Author Topic: Squadron 42 Dev Progress Watch  (Read 57457 times)

DemonInvestor

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 159
Re: Squadron 42
« Reply #45 on: December 23, 2017, 03:58:22 AM »
Maybe i misunderstood them, but did they basically say, they don't look into the mechanical/gameplay side of ships, before the art is actually finished, after the gameplay trailer? Is that normal? I mean shouldn't you check if cramped places (Avenger bed etc.) work with your animations, collisions and whatnot, before finalizing the art around such things?

The trailer itself is good enough to stir the dream of a great singleplayer space shooter. Only if you take a step back and be a bit jaded you'll realize how much on rails it was and how the engine still didn't seem to be able to handle more than a handful of moivng ships at any given time. So if you want to believe, you're going to believe after that trailer.

Also, how far are we on the "tonk" memes yet?

N0mad

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 588
Re: Squadron 42
« Reply #46 on: December 23, 2017, 04:18:04 AM »
SC is a case study in what happens if you concentrate on all the art & design for a game before working out how the gameplay is meant to work.

randomness

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 17
Re: Squadron 42
« Reply #47 on: December 23, 2017, 04:29:39 AM »
So basically.....

Not even Squadron 42 escapes the horrible performance issues that have plagued this project. If anything they proved Clive whatever his name is, that yes, the FPS issues have no relation to the netcode and are simply connected to sheer AMMOUNT of stuff that is passed to your CPU. I have no idea how much this makes your GPU chug, but this is the perfect counter point to "fideliteh" and why actual , responsible game developers enforce polycounts and limit assets in all their scenes.

The fact that this is all ignored because they actually showed SOMETHING proves once and for all what Derek and the rest already know. That despite this being expected to be the BEST GAME EVAR, the fanboys can and will infinitely  regress their standards as is appropriate. "Why do you NEED 60 fps? It's perfectly playable at 20"

There was this moment during the stream when the most attractive thing on screen was the Cutting torch's lighting. Everyone was amazed by a laser cutter's sparks. And that perfectly shows that people will just be dazzled by the pretty lights and forget that a single player game is running at 20 fps.
And yeah, HOLY MOLY!
They showed a SINGLE PLAYER game, running on a machine of THEIR CHOICE,(so they could've rented the HAL 9000 for this )  and was PRE-RECORDED to boot, and they STILL couldn't pull a stable minimum of 30 FPS. MY god...........
That moment when the ship flies out of the Idris in space and the game just goes "HUUuuuurughh!!" was jaw-dropping. The fact that they had do quickly switch to free view mode and point the camera backwards, to ease the loading of assets in the FOV was so cringy.

If ubisoft pulled this on their next Assasin's Creed people would laugh them off stage......

EDIT: However, the music was absolutely stunning. They need to give the composers and sound engineers a raise because it was absolutely amazing. Granted, it was sort of wasted on long stretches of doing nothing, but still. That orchestra that played when they were approaching the sandwiched together asteroids sold the moment more than all the "fideliteh" in the world will ever do. And hey, music doesn't slow down your PC at all. :smuggo:
« Last Edit: December 23, 2017, 04:37:01 AM by randomness »

helimoth

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 120
Re: Squadron 42
« Reply #48 on: December 23, 2017, 05:29:17 AM »

EDIT: However, the music was absolutely stunning. They need to give the composers and sound engineers a raise because it was absolutely amazing. Granted, it was sort of wasted on long stretches of doing nothing, but still. That orchestra that played when they were approaching the sandwiched together asteroids sold the moment more than all the "fideliteh" in the world will ever do. And hey, music doesn't slow down your PC at all. :smuggo:

Probably was the one part croberts left the hell alone.

randomness

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 17
Re: Squadron 42
« Reply #49 on: December 23, 2017, 06:07:17 AM »
Also, obligatory : "THEY SHOWED SQUADRON 42 GAMEPLAY ! WHERE IS YOUR GOD NOW DEREK!!!???"


helimoth

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 120
Re: Squadron 42
« Reply #50 on: December 23, 2017, 06:10:42 AM »
they sure showed him. now nobody will be able to say that a first person shooter tech demo isn't achievable in 6 years for $174m

dsmart

  • Supreme Cmdr
  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4874
    • Smart Speak Blog
Re: Squadron 42
« Reply #51 on: December 23, 2017, 06:13:34 AM »
they sure showed him. now nobody will be able to say that a first person shooter tech demo isn't achievable in 6 years for $174m

 :laugh:
Star Citizen isn't a game. It's a TV show about a bunch of characters making a game. It's basically "This is Spinal Tap" - except people think the band is real.

StanTheMan

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 674
Re: Squadron 42
« Reply #52 on: December 23, 2017, 06:35:15 AM »
Clearly you know nothing about game development.

Perfect qualifications and experience to start his own streaming channel dedicated to kissing Croberts ring.


nightfire

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 212
Re: Squadron 42
« Reply #53 on: December 23, 2017, 12:17:19 PM »
Finally got to watch the SQ42 demo. Heck, if CIG can delay it for a day, so can I  :shrug:

I have to agree with a lot of the criticisms. Stutterfest and glitches aside, the pacing was drawn out and quite boring… I found myself using the right-arrow key a lot to make this bearable.

