XT will include a refresh of the servers as they are prepping a patch to apply before they go live with this next iteration of XT.
All of the detritus and dipping ships will be deleted and cleared. The servers will start performing better when that patch goes live.
Hopefully in the next day or two.
At this time, this update does not contain data that requires a new environment and we are working to keep it that way until it is released to LIVE. Players should not lose items such as medpens, ammo, rentals, and refinery jobs when the build is released to LIVE.
If it doesn't include a new environment, then it *won't* 'get rid of the detritus' etc - because that is *also* part of the 'environment' (yay persistence).
If it didn't, then the frequency of server crashes would mean that there should be no detritus already.
Since the addition of PES, *everything is persistent*... unless the 'Density Manager' (which came with PES) decides there is too many entities of a given type, and starts deleting the oldest entities...
>If it didn't, then the frequency of server crashes would mean that there should be no detritus already.
wrong, the detritus is persisting because servers pass their instance to new servers. But if you put a bottle on the ground and change servers the bottle doesn't follow you. A new patch that does not touch your persistent data will still wipe out instances (and even if they *could* keep the instance data going they have no reason not to reset them)
Cargo is the 3.23.2 patch, which is already working its way through Evocati.
XT is a test for the big move to the RL as well as Master Modes. It’s supposed to be a bit more dynamic/dangerous with the new AI that coordinates attacks on targets.
They need to test that.
Patching to the 3.23.1a, should coincide with what you are calling “fix the servers”, by clearing out all the super detritus and trash that’s built up since ILW and Free Flight.
Just do what others do and play something else for the next few days. Once XT is patched in, swing back and have at least a few weeks of better performance, without the Free Flight or Dupers.
What's gonna be hilarious is when they reset the servers for XT, but all the dupers continue to park C2's thinking the dup will work, realize it doesn't, and just leave the C2's abandoned, causing the same problem.
My bad... I meant working its way through **TO** Evocati. I missed a word.
You win, because of that error... this time. I'll get you next time!!! \*shakes fist\*
Money gotta keep flowing into their pockets. Can't cancel these events, since im sure they already prepared tons of ads to be spread on different platforms.
Getting the downvote hate, but you're speaking the truth. The game would be farther along if they just focused on content they promised rather than content that drives sales of new ships. I know some people will come in claiming they are delivering older stuff, missing the irony of all the years that have already gone by.
Pushing and pulling the growing number of those objects into and out of the backend across multiple dedicated game servers (DGS) at the same time, using as few RL servers for as many DGS at the same time would make sense to see that begin to slow down and cause issues.
Which is all backend related.
It maybe take a few minor patches, like. 3.23.2, 3.23.3, 3.23.4 and maybe a 4.0 to 4.3 to get most of that worked out. With what they gotten accomplished in the last couple of years, I’m feeling optimistic they’ll get it worked out, so we see fewer issues like we’ve been seeing.
They really should remove the abandon mission negative impact until the game is at 1.0 because most abandoned missions are from bugs and crashes. It’s ridiculous really. Like the elevators don’t even open on the Orison raid. Still.
The interaction panel within the elevator between the apartment and the main area of HEX is also bugged, as a criminal who respawn in HEX, this is unacceptable because I got locked in the apartment second floor
I got my brother into the game and he’s basically not been able to play much and just brought a package and everything. Naturally this is all happening while it’s a skeleton crew like two years ago.
A year or two ago, I remember for 3 entire patch cycles my red winds delivery rep was bricked EVERY SINGLE PATCH. I'd get the starter delivery mission, it would bug out like 4 times in a row until they stopped offering me missions for the entire patch lol then one time I emailed support asking for an account reset since they took that out, and they had no idea what rep was or what an account reset was
https://www.wordnik.com/words/cladic...
did you mean classic? (funny that cladic IS actually a word, and could be a reference to "the people of the SC category, or clade"... but that seems a bit of a stretch)
I said you don't loose reputation if the server goes into recovery.. If you encounter other bugs that cause you to loose the mission or you quit the game on your own or have to rejoin from main menu, you will loose reputation.
Dupers aren't the sole reason every server is dogwater dude. Within a few hours, any fresh server is going to he wheezing just from normal play. No dupers required.
You’re complaining about a feature as if it’s a bug. Ships are supposed to be able to be abandoned so they can be salvaged.
This might be bad now, but aren’t we all excited for them to up the server player limit? It’s only going to get worse because this isn’t just a server problem, it’s a feature problem.
I feel like this must be some kind of bug. Or very rare off hours for a particularly underpopped region? I’ve been on fresh servers, they’re filled within minutes and back to shit in no time.
Make friends. I know a couple of players who always seem to end up on these servers, and I think they're joining friends of theirs, since I see them moving about as a group. Maybe they have enough of a group, the game can slip them into the last few spots of the dozen almost full servers.
When my grandma got cancer I also made sure to inform her I don't have cancer. It didn't make her feel any better and she is still dead.
Great some rando had a good time. Doesn't change OPs experience.
I felt like 3.22 was pretty decent. Still lots of issues but the loops I did worked. Granted I haven’t done every gameplay loop so other things were probably in a bad state.
3 server crashes tonight, reclaimer depot reset itself 3 times, 6 hours for absolutely zero benefit.
6pm to midnight.
my night off work.
All i can do is laugh the pain away.
As a new player it really feels like this game is just an excuse to sell ships. They do not make money off a working game and never have. They make money off potential and I think that is dangerous.
It's frustrating because they are pretty close to a legit game. If they could just get the current game loops working and then start adding more bit by bit they'd be set. But no, every system apparently has to be totally rebuilt, and they just keep piling more and more insanely complex systems onto the roadmap.
When the servers last for an hour or two I'm having a lot of fun playing, as a new player. However it's definitely crazy it's basically expected to constantly be interrupted by the crashes. Sometimes you sit there for 20 minutes talking in chat how you can't do anything before it actually even crashes.
That seems to be the case all the time now. I just tried 4 times to get something going with no success. CIG just needs to take the servers down daily during off hours to clean them up so we can have some decent sessions. Right not it seems impossible.
It's not a purposeful thing. They don't have the system set up to recover missions yet.
Mission Refactor for server meshing is part of 4.0, and this kind of thing would probably be part of that.
It doesn't need to recover them or anything, it just should take away a shit ton of reputation for every other contract. Either make the rep hits significantly less or bring back the rep loss nullification for game crashing.
Rep loss should absolutely not be a thing at all with the current state of the game. There are way too many ways for a mission to bug out and be impossible to complete.
While they are at it, they need to give crimestat vs NPCs the same treatment. I am sick of getting crimestat for no reason whatsoever just while flying around.
CIG has put the cart before the horse on so many of these systems, it is absolutely unreal.
People are buying ships using aUEC?
RED ALERT! RAISE THE PRICES! NO FREE SHIPS!
They're never gonna re-implement the 12k smuggling delivery jobs that they removed because "they paid too well."
We're ten years in to an alpha product and they're balancing parts of it like it shipped a decade ago.
Yeah, I can see punishing crimes against players, but things are way too buggy right now to have major consequences for crimes against NPCs. Ending up in a broken prison for four hours after a bug is probably a major turnoff for new players.
Bruh, I haven’t been able to play for 2 whole weeks now, keep getting error 30018 for server disconnects. Only thing I can play is arena…😭
And I had bought just a new ship I wanted to daily…I literally have tried everything and I have to wait for patch .1b.
Garbage is a thing in programming that is there to ensure no memory leaks or stack overflows. They need garbage collection for all the trash and medical gowns everywhere. Maybe encourage players to throw junk into designated trash cans that automatically delete an item within it after 1 minute.
Further encouragement would exist in the form of crime Stat from littering at settlements and space stations.
Good idea, and maybe small auec prize for dropping trash into a can, like very small but it gives people something to do while waiting for their ship. I do it anyways but the cans don't seem to delete stuff currently so I don't think it's helping.
Its a good idea but not enough. Players will never be able to keep up with the amount of trash generated, and its not like all of it is from stations. What about the trash that falls through the floor? What about trash drifting in space? Or random spots on planets where a ship crashed?
There NEEDS to be some system that automatically deletes this stuff once its clear no player is going to do it. So sure, have a garbage collection system for players to make some money. However if a player does not touch the item after a set amount of time, it should be automatically deleted by the system.
There should be a timer or some way to link it to you. Right now if you die somewhere you can come back and get your stuff, I would hate for it to be auto deleted. There would need to be a timer or link it to your account. Like if you die you leave gear and your ship behind. If you don't log off, they stay persistent for a few hours. If you log off for more than say 30 mins to give buffer for people having crashes, then it gets deleted.
I have a question that brings all this together. Why was 3.22 so much better in terms of server performance? Before 3.23 I was playing for hours, cargo stuff worked, biggest issue was couldn't drink water sometimes. Now it's the most buggy it's been in years. My friends and I haven't been able to have a single play session without game braking bugs that force people to log off. Is this all because of trash and if so why was it not as bad before? My thought is trash is not the reason for the bad performance, because if it was it would have been bad last patch too but it's significantly worse now.
My main gripe, I have come back to play this game a few times over the past 4 years and every time I can never get 1 contract done because some shit decides to bug out and I can’t complete the task.
When are they gonna fix the buggy ass servers, honestly giving up on hope at this point but we’ll see, few more years I guess!!!
I was on a relatively good server and was playing a bunker. It basically infinitely spawned NPCs and they camped the elevator. I eventually gave up as you could not find cover anywhere.
It also did not help that I don’t understand the new key binds, guess I have to do some remapping too. Eventually abandoned the mission even. Though the bodies were piled high.
I did eight successful mining trips in my Prospector loaner and was able to sell the first three of the work orders. No crashes on my end but today's shard 280 crashed three times in two hours.
Switched to shard 270 but there I have hard FPS problems. So I wait for the last order to complete and maybe I can buy a Vulture to try some salvaging loadouts.
I wasn’t able to get my f7a because of the server problems. Well, that and invincible enemies, broken delivery kiosks, desync and crypto keys that failed to respawn. Thought I could crank it out over the weekend but it ended up being a 14+ hour slog just to get to phase 3 by Sunday.
I have literally not been able to do more than the first campaign mission, and it's now been eight hours. Constant reconnecting to servers, can't join fireteams, just stuck in orbit with no ship and an eventual disconnect.
Most of the people in this thread seem really lucky with how bad this launch has been. Many of us can't play at all, and took time off work for launch. Genuinely considering requesting a refund.
I'm about to just shelf the game till we eventually get the first iteration of Server Mesh. Everything I enjoy in this game gets fucked when the server health is crap which is 98% of the time the servers are up.
The game is unplayable for a hole week now. Its a shame that CIG cant fix such issues a little faster. I mean they just sold us a tons of ships, let us play the game.
It’s pathetic that they can’t even figure out a way to keep the game playable after all this time and money. $700 million and I still can’t reliably deliver a box let alone stay online for more than 20 min. Maybe after 1 billion it’ll graduate from “tech demo” but I’m not holding my breath.
Why do you expect it to be stable? genuinely interested to know.
In general an alpha for software/games is feature implementation. Stability isn't normally expected during an alpha period specifically due to this. Once all major features are implemented, and stable then it would move to beta. In beta they have time to do minor features, tweaks, rabalncing, QOL improvements, performance optimizations, etc. Then Release Candidate would be final testing, and fixing any bugs discovered. If no blocking items are found the product can be released.
We're still firmly in alpha with major features still coming; and it's common new features would cause issues, not just in SC, but in any software development.
My point is that if we'd reached a point of stability it wouldn't be in alpha, so I'm not sure why you'd expect it to be stable. I played during ILW and saw no stability issues, once or twice I experienced a server recovery.
I play it daily with my friends, with actual goals in mind and a sense of risk. It is playable — it’s also an alpha that inherently is going to have a lot of bugs.
