Star Citizen - Quality Matters

แชร์
ฝัง
  • เผยแพร่เมื่อ 23 ม.ค. 2025

ความคิดเห็น • 66

  • @CitizenRyan
    @CitizenRyan 5 หลายเดือนก่อน +9

    Great points here. The only thing I had a disagreement on was something you clearly stated later in the video. Being: before CIG even considers a location/npc clothing etc, they must think about HOW it impacts a a player and the overall game. The lack of forethought in this regard plagues CIG and some of the obvious flops make them look … disjointed

    • @vorpalrobot
      @vorpalrobot 5 หลายเดือนก่อน

      NPCs at outposts with no breathable atmo, but no without space suits on...
      If they're gonna go systemic with this much stuff they need to plan ahead better. As they turn more of these systems on I think they're gonna be overwhelmed by the amount of unintended consequences they'll have to deal with.

    • @Maxxmentum
      @Maxxmentum 5 หลายเดือนก่อน

      I miss that mining planet where we could buy ships.

  • @Kakeyoro
    @Kakeyoro 5 หลายเดือนก่อน +3

    Very well compiled. I have a thought. I think the reason why CIG relies on feature heavy releases is because of the marketing hype that they can generate around them. I don't think they would be able to market as strongly as they would if smaller features were released incrementally. A big part of how they do development is most likely predicated by the marketing division.

    • @nosir5596
      @nosir5596 5 หลายเดือนก่อน +2

      @@Kakeyoro it's only recently-- and intermittently-- that they've even really done feature heavy releases. Basically just 3.18 and 3.23; 3.19-22 really would not pass as "major feature patches" in most live service games. 20 was basically an AC patch, 21 only really brought tractor beams which are still pretty broken and undercooked and 22 brought a shallow, slapped together salvage addition that broke the game economy lol

    • @lordfraybin
      @lordfraybin 5 หลายเดือนก่อน

      ​@nosir5596 They've never released ANYTHING in a finished state.
      Nothing is finished yet.
      Literally nothing...
      Not 1 single game feature, mechanic, ship, loop...
      It boggles my mind.
      I only follow because I HOPE that some day.... it will be playable, and I can get my $$ worth.

  • @Bubblegum_Ronin
    @Bubblegum_Ronin 5 หลายเดือนก่อน

    Nicely done @TheSpaceCoder !
    I love how you touch upon the game building experience and make it easily accessible for all.
    Definitely want to see more episodes about various aspects of how coding and game engineering relates to SC.
    If you had the time and inclination, it'd be really interesting to see the results of your coding for any part of a SC system/feature that peaks your interest. Of course it would be extremely simplistic and only serve as a model but might be interesting to see how you'd tackle certain parts of SC, especially the broken parts 😅.
    Of course it's probably all too much but thought I'd throw that out there!
    Keep up these great videos! I like your critical thought while keeping it real.

  • @Fonsecaj89
    @Fonsecaj89 5 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

    I really want to love this game, solo playing is amazing but the bugs are frustrating. I want to play to relax not to quite rage, I have enough stress at work, then this shit…

  • @Damaboo1
    @Damaboo1 5 หลายเดือนก่อน

    Always enjoyed your input. Keep up the good work! 👍

  • @andrewfanner2245
    @andrewfanner2245 5 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

    Some Proect Management
    Someone who says "No Chris, that's a silly idea" and can make it stick
    Collective viewing of Jurassic Park, which can be trimmed down to "spent so much time on what they could do they never stopped to think if they should do it"
    Pre release regression testing with no live till what worked pre patch still works.
    Ship design around function and use, not what looked cool to the graphic designer
    Don't release ships without game loops
    Tattooed on the [select body part] of decision makers "this is a game, not a job".
    You have a rich Lore, use it for content

  • @Michaelclayton283
    @Michaelclayton283 5 หลายเดือนก่อน +3

    Eve online NMS and Elite clearly demonstrates that CIG now has amateur developers. We were automating complex QA Server load and regression testing over 10 years ago but it requires discipline and professionalism which are both lacking at CIG. I think they knew the code is FUBAR and will never work after the 3.18 disaster and they have decided to milk the final years of SC and get as much money out of the player base until it's dead.

