I've not played in over a week but I'm hearing that its still pretty bugtacular. Worth logging in just to take a look at ArcCorp though, its so damn pretty. Gave me a real "first time in times square" feeling.
0
Options
Sir CarcassI have been shown the end of my worldRound Rock, TXRegistered Userregular
I played a little yesterday. It's the first time I've really even tried the Universe part. I was able to load my ship, take off, fly around a bit, and land. The only bug I saw was when I was looking at my 300i in the Self Land hangar, the wheels kept moving up and down, but otherwise everything seemed okay. I definitely need to watch a guide because I had no idea what I was doing. I'm digging the 300i rework.
0
Options
Just_Bri_ThanksSeething with ragefrom a handbasket.Registered User, ClubPAregular
One of these days they need to fix the hangar so that ships sit on the floor like they are supposed to and aren't on fire.
...and when you are done with that; take a folding
chair to Creation and then suplex the Void.
+2
Options
Sir CarcassI have been shown the end of my worldRound Rock, TXRegistered Userregular
One of these days they need to fix the hangar so that ships sit on the floor like they are supposed to and aren't on fire.
SecureContact(tm) Storage and Automated Fire Suppression are both a standard features in our Premium hangars. Would you like to see a brochure?
ArbitraryDescriptor on
+1
Options
Dusdais ashamed of this postSLC, UTRegistered Userregular
It's worth noting that several of the YouTubers criticizing the new flight model apparently don't know how to read. CIG had the heat system deliberately overtuned for the first, like, twenty patches in the PTU for testing. You know, that thing the Public Test Universe is for.
It's worth noting that several of the YouTubers criticizing the new flight model apparently don't know how to read. CIG had the heat system deliberately overtuned for the first, like, twenty patches in the PTU for testing. You know, that thing the Public Test Universe is for.
Because the way you test a subsystem in a public test environment is to tune it so that using it harshly punishes the player. This way, you ensure that everybody uses it all the time to see if any edge cases cause something to break.
+3
Options
Dusdais ashamed of this postSLC, UTRegistered Userregular
Yea, it’s one of those things in game dev, and another thing that people don’t normally get to see. When you’re playing with a new mechanic you are better off throwing the numbers to extremes and then reigning them in iteratively.
After spending a bit of time in each new patch, I can say the yardsticks are definitely moving forward. I run a pair of 970s in SLI which puts me on the lower end of what can play Star Citizen, and I'm getting between 60-72 avg FPS. My frames only really drop when I visit Lorville down to 45-60 avg fps; I used to get 30-45fps with the same rig. What I'm seeing is a solid foundation being incrementally developed and it is GOOD. The amount of detail being put into the environment alone is amazing.
There are mainly 2 things that are keeping me from logging in every day: a) meaningful game loops, and b) persistence. I know these things are milestones that CIG are tracking, so I'm not worried. This game will probably eat up all my gaming time when it does finally drop so I'm ok with being patient.
Granted, the sources I'm looking at are pretty biased, but I've been hearing that because 3.5 is so new, it's buggier than usual, so that the free fly weekend may have been poorly timed and should have waited for some of the bigger bugs to be squashed. Doesn't seem to matter how much you remind people it's an alpha and major bugs are to be expected. That said, I'm thinking it would have been smarter to wait a bit or something for the free fly.
Granted, the sources I'm looking at are pretty biased, but I've been hearing that because 3.5 is so new, it's buggier than usual, so that the free fly weekend may have been poorly timed and should have waited for some of the bigger bugs to be squashed. Doesn't seem to matter how much you remind people it's an alpha and major bugs are to be expected. That said, I'm thinking it would have been smarter to wait a bit or something for the free fly.