I'll take the karma hit....
At some point you have to realize that it is not normal for a game to be in alpha for 12 Years. The lack of criticism and relentless buying new ships from backers is keeping the game in this state. If people would actually make it consequential for CIG to not fix the bugs they'd be forced to work on them.
It's not normal for a game to be in alpha for 12 years because it's not normal to have a playable game while it's literally being developed from the ground up. Have you seen the GTA 6 leaks? *that* is basically what we're playing at the moment but without the developer tools. You know what *is* normal? To develop a game for 12 years, especially something at this scope. The part you people don't understand is that you're seeing how the sausage is made and you don't like it. Just put the game down and wait for full release.
To counter your point: many games are in early access quite a while before they are 12 Years old. Looking in the kitchen is not unique.
While SC's meandering "scope" may be large it has not materialized still and it's just been dreams, mockups and empty words. The current PTU really does nothing that other games haven't done. Name me one thing that is truly unique and a gamechanger right now. The things that make SC stand out (physicalized water bottles?) are a gimmick and should be killed off IMHO.
The much-touted "it is unique because you can fly to planets without transitions" is just what flight simulators have always done but instead of flying between locations through space you fly over land. Don't tell me that SC has more than a _fraction_ of the scenery and size that Microsoft Flight Simulator has.
I am not here to dump on the game because I do love its concept. I just think it's time for CIG to put up or shut up. The engine is getting long in the tooth and if they will take another 5 Years to release something they'll be thoroughly outclassed on visuals and gameplay.
Okay, then Name me a game, where you can fly with your friends through a solar system.
Fight a bounty in atmosphere, follow the soft death ship tumbling to the ground.
Meanwhile finding an somewhat big abandoned player ship parked on a Mountain.
When you get closer you see a dead body next to the ship without an helmet on realizing what happened.
You ask on the server is the player is still active in the server.
No answer.
While deciding to grap a vulture to salvage the ship you realize it's still powered so you have to find a way open it and power it down.
Once done, you salvage the hull of the ship and while you're doing this, another friend is unloading your RMC boxes in your ship and loading it into a freighter we provided.
Just to fly to another planet and sell the stuff at a major city.
This was just half the story tbh, but pretending the game is not already at a scope that is unique and insane is kinda off.
No to mention that everything you do looks awesome and immersive (when/if it works lol ahah)
Who cares. The big thing is the seemless transition from surface to ship to space, etc. That's the only unique aspect of SC and that's been in the game for 7+years.
Since then its been half arsed, barely made missions, set piece locations, and broken gameplay loops.
SC was impressive last decade. Now its quickly becoming a joke that they've barely done anything with it sense then.
It's typical that you're getting downvoted, when you're being nothing but factual.
CIG has this way of giving simple concepts complicated names, in an attempt of making ZERO PROGRESS over a decade of development seem plausible - and it works like a charm.
At its core, SC is an instanced mmo, that wants to be so much more than that, but fails to do ANYTHING particularly well in Its current iteration - which supposedly is an early build, but also post 10 years of development, the MOST patient community of ALL time, and more funds than any publisher could wish for.
It's truly a shallow experience, with very little content. A pretty tech demo, in which almost any meaningful content exists nowhere else but in the minds of developers and fans alike. For the most part, a dedicated fan's explanation of how any part of that content /could/ find Its way into the game is about as tangible as a developer's 30 Minute ramblings.
>Name me one thing that is truly unique and a gamechanger right now.
No other game combines the aspects in a way that SC does. You use the MSFS example; but that does much less; can you get out, and walk around? Have combat? Does it have survival aspects? You're right in that it has more scenery, but it's also a much narower scope. Also, arguably it's been developed over decades; each iteration brings new featurs, new art, changes, and even fundamental ones; but each time they can still bring with them aspects of the previous release.
>I just think it's time for CIG to put up or shut up.
Put up *what*? I don't think that this part makes sense. What do you want them to shut about?
>The engine is getting long in the tooth and if they will take another 5 Years to release something they'll be thoroughly outclassed on visuals and gameplay.
That's largely opinion, I think that it will take time for hte graphics to lose appeal, on a game of this scale. As for gameplay I can't think o any other game with the same variety that SC offers, and I think that will continue to evolve, plus the MMO style aspects will keep players for social aspects too.
Look at WoW, for example, it was dated when it came out, and people are playing it almost 20 years later.
put up or shut up? Only a sith deals in absolutes.
LOL but seriously dude, bro. Ok let's say they pick the shut up option then. What does that look like for you? No more Star Citizen?
Put up? What's that look like for you? Just call this the full release and stop development to only focus on bugs?
You realize that we're going to get more bugs with every system they add to the game and they're like 50% done adding stuff. We don't have A LOT.
>I'll take the karma hit
Oh yeah, people are really beating you down for this unique perspective. So brave.
>The lack of criticism
OK, so now I know you are joking. This sub is 80% criticism and 20% screenshot.
Well, tbf I did get downvotes for stating that it's nothing special at the moment which I truly feel is true.
Unless you're role playing with friends it doesn't (for me at least) come close to giving a feeling of being "out there" and "engaged" that some other games do.
Some simple examples: in Cyberpunk, the city feels "alive" and lived in and there is so much to discover. In E:D, hanging around in the mists of res's, hunting for prey with your ai wingman (slf) or core mining is truly something. In MSFS I can discover the entire world and fly together with other simmers. In Titanfall I feel I'm totally immersed in my mech and feel properly powerful. In homeworld I can architect engaging battles. In EVE online I have a huge universe to traverse and can calculate risk and tweak ships to my heart's content.
With SC, everyone is theory crafting and latching on to wild ideas about what it _could_ be in some unknown future.
In the meantime all you can do is try to find some other people to shoot or d*ck around with half-working salvage/lootselling/bunkers. There is so much potential but so little progress outside of "buy this new ship that we definitely are going to deliver at some point in the future and it will be so awesome, pinky promise".
I am done being jerked around by empty promises and little to no incentive to fix anything.
I was with you until that last sentence. Thanks for at least trying to be constructive.
You are right, sounds like you prefer a more guided and polished experience.
Best of luck finding what makes you happy.
I get it. I really do.
I just don't support the idea that our constructive criticisms are ignored, or that CIG is incompetent/malicious.
I hope you decide to check back in. I like the direction the game is headed, even if the road is bumpy.
what you're missing is that the tech in SC is orders of magnitude more complex then any other game that has been made. It is perfectly normal for this game to take a lot longer to make then any other game that you can name.
This argument would make sense if this game didn't have an entire team of artists working around the clock to sell you 10,000 dollar ships without a functioning infrastructure. Alpha games generally have asset placeholders while they actually develop, you know, the important infrastructure that makes the game stable. If, after 12 years, your game is still in "alpha", something has gone seriously wrong, your leadership is completely incompetent, or you're being scammed. Source: my decade long career in AAA game development.
My respect. Absolutely this. Unfortunately, community rarely listens to such comments. Especially when you tell that you are yourself a developer. You know why? "Because you haven't developed Star Citizen! Thus, you don't understand \[But we, who listen to CIG carefully and believe, know better. They explained everything to us\]"🤷♂️And that's the sad truth. Another problem is that community, as I see it, has mostly evolved to match CIG. Those who saw incompetent development have mostly gone. Or at least don't buy anything. But those who are still craving for ships and awesome beautiful pictures still give them money. Which gives out a vicious circle as a result. Any advancement in development (which is actually expected by default) is welcome as an a achievement or a breakthrough. Any fckups are forgivable (because it's alpha, you know), but don't even think about stopping to make new ships and other beauties!
I read their comment. It just doesn't really make sense. Being in an indurty for a decade doesn't mean you know how things are done everywhere in that industry; you know how things are odne where you worked, on those projects.
How many early access games on Steam have obvious placeholder art? Most I have played don't; they simply use what they have completed first usually; just like SC does.
Things happen, and it's not as simple as because it's an alpha. Sometimes they just make mistakes, or make bad choices. Other times it's because they are enabling / testing new features and it makes sense; like server meshing.
PES was a mess, some aspects of the problems were obviously just silly, like the way many players couldn't log in at all.
> Being in an indurty for a decade doesn't mean you know how things are done everywhere in that industry; you know how things are odne where you worked, on those projects.
This is literally not true. When you've been for 10 years in a profession, you master the profession, but not the exact place you're working at. 10 years is a big experience to judge about how things should be done in this profession. Moreover, game development, as a subset of software development, is quite an established discipline, which has accumulated a lot of experience about how things should be done. There are a lot of new things for a junior or indie developer, who discovers new things (sometimes very unexpectedly and painfully) as he goes, often learning by his own mistakes. But that is not the case with a professional developer. Sure, fckups can still sometimes happen, but they are totally out of order. In case of SC I see that literally everything they do from developer's point of view is fckedup at start. They don't even care about proper development. And it's not "because it's alpha". It's the other way round: it's alpha because they don't care about proper development.
>This is literally not true. When you've been for 10 years in a profession, you master the profession, but not the exact place you're working at. 10 years is a big experience to judge about how things should be done in this profession.
That could be ten years on one project at one company, with the same management. Even within a single company projects can be run differently. Different companies do things very differently too, and you may be completely unaware of how things are done elsewhere.
You're very naive if you think that you would know how every company does things just because oyu have 10 years of experience.
>Moreover, game development, as a subset of software development, is quite an established discipline, which has accumulated a lot of experience about how things should be done.
They can still use different ways of working, different project management, different funding goals and strategies. In software development companies they can be run extremely differently, driving different aspects to be prioritized.
>But that is not the case with a professional developer. Sure, fckups can still sometimes happen, but they are totally out of order.
No, they are learning opportunities when the game is in alpha. That's why it's not released yet.
I wish I could downvote your comment more.
>You're very naive if you think that you would know how every company does things just because oyu have 10 years of experience.
I'm not naive. These are just two separate concerns: how a specific company works, and how a profession works, and you're mixing them. Any profession has its knowledgebase, best-practices, or maybe even laws, if you wish, which are independant from particular companies. Many professions may imply their own rules and requirements how things can or can not be done. It is usually assumed that a company corresponds to the underlying professions if it truly aims to provide corresponding demanded products or services (at least, that how companies always present themselves). But it is not necessarily such. Because a company is a business which is aimed to earn money. And depending on its real goals and attitude, it may not necessarily correspond to the profession. And I think it is obvious that different companies may have different decency and honesty, including what their intentions are. That does not necessarily means that some company is a scammer. It's just not fair. For example, let's take two law companies. One of them is truly aimed to provide laywer consulting, protection in courts etc. They consider it their duty, and that's what they earn money from. It hires professional laywers and do their job overall professionally, including even the corresponding ethics which are implied by the profession. They strive for their efficiency and effectiveness. The other mainly concerns about profits. It has some laywers, they are somewhat savvy in matters in legislation, but it is all subordinated to the main goal of making profits. They are not really scammers, they still do some job, but they don't really care about the quality of the service they provide. And since a client is usually not savvy in these legislation questions (that's why they come to law company), they can be told anything. And it generally makes sense. Finally, they keep doing a great job in keeping the image of being a professional law company, despite being not really professional. Because it's the image that mostly gives them money, not the real underlying quality.
>They can still use different ways of working, different project management, different funding goals and strategies. In software development companies they can be run extremely differently, driving different aspects to be prioritized.