    • @BGIANAKy
      @BGIANAKy 5 หลายเดือนก่อน

      Elite and NMS are not impressive

    • @space_is_real
      @space_is_real 5 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      It shows that the number of developers doesn't matter if behind the scenes there's a high turnover or most of them don't have a big experience in making video games. We could notice it when CIG mentioned that most of the designers for the Merchantman all left the company (6 persons apparently), hence stopping the development for the ship. And when we compare this with what No Man's Sky is able to add with each update while they only had 20 employees (40 now but they're working on 2 games!), we can see a huge discrepancy between the 2.
      I also preferred the approach of Elite Dangerous that was released in the estimated time after the Kickstarter Campaign, and then Frontier added more content through extensions like in the old days. Frontier was also able to release various games since then and they now have 800 employees split on multiple games.

    • @Fonsecaj89
      @Fonsecaj89 5 หลายเดือนก่อน

      That’s planned incompetence and obsolescence to sell you hype and ships

    • @lordfraybin
      @lordfraybin 5 หลายเดือนก่อน

      ​@@space_is_real the past 7 years we've been largely paying for research and development.
      Which is STILL in R&D... 😶..
      And the "original" masterminds behind it, are indeed, gone.
      They are on their 3rd database engine... and I can tell you, from experience... it will NEVER work the way they need it to work.
      There just isn't a big enough pipe to push ALL that data, replicate it, save it, update it, sync, rinse and repeat, OVER the internet- to create a GOOD pvp experience.
      Never going to happen.
      DBs just can't grow that large, and be easily managed. When ANYTHING goes wrong, it takes TIME, lots of real... heart crunching time, even with the fastest of RAID arrays...to copy that data.
      More time than fluid, properly functioning AI...etc.. have.
      The whole notion of persistence/ physicalized "everything" is never going to work well.

  • @sennemaa59769
    @sennemaa59769 5 หลายเดือนก่อน +3

    o7 Citizen
    I wait for 10 years now and its getting more worse the last years.

  • @piedpiper1172
    @piedpiper1172 5 หลายเดือนก่อน +6

    The refinery example highlights how frustrating issues that boil down to individual values in data files are.
    Why is the reputation earned from a shared mission set to a less than 1.0 modifier? Why are they punishing group play in a game marketed on multicrew?
    Why do ships that have mass statistics several times higher than other ships have lower hull hp values?
    Etc.
    I really do think a team of just 3-4 people who are assigned “fix and polish values and minor bugs for really anything that you can” would do wonders for the game. Doubly so if one member of that team spends a portion of their time documenting it.
    Imagine the good will and positive sentiment that would generate. Post a video every Friday “this week we fixed the Argo RAFT’s hp, it has Reinforced in the name but less hull hp than some single seat fighters. Bug fixed: “Reinforced” ship was not reinforced. Corrected.”
    Or “we noticed players never share missions because of reduced reputation and credit earnings. Change: Reputation reward no longer reduces on mission share. Team suggestion: Requested mission team consider having sharing a mission trigger additional enemy spawns / higher cargo value rather than reduced pay out to facilitate group play.”
    Or “The Heartseeker has hearts again.”

    • @Bubblegum_Ronin
      @Bubblegum_Ronin 5 หลายเดือนก่อน +2

      I like your idea about the Resolution show! It would definitely bring interest to SC.