Yeah, I was just watching a video from a guy playing a 3.4 build who was experiencing a ton of bugs. Most of which I've never seen or even knew existed. In that particular case, it was because he had the game installed on a platter drive. I wonder how many people are going to miss the memo that installing the game on an SSD can resolve a whole slew of bugs/issues.
| Origin/R*SC: Ein7919 | Battle.net: Erlkonig#1448 | XBL: Lexicanum | Steam: Der Erlkönig (the umlaut is important) |
Granted, the sources I'm looking at are pretty biased, but I've been hearing that because 3.5 is so new, it's buggier than usual, so that the free fly weekend may have been poorly timed and should have waited for some of the bigger bugs to be squashed. Doesn't seem to matter how much you remind people it's an alpha and major bugs are to be expected. That said, I'm thinking it would have been smarter to wait a bit or something for the free fly.
Yeah, I was just watching a video from a guy playing a 3.4 build who was experiencing a ton of bugs. Most of which I've never seen or even knew existed. In that particular case, it was because he had the game installed on a platter drive. I wonder how many people are going to miss the memo that installing the game on an SSD can resolve a whole slew of bugs/issues.
Yeah. I keep wondering how many people will get burned by the whole "must have a 64 bit OS" thing. I know it's not completely a new concept for gaming. But I wonder how many people will brought over to the PC Master Race for Star Citizen and otherwise don't have any idea of what the difference is.
Granted, the sources I'm looking at are pretty biased, but I've been hearing that because 3.5 is so new, it's buggier than usual, so that the free fly weekend may have been poorly timed and should have waited for some of the bigger bugs to be squashed. Doesn't seem to matter how much you remind people it's an alpha and major bugs are to be expected. That said, I'm thinking it would have been smarter to wait a bit or something for the free fly.
Yeah, I was just watching a video from a guy playing a 3.4 build who was experiencing a ton of bugs. Most of which I've never seen or even knew existed. In that particular case, it was because he had the game installed on a platter drive. I wonder how many people are going to miss the memo that installing the game on an SSD can resolve a whole slew of bugs/issues.
Yeah. I keep wondering how many people will get burned by the whole "must have a 64 bit OS" thing. I know it's not completely a new concept for gaming. But I wonder how many people will brought over to the PC Master Race for Star Citizen and otherwise don't have any idea of what the difference is.
?
nobody. nobody from a statistics perspective at least will get burned (ya sure a couple people might have a weird 32bit OS version of windows 7 installed or something). It is basically impossible to buy a computer that doesn't have 64bit windows these days (for at least a good 5 years now), and literally all processors are 64 bit now. You might get somebody with a 7 year old computer who did some upgrades on their own or something.
Conversely, MANY people will get burned by somehow needing a SSD to run the game properly. That is insane and I can't imagine will be a real requirement if the game ever comes out.
Granted, the sources I'm looking at are pretty biased, but I've been hearing that because 3.5 is so new, it's buggier than usual, so that the free fly weekend may have been poorly timed and should have waited for some of the bigger bugs to be squashed. Doesn't seem to matter how much you remind people it's an alpha and major bugs are to be expected. That said, I'm thinking it would have been smarter to wait a bit or something for the free fly.
Yeah, I was just watching a video from a guy playing a 3.4 build who was experiencing a ton of bugs. Most of which I've never seen or even knew existed. In that particular case, it was because he had the game installed on a platter drive. I wonder how many people are going to miss the memo that installing the game on an SSD can resolve a whole slew of bugs/issues.
Yeah. I keep wondering how many people will get burned by the whole "must have a 64 bit OS" thing. I know it's not completely a new concept for gaming. But I wonder how many people will brought over to the PC Master Race for Star Citizen and otherwise don't have any idea of what the difference is.
?
nobody. nobody from a statistics perspective at least will get burned (ya sure a couple people might have a weird 32bit OS version of windows 7 installed or something). It is basically impossible to buy a computer that doesn't have 64bit windows these days (for at least a good 5 years now), and literally all processors are 64 bit now. You might get somebody with a 7 year old computer who did some upgrades on their own or something.
Conversely, MANY people will get burned by somehow needing a SSD to run the game properly. That is insane and I can't imagine will be a real requirement if the game ever comes out.
