Sir Madoc Posted February 19, 2015 Share Posted February 19, 2015 (edited) I don't see how you can compare Naval Action to Star Citizen? Maybe World of Tanks or POTBS would be a more accurate comparison? Star citizen is a true open world game. Naval Action has a separate view for the open world and battles, which are "instanced" with loading screens. Star Citizen battles are fought in the same map as the open world. Naval Actions open world ships become miniatures. The games are based on two entirely different models. Sure NA will be a good game but don't expect to be looking down your telescope spotting an enemy ship and engaging them like in Sea Trials. I assume the telescope will only be usable after you've past the loading screen and are in the battle. And if you don't believe this I am only going off things the admin said. Edited February 19, 2015 by Madoc Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dagann Posted February 19, 2015 Share Posted February 19, 2015 I don't see how you can compare Naval Action to Star Citizen? Maybe World of Tanks or POTBS would be a more accurate comparison? Star citizen is a true open world game. Naval Action has a separate view for the open world and battles, which are "instanced" with loading screens. Star Citizen battles are fought in the same map as the open world. Naval Actions open world ships become miniatures. The games are based on two entirely different models. Sure NA will be a good game but don't expect to be looking down your telescope spotting an enemy ship and engaging them like in Sea Trials. I assume the telescope will only be usable after you've past the loading screen and are in the battle. And if you don't believe this I am only going off things the admin said. SC battles are also instanced. I guess there will be a loading screen since SC battles are limited in numbers of players. If i'm not wrong For the telescope, may be, may be not. We still don't know. Could you provide the admin quote, please ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest raat Posted February 19, 2015 Share Posted February 19, 2015 SC battles are also instanced. I guess there will be a loading screen since SC battles are limited in numbers of players. If i'm not wrong For the telescope, may be, may be not. We still don't know. Could you provide the admin quote, please ? No loading screens and "battles" aren't instanced. Each area of space you fly in is instanced. Basically space will be a grid with each square of that grid being a very large instanced map. Eventually it'll all be procedurally generated, but for now it's mostly handcrafted. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dagann Posted February 19, 2015 Share Posted February 19, 2015 Oh, ok, thnaks for the explanation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
admin Posted February 19, 2015 Share Posted February 19, 2015 I don't see how you can compare Naval Action to Star Citizen? Maybe World of Tanks or POTBS would be a more accurate comparison? Star citizen is a true open world game. Star Citizen battles are fought in the same map as the open world. Naval Actions open world ships become miniatures Sure NA will be a good game but don't expect to be looking down your telescope . never trust developers. Any developers. Maybe gabe is ok.you were misled by clever marketing messaging of other developers. Star citizen is heavily instanced. They hide it behind cruise between systems. Watch their landing video again. Current tech allows you to hide loading of new zone by multiple ways. In space you can do it by hyperdrive visuals. When landing on a planet you hide it during passing through atmosphere. In fact all mmos are instanced to a certain extent. In a sailing game sea is flat you can't hide it by hyperdrive or gates or atmospheric burning. You have to show it as it is! + water tech. Thus we must have seamless open world map. In ED you can see 32 player max, in SC we doubt you can see more. Star citizen instance vertically (onion) eve instances horizontally (sausage). Our tech is different as we have a seamless huge map (that is truly huge) with water with weather with waves towns npc.s and players sailing and it is not instanced. only thing we instance is combat. Because it is too complex to be handled by one world, because unlike eve we are not a clicker. Next thing is unacceptable Maybe World of Tanks or POTBS would be a more accurate comparison Naval Actions open world ships become miniatures don't expect to be looking down your telescope spotting an enemy ship and engaging them like in Sea Trials. I assume the telescope will only be usable after you've past the loading screen and are in the battle. And if you don't believe this I am only going off things the admin said. These are all lies - you made It upWhy are you making this up? And why are you misleading fellow captains ? Also you claim I said so.. I wonder where. Next time think twice before posting misleading information on my behalf and presenting it as fact. 9 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest raat Posted February 19, 2015 Share Posted February 19, 2015 Star Citizen (Chris Roberts) has mentioned 100 players per instance as a goal for development. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AtomicTiger Posted February 19, 2015 Share Posted February 19, 2015 Im on both games, for Star Citizen i already part of a Organisation (german speaking) i pledged way to much, and hope it will be worth it. My luck Naval Action does not have this Pledge system Looking forward to play both of them in future, as it is at the moment i would prefer Naval Action, i love the time it takes place mor than this which Star Citizen is in, but SC got a lot of features.