    • @matuto1986
      @matuto1986 5 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      I really like your idea, but I think it's difficult to implement. It is "inefficient" to have Team B review the coding done by Team A, since Team A is more likely to know where the problem lies and how to fix them without breaking other things. The problem is that Team A is no longer there or was already signed in another internal goal. They are constantly launching "tier zero" and moving on.
      But I'm 100% with you that this should be something they needed to focus on, so they can REALLY show their tech demo working as it should, instead of this hot mess where you clip through the floor and colide with invisible asteroids.

    • @piedpiper1172
      @piedpiper1172 5 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      @@matuto1986 Team A was supposed to document and annotate the code as they went. No project is ever supposed to depend on people not leaving the company.
      Also, without *someone* assigned to going back and checking on bugs, what’s even the point of issue reporting?
      Besides, I’m pretty confident the marketing boom alone could cover the cost of the 3 employees, even if they do have to chase people down to ask questions sometimes.

  • @Clifton_Dynamite2020
    @Clifton_Dynamite2020 5 หลายเดือนก่อน

    I knew a contractor that employed young unskilled builders to do construction work, they used to wing it, terrible workmanship and short cuts, shoddy work was the result.
    That's probably what goes on over at CIG.

  • @izraphailzero5610
    @izraphailzero5610 5 หลายเดือนก่อน

    About the drawler in the item bank, I'm pretty sure that they thought more about "optimization" than actual "gameplay".
    Why? The answer is simple: they tried to switch to a bulk transactional model.
    In the current implementation every withdraw/deposit operation is atomic. New call to BE for every item movement.
    With the drawler we were generating a list of items for the operation, and it was processed in a single call.
    So from the technical point of view - they did it good. The problem is that from UX's point of view it was a disaster.
    Which leads me to one of two reasons:
    1. There are no PO (product oner) on a feature level for some of the teams (that can explain why the passionate team are delivering good things, and why some others doing just tech bare minimum)
    2. There is no policy that forces dev team to play their own game. (which multiplies the problem from p1.)
    And. yes... That's typical hell swamp for the product development, where PM/PO missfunction can create so many issues

    • @nosir5596
      @nosir5596 5 หลายเดือนก่อน

      @@izraphailzero5610 the worst thing is that if they'd just developed a proper character equipment UI they could've gotten away with doing it that way and just had us get equipped all at once after committing, but instead they tried to lazily double dip with the freight elevator UI and ask it to do things it just isn't designed for, which necessitated an extra step that falls back on the old inventory UI they want to replace.
      What's worse is it's the second time this year they've tried to replace the inventory panes with something that wasn't designed to do all the same tasks; the loot UI has the same issue and similarly falls back on the old.

  • @chrisajokinen
    @chrisajokinen 5 หลายเดือนก่อน

    I make use of a simple definition of development as a puzzle. The picture on the box is what your goal is. The pieces must be found and placed correctly to finish it.
    CIG has a serious issue. It has based its revenue on ship sales. The ships, even the small ones, are complex and take time to develop. when a new ship feature comes out all ships then need to be brought up to the new gold standard, which takes time away from other feature development. For example, the resource network needs to be added to all ships. Even the ships that are very behind in updates like the gladiator, caterpillar and so on. And while all this goes on, they will add more ships.
    In my opinion CIG needs to do two things. First, they need to get to feature complete and start on beta. Meaning no new features are to be added and work starts on adding content and polish. Secondly, they need to train up a large staff to focus on the ship back log and bring all ships to gold standard.

  • @younboyce7068
    @younboyce7068 5 หลายเดือนก่อน +3

    Calling it space sim is a stretch at this point looks like there going through development hell look at mastermodes

    • @BGIANAKy
      @BGIANAKy 5 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      Ya. It’s arcade af now

  • @arcadealchemist
    @arcadealchemist 5 หลายเดือนก่อน

    The gameplay is gonna be there
    the fedelity and quality is what sells it.
    hey you know what would be EPIC cool
    An admin office in your hanger with a BUISNESS LINE Kiosk for personal adverts/recrutement and all (not specrum) intergrated so player A can contact player B discuss a contract for a job and draw it up both parties get a fax copy and can record it
    the gameplay in an admin office is "arange jobs with other players, deligate jobs to other org memebrs online to keep space truckers moving, this gameplay loop is managerial for yourself as a solo player or a party/org"
    the simple thing make a kiosk that creates Work contracts (when a contract is forfilled you shred it or file it this is done by photocopy and then placing the document (physicalized) in to a File cabnet or a shredder.
    you can recover the record in your kiosk perminnant ledger or file it in the Supply files )
    I'll explain what kind of gameplay you can get out of "physical filed items"
    imagine a mission for a bounty you found evedence on site (serial number for a ammo clip, made by a person"
    you find out who created who sold it (emergent bounty mission)
    when you find it you can request via a call for the player to look up the RECIPTS and fax them over.
    so they can COPY/SEND a document to you if he document is required for edence.
    now obviously people can refuse in which case you physically can go to the location and just a hack to enter a VERSION of a hanger with the admin office in, you break and steal the data and take it back to investigate and find out who is behind XYZ crimes.
    Private investigation and bounty hunting alone would bennfit by proxy of logisics records etc.

  • @izraphailzero5610
    @izraphailzero5610 5 หลายเดือนก่อน +2

    As a QA automation - strongly disagree with the statement that "game testing can't be automated".

    • @fortmanr
      @fortmanr 5 หลายเดือนก่อน

      Agreed

    • @ricojes
      @ricojes 5 หลายเดือนก่อน

      💀

    • @Fonsecaj89
      @Fonsecaj89 5 หลายเดือนก่อน

      They use player as tester, look at the PTU version, that’s QA environment… and the stupid players test for free

  • @QziQza
    @QziQza 5 หลายเดือนก่อน

    CiG have really grown themselves into a corner, haven't they?from raising the funds to make a game, into an organisation that demands endless funding, just to exist.. and we still don't have an actual product, just lots,and lots, and lots of pretty digital assets, within a build of part baked, constantly changing, systems, that lack proper cohesion.
    years of CR dreaming away resources, at the expense of backers, and a development that still hasn't dialed into a solid, actionable plan.
    ..and now they are sending emails to 'select' backers, offering 'limited stock ships' from.previous low volume offerings. this highly targeted 'buy now because you missed out' borders on desperation, and is very alarming.

  • @michelartel2489
    @michelartel2489 5 หลายเดือนก่อน +2

    Hey SpaceCoder,
    In my opinion, you are confusing this public Alpha with a finished life service game.
    CIG is interested in tester feedback for this upcoming game in open development.
    It isn't intended to be lookt at as a product, fit for delivery.
    You are asking them to polish systems they possibly intending to replace in the future.
    A lot is still in flux. Why assign work to something that might get replaced in the future. A Dev once told me once:
    If they were a scam, they indeed would take the current version, and keep polishing and optimizing to attract as many as possible, before pulling the rug.
    Instead they are constantly adding new underlying tech, expanding the game and creating new incompatibilities that have to be found and fixed again.
    That's why they invite people. To help find problems.
    Keep up the good work!

  • @zantrag
    @zantrag 5 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

    Chris is no longer running CIG. That job belongs to the Marketing team It shows in the lack of concern for backers.
    Only the harvesting of new money matters lately. Older ships make no new money. (unless you make a $50 MKII.)

    • @nosir5596
      @nosir5596 5 หลายเดือนก่อน

      @@zantrag idk how to tell you this but Chris is and has always been a marketing guy lol

    • @lordfraybin
      @lordfraybin 5 หลายเดือนก่อน

      ​​@@nosir5596 No.. Chris is a slightly imaginative programmer, who borrowed most of his ideas from Star Wars... and became famous for Wing Commander.
      Sandy - his wife, is the Marketing Major, and SHE runs the Marketing Dept at CIG, which was 65% + of the employees, at one point.
      Watch Chris and Sandy in an interview together. He does exactly what she asks/tells him to do.
      Sandy wears the pants at CIG.

    • @nosir5596
      @nosir5596 5 หลายเดือนก่อน

      @@lordfraybin Chris is an ideas guy. He's the dream guy. He's always been marketing, even if it's not his title, he's the guy selling the dream, he's the guy selling the product everyone else is having to figure out if they can even make.

  • @LittleTed2
    @LittleTed2 5 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

    A case study in poor program/project management... said the project manager! lol o7

  • @kVidStream
    @kVidStream 5 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

    TLDR, CIG doesn't have professional level developers, and they're shooting the moon in delivering SC.

  • @cmdr_stretchedguy
    @cmdr_stretchedguy 5 หลายเดือนก่อน

    CIG - perpetual Alpha and bugs are ignored for 5+ years. Never in history has there been a company that had a something used as Alpha AND pulled in over $700M without releasing a final game/program. Thats enough money they should have hundreds of programmers that could release the 1.0 game within a year, not in alpha beyond 12 years.

    • @lordfraybin
      @lordfraybin 5 หลายเดือนก่อน

      If "history" is an indicator? 60% of the employees work directly with/for - Marketing.
      I doubt that number has changed, but someone could prove me wrong.

  • @RicoZaid_
    @RicoZaid_ 5 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

    o7

  • @nosir5596
    @nosir5596 5 หลายเดือนก่อน +7

    Quality may matter, but not to CIG. Honestly seen asset flip games that care more about the quality of what goes live than CIG seem to. At every stage from evo to live the standard is just too low to be acceptable, and it's becoming increasingly obvious with a number of features that have made it to player hands that there is just no effective internal playtesting or QA. Builds go out to PTU with trivially obvious and immediate problems, features make it to PTU and even to live with glaring "no one ever laid eyes or hands on this as a player" functionality issues (like most of the tractor beam placements on ships, f'ex). Idk what's going on internally but there is absolutely no way to look at what they're doing and conclude that quality of the product is a priority.

    • @77wolfking
      @77wolfking 5 หลายเดือนก่อน +2

      Stop whining

    • @neofromthewarnerbrothersic145
      @neofromthewarnerbrothersic145 5 หลายเดือนก่อน

      "Honestly seen asset flip games that care more about the quality of what goes live than CIG seem to."
      I don't know what definition of "quality" would make that true...
      Not to mention, Star Citizen's "Live" branch is not a release branch. Say it with me now... _it's alpha!_
      No seriously, I wish I didn't have to mention it, but when you're talking about the quality of what "goes live" in such an ambiguous way, I kinda have to.
      At most, you could say quality isn't a priority _right now..._ but with the definition of "quality" we seem to be using, it's really not supposed to be a priority right now.
      The thing very few people seem to understand about SC in particular is that NO amount of internal testing would suffice. Everything has to be tested at full scale in an online environment, more than any other game. Because of what it's trying to do, and the ways it's trying to do it. That's why we're even able to play it right now, they're not just giving us "early access." Especially for the really big things like PES, RL, server meshing, you need everybody. Not evocati, not PTU... you need as many people as possible in the shit.
      We are the bug testers, and to some degree we all know this... but everyone has a different idea of how many issues are acceptable at each stage. Yeah, lots of dumb things make it into the Live build, and sometimes they even stay there for a long time. Sometimes there is a totally understandable reason for it, sometimes less so. But ALWAYS, 100% of the time, the answer is more complicated than armchair devs in the comments imagine. Most people have no real concept of why SC is considered to be so "ambitious," and why it's so difficult to make, but everyone thinks they know better.
      When I look at SC, I don't see a product that places a low priority on quality. I see an insanely ambitious product (with a nearly impossible scope) that is still WIP. In the early/just crossing into mid stage of development. If quality wasn't a priority, they would have shipped it years ago. But they don't just want to release something functional, they want to deliver the highest "quality" we've ever seen. You don't put that much focus on "immersion and fidelity" unless you intend to give it the polish those things require.
      There is absolutely no way to look at what they're doing and conclude anything else.