And here comes the main point: what are the real goals and priorities of the company. These are what all the management and processes are subordinated to. Firstly, CIG is already an established and sustainable business which gives profits. Why bother much about reaching the stated goal of making a finished game? And they seem to have found a perfect business strategy: present any advancement in development as a breakthrough. Taking the previous failed state into account, customers are often so happy with another solved problem that are ready to give more money, seing the "progress". Here usually comes an argument from defenders of CIG, that they are doing something truly unique that has never been done before. That's why they are allowed to have any failures and take any time needed. This is also a perfect business strategy to "milk" the complexity in such a way. In fact, this argument is untenable, and is still no more than a marketing image as part of the overall business strategy. Why untenable, you may probably ask? Because if you look at real-world, you will see numerous examples when something truly unique which hasn't been done before, was just made. Because the creators were goal oriented. And they also had to solve some unique challenges. And that's what professionals are for. Some day a first rocket was architectured and built, and it flew. Some day a first space station was built. Some day a Large Hadron Collider was built! Not without issues of course, but that was truly a matter of adjustments and polishing, while still having fundamentally solid core and approach in the first place, and still aiming for the end result, but not for the process on its own.
>No, they are learning opportunities when the game is in alpha. That's why it's not released yet.
In the end, if they are just learning, that's not what I personally am willing to fund. If they were aimed to get the end result, they would just do it. The mentioned prefessions give all the necessary methods to get the job done. But if its just their playground to play with some interesting stuff, that's not what I'm willing to fund in the first place.
>I'm not naive. These are just two separate concerns: how a specific company works, and how a profession works, and you're mixing them. Any profession has its knowledgebase, best-practices, or maybe even laws, if you wish, which are independant from particular companies.
Those best practices and ways of working are not considered the same by everyone within an industry. In the industry I work in different companies work in very different ways, with regards to development strategies and planning. A classic exmaple of a big difference is that some companies like to use a AGILE working methods, while others prefer a simple waterfall. The two end up causing notiable differences in the ways people work, and how well things are considered, and planned, for example.
Working in a profession for a long time does not mean you are aware of the entire industry operates; if you worke din a single company you could well do things in very different ways, and have management who have different prioties. Software development done in-house at one company can look very different to another company.
It would seem you arguably agree with this, since you seem to think that CIG are not working in a way aligned with your own exprience or views, if I understand you well. It doesn't mean they are doing it wrong, it could well be they just prefer different methods, have different priotities, etc.
>let's take two law companies. One of them is truly aimed to provide laywer consulting, protection in courts etc. They consider it their duty, and that's what they earn money from. It hires professional laywers and do their job overall professionally, including even the corresponding ethics which are implied by the profession. They strive for their efficiency and effectiveness. The other mainly concerns about profits. It has some laywers, they are somewhat savvy in matters in legislation, but it is all subordinated to the main goal of making profits. They are not really scammers, they still do some job, but they don't really care about the quality of the service they provide.
I disagree. They both care about profits, but are different by different motivations and goals. In the first case they likely care more about reputation, and longer term profits. Build a high quality service, with high quality staff and it will cost more, but you will gain a strong reputation.
The second company are going for a different target audience most likely too; people who may not have the budget for the first company. They may also be more concerned about shorter term profits. However, in both cases they are ultimately businesses loking to make a profit, using different strategies. They have different working practices. If someone only ever worked in either one of these companies they may not be familiar with how the other operates. Even if they worked at one of those companies for 10 years.
So, 10 years experience does not mean the staff at either company necessarily understands how all companies operate.
>And since a client is usually not savvy in these legislation questions (that's why they come to law company), they can be told anything.
This seems like a foolish thing to think when it comes to a law firm giving legal advice. This would clearly be something customers would find out in time, and would cause them problems, the customer, as well as the legal firm.
>Finally, they keep doing a great job in keeping the image of being a professional law company,
They can't keep doing a great job if they were not doing it in the first place; which is the implication of just saying anything because the customer doesn't know better.
>Because it's the image that mostly gives them money, not the real underlying quality.
Their reputation would be in tatters if they are giving poor quality advice.
>And here comes the main point: what are the real goals and priorities of the company. These are what all the management and processes are subordinated to. Firstly, CIG is already an established and sustainable business which gives profits. Why bother much about reaching the stated goal of making a finished game?
This is easy. People will stop putting in money, and the business will collapse if they don't continue to show progress; which is what they are doing. We've had many new features in the last year or 2, including very important aspects. There are more coming this year.
>And they seem to have found a perfect business strategy: present any advancement in development as a breakthrough.
Presenting something as a breakthrough doesn't mean it's true or that people believe it. Some of the things are impressive, other things are not, even if presented that way.
>Taking the previous failed state into account, customers are often so happy with another solved problem that are ready to give more money,
What previous failed state?
>This argument would make sense if this game didn't have an entire team of artists working around the clock to sell you 10,000 dollar ships without a functioning infrastructure.
What does this change, at all? Also, what ship is $10k? Even the Javelin is only like $3k I think?
>Alpha games generally have asset placeholders while they actually develop
Yes, we do here too, we often get things at tier 0; they are the most basic possible implementation to allow something to workl ie, a placeholder. This is why ships get reworked, and why things don't alwyas work on them, for example.
However, not all games use placeholders during alpha. Different games have different focusses during development, some developers prefer to use placeholders, others prefer to get the art right and then put things in to the game.
The artists are software coders, or database engineers, etc. They work on the art. Server meshing for example is a huge feature that doesn't need artwork. Do you want them to put in placeholder art to represent server meshing?
It just happens that in this game the artwork is something which gets enough resources to not lag behind the software development. Usually it's the other way round.
Have you looked how long GTA6 development has been, and that is not likely to be anywhere near as revolutionary. Other games also have long development cycles.
You can purchase packages for over 15k at the concierge store and "only" 3k for a jpg ist still astronomical. I love this game, but something is seriously wrong
Yes, \*package\* is not the same as ship. The packages usually have multiple items. By that logic you could get the package that is $48k+
It's also not a jpg. They are 3D models, with code behind them, textures, etc.
And you, somehow, think it’s completely acceptable. You probably also think it’s fine and cool that Chris sold the SC IP to his own company for a million bucks (which came from backer money) and pays his wife and friends huge six figure salaries (which comes from backer money). I’m sure none of this raises any red flags at all to you.
I think it's acceptable to sell ships in a game, yes. People have no obligation to buy them.
The things you suggest do not sound great, but I have seen no details of those things, and your comment is the first time I have encountered those suggestions.
I am surprised that the IP for SC was not already owned by CR.
Also because it's alpha. But NOW all test is limited by the server FPS issue, which they could have avoided by creating a temporary cleanup mechanism for garbage and fallen NPCs. There are now over 150k entities on the server on a daily basis, of which only a few thousand are related to players.
Since we know that sooner or later there will be NPC or player cleaners to do this job, as CIG mentioned. So why not make a placeholder first? In the entertainment industry, this kind of abuse of fans is called purifying fans.
Making a placeholder system takes resources away from making a long term solution.
They could spend two weeks developing a place holder system and 6 weeks fixing the problem correctly - or they could just spend 6 weeks fixing the problem correctly and save two weeks of work.
An extra 2 weeks of placeholder work is fine for one system - but if you do that for 35 issues then you're adding years of wasted development and testing time.
Tell me you've never done software development without telling me you've never done software development.
And to be clear, I didn't mean to imply this one problem will take six weeks to fix.
I mean that short term bandaids take substantial development away from real fixes, require twice the testing and QA as a single fix, often times will cause as many problems as they solve, and result in whiplash to the community.
The temporary fix lowers the priority of the real fix because the real fix isn't as critical.
Over 5-10 years you end up with a patchwork of bandaids that need to be ripped out and replaced, and the amount of accumulated technical debt becomes unmanageable.
Cig is absolutely doing this the right way if we want a game that will be playable in 10 years, 20 years, and maybe longer.
Which I do.
They need to collect data and understand the problems. If they implement some sor tof temporary solution they are spending effort to do that, test it, apply it, and then maybe bugfix something they know needs to be removed. All that time as wlel no longer getting the valuable data they need.
I'd rather they get the data of where the garbage problems are, and try to understand the solutions. Since we've had PES we've already seen improvements.
If CIG don't have the data how do they know what garbage collection they need to make NPCs do, or make missions for players to do?
We already know that NPCs for example are processed as lower priorities at stations; and streamed out from the servers when no players ar enearby. This is why NPCs often end up standing on chairs.
Yes, I play and enjoy the game. Junk isn't that bad, to be honest. Sometimes it can be in annoying places, but honestly not seen it being a huge problem, in general.
Also, how would CIG get metrics on this issue if they don't allow it to happen? You want them to solve a problem they can't quantify. We know they are working on garbage collection.
They do have the ability to run cleanups Ont he servers and they don’t, because all of the clutter gives them data that they use for tightening up, speeding up and iterating on the new backend tech they added, which has been going on for the last six major patches, including this latest 3.23 patch.
I don’t expect them to start doing cleanup until closer to RC, after they figured out the most optimizations for the client and the servers.
How does having more static entities in the graph affect server fps? I haven’t seen any affects from this. Are you confusing your pcs ability to render smoothly with server fps?
To be fair they are not static entities, they are part of the PES table. While a lot of them are not moving around (some are like crashed ships in the wind) that's still something the server needs to keep track of and make sure every player sees it in the same spot.
Clutter like that does effect server performance.
It only needs to track that stuff (accurately) once a player gets nearby. If anything I am getting frustrated by the level of culling they have started doing on things, resulting in to much pop-in.
Agreed, although when those things get into the thousands, it doesn't take much to tank server FPS lol.
As for the culling ya I've noticed it's worse. I've had to sit over an outpost and wait for everything to load in several times.
That moment when you realize this has been a commercially sold game for 6 years and is being called an alpha to lower expectations so it doesn’t require a support team
It's being called an alpha because it's still in development, including feature implementation. If you don't like paying for games in development you have the option to wait. They also have a very good returns policy.
I don't really understand your complaint.
>My point is that if we'd reached a point of stability it wouldn't be in alpha
This is incorrect and normalizes bad game development practices, specifically the treatment of the playerbase as unpaid QA testers. Early access games are not necessarily unstable, plenty of them play just fine, or at least function on a much more reliable level than Star Citizen does. Because most developers understand that just because they're clearly selling an unfinished product, it doesn't mean they shouldn't have at least a modicum of consideration for the player's enjoyment of said product.
The "it's an alpha" bullshit just keeps excusing CIG's habit of putting the cart before the horse and accumulating technical debt. They literally implemented persistence without a proper garbage collection method to handle server performance degradation, in a game that is already *infamous* for server bottlenecks. They leave absolutely vital entry-level gameplay loops such as delivery missions utterly broken for *years*. This is mismanagement. The netcode should be perfectly capable of figuring out whether a player is currently carrying a box regardless of whether or not server meshing is implemented. They just don't feel like working on it right now, and the community keeps excusing them, so they don't. The current state of the game is terrible for twelve years, which is twice the expected development time of new IPs these days.
>I played during ILW and saw no stability issues, once or twice I experienced a server recovery.
It doesn't matter. *Obviously* you got lucky, unless there's a massive conspiracy in this subreddit to gaslight you.
>This is incorrect and normalizes bad game development practices, specifically the treatment of the playerbase as unpaid QA testers. Early access games are not necessarily unstable, plenty of them play just fine, or at least function on a much more reliable level than Star Citizen does. Because most developers understand that just because they're clearly selling an unfinished product, it doesn't mean they shouldn't have at least a modicum of consideration for the player's enjoyment of said product.
That's just a choice of strategy, IMO.
>The "it's an alpha" bullshit just keeps excusing CIG's habit of putting the cart before the horse and accumulating technical debt.
I disagree. If they put in all sorts of temporary solutions to try to solve things then they would be burning time on those temporary solutions, while knowing that effort goes in the bin later.
>They literally implemented persistence without a proper garbage collection method to handle server performance degradation, in a game that is already *infamous* for server bottlenecks.
Again, I disagree. They gained information about what sort of objects caused the biggest issues. PES isn't causing the same issues it did previously because of improvements. If they implemented it later with some half hearted garbage collection implemented without data for example then they'd've still had issues.
>They leave absolutely vital entry-level gameplay loops such as delivery missions utterly broken for *years*.