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SirWili Posted February 19, 2015 Share Posted February 19, 2015 Star Citizen (Chris Roberts) has mentioned 100 players per instance as a goal for development. Nice goal. Sadly the timetable in SC seems to be made of rubberbands and goals from soap bubbles. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ivan Posted February 19, 2015 Author Share Posted February 19, 2015 No loading screens and "battles" aren't instanced. Each area of space you fly in is instanced. Basically space will be a grid with each square of that grid being a very large instanced map. Eventually it'll all be procedurally generated, but for now it's mostly handcrafted. Battles are instanced. Otherwise around POI like space stations there would be battles between thousands of players.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OTMatt Posted February 19, 2015 Share Posted February 19, 2015 (edited) Star Citizen (Chris Roberts) has mentioned 100 players per instance as a goal for development. Never promises good framerate I bet Though 48 ships for NA seems very doable, hoping we can hit the 64 mark like in the good ol days of multiplayer games. Edited February 19, 2015 by OTMatt 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest raat Posted February 19, 2015 Share Posted February 19, 2015 Nice goal. Sadly the timetable in SC seems to be made of rubberbands and goals from soap bubbles. Yeah, I don't know that's fair. I mean, the scope of SC is masssssssivvvvve. With more funding, it seems like they've chose to work on everything at once, instead of focusing specific areas. Progress is slow, but there is progress. You can hate if you want, but I think patience is key with that game. Instead of demanding a sub-par game now, I'd rather they take their time to make something incredible. I've seen nothing that suggest the former rather than the latter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SirWili Posted February 19, 2015 Share Posted February 19, 2015 (edited) Yeah, I don't know that's fair. I mean, the scope of SC is masssssssivvvvve. With more funding, it seems like they've chose to work on everything at once, instead of focusing specific areas. Progress is slow, but there is progress. You can hate if you want, but I think patience is key with that game. Instead of demanding a sub-par game now, I'd rather they take their time to make something incredible. I've seen nothing that suggest the former rather than the latter. Why it wouldn't be fair? I was backing them up in crowdfunding, the problem was not the amount of money they collected in the beginning, the real problem was that they didnt stop collecting it. This led to a situation where the plans for the game become huge and frankly a bit megalomaniac. People still listened to the sweet talk and kept on funding them even more so they had to keep promising more, then they got more funding and.... You see the pattern here? Sadly they still keep on doing it. Im afraid that because of the massive intentent content, they wont be able to keep up the high stantards, some sections or subgames, if you prefer the term, will end up unplayed or unbalanced. It will most likely end up being jack of all trades, but master of only graphics. It wont be the next tetris, I lost a lot of my trust for the development after they started to spam new ships on marked before they were even fully modelled, or playable. For time being I have seen them setting mostly goals, working on them slowly, setting new goals, working on them even slower, setting some more goal, postponing their schedule and slowly forgetting their first goals. Edited February 19, 2015 by SirWili Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
admin Posted February 19, 2015 Share Posted February 19, 2015 I am a backer . Love space games x3 eve, freelancer. Lowest tier, and wish them luck. I started getting worried when they announced FPS. Being a developer and having a former technical director from DICE on my team we know that to make a good shooter you need experience and 300 mln dollars. In all other cases they will deliver firefall or defiance or worse. (Colonial marines was outsourced). Another concern is timing. The longer they develop it the higher expectations are. The higher expectations are the more money they get. The more money they get the more features they promise the higher expectations are. And the circle continues. It is beneficial for them to delay for as long as possible because showing game stops the inflow. Promising features is easier and faster than making them. Also when promising they are selling you a perfect feature (as you imagine it in your head just like you wanted it and get an endorphin release). And you bring more cash thinking it will speed up the development. The whole industry wishes them luck, but everyone is worried because if they fail crowdfunding is dead. 6 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Taki1980 Posted February 20, 2015 Share Posted February 20, 2015 I supported SC back on kickstarter... but the simple fact is that I don't have any fun playing the arena commander... And Iam actually not sure why. Maybe because it play more like a first person shooter than a Classics space fighter game like wing commander or x-wing? (And I have no idea how many hours I spent on the old