[z64555]

What's with the inconsistent weaver rails, tho? Otherwise looks good.

[headdie]

What's with the inconsistent weaver rails, tho? Otherwise looks good.

Looks like they modeled the full sized carry handle and then scaled the last span by about half to fit before texturing

[Lorric]

Headbob doesn't bother me one iota. It surprises me that it would bother anyone but there you go. If anything I prefer it, it feels much more natural than being like you're some on rails robot, but I care little when you really get down to it.

But it's funny what you think about sometimes. I was sat in the bus station earlier today, and this pigeon had got in and I was watching it wandering around. And I ended up thinking about this thread and imagining what it would be like with pigeon headbob in this game.

[Spoon]

Headbob is ****ing awful, its in the same realm as awful as small fov and it literally makes me sick. I couldn't play half life 2 for more than 2 hours without feeling nausea because of its default ****ty 75 degree fov and headbobbing.
It doesn't add immersion nor does it feel 'natural'.

[Luis Dias]

Gasp. How dare ye. Your heresy will be shown to the Emperator's committee and you'll be shown the true color of our imperial speech code justice. May the prison designers have mercy on you and finish its design before you're too old to leave.

[Phantom Hoover]

I can filter out headbob pretty well but I'm not a ****head so I don't tell people who get sick from it that that's their problem.

[karajorma]

But it's funny what you think about sometimes. I was sat in the bus station earlier today, and this pigeon had got in and I was watching it wandering around. And I ended up thinking about this thread and imagining what it would be like with pigeon headbob in this game.

Ummmmmm. Hate to break this to you, but one of the main theories about why they do that is so as to stabilise their vision. i.e to avoid headbob.

Birds in general have some quite amazing steadying properties. One of the cheapest ways to get a steadycam is to simply mount a small camera on the head of a chicken and give it something fascinating to look at. Seriously.

[Lorric]

@ Karajorma

Very interesting. Thanks.

Headbob is ****ing awful, its in the same realm as awful as small fov and it literally makes me sick. I couldn't play half life 2 for more than 2 hours without feeling nausea because of its default ****ty 75 degree fov and headbobbing.
It doesn't add immersion nor does it feel 'natural'.

I didn't know it could have this effect. And you can play other games which would be more jerky no problem?

This actually makes me think back to a few months ago, I ran into I believe the first game which made me feel sick, Beat Hazard. Also brought on headache iirc. I loved the game, but I'm not able to play it because of all the screen shaking. 5mins on that is enough for the effect to kick in. I tried to tough it out and played the game for several hours but I couldn't get used to it and had to stop and felt wretched for hours after stopping play. I tried a few more times in short bursts hoping it would get easier and I could eventually adapt and break myself in, but it never got any easier. I really wish it was possible to turn off the screen shaking in that game.

I don't understand why headbob would have this effect when there are games with so much more jerkiness to them, but if it bothers people like this, then okay, I suppose it's a bad design decision. I don't know if it works the other way on some people who might be really bothered because there isn't headbob, but unless that's the case then you're just leaving money on the table from people who might like your game but physically can't play it. If you really wanted it in your game, maybe there could be a setting to switch it on or off in the options.

[Spoon]

Gasp. How dare ye. Your heresy will be shown to the Emperator's committee and you'll be shown the true color of our imperial speech code justice. May the prison designers have mercy on you and finish its design before you're too old to leave.

Ack, please no. Mercy!

I can filter out headbob pretty well but I'm not a ****head so I don't tell people who get sick from it that that's their problem.

Good man.

I didn't know it could have this effect. And you can play other games which would be more jerky no problem?

I can play unreal tournament for hours on end without any issues. It's mostly a FoV issue, but headbobbing amplifies it.

[Luis Dias]

Gasp. How dare ye. Your heresy will be shown to the Emperator's committee and you'll be shown the true color of our imperial speech code justice. May the prison designers have mercy on you and finish its design before you're too old to leave.

Ack, please no. Mercy!

And here's the kicker: You'll have to flee the prison with your headbob enabled.

MuhuhahhahahAHAHAH

[Spoon]

You fiend.

[Akalabeth Angel]

Wow nice gun, looks straight out of COD.  Are they using a free unity asset for testing purposes?
Even this gun set 200 years in the future from a 20-year old movie looks more futuristic:



Is the game going to simulate ricochets? I wonder how fun it will be to fire a ton of bullets into a metal hallway or off a bulkhead? Will you get decompression?

[Sushi]

I found this to be a pretty good read:

http://massivelyop.com/2015/10/21/ascents-lead-dev-offers-insight-on-the-star-citizen-controversy/

[Luis Dias]

If the bullets don't ricochet, my immersion is irredeemedly destroyed. And they better ricochet differently according to materials. OR ELSE.