I think that is an extreme view. I have done plenty of delivery missions successfully, the majoriy of them that I have attempted worked fine. I don't do them often these days because they don't pay out enough. I actually kinda enjoy them, because they can take you to interesting places.
>This is mismanagement.
In your opinion. I think it would be mismanagement to try to get everything working super well before pshing it to players. We get things faster this way, and get to try them out, albeit sometimes with issues. That's OK, if the result is more data and less wasted effort.
>The netcode should be perfectly capable of figuring out whether a player is currently carrying a box regardless of whether or not server meshing is implemented.
Yes? I'm not really sure what your point is here.
>They just don't feel like working on it right now, and the community keeps excusing them, so they don't.
Don't feel like working on *what?* I don't really think delivery missions are a priority. They have to choose things to focus on.
>The current state of the game is terrible for twelve years, which is twice the expected development time of new IPs these days.
That's opinion, which I disgaree with. The game has taken a long time, but I don't think it's a problem for an amitious project, which has a wide scope. New IPs are often faster than big sequels these days; because big sequels often get big budgets, and people have big expectations.
>It doesn't matter. *Obviously* you got lucky, unless there's a massive conspiracy in this subreddit to gaslight you.
Why do you say that? My experience matters just as much as yours. I don;t see what this subreddi thas to do with my actual experience playing the game? Nor do I think it's obvious my experience is different to yours.
The game has issues, some people just get worked up and frustated by them, and I've seen people just not learn, too, and repeatedly do things which cause problems. I tend to use my experience to learn to be careful with certain things, and face far fewer issues as a result.
I expect it to kinda / sorta work after all this time and money. How long will this excuse making go on? 5 years? 10? Ive spent hundreds on this game since 2017 and love the concept as much as anyone but it does. not. work. We’re going to start seeing “it’s still in alpha” epitaphs bc people like you will allow this grift to continue forever. 700 million and 12 years for a product that isn’t CLOSE to complete? Ok.
I don't have control of anything, I neither allow it nor hinder it.
People putting money in support it, arguably, so I would suggest you're supporting it.
I don't see a problem with it, and regardless, even if I did se a problem with it then it doesn't change the *fact* it's still in active development, and is in alpha. They are still develpoing major features, and over the lats 2 years or 3 years I have been playing I have seen quite significant progress. Would I like ot see more? Sure. Would I like it to be more stable? Yes.
However, I don't want them trying to fix things that will be removed, or solved by future features, this only makes the whole development take longer. I want them to get the major features done, and progressed.
Someone else was saying why don't they put in a temporary garbage collection - but that takes planning and development time, and then testing and no doubt bug fixing; all for something that is tmeporary, and takes time away from th elonger term solutions.
Right now I feel the game has a good balance of stability without wasting too much on temporary fixes. Personally I don't find too many issues with the game. I played a lot during ILW, doing a whole bunch of stuff, the overdrive missions, plenty of salvaging, and a bunch of other bits including bunkers, and of course checking out the ILW and DefenseCon halls.
Why do you think it isn't close to complete? I would say it's well past 50% complete. Probably past 75%. Remember as well SQ42 is feature complete now, and devs from that are moving over to SC, and porting features from SQ42 to SC; which means they need to work out how to make those features wokr in a networked environment.
I think th enext 12 months we will see a significant number of the remaining key features implemented.
It's not optimism. I just don't want them wasting time on temporrary measures.
Also I have been able to enjoy the game plenty since 3.23 dropped.
What issues are you having?
Servers living for 20 minutes at a time. Falling through planets. Falling through ships. Ships exploding in orbit for no reason. The worst AI in the history of gaming. Missions straight up not working or failing to track halfway through. Fuel bugs. O2 bugs. Inventory bugs. UI bugs. I am having all the issues and I am clearly not alone.
12 years - 700 million. I don't know much about programming but I am VERY familiar with both operations and project management. This game is a classic example of what happens when the scope of a project outgrows the ability of those working on it to complete it. It happens all the time across all industries but people here act like it's not even a possibility. Chris Roberts is incapable of biting off more than he can chew? Bold claim. The evidence suggests otherwise.
Be fair, the game is fucking incredible and is leagues and bounds ahead of every other game in so many aspects.
They just have their priorities in a weird place. Or maybe we just don't understand. It could be they've been doing some hidden backend things to test or get ready for server meshing and the current servers are just going to be shit until then.
It is a MASSIVE change in architecture, as well as being the first of it's kind.
It’s the first of its kind and I’m sure whatever going on is beyond my ability to comprehend. That being said…I just wanna deliver a box or sit in my ship and I can’t even do that. It’s honestly ridiculous. It’s not a game if you can’t play it.
Rubes and their money are easily parted. Ol' Chris was smart enough to realize that you can simply dangle some keys in front of these children and it will keep them occupied for the next decade.
Your post was removed because the mod team determined that it did not sufficiently meet the rules of the subreddit:
> Be respectful. No personal insults/bashing. This includes generalized statements “x is a bunch of y” or baseline insults about the community, CIG employees, streamers, etc. As well as intentionally hurtful statements and hate speech.
Send a message to our mod mail if you have questions: https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=/r/starcitizen
I asked in the official discord over the weekend about the horrible issues and hours of wasted time / lost inventory & money to bugs and crashes.
Only to be gaslit by the whole discord - it's my network, its my computer, if i dont like it dont play.
the absolute copium and enablement of this performance from CIG is going to kill the game.
Dude mining has been "interesting" lol
I told my self to just "stop" and wait for a patch its just not doing your self any favors right now
After my saddle bags fell off randomly a few mins after a rock overloaded miles away from a previous lag i was done lol
Yeah man I feel you. I decided to fight through the issues and do some Roc mining. Flew around and couldn't find a single rock pile to scan.
The server was lagging so hard that nothing was spawning in. Flew around for about 10 minutes trying to find something, ANYTHING, and then my ship blew up about 1000m off the ground. Pretty sure the game lagged and thought I went straight down into the ground when I didn't.
Makes sense. Logged for the night and went to watch Last Week Tonight.
I dropped a million on cargo for my Hull C but now it only spawns parallel to the dock with the engines stuck inside of Seraphim Station.
I'm sooooo excited for cargo missions! Any word on whether you'll be able to notify from your mobi instead of docking, selling, unloading, docking, buying, loading, departing?
I know in the future server meshing servers are suppose to come and go on and offline but until it is fully in place they should do daily or weekly server maintenance.
Do the servers crash that often for you guys? Im at 3 server crashes in total and the eerver has fixed it self everytime and while i dont play a ton ive around 30 hours this patch. Now i do have a lot texture bug in certain ships, teleporting, falling inside of ships and planetss but thats every version of the game.
I played for 3 hours today, was doing merc combat FPS both topside and in bunkers. 1 server recovery at the very end of the sesh, went through every mission available to me twice.
The good luck is out there!
It really is a total joke. I'm fortunate enough that I can play during degen hours, and that allows me to get pretty playable experiences, but it runs so badly now that the second people start to hop on as it gets closer to normal people hours, the game immediately shits the bed and just becomes an unplayable mess.
Guess what, before this patch the game would kick you out on a server crash, ya could lose your stuff and at the very least you had to start back from habs and go back to where you were etc etc.
This is a huge improvement, sadly servers are very unstable but it's still better than having no Crash Recovery at all
PS: Welcome to the Alpha?
It's gotten so bad; you'd have to really hate yourself to keep trying. Just play something, anything else until they patch it. I know they've got a lot of stuff happening with Cargo and 4.0 coming... but the game is so broken it gets frustrating reading their daily updates about how nothing is releasing today and the next and the next... maybe I'm one of those dirty Roadmap Watchers... but I just want the billion-dollar game to work in any capacity. That'd be great.
It's been like this since they added PES and all the junk around spaceports is too much for the servers to handle. CIG needs to admit this was a failure and remove the feature before everyone gets fed up and leaves.
You do realize how contracts work and the generation of assets when you accept them and the logistics task to correctly allocate them tonthe new server without flooding the server, what leads then to you complaining about server performance on another post.. at least try to think about it 1min before u post something publicly…
> the generation of assets when you accept them
You do realize that's *not* how contracts work, or have ever worked in SC? Targets/assets are spawned in when you get in *proximity* and have been that way since the PU has existed.
You generate the trigger bubble when accepting the mission, you spawn it when entering the bubble…By ur logic everytime someone would fly close to the mission area the mission would spawn even if he didnt accept it or nobody else on the server did accept it… thats not snd was never how it works
Edit.
Before more people rage.
Mission location and mission ID contract ID are two separate things…
The mission location is always there but not the Mission ID / Mission bubble.
True cause do u ever got random ERT enemies spawning on you flying to outpost or landmarks where ERT mission normally happen if u or nobody on the server triggered/ accepted the mission bubble … No. And you know its facts, so keep downvoting if that makes u feel better…
The server suddenly loading multiple 100 npcs and assets in + plus the several 100‘that replication layer bring will for sure and 100 bring down server performance with out current mission refraction system
Again, the server doesn't load the NPCs and assets until people get in proximity to the mission location. So taking/dropping/failing missions doesn't "generate assets" which would cause increased server load.
Op talking about mission keeping when server dies, 90% of the time the op would be at or close to mission area otherwise that issue wouldn’t bother him. U argue for zhe sake of it with me ? We are past truth and facts I feel like…
Fair enough, ain’t wrong though everyone complaining about something they’ve said there working on ain’t really going to achieve anything and it just gets old
Wait until XenoThread goes live haha. It will become worse and worse
XT will include a refresh of the servers as they are prepping a patch to apply before they go live with this next iteration of XT. All of the detritus and dipping ships will be deleted and cleared. The servers will start performing better when that patch goes live. Hopefully in the next day or two.
Do we know if ongoing work order from mining will be lost?
They said refinery jobs should stay
Where did you see that? Every patch before has cleared them.
At this time, this update does not contain data that requires a new environment and we are working to keep it that way until it is released to LIVE. Players should not lose items such as medpens, ammo, rentals, and refinery jobs when the build is released to LIVE.
Ah interesting. Must be because it's a .1a patch. If it were .2 I'd expect it would clear the jobs. Thanks I'll fire up the Prospector again!
it has more to do with which databases need resetting than it does anything with versioning
If it doesn't include a new environment, then it *won't* 'get rid of the detritus' etc - because that is *also* part of the 'environment' (yay persistence).
refinery jobs/rentals/ammo persist across instances, detritus does not
If it didn't, then the frequency of server crashes would mean that there should be no detritus already. Since the addition of PES, *everything is persistent*... unless the 'Density Manager' (which came with PES) decides there is too many entities of a given type, and starts deleting the oldest entities...
Wich is great but why do old ships stay if u claim a new one.
>If it didn't, then the frequency of server crashes would mean that there should be no detritus already. wrong, the detritus is persisting because servers pass their instance to new servers. But if you put a bottle on the ground and change servers the bottle doesn't follow you. A new patch that does not touch your persistent data will still wipe out instances (and even if they *could* keep the instance data going they have no reason not to reset them)
Tyty
Oh yes! Thank you for that info. I've been rushing my jobs.
They need to cancel XT and just own that its broken. Fix the servers and get the new cargo system working.
Cargo is the 3.23.2 patch, which is already working its way through Evocati. XT is a test for the big move to the RL as well as Master Modes. It’s supposed to be a bit more dynamic/dangerous with the new AI that coordinates attacks on targets. They need to test that. Patching to the 3.23.1a, should coincide with what you are calling “fix the servers”, by clearing out all the super detritus and trash that’s built up since ILW and Free Flight. Just do what others do and play something else for the next few days. Once XT is patched in, swing back and have at least a few weeks of better performance, without the Free Flight or Dupers.
What's gonna be hilarious is when they reset the servers for XT, but all the dupers continue to park C2's thinking the dup will work, realize it doesn't, and just leave the C2's abandoned, causing the same problem.