I never claimed it would be a large number. And no, my computer is 5 years old and it was still very much a question as to what to get 32 vs 64 bit back then unless you were in IT or an enthusiast. And while yes, 64 bit processors have been around very very long time. MS has done shit to try and get people on 64 bit OS since they still offer 32. I'm simply wondering how many will get hit regardless of its statistical significance. Is that OK with you?
Frankly why isn't a requirement for an SSD fine, in this the year 2019? SSD prices have plummeted since quad level cells became available.
Not even for 2019, for 2020(-2025) when SC is coming out
SSDs have been viable for PCs for at least 10 years now, and their costs are currently such that it would basically be dumb to not get an SSD instead of antiquated platter drives.
Considering that pushing hardware limits was a design goal from the start, it's not in any way unreasonable for the game to require an SSD. Getting an SSD that could easily hold the game with plenty of extra room wouldn't even cost fifty bucks.
That's not burning PC users, that's expecting people to meet the minimum requirements of changes to PC tech.
+3
Options
HardtargetThere Are Four LightsVancouverRegistered Userregular
edited May 2019
joe dell is not getting a SSD in their system
they are however getting a 64bit system and have been for more than 5 years
daveNYCWhy universe hate Waspinator?Registered Userregular
I think both things will bite people in the ass because they're not items that we're used to seeing as spec requirements for games. CPU, GPU, RAM, free HD space are basically the check boxes people are used to. Type of hard drive and the nitty gritty of whether it's a 32 or 64 bit OS are things that are going to catch people by surprise.
Shut up, Mr. Burton! You were not brought upon this world to get it!
There have been numerous games that have required a 64bit version of Windows to run, that isn't anything new. Even if Star Citizen ran on a 32bit OS it would be a slideshow if it could only address 4GB of memory so it's pretty moot.
Anyone who is serious about PC gaming has an SSD. If you don't have one, or don't have one large enough, than I could see it being a hidden cost, but a 120GB SSD is literally $20 with free shipping on Newegg right now, let alone however cheap they'll be when the game launches in the future.
There have been numerous games that have required a 64bit version of Windows to run, that isn't anything new. Even if Star Citizen ran on a 32bit OS it would be a slideshow if it could only address 4GB of memory so it's pretty moot.
Anyone who is serious about PC gaming has an SSD. If you don't have one, or don't have one large enough, than I could see it being a hidden cost, but a 120GB SSD is literally $20 with free shipping on Newegg right now, let alone however cheap they'll be when the game launches in the future.
That's kinda the point. There is a lot of elitism in gaming. Not everyone is serious about PC gaming, yet wants to play anyway. Lot of people out there think all you need is a good video card.
AxenMy avatar is Excalibur.Yes, the sword.Registered Userregular
Even FFXIV is dropping 32bit support this summer. If a sub based MMO thinks it's fine to drop 32bit then I think the Star Citizen community will likely be fine.
A Capellan's favorite sheath for any blade is your back.
Yeesh, that is super not true. Tons of people out there play and love computer games on their Dell or hp machine that didn't come with a ssd, have no idea what a ssd is, and have never once opened their PC case.
Hardtarget on
+3
Options
daveNYCWhy universe hate Waspinator?Registered Userregular
There have been numerous games that have required a 64bit version of Windows to run, that isn't anything new. Even if Star Citizen ran on a 32bit OS it would be a slideshow if it could only address 4GB of memory so it's pretty moot.
Anyone who is serious about PC gaming has an SSD. If you don't have one, or don't have one large enough, than I could see it being a hidden cost, but a 120GB SSD is literally $20 with free shipping on Newegg right now, let alone however cheap they'll be when the game launches in the future.
That's kinda the point. There is a lot of elitism in gaming. Not everyone is serious about PC gaming, yet wants to play anyway. Lot of people out there think all you need is a good video card.
It also injects the word 'serious' with a lot of goosery. Like at what level of gaming hardware are you no longer considered a serious gamer? Do only the opinions of serious gamers count for things like hardware requirements?
