etc.

 

No, his point isn't valid - neither is yours. This topic gets beaten to death in every single thread this game is mentioned in. And it's often the same people, stating the exact same things, with absolutely zero attempt to understand the development process.

The game has been in development for 3 years, 4 if you include the time they took between the kickstarter and first office opening. They didn't reach peak developer saturation until about a year ago. Most AAA games take 5+ years to develop, with some, like Fortnite/SC2/WoW/Etc taking 7+ years. Most games don't also have to ship working modules of the game and do fund raising as they go along - which not only slows down the process because you have to create standalone modules and ship them to backers - but it also creates a moving development target.

During the development of most games, a significant portion of the upfront time goes into designing/developing/integrating the major gameplay systems into the engine. The FPS Module/Procedural Planets/Flight systems/etc are all examples of this. Their Frankfurt studio is refactoring large portions of the CryEngine in order to bring these systems together. Once all that is done, building quests, missions, etc is more straight forward and visually offers a bigger chunk of content that people will appreciate. The reason why most gamers don't know this is because the vast majority of developers don't begin showing/shipping betas/alphas until all the system/design integration work is already complete. So generally, when you see something like Alpha versions of a new Battlefield game for example -- the game has already been in development for 3-4 years prior.

Obviously there are things that CR/Cloud Imperium could have handled better - but it's not like there is a guide book on how to develop a $100M crowd funded game. Most of the complaints people have about the development process are trivially easy to see in hindsight. I personally think they've done a great job considering the scope of the project and moving budget.

I suggest you watch the conference. They explain that they use a mixture of procedural generation and artist driven world building in order to overcome some of the pitfalls of other procedurally generated games. I don't know how you expect any company, let alone an independently funded one to manually handcraft entire worlds.

 

Actually both of their points are valid till the game is released sorry to say.

And my point was they need to somehow rethink how they do it perhaps. Some procedurally done but some hand crafted is what am getting at.

Or the procedural parameters need to be tightened and given a "story" "Set" outline.

my point being with no mans sky didnt we have all procedurally done and it ended up being boring/banal?

 

I literally wrote they use a mixture of it in my post.

And no, I don't think their points are valid. SHOCKTRUPPEN said " but you can't make a game in four years?" almost every single AAA title has a development period longer then four years and none of them have to deal with the constraints put on CIG by being transparent and modular with the development process or having a shifting budget to adhere to.

These threads are really frustrating to deal with - you see the same people say literally the exact same thing in multiple threads and don't even address the responses to their complaints. SHOCKTRUPPEN wrote an identical post less then a week ago -- multiple people replied to him and he just ignored it and posted the exact same thing in this thread.

 

Well I might stand corrected then re the procedural content. You have to admit though Jury is still out.

I do agree posting the same thing twice is just sad/childish. However I'd wait to make any final judgements on this game.

I had a brief look and wasnt impressed. But then my Space sim experience is only from Elite/Starlancer/X wing...(I think Starlancer was Amiga?)

Was never a huge fan but I loved some of the combat and exploration. I could have liked something like no mans sky but...well you know how that ended..

 

First of all, the fact that you're even mentioning No Man's Sky in this thread is already a mistake, since in no way form or shape are these two games even the least bit similar beyond the fact that they are both set in space and utilize procedural generation. they otherwise are nothing alike.

Second, they already have done what you're mentioning. They are using procedural generation for the persistent universe, but certain planets and stations and features will not be procedurally generated and will be static. Otherwise there is no way for them to make a universe that plays the same for everyone. So, they are already "tightened"

Again, a situation where if you actively followed the development, you'd know these things.

Arent they though? I feel like some fan boy for having to correct so many posts filled with so much misinformation and false claims even though i'm just stating facts.
Its unreal the wild speculation and incorrect claims that are made about this game.. I honestly can't remember a game that has taken so much flak that is so unfounded.

 

1: It's not a AAA game. It's a $2m kickstarter project, which decided to redefine 'development funds' as 'income & revenue', even though they do not have a finished product on the shelves.

2: No one can deny the arduous nature of game development, you can only argue the ineptitude of management for not knowing or understanding the technical requirements and subsequent timescales involved in game development. In other words, you cannot give credit or allow for delays or slippage, because your technical director had a hard time refactoring a game engine. That's their fault, and is most certainly is not an excuse, it is a reason.

4: There is not a guide book on how to make a computer game, but there are many BANKS out there who help you write your business plan with key items like, timescales and requirements to get your business running. Most importantly, staff. Credible staff. Staff who know what to do, how to do it and how long it will take to do.

I am truly sorry, I really am, but you cannot and should not give any excuses for (again) the inability for an individual responsible for running a business. There are more than enough ways to get your business plan "perfect" before embarking on such an endeavour, with heaps of financial and legal assistance from many institutions certified to make it so your business plan is 'workable' and can be 'executed'.

To argue that there isn't, that unforeseen circumstances, or 'problems with third-parties' contradicts the credibility you are apportioning to them.

Changing the business plan on the fly, and redefining what 'revenue' and 'development funds' actually are has been the main problem for the last few years. The money has kept coming in, so they have changed that income from 'development funds' destined for development of the existing plan, to 'revenue' for a project which has not been released.

The plan keeps changing, they keep adding to it - and people are essentially paying for a product, which has not been released. If it had - I would be judging/critiquing/appraising it in reference to the review scores and how they weigh on my own personal experience. It hasn't, so I won't.

What I will do is judge the company and how they conduct business, because without a product; that's all I can do.

 

Except for the fact that there is a product which you can judge them on, albeit prematurely, though that seems like it would never stop you from throwing around your opinion good or bad.

There is a very real and working pre-alpha build that is being updated all the time with new content. If you'd prefer to speak toward them as a company instead of judging them based on the strides they are making in game, you're entirely free to do that.

But what you can't sit there and say is that they don't have a product.. just because it isn't finished does not mean it isn't a product. If I'm downloading it and playing it on my PC at home, guess what.. its a product.