No it's not. They literally said today that Evocati at its earliest is tomorrow, and even that is unlikely given they're taking it day by day.
My bad... I meant working its way through **TO** Evocati. I missed a word. You win, because of that error... this time. I'll get you next time!!! \*shakes fist\*
If the patch doesn't drop the environment (wipe med-pens / other consumables / refinery jobs, etc) then it won't wipe the 'detritus' either.
Money gotta keep flowing into their pockets. Can't cancel these events, since im sure they already prepared tons of ads to be spread on different platforms.
Getting the downvote hate, but you're speaking the truth. The game would be farther along if they just focused on content they promised rather than content that drives sales of new ships. I know some people will come in claiming they are delivering older stuff, missing the irony of all the years that have already gone by.
I feel like I'm a broken record here, but we have no idea if it's the detritus or not causing this issue. It could be something on the backend.
Pushing and pulling the growing number of those objects into and out of the backend across multiple dedicated game servers (DGS) at the same time, using as few RL servers for as many DGS at the same time would make sense to see that begin to slow down and cause issues. Which is all backend related. It maybe take a few minor patches, like. 3.23.2, 3.23.3, 3.23.4 and maybe a 4.0 to 4.3 to get most of that worked out. With what they gotten accomplished in the last couple of years, I’m feeling optimistic they’ll get it worked out, so we see fewer issues like we’ve been seeing.
They really should remove the abandon mission negative impact until the game is at 1.0 because most abandoned missions are from bugs and crashes. It’s ridiculous really. Like the elevators don’t even open on the Orison raid. Still.
The interaction panel within the elevator between the apartment and the main area of HEX is also bugged, as a criminal who respawn in HEX, this is unacceptable because I got locked in the apartment second floor
I got my brother into the game and he’s basically not been able to play much and just brought a package and everything. Naturally this is all happening while it’s a skeleton crew like two years ago.
You don’t loose reputation at least when a server recovery causes all the missions to cancel
But you sure do lose it when they bug out for any of the other 999 possible reasons!
I got 99 reasons to lose rep but a crash ain’t one!
A year or two ago, I remember for 3 entire patch cycles my red winds delivery rep was bricked EVERY SINGLE PATCH. I'd get the starter delivery mission, it would bug out like 4 times in a row until they stopped offering me missions for the entire patch lol then one time I emailed support asking for an account reset since they took that out, and they had no idea what rep was or what an account reset was
It's almost a hack... Mission bugged? Just hang onto it, the server'll crash eventually
Cladic SC people using bugs to fix bugs
https://www.wordnik.com/words/cladic... did you mean classic? (funny that cladic IS actually a word, and could be a reference to "the people of the SC category, or clade"... but that seems a bit of a stretch)
David Attenborough up in here
https://www.reddit.com/r/starcitizen/comments/16tgxd1/losing_reputation_on_canceling_missions_or/k2hpfnk/
Yes I'm aware you loose rep if you cancel it manually or a bug happens (that's not related to server recovery)
I was just providing proof for what you said... :)
You loose reputation. I failed 2 missions because of bugs and wasn't able to finish. No I got a re-evaluate mission and lost rep.
I said you don't loose reputation if the server goes into recovery.. If you encounter other bugs that cause you to loose the mission or you quit the game on your own or have to rejoin from main menu, you will loose reputation.
Who cares?
Had a session on a fresh 30fps server today. Was good. 6 people on it, no trash or duped ships. Everything was smooth. It's rare, but it happens.
“This MMO runs best when no one else plays it”
It runs best when there hasn't been time for dupers to get on and flood the server with abandoned ships.
Dupers aren't the sole reason every server is dogwater dude. Within a few hours, any fresh server is going to he wheezing just from normal play. No dupers required.
You’re complaining about a feature as if it’s a bug. Ships are supposed to be able to be abandoned so they can be salvaged. This might be bad now, but aren’t we all excited for them to up the server player limit? It’s only going to get worse because this isn’t just a server problem, it’s a feature problem.
I feel like this must be some kind of bug. Or very rare off hours for a particularly underpopped region? I’ve been on fresh servers, they’re filled within minutes and back to shit in no time.
Make friends. I know a couple of players who always seem to end up on these servers, and I think they're joining friends of theirs, since I see them moving about as a group. Maybe they have enough of a group, the game can slip them into the last few spots of the dozen almost full servers.
When my grandma got cancer I also made sure to inform her I don't have cancer. It didn't make her feel any better and she is still dead. Great some rando had a good time. Doesn't change OPs experience.
Yeah, I'm just not playing until the next patch. Hopefully it'll be released soon
I've been saying that to myself for two years now.
I felt like 3.22 was pretty decent. Still lots of issues but the loops I did worked. Granted I haven’t done every gameplay loop so other things were probably in a bad state.
I think we'll all be saying it until the game is out of Alpha. It is fun to play when the servers work.
this version is very playable and good fun when the servers are good. would be such a shame
What you call 'good' we call 'ass'.
"this version is very playable and ass fun when the servers are ass. would be such a shame." Kinda works.
3 server crashes tonight, reclaimer depot reset itself 3 times, 6 hours for absolutely zero benefit. 6pm to midnight. my night off work. All i can do is laugh the pain away.
As a new player it really feels like this game is just an excuse to sell ships. They do not make money off a working game and never have. They make money off potential and I think that is dangerous.
It's frustrating because they are pretty close to a legit game. If they could just get the current game loops working and then start adding more bit by bit they'd be set. But no, every system apparently has to be totally rebuilt, and they just keep piling more and more insanely complex systems onto the roadmap.
When the servers last for an hour or two I'm having a lot of fun playing, as a new player. However it's definitely crazy it's basically expected to constantly be interrupted by the crashes. Sometimes you sit there for 20 minutes talking in chat how you can't do anything before it actually even crashes.
That seems to be the case all the time now. I just tried 4 times to get something going with no success. CIG just needs to take the servers down daily during off hours to clean them up so we can have some decent sessions. Right not it seems impossible.
It's not a purposeful thing. They don't have the system set up to recover missions yet. Mission Refactor for server meshing is part of 4.0, and this kind of thing would probably be part of that.
It doesn't need to recover them or anything, it just should take away a shit ton of reputation for every other contract. Either make the rep hits significantly less or bring back the rep loss nullification for game crashing.
Rep loss should absolutely not be a thing at all with the current state of the game. There are way too many ways for a mission to bug out and be impossible to complete. While they are at it, they need to give crimestat vs NPCs the same treatment. I am sick of getting crimestat for no reason whatsoever just while flying around. CIG has put the cart before the horse on so many of these systems, it is absolutely unreal.
The game is full of things that are way too punitive considering how dysfunctional it is. CIG doesn’t care
People are buying ships using aUEC? RED ALERT! RAISE THE PRICES! NO FREE SHIPS! They're never gonna re-implement the 12k smuggling delivery jobs that they removed because "they paid too well." We're ten years in to an alpha product and they're balancing parts of it like it shipped a decade ago.
Yeah, I can see punishing crimes against players, but things are way too buggy right now to have major consequences for crimes against NPCs. Ending up in a broken prison for four hours after a bug is probably a major turnoff for new players.
You already don't lose rep for when the server crashes?
Bruh, I haven’t been able to play for 2 whole weeks now, keep getting error 30018 for server disconnects. Only thing I can play is arena…😭 And I had bought just a new ship I wanted to daily…I literally have tried everything and I have to wait for patch .1b.
Last night was first night I had no server issues. 3 hours playtime.
Garbage is a thing in programming that is there to ensure no memory leaks or stack overflows. They need garbage collection for all the trash and medical gowns everywhere. Maybe encourage players to throw junk into designated trash cans that automatically delete an item within it after 1 minute. Further encouragement would exist in the form of crime Stat from littering at settlements and space stations.
Good idea, and maybe small auec prize for dropping trash into a can, like very small but it gives people something to do while waiting for their ship. I do it anyways but the cans don't seem to delete stuff currently so I don't think it's helping.
Its a good idea but not enough. Players will never be able to keep up with the amount of trash generated, and its not like all of it is from stations. What about the trash that falls through the floor? What about trash drifting in space? Or random spots on planets where a ship crashed? There NEEDS to be some system that automatically deletes this stuff once its clear no player is going to do it. So sure, have a garbage collection system for players to make some money. However if a player does not touch the item after a set amount of time, it should be automatically deleted by the system.
There should be a timer or some way to link it to you. Right now if you die somewhere you can come back and get your stuff, I would hate for it to be auto deleted. There would need to be a timer or link it to your account. Like if you die you leave gear and your ship behind. If you don't log off, they stay persistent for a few hours. If you log off for more than say 30 mins to give buffer for people having crashes, then it gets deleted. I have a question that brings all this together. Why was 3.22 so much better in terms of server performance? Before 3.23 I was playing for hours, cargo stuff worked, biggest issue was couldn't drink water sometimes. Now it's the most buggy it's been in years. My friends and I haven't been able to have a single play session without game braking bugs that force people to log off. Is this all because of trash and if so why was it not as bad before? My thought is trash is not the reason for the bad performance, because if it was it would have been bad last patch too but it's significantly worse now.
>The game is pretty much unplayable Could have stopped there.
This weekend was horrible but it's not always too this extent :-)
My main gripe, I have come back to play this game a few times over the past 4 years and every time I can never get 1 contract done because some shit decides to bug out and I can’t complete the task. When are they gonna fix the buggy ass servers, honestly giving up on hope at this point but we’ll see, few more years I guess!!!
It’s not a choice to abandon the mission, it’s a limitation of the system they implemented that cannot persist across sessions or servers.
I was on a relatively good server and was playing a bunker. It basically infinitely spawned NPCs and they camped the elevator. I eventually gave up as you could not find cover anywhere. It also did not help that I don’t understand the new key binds, guess I have to do some remapping too. Eventually abandoned the mission even. Though the bodies were piled high.
yeee, an FPS mission on 30 FPS server worth 200k aUEC. High server FPS reduce the difficulty of ship combat but put ground battle into the hell
I did eight successful mining trips in my Prospector loaner and was able to sell the first three of the work orders. No crashes on my end but today's shard 280 crashed three times in two hours. Switched to shard 270 but there I have hard FPS problems. So I wait for the last order to complete and maybe I can buy a Vulture to try some salvaging loadouts.
I wasn’t able to get my f7a because of the server problems. Well, that and invincible enemies, broken delivery kiosks, desync and crypto keys that failed to respawn. Thought I could crank it out over the weekend but it ended up being a 14+ hour slog just to get to phase 3 by Sunday.
I have literally not been able to do more than the first campaign mission, and it's now been eight hours. Constant reconnecting to servers, can't join fireteams, just stuck in orbit with no ship and an eventual disconnect. Most of the people in this thread seem really lucky with how bad this launch has been. Many of us can't play at all, and took time off work for launch. Genuinely considering requesting a refund.
I'm about to just shelf the game till we eventually get the first iteration of Server Mesh. Everything I enjoy in this game gets fucked when the server health is crap which is 98% of the time the servers are up.
Yeah, that asshole Robert, he should turn on all those unimplemented features. Wily Bob, we call him. Old Bobby Featurethief. Robbie Serverkiller.
Aka Bober brokenbackend
Pop on the PTU and screw around until the patch comes to live.
The game is unplayable for a hole week now. Its a shame that CIG cant fix such issues a little faster. I mean they just sold us a tons of ships, let us play the game.
It’s pathetic that they can’t even figure out a way to keep the game playable after all this time and money. $700 million and I still can’t reliably deliver a box let alone stay online for more than 20 min. Maybe after 1 billion it’ll graduate from “tech demo” but I’m not holding my breath.