The aesthetics and design looked dated, conventional, and utterly uninspired. I remember being glued to the screen when first watching the COD:IW trailer, and the tech in the game was simply awesome (for example, I loved the Jackal takeoff from a town square in Geneva right into orbit and into space combat which was engaging as hell). In comparison, the SQ42 demo was tired and the dialog interface brought back memories of ME:A… not good ones.

All in all, this would certainly have raised eyebrows and been a contender if it had released in 2012. In 2017 however (not to speak of an actual release in 2018 or whatever), it comes across as an aged and outdated leftover from a past gaming era. In the meantime, it's been overtaken by other games left and right, and I don't see anything innovative in it at all. Virtually every feature and mechanic I noticed has already been shown elsewhere, and far better.

BTW: A thousand years from now, people still heat their meals in microwave ovens? What use is the vast, empty, utterly wasted space on the bridge, like an entire office floor with only a handful of desks? We still have space fighters do 1980s Top Gun aircraft carrier-style launches? I could go on and on… all of this is just so lame. The people saying that by the time this gets released, we'll be using Mobiglasses in real life – they do have a point.

David-2

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 152
Re: Squadron 42
« Reply #54 on: December 23, 2017, 01:39:49 PM »
I'm not really a game player - Pinball Construction Set was more my thing, back in the day - but the guys here seem to be thinking SQ42 is a movie.  Admittedly, that's the topic of the thread, but still: is the acting and facial expressions that key in a space shooter? 

I thought a space shooter was all about skill in flying and tactics and stuff like that with just enough "plot" to get you from one mission to the next.  Or am I completely out of date?

If it is that important - how much of the same stuff do you see from game to game?  I imagine it's like a Choose Your Own Adventure book - there's only a certain number of ways any scene can play out, and when you've seen them you've got no choice, when playing the game, but to see them again.  Right?  Or not?

Backer42

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 196
  • Refundian
Re: Squadron 42
« Reply #55 on: December 24, 2017, 01:38:16 AM »
as
The aesthetics and design looked dated, conventional, and utterly uninspired. I remember being glued to the screen when first watching the COD:IW trailer, and the tech in the game was simply awesome (for example, I loved the Jackal takeoff from a town square in Geneva right into orbit and into space combat which was engaging as hell). In comparison, the SQ42 demo was tired and the dialog interface brought back memories of ME:A… not good ones.

All in all, this would certainly have raised eyebrows and been a contender if it had released in 2012. In 2017 however (not to speak of an actual release in 2018 or whatever), it comes across as an aged and outdated leftover from a past gaming era. In the meantime, it's been overtaken by other games left and right, and I don't see anything innovative in it at all. Virtually every feature and mechanic I noticed has already been shown elsewhere, and far better.

Around 2014-2015 was the time when CIG's render demos stopped to impress me. Visually they are behind what a PlayStation 4 can do with a modern engine.

Also there is not a single gameplay mechanic demonstrated, which would make it a proper PC game. Having clunky mouse controls alone doesn't qualify.

Squadron 42: "I AM A PC GAME" - No, you are a Xbox 360 Kinect game in 2018. You look like one, you stutter like one and you have simplified gameplay like one.

helimoth

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 120
Re: Squadron 42
« Reply #56 on: December 24, 2017, 06:18:39 AM »
as
Around 2014-2015 was the time when CIG's render demos stopped to impress me. Visually they are behind what a PlayStation 4 can do with a modern engine.

By this point visually they are behind what an indie dev can do. The shitizens are keeping themselves willfully ignorant if they won't bother to look further than the end of their nose to see some of the great-looking games being developed that put SC/S42 to absolute shame in all aspects.

Like you said (and I'm now repeating), if this latest S42 trailer was a 2014 trailer I'd be on board.. But for 2018? lolol no

nightfire

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 212
Re: Squadron 42
« Reply #57 on: December 24, 2017, 09:36:10 AM »
With $174m, 6 years of development and 400 people, they could have made Grand Theft Spaceship V in the Los Stantos system

dsmart

  • Supreme Cmdr
  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4874
    • Smart Speak Blog
Re: Squadron 42
« Reply #58 on: December 24, 2017, 03:57:32 PM »
Well, just look at this. All of it. Then ask yourself how those clowns are ever going to come close to this; let alone top it.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=1882&v=ixzKvJeXrY4
Star Citizen isn't a game. It's a TV show about a bunch of characters making a game. It's basically "This is Spinal Tap" - except people think the band is real.

helimoth

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 120
Re: Squadron 42
« Reply #59 on: December 24, 2017, 04:40:47 PM »
Well, just look at this. All of it. Then ask yourself how those clowns are ever going to come close to this; let alone top it.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=1882&v=ixzKvJeXrY4

the shitizens would love for that to be S42 right now. the game they are hoping is going to change things and save CIG (and the whole sc project) is already a second-rate CoD;IW

 

SMF spam blocked by CleanTalk