Shut up, Mr. Burton! You were not brought upon this world to get it!
I have 2 ssds. One for windows, another for games that exist. I can't just buy another SSD for a single game that might be released in the next 3 to 5 years. SSDs are expensive, over here.
I mean, where do we draw the line between reasonable factors and making excuses for CIG?
Counterpoint is how much cheaper are SSDs going to be in another 3-5 years? You can already get a 1TB NVME SSD for ~100 US if you look for a sale. Five, even three years ago, that would have been, what, quadruple that?
I understand things are more expensive overseas but there will come a point where for the same amount of $ you already spent on your two (sounds like smaller) SSDs, you'll be able to get a newer, significantly faster and larger one for the same price. And then just put everything on it.
Just_Bri_ThanksSeething with ragefrom a handbasket.Registered User, ClubPAregular
Game companies like square also design to the specs that their surveys tell them that their customers can play on. If S-E is dropping 32bit then they have documentation that says a signifigant portion of their playets won't be impacted.
...and when you are done with that; take a folding
chair to Creation and then suplex the Void.
The game is "only" 47 GB so far, right? That's less than I expected, but probably reflects more on the embryonic state of the game than any good storage management. Also, it's still huge by not-so-long-ago standards.
That being said, if that doubled, or tripled, as can happen with "living" big budget titles that occupy an online space (look at how World of Warcraft's installation size grew, for what is a technologically modest game), requiring it be installed on an SSD could be problematic. I own two SSDs, one of them a Samsung 850 Pro (mid-range), both in the 512 GB range. Unlike my mechanical drive, storage is something I have to actively put some thought into. An economy SSD at 120 GB could be entirely occupied by Star Citizen (or even be too little in terms of actual versus advertised space), and while "only" $20, does require a free SATA slot. Already having 4 drives and an blu ray drive, I'm not going to be buying any more drives, and it should be pretty obvious how Star Citizen having a "no limits" view of real estate, if the developers do, could combine with "SSDs only" to be a serious issue.
0
Options
HardtargetThere Are Four LightsVancouverRegistered Userregular
I always figured the biggest thing for SSD was not so much the size of the game but how the information is loaded/swapped and the resolution the game is set at?
I figure if you play at 4k, due to the size of the textures being loaded off the drive you would need an SSD?
I guess I could test what the hard drive throughout is at for 1080 vs 4k
Dixon on
0
Options
Sir CarcassI have been shown the end of my worldRound Rock, TXRegistered Userregular
I have 2 ssds. One for windows, another for games that exist. I can't just buy another SSD for a single game that might be released in the next 3 to 5 years. SSDs are expensive, over here.
I mean, where do we draw the line between reasonable factors and making excuses for CIG?
Why would you need another one? I only have 1 256GB SSD for Windows and a couple of games I swap in and out, and the game is sitting comfortably on it at the moment.
See, that's what I mean. I got WoW, GTAV and CivVI on my ssd, those games don't get swapped.
And it's 47 gigs with something like 5% of the promised content...
Most of the gigs right now are likely materials libraries and partially completed geometry for assets. The materials libraries can be shared and the asset geometry with either become complete or depreciated and removed from future builds. Basing your conclusions about how big the finished product is going to be based off what the game is like now is about as accurate as throwing a dart at a board.
We all can agree it is likely to be quite big, but it's current state is not an useful base for your calculations.
...and when you are done with that; take a folding
chair to Creation and then suplex the Void.
See, that's what I mean. I got WoW, GTAV and CivVI on my ssd, those games don't get swapped.
And it's 47 gigs with something like 5% of the promised content...
Which has little to nothing to do with the size of the final game.
Also you're complaining about the game being 47GB and how could anyone put that on an SSD when you have, of all things, World of Warcraft on your SSD which is nearly twice the size.
C'mon, Stormwatcher I know you take a bizarre joy in complaining about this game but this is just getting sad.