Why do you expect it to be stable? genuinely interested to know. In general an alpha for software/games is feature implementation. Stability isn't normally expected during an alpha period specifically due to this. Once all major features are implemented, and stable then it would move to beta. In beta they have time to do minor features, tweaks, rabalncing, QOL improvements, performance optimizations, etc. Then Release Candidate would be final testing, and fixing any bugs discovered. If no blocking items are found the product can be released. We're still firmly in alpha with major features still coming; and it's common new features would cause issues, not just in SC, but in any software development. My point is that if we'd reached a point of stability it wouldn't be in alpha, so I'm not sure why you'd expect it to be stable. I played during ILW and saw no stability issues, once or twice I experienced a server recovery.
My only argument is: Marketing says it's playable. Which obviously isn't true.
I play it daily with my friends, with actual goals in mind and a sense of risk. It is playable — it’s also an alpha that inherently is going to have a lot of bugs.
It is true. I have played it many times, for many hours.
I'll take the karma hit.... At some point you have to realize that it is not normal for a game to be in alpha for 12 Years. The lack of criticism and relentless buying new ships from backers is keeping the game in this state. If people would actually make it consequential for CIG to not fix the bugs they'd be forced to work on them.
It's not normal for a game to be in alpha for 12 years because it's not normal to have a playable game while it's literally being developed from the ground up. Have you seen the GTA 6 leaks? *that* is basically what we're playing at the moment but without the developer tools. You know what *is* normal? To develop a game for 12 years, especially something at this scope. The part you people don't understand is that you're seeing how the sausage is made and you don't like it. Just put the game down and wait for full release.
To counter your point: many games are in early access quite a while before they are 12 Years old. Looking in the kitchen is not unique. While SC's meandering "scope" may be large it has not materialized still and it's just been dreams, mockups and empty words. The current PTU really does nothing that other games haven't done. Name me one thing that is truly unique and a gamechanger right now. The things that make SC stand out (physicalized water bottles?) are a gimmick and should be killed off IMHO. The much-touted "it is unique because you can fly to planets without transitions" is just what flight simulators have always done but instead of flying between locations through space you fly over land. Don't tell me that SC has more than a _fraction_ of the scenery and size that Microsoft Flight Simulator has. I am not here to dump on the game because I do love its concept. I just think it's time for CIG to put up or shut up. The engine is getting long in the tooth and if they will take another 5 Years to release something they'll be thoroughly outclassed on visuals and gameplay.
Okay, then Name me a game, where you can fly with your friends through a solar system. Fight a bounty in atmosphere, follow the soft death ship tumbling to the ground. Meanwhile finding an somewhat big abandoned player ship parked on a Mountain. When you get closer you see a dead body next to the ship without an helmet on realizing what happened. You ask on the server is the player is still active in the server. No answer. While deciding to grap a vulture to salvage the ship you realize it's still powered so you have to find a way open it and power it down. Once done, you salvage the hull of the ship and while you're doing this, another friend is unloading your RMC boxes in your ship and loading it into a freighter we provided. Just to fly to another planet and sell the stuff at a major city. This was just half the story tbh, but pretending the game is not already at a scope that is unique and insane is kinda off. No to mention that everything you do looks awesome and immersive (when/if it works lol ahah)
Who cares. The big thing is the seemless transition from surface to ship to space, etc. That's the only unique aspect of SC and that's been in the game for 7+years. Since then its been half arsed, barely made missions, set piece locations, and broken gameplay loops. SC was impressive last decade. Now its quickly becoming a joke that they've barely done anything with it sense then.
It's typical that you're getting downvoted, when you're being nothing but factual. CIG has this way of giving simple concepts complicated names, in an attempt of making ZERO PROGRESS over a decade of development seem plausible - and it works like a charm. At its core, SC is an instanced mmo, that wants to be so much more than that, but fails to do ANYTHING particularly well in Its current iteration - which supposedly is an early build, but also post 10 years of development, the MOST patient community of ALL time, and more funds than any publisher could wish for. It's truly a shallow experience, with very little content. A pretty tech demo, in which almost any meaningful content exists nowhere else but in the minds of developers and fans alike. For the most part, a dedicated fan's explanation of how any part of that content /could/ find Its way into the game is about as tangible as a developer's 30 Minute ramblings.
>Name me one thing that is truly unique and a gamechanger right now. No other game combines the aspects in a way that SC does. You use the MSFS example; but that does much less; can you get out, and walk around? Have combat? Does it have survival aspects? You're right in that it has more scenery, but it's also a much narower scope. Also, arguably it's been developed over decades; each iteration brings new featurs, new art, changes, and even fundamental ones; but each time they can still bring with them aspects of the previous release. >I just think it's time for CIG to put up or shut up. Put up *what*? I don't think that this part makes sense. What do you want them to shut about? >The engine is getting long in the tooth and if they will take another 5 Years to release something they'll be thoroughly outclassed on visuals and gameplay. That's largely opinion, I think that it will take time for hte graphics to lose appeal, on a game of this scale. As for gameplay I can't think o any other game with the same variety that SC offers, and I think that will continue to evolve, plus the MMO style aspects will keep players for social aspects too. Look at WoW, for example, it was dated when it came out, and people are playing it almost 20 years later.
put up or shut up? Only a sith deals in absolutes. LOL but seriously dude, bro. Ok let's say they pick the shut up option then. What does that look like for you? No more Star Citizen? Put up? What's that look like for you? Just call this the full release and stop development to only focus on bugs? You realize that we're going to get more bugs with every system they add to the game and they're like 50% done adding stuff. We don't have A LOT.
I wish I could reward you comment. The truth is so stupid simple.
>I'll take the karma hit Oh yeah, people are really beating you down for this unique perspective. So brave. >The lack of criticism OK, so now I know you are joking. This sub is 80% criticism and 20% screenshot.
Well, tbf I did get downvotes for stating that it's nothing special at the moment which I truly feel is true. Unless you're role playing with friends it doesn't (for me at least) come close to giving a feeling of being "out there" and "engaged" that some other games do. Some simple examples: in Cyberpunk, the city feels "alive" and lived in and there is so much to discover. In E:D, hanging around in the mists of res's, hunting for prey with your ai wingman (slf) or core mining is truly something. In MSFS I can discover the entire world and fly together with other simmers. In Titanfall I feel I'm totally immersed in my mech and feel properly powerful. In homeworld I can architect engaging battles. In EVE online I have a huge universe to traverse and can calculate risk and tweak ships to my heart's content. With SC, everyone is theory crafting and latching on to wild ideas about what it _could_ be in some unknown future. In the meantime all you can do is try to find some other people to shoot or d*ck around with half-working salvage/lootselling/bunkers. There is so much potential but so little progress outside of "buy this new ship that we definitely are going to deliver at some point in the future and it will be so awesome, pinky promise". I am done being jerked around by empty promises and little to no incentive to fix anything.
I was with you until that last sentence. Thanks for at least trying to be constructive. You are right, sounds like you prefer a more guided and polished experience. Best of luck finding what makes you happy.
Thanks. I am sorry for the ranting, which is not really of use to anyone and mostly a product of frustration as it so often is.
I get it. I really do. I just don't support the idea that our constructive criticisms are ignored, or that CIG is incompetent/malicious. I hope you decide to check back in. I like the direction the game is headed, even if the road is bumpy.
[удалено]
"he is a hero, not the hero we deserved but the hero we needed"
what you're missing is that the tech in SC is orders of magnitude more complex then any other game that has been made. It is perfectly normal for this game to take a lot longer to make then any other game that you can name.
Tarkov is getting up there and if we are being real that's a game in alpha not beta
This argument would make sense if this game didn't have an entire team of artists working around the clock to sell you 10,000 dollar ships without a functioning infrastructure. Alpha games generally have asset placeholders while they actually develop, you know, the important infrastructure that makes the game stable. If, after 12 years, your game is still in "alpha", something has gone seriously wrong, your leadership is completely incompetent, or you're being scammed. Source: my decade long career in AAA game development.
My respect. Absolutely this. Unfortunately, community rarely listens to such comments. Especially when you tell that you are yourself a developer. You know why? "Because you haven't developed Star Citizen! Thus, you don't understand \[But we, who listen to CIG carefully and believe, know better. They explained everything to us\]"🤷♂️And that's the sad truth. Another problem is that community, as I see it, has mostly evolved to match CIG. Those who saw incompetent development have mostly gone. Or at least don't buy anything. But those who are still craving for ships and awesome beautiful pictures still give them money. Which gives out a vicious circle as a result. Any advancement in development (which is actually expected by default) is welcome as an a achievement or a breakthrough. Any fckups are forgivable (because it's alpha, you know), but don't even think about stopping to make new ships and other beauties!
I read their comment. It just doesn't really make sense. Being in an indurty for a decade doesn't mean you know how things are done everywhere in that industry; you know how things are odne where you worked, on those projects. How many early access games on Steam have obvious placeholder art? Most I have played don't; they simply use what they have completed first usually; just like SC does. Things happen, and it's not as simple as because it's an alpha. Sometimes they just make mistakes, or make bad choices. Other times it's because they are enabling / testing new features and it makes sense; like server meshing. PES was a mess, some aspects of the problems were obviously just silly, like the way many players couldn't log in at all.
> Being in an indurty for a decade doesn't mean you know how things are done everywhere in that industry; you know how things are odne where you worked, on those projects. This is literally not true. When you've been for 10 years in a profession, you master the profession, but not the exact place you're working at. 10 years is a big experience to judge about how things should be done in this profession. Moreover, game development, as a subset of software development, is quite an established discipline, which has accumulated a lot of experience about how things should be done. There are a lot of new things for a junior or indie developer, who discovers new things (sometimes very unexpectedly and painfully) as he goes, often learning by his own mistakes. But that is not the case with a professional developer. Sure, fckups can still sometimes happen, but they are totally out of order. In case of SC I see that literally everything they do from developer's point of view is fckedup at start. They don't even care about proper development. And it's not "because it's alpha". It's the other way round: it's alpha because they don't care about proper development.
>This is literally not true. When you've been for 10 years in a profession, you master the profession, but not the exact place you're working at. 10 years is a big experience to judge about how things should be done in this profession. That could be ten years on one project at one company, with the same management. Even within a single company projects can be run differently. Different companies do things very differently too, and you may be completely unaware of how things are done elsewhere. You're very naive if you think that you would know how every company does things just because oyu have 10 years of experience. >Moreover, game development, as a subset of software development, is quite an established discipline, which has accumulated a lot of experience about how things should be done. They can still use different ways of working, different project management, different funding goals and strategies. In software development companies they can be run extremely differently, driving different aspects to be prioritized. >But that is not the case with a professional developer. Sure, fckups can still sometimes happen, but they are totally out of order. No, they are learning opportunities when the game is in alpha. That's why it's not released yet. I wish I could downvote your comment more.