    • @facelesshalo5174
      @facelesshalo5174 5 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      Not defending the constant broken state of SC. But as a QA professional in the same field. The amount of issues we raise and are subsequently ignored by the production team for people to then turn around and say “this was never even tested.” Is staggeringly high.
      There are bugs we miss, but not to the degree people think.
      QA doesn’t budget the project. They don’t put the time costs for fixing bugs to developing features. It’s rare we even get a say in what should cancel or delay a release. And in star citizens case I doubt that is any different.
      Stop blaming the little guy when it comes to big problems. It doesn’t fix the issue.

    • @nosir5596
      @nosir5596 5 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      @@facelesshalo5174 in what way is blaming management for clearly not having/prioritizing internal QA "blaming the little guy"

    • @facelesshalo5174
      @facelesshalo5174 5 หลายเดือนก่อน

      @@nosir5596 ..what? You literally said: "features that have made it to player hands that there is just no effective internal playtesting or QA"
      In what way is saying QA is ineffective, not blaming them?

  • @ScottJones243
    @ScottJones243 5 หลายเดือนก่อน

    I feel like this video adds so little value and only regurgitates misinformation / speculations.
    Consider its alpha-lite, that until recently most resources have been spent on sq42, a ton of feature and tech branches are not merged in to the PTU branch etc.
    SC runs as you would expect from a modular and split codebase where a lot of more polished features are not yet merged in.
    Some bugs are likely fixed in the next feature iteration branch / SQ42 branch etc.
    Your video does not in seem to consider these factors at all and seems to continue to misinform.
    Theres ton of valid criticism for sure, scope creep etc. But this video misses the mark.
    You do not spend time polishing a MVP feature, especially when you know other teams are touching systems you will adapt for in the future.

    • @lordfraybin
      @lordfraybin 5 หลายเดือนก่อน

      All your points amount to "tech debt", they can't pay.
      EVERY game loop and mechanic has been discussed "too death" for the past 10 years.
      No joke.
      And CIG will literally present shit like "we just started thinking about salvage & repair" .... As if they "havent" thought about it at all for the past 10 years...
      Then release v1 and prove they hadn't given it a lot of thought over the past decade....

    • @ScottJones243
      @ScottJones243 5 หลายเดือนก่อน

      ​@@lordfraybin Technical debt or technical legacy from an ever growing scope and feature creep is indeed a valid criticism of CIG, there is indeed the aspect of CIG having to regularly re-evaluate a gameplay loop because they have new features / tooling to consider to make the experience consistent. E.G ships requiring more passes and polish due to engineering and other complexities being more thought-out and detailed than originally expected (scope creep). - again very valid criticism.
      This video however (again) does not go into those specifics, instead it talks of development cycles and polish and not really factoring in things that easy account for what CIG is doing and how that results in incomplete / inconsistent MVP / Initial features.
      To further summarise, if this video was about SQ42 after it's release and if that release is is a buggy cyberpunk-type release... then this video could land itself really well in discussing workflows and development cycles that could've given SQ42 better results.
      But right now, it doesn't add value and missing the mark (at least to me).

  • @davidforinash2950
    @davidforinash2950 5 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

    It’s a pre alpha. Server meshing will help a lot and once it’s dynamic, it will become alpha.

    • @piedpiper1172
      @piedpiper1172 5 หลายเดือนก่อน +3

      They can say pre-alpha all they like, but they run “playable now” and “live now” advertisements. They’re using our backer money to run those adds to attract new players. New players whom they immediately offer a monthly sub for otherwise gated gear, cosmetics, and hanger items.
      So, it’s a live service. A live service I dearly love, but they have chosen to make it a live service, so the “pre-alpha” excuse is a bit thin.