Yeesh, that is super not true. Tons of people out there play and love computer games on their Dell or hp machine that didn't come with a ssd, have no idea what a ssd is, and have never once opened their PC case.
I don't believe that these people own the target hardware for a game that has, since its inception, been designed to "push the limits of PC gaming".
If someone isn't on the cutting edge that's fine, but complaining about how a AAA game from a developer who literally will not shut up about "fidelity" probably won't run that well on your prebuilt Dell budgetbox doesn't really make a lot of sense. One of the downsides of PC gaming is that every 5-10 years or so you have to spend a few bucks to buy some new technology for a new game - remember when people had to buy CD-ROM drives to get the best experience in the newest games? 3D accelerators? DVD-ROM drives? Widescreen monitors? People made the same complaints every time.
Posts
chair to Creation and then suplex the Void.
Oh yeah, that was the other thing, the sparks. I wasn't sure if my ship was damaged or if it was a bug.
SecureContact(tm) Storage and Automated Fire Suppression are both a standard features in our Premium hangars. Would you like to see a brochure?
Because the way you test a subsystem in a public test environment is to tune it so that using it harshly punishes the player. This way, you ensure that everybody uses it all the time to see if any edge cases cause something to break.
There are mainly 2 things that are keeping me from logging in every day: a) meaningful game loops, and b) persistence. I know these things are milestones that CIG are tracking, so I'm not worried. This game will probably eat up all my gaming time when it does finally drop so I'm ok with being patient.
The folder I installed it to is currently at 47.7GB
Enlist in Star Citizen! Citizenship must be earned!
Yeah, I was just watching a video from a guy playing a 3.4 build who was experiencing a ton of bugs. Most of which I've never seen or even knew existed. In that particular case, it was because he had the game installed on a platter drive. I wonder how many people are going to miss the memo that installing the game on an SSD can resolve a whole slew of bugs/issues.
Unreal Engine 4 Developers Community.
I'm working on a cute little video game! Here's a link for you.
Yeah. I keep wondering how many people will get burned by the whole "must have a 64 bit OS" thing. I know it's not completely a new concept for gaming. But I wonder how many people will brought over to the PC Master Race for Star Citizen and otherwise don't have any idea of what the difference is.
Enlist in Star Citizen! Citizenship must be earned!
?
nobody. nobody from a statistics perspective at least will get burned (ya sure a couple people might have a weird 32bit OS version of windows 7 installed or something). It is basically impossible to buy a computer that doesn't have 64bit windows these days (for at least a good 5 years now), and literally all processors are 64 bit now. You might get somebody with a 7 year old computer who did some upgrades on their own or something.
Conversely, MANY people will get burned by somehow needing a SSD to run the game properly. That is insane and I can't imagine will be a real requirement if the game ever comes out.
I never claimed it would be a large number. And no, my computer is 5 years old and it was still very much a question as to what to get 32 vs 64 bit back then unless you were in IT or an enthusiast. And while yes, 64 bit processors have been around very very long time. MS has done shit to try and get people on 64 bit OS since they still offer 32. I'm simply wondering how many will get hit regardless of its statistical significance. Is that OK with you?
Enlist in Star Citizen! Citizenship must be earned!
Not even for 2019, for 2020(-2025) when SC is coming out
Inquisitor77: Rius, you are Sisyphus and melee Wizard is your boulder
Tube: This must be what it felt like to be an Iraqi when Saddam was killed
Bookish Stickers - Mrs. Rius' Etsy shop with bumper stickers and vinyl decals.
SSDs have been viable for PCs for at least 10 years now, and their costs are currently such that it would basically be dumb to not get an SSD instead of antiquated platter drives.
Considering that pushing hardware limits was a design goal from the start, it's not in any way unreasonable for the game to require an SSD. Getting an SSD that could easily hold the game with plenty of extra room wouldn't even cost fifty bucks.
