Star Citizen devs offer alpha 3.10 postmortem, consider nerfs and ‘power triangle’ tweaks

    
35
Star Citizen devs offer alpha 3.10 postmortem, consider nerfs and ‘power triangle’ tweaks

It appears that 3.10 is truly in the rearview mirror of Star Citizen, but that doesn’t mean that the team at CIG hasn’t learned a thing or two as a result of the features that the update added. For proof of that, we turn to a postmortem shared by the devs that outlines goals for various alpha 3.10 features, explains what worked out, and elaborates on things that need improvement.

The new flight model’s aerodynamics and thruster efficiency curves have overall gone well according to the post, with few changes planned beyond some minor balancing tweaks. Speaking of spaceship things, turret improvements have overall done well, seeing them hit the top of the damage heap versus gimbaled weapons, but a few adjustments are still needed, particularly to the Super Hornet’s remote turret projectile synchronization. Additionally, the devs promise to do more work to improve the visibility of HUD elements like targeting reticles, auto-gimbal displays, and landing zone navigation splines in bright environments.

The post also looked at several planned nerfs to spaceships that choose to enter combat at high speeds, noting that only a couple made it in to 3.10 as the other limitations felt arbitrary and were not communicated by the ship UI. Going forward, the devs will look to the “power triangle” (where players divert power to weapons, engines, or shields) as a source of high speed combat limitations by adding capacitor restrictions to each system.

Finally, the devs look to the ROC mining buggy, outlining the difficulties in making its harvesting laser work, most of which were fixed by 3.10 or with a follow-up patch. The only feature that didn’t make it in time was external access to the ROC’s storage bin, which will become a feature in update 3.11.

No posts to display

35
LEAVE A COMMENT

Please Login to comment
  Subscribe  
newest oldest most liked
Subscribe to:
Reader
Nathan Aldana

You know whats fucking craziest to me.

we’re on version 3.something and its still considered an alpha.

Reader
Bruno Brito

There were 2 alphas before lol

Reader
Nathan Aldana

Like most games dont go to 1.0 until beta ENDS

Reader
Joe Blobers

This is not correct except for open source software.
Software versioning don’t follow such rule: numbering below 1 until Beta ends. Most of the time it is internal version number that can be anything.
Furthermore, SC is playable and always associated with Alpha.

masterblaster0
Reader
masterblaster0

I do a lot with Unix, ie FreeBSD, SmartOS, Omnios and follow a lot of projects where virtually all software versioning follows the 1.0 = release ruleset.

Reader
Joe Blobers

Exactly what I said: “This is not correct except for open source software.”

Reader
Bruno Brito

Getting a postmortem for .xx patches is living proof ot the development limbo this game really is.

Reader
Armsman

How is ongoing development (3.11 is about to launch in a week or so) – and PROVIDING INFO TO BACKERS AN THE PUBLIC on the most recent patch WRT what they feel went well, and went wrong ?

That’s not development limbo – that ‘open development’ <— Something CR promised and is spotty on delivering oftentimes; but your post in response to it just shows the old saying holds true:

“Damned if they do and dammed if they don’t.”

Yes, SC development has a lot of issues; some major ones too; but it’s hardly ‘in limbo’ as they add new features and continue iteration on existing features with each patch and the have a server running the current Tech Demo (no I won’t call it a game yet because it isn’t) 24/7. Hardly ‘in limbo’ or vaporware/scam.

StuartGT
Reader
StuartGT

Hardly ‘in limbo’ or vaporware

SC isn’t, but Squadron 42 is definitely vaporware

Reader
ichi sakari

you don’t know that

you may very well be right, but you don’t really know and may be proven wrong

Squadron 42 - Star Citizen Screenshot 2020.09.09 - 21.14.45.16.png
StuartGT
Reader
StuartGT

Huh? Vaporware is a product which is announced and/or being developed, but never released, nor ever cancelled.

Squadron 42’s release has been delayed for six years already, and looks to be delayed further (roadmap of a roadmap), so is the poster-child for vaporware until CIG actually get around to releasing it.

It’s also in development hell.

Reader
ichi sakari

42 is tied to SC, CIG wants the tech to cross over as well as time the releases for max effect, and as we both know the tech for SC isn’t ready yet

Your logical fallacy is that because 42 hasn’t been released as fast as you think it should its vaporware, and the truth is you really don’t know whether it will never be developed or if its simply still in development

Reader
Bruno Brito

Never said it was a scam. It IS in limbo. No matter how much you spin this.

Damned if they do. Talk. If they delivered something, it wouldn’t be the case.

Reader
Tee Parsley

Folks talk a lot about monetization effecting a game’s design. Say…lockboxes. Star Citizen’s continual broadsides of development propaganda is an integral part of their donation monetization. Especially after so many years, and so many missed deadlines, altered claims, and general ongoing hype.

Reader
Joe Blobers

That’s total non sense. The best incentive to RSI is to deliver as much game as possible so all on the fence never joining either alpha or crowdfunded project do spend $.
If a company make 300M$ with an Alpha with a fraction of the gamer population, delivering is clearly the best way to make way more.

Reader
Tee Parsley

They’ve got the most expensive development ever, funded by marketing and selling dreams. If they deliver a game that has significant problems, they risk Anthem-style fallout risk.

It’s not that Roberts doesn’t want to deliver a great game (or two). It’s just that SC planning is done haphazardly, by whim. If you know much about game development, you understand the problems with trying to shoehorn every single thing into a game abstraction.