    • @rupert456
      @rupert456 5 หลายเดือนก่อน +2

      Server meshing is the new Jesus tech buzz word. When that fails and we realize good old proper Netcoding is what is required and CIG are minimizing server infrastructure costs then we'll wait for the next Icache/ssm//replication layer Jesus tech is going to improve the gameplay experience soon TM.
      Coming to you soon from Cotizencon

    • @mracicot
      @mracicot 5 หลายเดือนก่อน +2

      I disagree. Alpha is exactly what this is. Things overall work about 75% of the time, and they are in a constant adjust and release model…very typical /public/ alpha. The real issue is the length of time known bugs are allowed to persist in the code. Their ‘get 10 votes’ approach to verify a bug before they work on it is understandable to a point. They can’t respond to every bug, but a lower threshold would help players feel like their input matters…provided they actually work on and publicize the player-reported-bug-fixes better. I don’t know their company internals, but I have doubts they have any dedicated bug hunters. If there really are hundreds of devs out of the 1,000+ employees I keep hearing they have, it shouldn’t be a problem to create and run such a bug hunting team to work those lingering issues.

    • @neofromthewarnerbrothersic145
      @neofromthewarnerbrothersic145 5 หลายเดือนก่อน

      @@rupert456 Addressing this because these all of these misconceptions are very common. (TL;DR warning: Brandolini's Law)
      "Jesus tech" is the only buzz word I see here... Server meshing is an actual thing that exists.
      Good old proper netcode and beefy server infrastructure will only take you so far. And it will not be enough to have thousands of players or dozens of star systems.
      For that, we will need all of them. Good netcode, good server infrastructure, and static/dynamic server meshing. If dynamic never works, we can do something with static, but it would be far from ideal. With no server meshing at all, it won't even get past 100 players.
      SC doesn't perform badly because it has "bad netcode" or "cheap servers," but those are the first things everyone points to when they have no clue. And that's fair, it's a natural assumption to make..... (when you don't have a clue.)
      Want to know why SC's performance is rough? Compare it to something like Hell Let Loose. Similar player count (100 players), and a similarly high level of graphics/fidelity, but SC's "map" is... just a little bit bigger? And there are just a few more vehicles with just a bit more detail, POI's, NPC's, and you can see all of it without ever seeing a loading screen...
      Seems obvious when you look at it that way. It's not the infrastructure, it's the load its carrying. Actually the infrastructure must be pretty decent to even hold up at all.
      None of the "buzz words" you listed (icache/PES, static server meshing, replication layer) was supposed to be a "Jesus tech" silver bullet to "improve the gameplay experience." They're all just parts of the machine. They're not even "buzz words" either, they're just... the names of those parts. If you don't care how it all works that's cool, but that doesn't mean they're just buzz words with no meaning.
      Not to mention, there actually have been some pretty major improvements since RL was implemented. 30k's are literally a thing of the past, CTD's are extremely rare. Server errors were common for a bit, but pretty rare now (more common in PTU of course). It's becoming more and more normal to have long, uninterrupted play sessions where the biggest problem you run into is lag/desync. And the lag _is_ pretty bad, can cause a hangar door to eat your ship once in awhile, but it's better than getting a 30k or CTD every 30-90 minutes. Tbh, it seems like it's about ready for some hot, meshy, server on server action.
      But yes, TL;DR, it's possible that dynamic server meshing never works, and the game never gets where it's trying to go. And if that happens, I hope you say "I told you so" and it feels really cool 👍

    • @lordfraybin
      @lordfraybin 5 หลายเดือนก่อน

      ​@@rupert456 You forgot to mention the future jesus tech announcement: "AI meshing tech".
      This is to give us "life like" NPC's in the verse, to interact with. These will require their own dedicated servers, mixed into our glorious meshing soup.

  • @unclevane
    @unclevane 5 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

    Elite Dangerous is better.