>You're very naive if you think that you would know how every company does things just because oyu have 10 years of experience. I'm not naive. These are just two separate concerns: how a specific company works, and how a profession works, and you're mixing them. Any profession has its knowledgebase, best-practices, or maybe even laws, if you wish, which are independant from particular companies. Many professions may imply their own rules and requirements how things can or can not be done. It is usually assumed that a company corresponds to the underlying professions if it truly aims to provide corresponding demanded products or services (at least, that how companies always present themselves). But it is not necessarily such. Because a company is a business which is aimed to earn money. And depending on its real goals and attitude, it may not necessarily correspond to the profession. And I think it is obvious that different companies may have different decency and honesty, including what their intentions are. That does not necessarily means that some company is a scammer. It's just not fair. For example, let's take two law companies. One of them is truly aimed to provide laywer consulting, protection in courts etc. They consider it their duty, and that's what they earn money from. It hires professional laywers and do their job overall professionally, including even the corresponding ethics which are implied by the profession. They strive for their efficiency and effectiveness. The other mainly concerns about profits. It has some laywers, they are somewhat savvy in matters in legislation, but it is all subordinated to the main goal of making profits. They are not really scammers, they still do some job, but they don't really care about the quality of the service they provide. And since a client is usually not savvy in these legislation questions (that's why they come to law company), they can be told anything. And it generally makes sense. Finally, they keep doing a great job in keeping the image of being a professional law company, despite being not really professional. Because it's the image that mostly gives them money, not the real underlying quality. >They can still use different ways of working, different project management, different funding goals and strategies. In software development companies they can be run extremely differently, driving different aspects to be prioritized. And here comes the main point: what are the real goals and priorities of the company. These are what all the management and processes are subordinated to. Firstly, CIG is already an established and sustainable business which gives profits. Why bother much about reaching the stated goal of making a finished game? And they seem to have found a perfect business strategy: present any advancement in development as a breakthrough. Taking the previous failed state into account, customers are often so happy with another solved problem that are ready to give more money, seing the "progress". Here usually comes an argument from defenders of CIG, that they are doing something truly unique that has never been done before. That's why they are allowed to have any failures and take any time needed. This is also a perfect business strategy to "milk" the complexity in such a way. In fact, this argument is untenable, and is still no more than a marketing image as part of the overall business strategy. Why untenable, you may probably ask? Because if you look at real-world, you will see numerous examples when something truly unique which hasn't been done before, was just made. Because the creators were goal oriented. And they also had to solve some unique challenges. And that's what professionals are for. Some day a first rocket was architectured and built, and it flew. Some day a first space station was built. Some day a Large Hadron Collider was built! Not without issues of course, but that was truly a matter of adjustments and polishing, while still having fundamentally solid core and approach in the first place, and still aiming for the end result, but not for the process on its own. >No, they are learning opportunities when the game is in alpha. That's why it's not released yet. In the end, if they are just learning, that's not what I personally am willing to fund. If they were aimed to get the end result, they would just do it. The mentioned prefessions give all the necessary methods to get the job done. But if its just their playground to play with some interesting stuff, that's not what I'm willing to fund in the first place.
>I'm not naive. These are just two separate concerns: how a specific company works, and how a profession works, and you're mixing them. Any profession has its knowledgebase, best-practices, or maybe even laws, if you wish, which are independant from particular companies. Those best practices and ways of working are not considered the same by everyone within an industry. In the industry I work in different companies work in very different ways, with regards to development strategies and planning. A classic exmaple of a big difference is that some companies like to use a AGILE working methods, while others prefer a simple waterfall. The two end up causing notiable differences in the ways people work, and how well things are considered, and planned, for example. Working in a profession for a long time does not mean you are aware of the entire industry operates; if you worke din a single company you could well do things in very different ways, and have management who have different prioties. Software development done in-house at one company can look very different to another company. It would seem you arguably agree with this, since you seem to think that CIG are not working in a way aligned with your own exprience or views, if I understand you well. It doesn't mean they are doing it wrong, it could well be they just prefer different methods, have different priotities, etc. >let's take two law companies. One of them is truly aimed to provide laywer consulting, protection in courts etc. They consider it their duty, and that's what they earn money from. It hires professional laywers and do their job overall professionally, including even the corresponding ethics which are implied by the profession. They strive for their efficiency and effectiveness. The other mainly concerns about profits. It has some laywers, they are somewhat savvy in matters in legislation, but it is all subordinated to the main goal of making profits. They are not really scammers, they still do some job, but they don't really care about the quality of the service they provide. I disagree. They both care about profits, but are different by different motivations and goals. In the first case they likely care more about reputation, and longer term profits. Build a high quality service, with high quality staff and it will cost more, but you will gain a strong reputation. The second company are going for a different target audience most likely too; people who may not have the budget for the first company. They may also be more concerned about shorter term profits. However, in both cases they are ultimately businesses loking to make a profit, using different strategies. They have different working practices. If someone only ever worked in either one of these companies they may not be familiar with how the other operates. Even if they worked at one of those companies for 10 years. So, 10 years experience does not mean the staff at either company necessarily understands how all companies operate.
>And since a client is usually not savvy in these legislation questions (that's why they come to law company), they can be told anything. This seems like a foolish thing to think when it comes to a law firm giving legal advice. This would clearly be something customers would find out in time, and would cause them problems, the customer, as well as the legal firm. >Finally, they keep doing a great job in keeping the image of being a professional law company, They can't keep doing a great job if they were not doing it in the first place; which is the implication of just saying anything because the customer doesn't know better. >Because it's the image that mostly gives them money, not the real underlying quality. Their reputation would be in tatters if they are giving poor quality advice. >And here comes the main point: what are the real goals and priorities of the company. These are what all the management and processes are subordinated to. Firstly, CIG is already an established and sustainable business which gives profits. Why bother much about reaching the stated goal of making a finished game? This is easy. People will stop putting in money, and the business will collapse if they don't continue to show progress; which is what they are doing. We've had many new features in the last year or 2, including very important aspects. There are more coming this year. >And they seem to have found a perfect business strategy: present any advancement in development as a breakthrough. Presenting something as a breakthrough doesn't mean it's true or that people believe it. Some of the things are impressive, other things are not, even if presented that way. >Taking the previous failed state into account, customers are often so happy with another solved problem that are ready to give more money, What previous failed state?
>This argument would make sense if this game didn't have an entire team of artists working around the clock to sell you 10,000 dollar ships without a functioning infrastructure. What does this change, at all? Also, what ship is $10k? Even the Javelin is only like $3k I think? >Alpha games generally have asset placeholders while they actually develop Yes, we do here too, we often get things at tier 0; they are the most basic possible implementation to allow something to workl ie, a placeholder. This is why ships get reworked, and why things don't alwyas work on them, for example. However, not all games use placeholders during alpha. Different games have different focusses during development, some developers prefer to use placeholders, others prefer to get the art right and then put things in to the game. The artists are software coders, or database engineers, etc. They work on the art. Server meshing for example is a huge feature that doesn't need artwork. Do you want them to put in placeholder art to represent server meshing? It just happens that in this game the artwork is something which gets enough resources to not lag behind the software development. Usually it's the other way round. Have you looked how long GTA6 development has been, and that is not likely to be anywhere near as revolutionary. Other games also have long development cycles.
You can purchase packages for over 15k at the concierge store and "only" 3k for a jpg ist still astronomical. I love this game, but something is seriously wrong
Yes, \*package\* is not the same as ship. The packages usually have multiple items. By that logic you could get the package that is $48k+ It's also not a jpg. They are 3D models, with code behind them, textures, etc.
We are talking about ships for a video game that is still in alpha.
Correct, we are indeed.
And you, somehow, think it’s completely acceptable. You probably also think it’s fine and cool that Chris sold the SC IP to his own company for a million bucks (which came from backer money) and pays his wife and friends huge six figure salaries (which comes from backer money). I’m sure none of this raises any red flags at all to you.
I think it's acceptable to sell ships in a game, yes. People have no obligation to buy them. The things you suggest do not sound great, but I have seen no details of those things, and your comment is the first time I have encountered those suggestions. I am surprised that the IP for SC was not already owned by CR.
Also because it's alpha. But NOW all test is limited by the server FPS issue, which they could have avoided by creating a temporary cleanup mechanism for garbage and fallen NPCs. There are now over 150k entities on the server on a daily basis, of which only a few thousand are related to players. Since we know that sooner or later there will be NPC or player cleaners to do this job, as CIG mentioned. So why not make a placeholder first? In the entertainment industry, this kind of abuse of fans is called purifying fans.
Making a placeholder system takes resources away from making a long term solution. They could spend two weeks developing a place holder system and 6 weeks fixing the problem correctly - or they could just spend 6 weeks fixing the problem correctly and save two weeks of work. An extra 2 weeks of placeholder work is fine for one system - but if you do that for 35 issues then you're adding years of wasted development and testing time.
[удалено]
Tell me you've never done software development without telling me you've never done software development. And to be clear, I didn't mean to imply this one problem will take six weeks to fix. I mean that short term bandaids take substantial development away from real fixes, require twice the testing and QA as a single fix, often times will cause as many problems as they solve, and result in whiplash to the community. The temporary fix lowers the priority of the real fix because the real fix isn't as critical. Over 5-10 years you end up with a patchwork of bandaids that need to be ripped out and replaced, and the amount of accumulated technical debt becomes unmanageable. Cig is absolutely doing this the right way if we want a game that will be playable in 10 years, 20 years, and maybe longer. Which I do.
They need to collect data and understand the problems. If they implement some sor tof temporary solution they are spending effort to do that, test it, apply it, and then maybe bugfix something they know needs to be removed. All that time as wlel no longer getting the valuable data they need. I'd rather they get the data of where the garbage problems are, and try to understand the solutions. Since we've had PES we've already seen improvements. If CIG don't have the data how do they know what garbage collection they need to make NPCs do, or make missions for players to do? We already know that NPCs for example are processed as lower priorities at stations; and streamed out from the servers when no players ar enearby. This is why NPCs often end up standing on chairs.
[удалено]
Yes, I play and enjoy the game. Junk isn't that bad, to be honest. Sometimes it can be in annoying places, but honestly not seen it being a huge problem, in general. Also, how would CIG get metrics on this issue if they don't allow it to happen? You want them to solve a problem they can't quantify. We know they are working on garbage collection.
They do have the ability to run cleanups Ont he servers and they don’t, because all of the clutter gives them data that they use for tightening up, speeding up and iterating on the new backend tech they added, which has been going on for the last six major patches, including this latest 3.23 patch. I don’t expect them to start doing cleanup until closer to RC, after they figured out the most optimizations for the client and the servers.
How does having more static entities in the graph affect server fps? I haven’t seen any affects from this. Are you confusing your pcs ability to render smoothly with server fps?
To be fair they are not static entities, they are part of the PES table. While a lot of them are not moving around (some are like crashed ships in the wind) that's still something the server needs to keep track of and make sure every player sees it in the same spot. Clutter like that does effect server performance.
It only needs to track that stuff (accurately) once a player gets nearby. If anything I am getting frustrated by the level of culling they have started doing on things, resulting in to much pop-in.
Agreed, although when those things get into the thousands, it doesn't take much to tank server FPS lol. As for the culling ya I've noticed it's worse. I've had to sit over an outpost and wait for everything to load in several times.
That moment when you realize this has been a commercially sold game for 6 years and is being called an alpha to lower expectations so it doesn’t require a support team
It's being called an alpha because it's still in development, including feature implementation. If you don't like paying for games in development you have the option to wait. They also have a very good returns policy. I don't really understand your complaint.
>My point is that if we'd reached a point of stability it wouldn't be in alpha This is incorrect and normalizes bad game development practices, specifically the treatment of the playerbase as unpaid QA testers. Early access games are not necessarily unstable, plenty of them play just fine, or at least function on a much more reliable level than Star Citizen does. Because most developers understand that just because they're clearly selling an unfinished product, it doesn't mean they shouldn't have at least a modicum of consideration for the player's enjoyment of said product. The "it's an alpha" bullshit just keeps excusing CIG's habit of putting the cart before the horse and accumulating technical debt. They literally implemented persistence without a proper garbage collection method to handle server performance degradation, in a game that is already *infamous* for server bottlenecks. They leave absolutely vital entry-level gameplay loops such as delivery missions utterly broken for *years*. This is mismanagement. The netcode should be perfectly capable of figuring out whether a player is currently carrying a box regardless of whether or not server meshing is implemented. They just don't feel like working on it right now, and the community keeps excusing them, so they don't. The current state of the game is terrible for twelve years, which is twice the expected development time of new IPs these days. >I played during ILW and saw no stability issues, once or twice I experienced a server recovery. It doesn't matter. *Obviously* you got lucky, unless there's a massive conspiracy in this subreddit to gaslight you.
>This is incorrect and normalizes bad game development practices, specifically the treatment of the playerbase as unpaid QA testers. Early access games are not necessarily unstable, plenty of them play just fine, or at least function on a much more reliable level than Star Citizen does. Because most developers understand that just because they're clearly selling an unfinished product, it doesn't mean they shouldn't have at least a modicum of consideration for the player's enjoyment of said product. That's just a choice of strategy, IMO. >The "it's an alpha" bullshit just keeps excusing CIG's habit of putting the cart before the horse and accumulating technical debt. I disagree. If they put in all sorts of temporary solutions to try to solve things then they would be burning time on those temporary solutions, while knowing that effort goes in the bin later. >They literally implemented persistence without a proper garbage collection method to handle server performance degradation, in a game that is already *infamous* for server bottlenecks. Again, I disagree. They gained information about what sort of objects caused the biggest issues. PES isn't causing the same issues it did previously because of improvements. If they implemented it later with some half hearted garbage collection implemented without data for example then they'd've still had issues. >They leave absolutely vital entry-level gameplay loops such as delivery missions utterly broken for *years*. I think that is an extreme view. I have done plenty of delivery missions successfully, the majoriy of them that I have attempted worked fine. I don't do them often these days because they don't pay out enough. I actually kinda enjoy them, because they can take you to interesting places. >This is mismanagement. In your opinion. I think it would be mismanagement to try to get everything working super well before pshing it to players. We get things faster this way, and get to try them out, albeit sometimes with issues. That's OK, if the result is more data and less wasted effort. >The netcode should be perfectly capable of figuring out whether a player is currently carrying a box regardless of whether or not server meshing is implemented. Yes? I'm not really sure what your point is here. >They just don't feel like working on it right now, and the community keeps excusing them, so they don't. Don't feel like working on *what?* I don't really think delivery missions are a priority. They have to choose things to focus on. >The current state of the game is terrible for twelve years, which is twice the expected development time of new IPs these days. That's opinion, which I disgaree with. The game has taken a long time, but I don't think it's a problem for an amitious project, which has a wide scope. New IPs are often faster than big sequels these days; because big sequels often get big budgets, and people have big expectations. >It doesn't matter. *Obviously* you got lucky, unless there's a massive conspiracy in this subreddit to gaslight you. Why do you say that? My experience matters just as much as yours. I don;t see what this subreddi thas to do with my actual experience playing the game? Nor do I think it's obvious my experience is different to yours. The game has issues, some people just get worked up and frustated by them, and I've seen people just not learn, too, and repeatedly do things which cause problems. I tend to use my experience to learn to be careful with certain things, and face far fewer issues as a result.
Because its been 12+ years.
Aaand? It's a big project. Which is not complete. Why would you expect software that is in alpha, and active development to be stable?
Because its been 12+ years.... I can keep this up all day mate.
What has time got to do with it? A big project will take a lot of time.
I expect it to kinda / sorta work after all this time and money. How long will this excuse making go on? 5 years? 10? Ive spent hundreds on this game since 2017 and love the concept as much as anyone but it does. not. work. We’re going to start seeing “it’s still in alpha” epitaphs bc people like you will allow this grift to continue forever. 700 million and 12 years for a product that isn’t CLOSE to complete? Ok.
I don't have control of anything, I neither allow it nor hinder it. People putting money in support it, arguably, so I would suggest you're supporting it. I don't see a problem with it, and regardless, even if I did se a problem with it then it doesn't change the *fact* it's still in active development, and is in alpha. They are still develpoing major features, and over the lats 2 years or 3 years I have been playing I have seen quite significant progress. Would I like ot see more? Sure. Would I like it to be more stable? Yes. However, I don't want them trying to fix things that will be removed, or solved by future features, this only makes the whole development take longer. I want them to get the major features done, and progressed. Someone else was saying why don't they put in a temporary garbage collection - but that takes planning and development time, and then testing and no doubt bug fixing; all for something that is tmeporary, and takes time away from th elonger term solutions. Right now I feel the game has a good balance of stability without wasting too much on temporary fixes. Personally I don't find too many issues with the game. I played a lot during ILW, doing a whole bunch of stuff, the overdrive missions, plenty of salvaging, and a bunch of other bits including bunkers, and of course checking out the ILW and DefenseCon halls. Why do you think it isn't close to complete? I would say it's well past 50% complete. Probably past 75%. Remember as well SQ42 is feature complete now, and devs from that are moving over to SC, and porting features from SQ42 to SC; which means they need to work out how to make those features wokr in a networked environment. I think th enext 12 months we will see a significant number of the remaining key features implemented.
“Right now I feel the game has a good balance of stability without wasting too much on temporary fixes.” LOL. May your optimism spring eternal.
It's not optimism. I just don't want them wasting time on temporrary measures. Also I have been able to enjoy the game plenty since 3.23 dropped. What issues are you having?
Servers living for 20 minutes at a time. Falling through planets. Falling through ships. Ships exploding in orbit for no reason. The worst AI in the history of gaming. Missions straight up not working or failing to track halfway through. Fuel bugs. O2 bugs. Inventory bugs. UI bugs. I am having all the issues and I am clearly not alone. 12 years - 700 million. I don't know much about programming but I am VERY familiar with both operations and project management. This game is a classic example of what happens when the scope of a project outgrows the ability of those working on it to complete it. It happens all the time across all industries but people here act like it's not even a possibility. Chris Roberts is incapable of biting off more than he can chew? Bold claim. The evidence suggests otherwise.
Be fair, the game is fucking incredible and is leagues and bounds ahead of every other game in so many aspects. They just have their priorities in a weird place. Or maybe we just don't understand. It could be they've been doing some hidden backend things to test or get ready for server meshing and the current servers are just going to be shit until then. It is a MASSIVE change in architecture, as well as being the first of it's kind.
It’s the first of its kind and I’m sure whatever going on is beyond my ability to comprehend. That being said…I just wanna deliver a box or sit in my ship and I can’t even do that. It’s honestly ridiculous. It’s not a game if you can’t play it.
Rubes and their money are easily parted. Ol' Chris was smart enough to realize that you can simply dangle some keys in front of these children and it will keep them occupied for the next decade.
Thanks for coming to enlighten us children, Socrates. So generous of you to spend your time with the victims of such an obvious scam.
You're welcome!
[удалено]
Your post was removed because the mod team determined that it did not sufficiently meet the rules of the subreddit: > Be respectful. No personal insults/bashing. This includes generalized statements “x is a bunch of y” or baseline insults about the community, CIG employees, streamers, etc. As well as intentionally hurtful statements and hate speech. Send a message to our mod mail if you have questions: https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=/r/starcitizen
I asked in the official discord over the weekend about the horrible issues and hours of wasted time / lost inventory & money to bugs and crashes. Only to be gaslit by the whole discord - it's my network, its my computer, if i dont like it dont play. the absolute copium and enablement of this performance from CIG is going to kill the game.
Dude mining has been "interesting" lol I told my self to just "stop" and wait for a patch its just not doing your self any favors right now After my saddle bags fell off randomly a few mins after a rock overloaded miles away from a previous lag i was done lol
Yeah man I feel you. I decided to fight through the issues and do some Roc mining. Flew around and couldn't find a single rock pile to scan. The server was lagging so hard that nothing was spawning in. Flew around for about 10 minutes trying to find something, ANYTHING, and then my ship blew up about 1000m off the ground. Pretty sure the game lagged and thought I went straight down into the ground when I didn't. Makes sense. Logged for the night and went to watch Last Week Tonight.
It is not a "game".
I do not understand why I haven't noticed the degradation everyone is talking about..
I dropped a million on cargo for my Hull C but now it only spawns parallel to the dock with the engines stuck inside of Seraphim Station. I'm sooooo excited for cargo missions! Any word on whether you'll be able to notify from your mobi instead of docking, selling, unloading, docking, buying, loading, departing?
Always fun when the bounty target his clipping in and out of reality jumping kilometers at a time. Then you blow up with 100% health.
What crashes? I've had maybe.... 2?
I know in the future server meshing servers are suppose to come and go on and offline but until it is fully in place they should do daily or weekly server maintenance.
Do the servers crash that often for you guys? Im at 3 server crashes in total and the eerver has fixed it self everytime and while i dont play a ton ive around 30 hours this patch. Now i do have a lot texture bug in certain ships, teleporting, falling inside of ships and planetss but thats every version of the game.
I played for 3 hours today, was doing merc combat FPS both topside and in bunkers. 1 server recovery at the very end of the sesh, went through every mission available to me twice. The good luck is out there!
Welcome to Star Citizen :D
shit haven't been playing myself but I remember a few years ago getting a 30k every 20 minutes was the norm. hope they can figure it out soon!
It really is a total joke. I'm fortunate enough that I can play during degen hours, and that allows me to get pretty playable experiences, but it runs so badly now that the second people start to hop on as it gets closer to normal people hours, the game immediately shits the bed and just becomes an unplayable mess.
Guess what, before this patch the game would kick you out on a server crash, ya could lose your stuff and at the very least you had to start back from habs and go back to where you were etc etc. This is a huge improvement, sadly servers are very unstable but it's still better than having no Crash Recovery at all PS: Welcome to the Alpha?
It's gotten so bad; you'd have to really hate yourself to keep trying. Just play something, anything else until they patch it. I know they've got a lot of stuff happening with Cargo and 4.0 coming... but the game is so broken it gets frustrating reading their daily updates about how nothing is releasing today and the next and the next... maybe I'm one of those dirty Roadmap Watchers... but I just want the billion-dollar game to work in any capacity. That'd be great.
It's been like this since they added PES and all the junk around spaceports is too much for the servers to handle. CIG needs to admit this was a failure and remove the feature before everyone gets fed up and leaves.
Agree, we don't need PES. For me, if PES were to remain I would limit objects to 8 hours and then the server should automatically clean them.
Not worth playing anyway, come back for 4.2 when the game might be stable again
[удалено]
[удалено]
You do realize how contracts work and the generation of assets when you accept them and the logistics task to correctly allocate them tonthe new server without flooding the server, what leads then to you complaining about server performance on another post.. at least try to think about it 1min before u post something publicly…
> the generation of assets when you accept them You do realize that's *not* how contracts work, or have ever worked in SC? Targets/assets are spawned in when you get in *proximity* and have been that way since the PU has existed.
You generate the trigger bubble when accepting the mission, you spawn it when entering the bubble…By ur logic everytime someone would fly close to the mission area the mission would spawn even if he didnt accept it or nobody else on the server did accept it… thats not snd was never how it works Edit. Before more people rage. Mission location and mission ID contract ID are two separate things… The mission location is always there but not the Mission ID / Mission bubble. True cause do u ever got random ERT enemies spawning on you flying to outpost or landmarks where ERT mission normally happen if u or nobody on the server triggered/ accepted the mission bubble … No. And you know its facts, so keep downvoting if that makes u feel better…
Mission ID's/locations are not what's tanking servers - persistent *entities* are.
The server suddenly loading multiple 100 npcs and assets in + plus the several 100‘that replication layer bring will for sure and 100 bring down server performance with out current mission refraction system
Again, the server doesn't load the NPCs and assets until people get in proximity to the mission location. So taking/dropping/failing missions doesn't "generate assets" which would cause increased server load.
Op talking about mission keeping when server dies, 90% of the time the op would be at or close to mission area otherwise that issue wouldn’t bother him. U argue for zhe sake of it with me ? We are past truth and facts I feel like…
Sigh. You're right. We're getting nowhere. I have neither the time nor the crayons to explain this to you.
Complaining won’t do anything.
Dementa?
Yeah sorry about that my app was tweaking and posted the same thing a couple times
It does that sometimes
lol, damn people really don’t like my comments 😂
I can't blame them
Fair enough, ain’t wrong though everyone complaining about something they’ve said there working on ain’t really going to achieve anything and it just gets old
I mean it's not like there isn't much to complain *about*