Reader
Joe Blobers

False this is not the most expensive. You can ignore the fact publishers spend only 50/60M$ to make a game, spend +100M$ on advertising but also spend hundreds M$ over decades to built their companies, hired thousands of devs or buy others companies to grab tech.
The funding model is the crowdfunded model. Working well for ten thousands of released project. Individual participating to such model are educated enough to understand the concept of pledging to get product released later on.

What you call a game abstraction is played as an alpha by 30K daily and 100K during free events.
You have the right to not support such model like many others not joining either any alpha. Backer are joining because no others games are offering what SC Alpha do provide in its incomplete state.

Reader
Bruno Brito

Don’t bother, man.

Chronic Enigma
Reader
Chronic Enigma

You seriously are talking outta your butt here, as a backer, getting this kind of information is what we are looking for. Clear concise information what was shipped in the patch. The newest patch 3.11 is in testers hands right now, so.. limbo.. naw, just slow as crap trying to make all this technology and fidelity.

Reader
Bruno Brito

I don’t remember asking you what you are looking for.

Reader
budtoker420

The guys can white knight this all they want. “Director Chris Roberts originally launched the Kickstarter campaign for Star Citizen in October 2012, with a $500,000 funding goal and a 2014 release date.”

I’m with you and think limbo is a good way to describe it.

Reader
Armsman

FYI – 2014 was When CR expected the Alpha to start. 2016 was when he expected the game to launch. He was a full year late on the Alpha, and yes, the game still hasn’t launched; but 2016 was also the date prior to the scope expansion.

And yes, the Tech Demo is where it is and it’s taking WAAAAY longer than anyone thought, and yes, it may never make it to launch; but everyone claiming CR said “2014 for the game launch” has been misquoting from day one – 2014 was supposed to be the start of the 24/7 Alpha.

cmdr_cotic
Reader
cmdr_cotic

That just shows the mixed messages from day 1 :)

The kickstarter page has the different tier options down the right side and they say “A copy of the finished game blah blah – expected delivery date 2014”

While the central blurb says alpha starting in 12 months and beta in 20-22 months.

StuartGT
Reader
StuartGT

FYI – 2014 was When CR expected the Alpha to start. 2016 was when he expected the game to launch.

2014 was the first year that Squadron 42 was expected to launch, until it was delayed to 2015 at CitizenCon 2014.

Reader
Nosy Gamer

That’s interesting about the game not even supposed to be entering alpha until 2014. Because on the Kickstarter page, this is what was the description of what $30 backers of the game would receive. Notice that the description states access to both the alpha & beta plus a copy of the finished game with an estimated delivery date of November 2014. The image was captured on October 15, 2015.

Star Citizen Digital Scout.png
Reader
Kickstarter Donor
Greaterdivinity

I’m a pretty big critic but like, this is actually pretty good shit. While they’re rarely “produced” like this one, it’s not uncommon to have internal post-mortems on updates (especially milestones during development) to see what’s working, what’s not, and where to go from there.

Given that this is crowdfunded with additional transparency for backers (and the public), this is actually pretty solid.

There are plenty of other meaningful, and real issues with the development of the game, but something like this ain’t it. 3.9 was what, back in April and 3.8 in Dec 2019? That’s a few sizable milestone patches a year at this rate, which is very reasonable for a slightly more in-depth post-mortem than if they were updating every other month or even quarterly.

Reader
PanagiotisLial1

Yes I am very critical too on many things on SC but they are almost obligated to give such communication on updates since its a crowdfunded game that hasnt yet released. Other than that, there are a lots we can critisize them on, especially after taking so many years and still havent build a basic economy model frame even

Reader
Bruno Brito

Don’t get me wrong, i’m all for communication, but a lot of talking and half-features was the MO for SC for a while now.

Reader
PanagiotisLial1

They have to start working better and ask less(funds) add less(feature creep) than they do, but I believe part of the commitment to kickstarter was giving updates on everything, even on less exciting things. Generally I dont think their odds of success with the probject are too high anymore, because their product will come out in 5 years earliest and may face a landscape where the other games got significantly better just by expansions etc or at least being close. Already for example, ED is planning being able to land on planets and walk inside stations – at first it may not be so polished but by the time SC is even BETA it may be too good already

Reader
Bruno Brito

Which brings me to my main point: This is exactly what development limbo is. Having feature creep on a alpha game that has 8 years on it’s belt is exactly what development limbo is.

Again: I have no problem with communication. I think a lot of companies should do this more. That being said, CIG is past that phase, and this move would surprise me coming from Blizzard, for instance.

CIG talks a lot already.

Reader
Bruno Brito

I feel like SC’s problem isn’t the lack of communication per se, is that their word is worthless when it comes to tangible progress. They delay too much and gave up on ETAs because of it. Having to put Roberts overactive mind in order to launch a product is hurting them.

Reader
ichi sakari

I agree with you, the problem isn’t lack of comms its a lack of credibility, they’ve not delivered on some promises

Altho I still believe in CR and the future of this project – I think it will launch eventually and be considered a quality AAA title – I wish they’d improve the way they communicate, and this effort was actually a step forward

Squadron 42 - Star Citizen Screenshot 2020.09.09 - 21.50.58.69.png
Reader
Bruno Brito

Hey, if this is good for you guys, then i’m happy. Thing is, CR antics have the potential to ripple across the industry. We need more responsability taken, the time for steps forward has loooong past, they should start running.

Reader
Patreon Donor
Loyal Patron
TheDonDude

Ehhh, not sure how a postmortem is in any way proof of that. Seems entirely unrelated?

Besides, there is MUCH better evidence why SC is in dev limbo out there.

Reader
Bruno Brito

It means they have time to talk about a game that has not yet been delivered.

That being said, sure, there are better proofs.