games... ) I have player NA 5-10times more than Arana commander and have fun with it... (and I paid less money for it) I also supported Kingdom Come: Deliverance... (as a medieval archaeologist it was pretty natural to do so) Same here. I backed to get the hornet and i hope it gets a good game. I like that they try to be visionary and stop saying "no, not possible with the current computers" but start thinking over boundaries. But im not hyped. This Game needs more than 2 Years to be released at least. Expectations are to high and it will never reach the standard of the hype it generated by marketing. Sometimes i feel they should have asked the church how to setup a Star Citizen religion. It makes me laugh and sometimes i feel unconfortable when i look the Conventions where the "followers" of that new religion met and praise the Lord. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack Feathersword Posted February 20, 2015 Share Posted February 20, 2015 I can never quite understand just how much money people are throwing at SC. I wonder how many marketing people they have to think up new goals for funding... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChainsawEcosse Posted February 20, 2015 Share Posted February 20, 2015 I am a backer . Love space games x3 eve, freelancer. Lowest tier, and wish them luck. I started getting worried when they announced FPS. Being a developer and having a former technical director from DICE on my team we know that to make a good shooter you need experience and 300 mln dollars. In all other cases they will deliver firefall or defiance or worse. (Colonial marines was outsourced). Another concern is timing. The longer they develop it the higher expectations are. The higher expectations are the more money they get. The more money they get the more features they promise the higher expectations are. And the circle continues. It is beneficial for them to delay for as long as possible because showing game stops the inflow. Promising features is easier and faster than making them. Also when promising they are selling you a perfect feature (as you imagine it in your head just like you wanted it and get an endorphin release). And you bring more cash thinking it will speed up the development. The whole industry wishes them luck, but everyone is worried because if they fail crowdfunding is dead. Also the technology can advance almost as fast as you can develop and they end up releasing a 'dated looking' game Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ivan Posted February 20, 2015 Author Share Posted February 20, 2015 I can never quite understand just how much money people are throwing at SC. I wonder how many marketing people they have to think up new goals for funding... They shut down funding goals months ago. Actually they wanted to shut them down a lot of time ago but they made a community poll and most people voted on funding goals to continue. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kalnaren Posted February 22, 2015 Share Posted February 22, 2015 (edited) I don't get why this thread title is "one or the other". Can't I have all types of ships? Looking forward to SC. If people actually manage to separate their preconceived notions about the game, actually look at what they've said they're going to do, and look at how they've said they're accomplishing it, technologically the game really isn't that far out. The only single component they're going for that's never been done is the local overlayed physics grids, and they've already demonstrated that working. Pretty much everything else is just evolutionary developments on previous methods and technologies. The only other novel thing is combining all the components into a single game. But because it hasn't been done before tons of people seem to think it's impossible. Too bad nobody told CIG that was the case.. because they're well on their way to doing it. Any time I ask people to explain why they think it's impossible the answers pretty much just amount to "Just look at what they're promising! It's never been done before!" as if that means it can't be done. Numerous times I've been told by people that they'll never accomplish some functionality or another that they've had in the game since the first release of the dogfight module. At PAX Chris Roberts said there isn't anything left that they're not sure about how to do. The game is expected to take a while to develop. The average development time for a AAA game is 4 years. SC hasn't even been in full production for two (most of 2013 was spent ramping up the studios.. remember that CIG is a brand new studio that started with 5 people in 2012. There's now over 300 working on the project). 2014 was the first full year of production. And as it sits now they're actually ahead of where they thought they were going to be 4 months ago. Assuming their new schedule holds we're going to be seeing some components in Q2 of this year that we weren't suppose to be seeing until Q4, and some things by Q4 we weren't going to have until Q1 2016. To put it bluntly anyone who claims this project isn't making progress or doesn't have anything to show is willfully ignorant. As for stretch goals.. with one or two exceptions all of them since around 43 million IIRC have been fairly basic things (like some object, hangar flair, or some other little thing). And the two that aren't have been contracted out to separate studios. So again, claims of feature creep are just ignorant. I'm actually rather amazed at the amount of negativity toward Star Citizen