That's not burning PC users, that's expecting people to meet the minimum requirements of changes to PC tech.
they are however getting a 64bit system and have been for more than 5 years
edit - also @VoodooV ya it's fine with me, i dunno why you'd think it wasn't
edit 2 - a SSD isn't actually a requirement, CIG states it's "strongly recommended" though, which is interesting. https://support.robertsspaceindustries.com/hc/en-us/articles/360000758928-Game-and-Launcher-Requirements
Anyone who is serious about PC gaming has an SSD. If you don't have one, or don't have one large enough, than I could see it being a hidden cost, but a 120GB SSD is literally $20 with free shipping on Newegg right now, let alone however cheap they'll be when the game launches in the future.
That's kinda the point. There is a lot of elitism in gaming. Not everyone is serious about PC gaming, yet wants to play anyway. Lot of people out there think all you need is a good video card.
Enlist in Star Citizen! Citizenship must be earned!
It also injects the word 'serious' with a lot of goosery. Like at what level of gaming hardware are you no longer considered a serious gamer? Do only the opinions of serious gamers count for things like hardware requirements?
I mean, where do we draw the line between reasonable factors and making excuses for CIG?
I understand things are more expensive overseas but there will come a point where for the same amount of $ you already spent on your two (sounds like smaller) SSDs, you'll be able to get a newer, significantly faster and larger one for the same price. And then just put everything on it.
Inquisitor77: Rius, you are Sisyphus and melee Wizard is your boulder
Tube: This must be what it felt like to be an Iraqi when Saddam was killed
Bookish Stickers - Mrs. Rius' Etsy shop with bumper stickers and vinyl decals.
chair to Creation and then suplex the Void.
That being said, if that doubled, or tripled, as can happen with "living" big budget titles that occupy an online space (look at how World of Warcraft's installation size grew, for what is a technologically modest game), requiring it be installed on an SSD could be problematic. I own two SSDs, one of them a Samsung 850 Pro (mid-range), both in the 512 GB range. Unlike my mechanical drive, storage is something I have to actively put some thought into. An economy SSD at 120 GB could be entirely occupied by Star Citizen (or even be too little in terms of actual versus advertised space), and while "only" $20, does require a free SATA slot. Already having 4 drives and an blu ray drive, I'm not going to be buying any more drives, and it should be pretty obvious how Star Citizen having a "no limits" view of real estate, if the developers do, could combine with "SSDs only" to be a serious issue.
I figure if you play at 4k, due to the size of the textures being loaded off the drive you would need an SSD?
I guess I could test what the hard drive throughout is at for 1080 vs 4k
Why would you need another one? I only have 1 256GB SSD for Windows and a couple of games I swap in and out, and the game is sitting comfortably on it at the moment.
And it's 47 gigs with something like 5% of the promised content...
Most of the gigs right now are likely materials libraries and partially completed geometry for assets. The materials libraries can be shared and the asset geometry with either become complete or depreciated and removed from future builds. Basing your conclusions about how big the finished product is going to be based off what the game is like now is about as accurate as throwing a dart at a board.
We all can agree it is likely to be quite big, but it's current state is not an useful base for your calculations.
chair to Creation and then suplex the Void.
Which has little to nothing to do with the size of the final game.
Also you're complaining about the game being 47GB and how could anyone put that on an SSD when you have, of all things, World of Warcraft on your SSD which is nearly twice the size.
C'mon, Stormwatcher I know you take a bizarre joy in complaining about this game but this is just getting sad.
I don't believe that these people own the target hardware for a game that has, since its inception, been designed to "push the limits of PC gaming".
If someone isn't on the cutting edge that's fine, but complaining about how a AAA game from a developer who literally will not shut up about "fidelity" probably won't run that well on your prebuilt Dell budgetbox doesn't really make a lot of sense. One of the downsides of PC gaming is that every 5-10 years or so you have to spend a few bucks to buy some new technology for a new game - remember when people had to buy CD-ROM drives to get the best experience in the newest games? 3D accelerators? DVD-ROM drives? Widescreen monitors? People made the same complaints every time.