[Grizzly]

But it's funny what you think about sometimes. I was sat in the bus station earlier today, and this pigeon had got in and I was watching it wandering around. And I ended up thinking about this thread and imagining what it would be like with pigeon headbob in this game.

Ummmmmm. Hate to break this to you, but one of the main theories about why they do that is so as to stabilise their vision. i.e to avoid headbob.

Birds in general have some quite amazing steadying properties. One of the cheapest ways to get a steadycam is to simply mount a small camera on the head of a chicken and give it something fascinating to look at. Seriously.

[666maslo666]

I found this to be a pretty good read:

http://massivelyop.com/2015/10/21/ascents-lead-dev-offers-insight-on-the-star-citizen-controversy/

James Hicks is uninformed about SC rendering tech, so take the first part of this blog with a huge grain of salt. Star Citizen is using reversed 32-bit floating point depth buffer, devs have confirmed that already. This allows them to render objects at any range correctly, from centimeters to millions of kilometers, and it does not need any complex camera trickery to do it. More info about reversed depth buffer here:

http://outerra.blogspot.sk/2012/11/maximizing-depth-buffer-range-and.html

You need to be painting a 32bit picture for the GPU, a snapshot based on the larger 64bit picture your game engine has… every frame. If this sounds complex, that’s because it is.

It really is not, it is a simple and elegant solution. What may take long is converting an entire Cryengine to use this system, but not because of any inherent complexity of "camera-relative" rendering, but because it is just a very long task to convert such a huge codebase to use doubles for all positional calculations (which are everywhere in 3d engines) and camera relative positions for the renderer.

[Phantom Hoover]

But it's funny what you think about sometimes. I was sat in the bus station earlier today, and this pigeon had got in and I was watching it wandering around. And I ended up thinking about this thread and imagining what it would be like with pigeon headbob in this game.

Ummmmmm. Hate to break this to you, but one of the main theories about why they do that is so as to stabilise their vision. i.e to avoid headbob.

Birds in general have some quite amazing steadying properties. One of the cheapest ways to get a steadycam is to simply mount a small camera on the head of a chicken and give it something fascinating to look at. Seriously.

[NGTM-1R]

Wow nice gun, looks straight out of COD.

The ergonomics and design of firearms are pretty well settled by now, constrained far more by the basic limiting factors of having to be used by human beings than by the underlying technology. Expecting projectile chemical-reaction firearms to look radically different from what you know is more reflective of a problem with you.

So if you want to make criticism, y'know, find stuff that's not horrendously nitpicky and kind of silly. There's a lot of it, as this thread demonstrates.

[Akalabeth Angel]

Wow nice gun, looks straight out of COD.

The ergonomics and design of firearms are pretty well settled by now, constrained far more by the basic limiting factors of having to be used by human beings than by the underlying technology. Expecting projectile chemical-reaction firearms to look radically different from what you know is more reflective of a problem with you.

So if you want to make criticism, y'know, find stuff that's not horrendously nitpicky and kind of silly. There's a lot of it, as this thread demonstrates.

Feel free to try and peddle whatever **** excuse you have for banal design work but I'm not buying.

If a gun a thousand years in the future doesn't look more futuristic than a P90 PDW there's something wrong.  I see no less than 26 rivets or bolts on that gun.  A Famas has about 5.

It's not about ergonomics its about construction techniques and materials. Why is there a display on the gun? Wouldn't a man in a space suit have a Heads Up Display? Information link from his gun to his suit?  How compact is it? Isn't storage on a spaceship at premium? Wouldn't they make it out of lightweight materials to decrease the fuel required to transport it around? To ease its use in zero G? Is there any kind of recoil compensation? Does it break down/fold up for easy storage? The gun doesn't even have a grip for the off-hand.

Use your brain a little. If you were trying to imagine a gun a thousands years in the future is that the best you could imagine?

[666maslo666]

Feel free to try and peddle whatever **** excuse you have for banal design work but I'm not buying.

If a gun a thousand years in the future doesn't look more futuristic than a P90 PDW there's something wrong.  I see no less than 26 rivets or bolts on that gun.  A Famas has about 5.

It's not about ergonomics its about construction techniques and materials. Why is there a display on the gun? Wouldn't a man in a space suit have a Heads Up Display? Information link from his gun to his suit?  How compact is it? Isn't storage on a spaceship at premium? Wouldn't they make it out of lightweight materials to decrease the fuel required to transport it around? To ease its use in zero G? Is there any kind of recoil compensation? Does it break down/fold up for easy storage? The gun doesn't even have a grip for the off-hand.

Use your brain a little. If you were trying to imagine a gun a thousands years in the future is that the best you could imagine?

You will not have a heads up display available all the time, so display on the gun makes complete sense. If you want to nitpick, then the issue is that it looks like an old LCD alphanumeric type, such technology would probably be long deprecated. We dont know what material is it made of or if it can fold for storage.