from the gaming population in general. Chris Roberts has done something PC gamers have been yelling about for years (big project that listens to gamers, cuts out publisher interference, and pushes the technical envelope) and has gotten a ridiculous and completely disproportionate amount of negativity for it. It doesn't help that there's very little mainstream game media attention that focuses on anything but the $$$. The game is still early alpha and I think a lot of people forget just what that means. Too many AAA games using the "BETA!" tag for nothing more than early access (I remember one of the Battlefield games -3 I think- had 'BETA access' for 2 or 3 weeks before release.. at that point you can guarantee the release version is already delivered to the companies cutting the DVDs). It's expected to be buggy, unbalanced, and have a multitude of severe problems. CIG isn't perfect. They've made some mistakes.. some sad in a funny way (like letting artists design ships that operating in a real physics engine, then wondering why they perform all wonky) and some downright aggravating (like their mouseflight issues). I'm not a fan of their current monetization system, but again, twice CIG has asked the community whether or not to stop funding, and twice the community voted to continue it. Being the first AAA game developed purely through crowd funding, I don't think it's reasonable to expect them to do everything perfectly all the time. They're going to make some mistakes (LTI was one of them, and they admitted as much). But CIG is by FAR the most open and transparent game studio ever to do a project of this size. And even the most popular and active indie studios still don't come close to CIG's level of community involvement. Anyway, just my $0.02 Edited February 22, 2015 by kalnaren 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paxton Brimstone Posted February 22, 2015 Share Posted February 22, 2015 I just wanted to help make it possible for Chris to attempt to make this game. I grew up playing the wing commander games as well as freelancer so I am fanboi. Its ok im cool with that I freely admit I am. Im also a huge Richard Garriott fan from playing many of the Ultima games so ill probably even buy into his game Shroud of the Avatar. But also on a bigger level I like it that if they succeed it also opens hopefully stronger bonds of the players directly to the design studios by way of direct support and perhaps the big publishing houses will give the guys who make our games more respect and latitude in there creative process. Good luck SC and NA I say and tell Blizzard, EA and all the other big guys to stick it where the sun don't shine us the gamers we got your backs. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Draco Silverpath Posted February 22, 2015 Share Posted February 22, 2015 Both of these games look absolutely amazing in their own way and scope for what they plan to offer, it truely baffles and irritates me seeing soo many ignorant people who just look at the $$ sign associated with SC thanks to news outlets and people gawking at it and write it off completely. As several people have posted above me, they have shown great progress on multiple fronts, and are indeed ahead of the schedule now that they mentioned to the community before. This game will take time to get right and to polish, and I'm sure there will be hiccups along the way, but I am confident with the talent they have onboard they will give us something good in the end. I have played far more of NA than I have of SC at this point, but not for lack of interest, as I am purely waiting for the economic models of them both to "eventually" come out, though I don't hold too many hopes of seeing them in the very near future, but am waiting enthusiastically nonetheless Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ivan Posted February 22, 2015 Author Share Posted February 22, 2015 I don't get why this thread title is "one or the other". Can't I have all types of ships? I am not saying people chose one of the two games. I am comparing them because they are bout ships and are sandbox I've pledged for both. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AtomicTiger Posted February 22, 2015 Share Posted February 22, 2015 both games will eat your time you are able to spend gaming, so that maybe is a problem playing both at same time 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sharpe Posted February 23, 2015 Share Posted February 23, 2015 I think I'll stick with Naval Action. I just can't shake the feeling that somehow Star Citizen is overhyped. I've fallen into that kind of trap before. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kalnaren Posted February 24, 2015 Share Posted February 24, 2015 (edited) I think I'll stick with Naval Action. I just can't shake the feeling that somehow Star Citizen is overhyped. I've fallen into that kind of trap before. Look at what the developers have said they're doing, look at what they've actually shown and released, and make your own judgements. 90% of the "information" you'll hear about the game outside of the SC community is ridiculously uninformed. It's actually quite sad considering just how open and transparent CIG is. Edited February 24, 2015 by kalnaren 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Noobdelux Posted February 24, 2015 Share Posted February 24, 2015 Want to play Naval Action, join Stormcloud Armada Want to play Star Citizen, join Stormcloud Armada Easy : ) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts