If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Joystiq)   For those of you who haven't heard about this Star Citizen thing, today is a good morning to sit down, review your future ship, and throw some money at the screen   (joystiq.com) divider line 67
    More: PSA, Star Citizen, angel investors, Joystiq, Wing Commander, space fighter, loading  
•       •       •

5853 clicks; posted to Geek » on 30 Jun 2013 at 11:00 AM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



67 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread
 
2013-06-30 11:06:03 AM  
Already got my Star Citizen card.

i1212.photobucket.com
 
2013-06-30 11:13:29 AM  

RexTalionis: Already got my Star Citizen card.

[i1212.photobucket.com image 600x393]


I really wanted one :( but I had to wait to pledge.
 
2013-06-30 11:14:25 AM  
I went with the green one because I wanted to have a "green card."  That and I didn't want to dish out more than $60.
 
2013-06-30 11:26:28 AM  

ramblinwreck: I went with the green one because I wanted to have a "green card."  That and I didn't want to dish out more than $60.


Same here.  The perks in the upper tiers were neat, but not realistically worth the cost.
 
2013-06-30 11:27:42 AM  
I'm leery of getting on board, every time I read an interview with the designer his "vision" of what the game requires jumps by like $5 million. Now he needs 12 million just to get a working alpha game with a minecraft release, with more $$$ to release two additional versions?

That seems like money isn't being well spent, like he needs a CFO the way GRRMartin needs an editor.
 
2013-06-30 11:39:21 AM  

deadsanta: I'm leery of getting on board, every time I read an interview with the designer his "vision" of what the game requires jumps by like $5 million. Now he needs 12 million just to get a working alpha game with a minecraft release, with more $$$ to release two additional versions?

That seems like money isn't being well spent, like he needs a CFO the way GRRMartin needs an editor.


I was starting to notice that as well.
 
2013-06-30 11:42:01 AM  
s.uvlist.net
 
2013-06-30 11:42:42 AM  

deadsanta: I'm leery of getting on board, every time I read an interview with the designer his "vision" of what the game requires jumps by like $5 million. Now he needs 12 million just to get a working alpha game with a minecraft release, with more $$$ to release two additional versions?

That seems like money isn't being well spent, like he needs a CFO the way GRRMartin needs an editor.


Maybe he needs an experienced publisher, someone like EA or Activision.  I'm sure that would help the process alot and give a lot of fence sitters some comfort in knowing such stalwart hands held the coin purse.

/I could barely type that
 
2013-06-30 11:59:41 AM  
Can't wait to see a release version of Star Citizen.  I'm getting the itch to play Privateer again.
 
2013-06-30 12:06:00 PM  

State_College_Arsonist: Can't wait to see a release version of Star Citizen.  I'm getting the itch to play Privateer again.


I reinstalled Freelancer.
 
2013-06-30 12:06:30 PM  
Already paid in and waiting.
 
2013-06-30 12:21:08 PM  

BumpInTheNight: deadsanta: I'm leery of getting on board, every time I read an interview with the designer his "vision" of what the game requires jumps by like $5 million. Now he needs 12 million just to get a working alpha game with a minecraft release, with more $$$ to release two additional versions?

That seems like money isn't being well spent, like he needs a CFO the way GRRMartin needs an editor.

Maybe he needs an experienced publisher, someone like EA or Activision.  I'm sure that would help the process alot and give a lot of fence sitters some comfort in knowing such stalwart hands held the coin purse.

/I could barely type that


LoL ok point there, but origin was a great company that released completed games, I think he just needs more of a sounding board of experienced collaborators than just his own ego. Like a core group of 4-6 folks who share a vision like, maybe, the original ELectronic Arts of the 1980's.
 
2013-06-30 12:21:26 PM  
For me: No game, no money.

You are purchasing on faith. Remember 1998?

art.penny-arcade.com
 
2013-06-30 12:39:46 PM  
Anyone else considering getting a Starfarer?

I already have a Connie and a 315p.
 
2013-06-30 12:47:25 PM  
Cupping your ear over the neighbor's wall works just fine.

/Wut?
 
2013-06-30 01:02:46 PM  

Skunkwolf: For me: No game, no money.

You are purchasing on faith. Remember 1998?

[art.penny-arcade.com image 800x321]



Except we have seen a working demo. John didn't have shiatl
 
2013-06-30 01:27:56 PM  
I'm leery about this game.  For as cool as it looks, it also looks like the piloting could be too realistic and complicated.

Star Conflict is f2p on steam now, but I found the handling too clunky and too few features.(match play like CoD, to include domination matches).

/want another space mmo like Black Prophecy, even though they butchered space flight it was fun
 
2013-06-30 01:34:31 PM  
So is this like EVE with more of a first person combat focus?  That could be pretty cool.
 
2013-06-30 01:38:44 PM  

ramblinwreck: I went with the green one because I wanted to have a "green card."  That and I didn't want to dish out more than $60.


That's me as well
 
2013-06-30 01:45:11 PM  

TuteTibiImperes: So is this like EVE with more of a first person combat focus?  That could be pretty cool.


I think the only thing that is similar between this game and EVE is that they both take place primarily in space.

It will be very cool though.
 
2013-06-30 02:00:01 PM  

JohnnyC: TuteTibiImperes: So is this like EVE with more of a first person combat focus?  That could be pretty cool.

I think the only thing that is similar between this game and EVE is that they both take place primarily in space.

It will be very cool though.


Eve would have had me if you would have actually controlled the ship in a pilot-like fashion.   I'd have played despite the horrible implant loss(or alternatively the horrible clone system that would slow learning) and destruction of valuable ships and modules and the tacky seniority based learning system which guaranteed you'd never catch up to people who started first.

Well, control and not having missiles and guns not fire through the scenery, and the hotlist of every structure and player in the zone.... things like that.
 
2013-06-30 02:08:04 PM  

ThatBillmanGuy: deadsanta: I'm leery of getting on board, every time I read an interview with the designer his "vision" of what the game requires jumps by like $5 million. Now he needs 12 million just to get a working alpha game with a minecraft release, with more $$$ to release two additional versions?

That seems like money isn't being well spent, like he needs a CFO the way GRRMartin needs an editor.

I was starting to notice that as well.


When they released the new stuff for the 300i ship I thought it was cool, but then I saw that it was starting at $65 for the basic model to  add the ship to an existing pledge.  The heck?  You want the price of a full game to add a ship that is not timed or exclusive (can be bought for in-game credits), that's crazy.

It's like that Steam game, Planetary Annihilation, where $90 gets you Early Access to the alpha/beta.  Normally you get a discount for an unfinished product.
 
2013-06-30 02:22:58 PM  

deadsanta: I'm leery of getting on board, every time I read an interview with the designer his "vision" of what the game requires jumps by like $5 million. Now he needs 12 million just to get a working alpha game with a minecraft release, with more $$$ to release two additional versions?

That seems like money isn't being well spent, like he needs a CFO the way GRRMartin needs an editor.


Actually, on the initial Star Citizen website, he made two numbers available. The first one was $2 million, which is what the team felt they needed to realistically prove demand for this type of game, and secure additional investment from backers they'd already spoken with.

The actual cost to make the game he wanted to make was upwards of $10 million. I think his new number of $22 million came about because the fan response exceeded his expectations, and has him thinking about all the things he could add that he didn't think he'd have the money to implement.

I'm not entirely sure what this alpha/minecraft model thing is about. I suspect he's shooting for the moon, and wants to make sure he finishes what he's started.

/already in for a 300i
//will probably need to upgrade my gaming rig when this comes out
 
2013-06-30 02:41:32 PM  

Cytokine Storm: ThatBillmanGuy: deadsanta: I'm leery of getting on board, every time I read an interview with the designer his "vision" of what the game requires jumps by like $5 million. Now he needs 12 million just to get a working alpha game with a minecraft release, with more $$$ to release two additional versions?

That seems like money isn't being well spent, like he needs a CFO the way GRRMartin needs an editor.

I was starting to notice that as well.

When they released the new stuff for the 300i ship I thought it was cool, but then I saw that it was starting at $65 for the basic model to  add the ship to an existing pledge.  The heck?   You want the price of a full game to add a ship that is not timed or exclusive (can be bought for in-game credits), that's crazy.

It's like that Steam game, Planetary Annihilation, where $90 gets you Early Access to the alpha/beta.  Normally you get a discount for an unfinished product.


It's called fundraising. Like you say, the ship can be bought for in-game credits.

So there's no real advantage to buying now with real money, unless you want to offer support to the project. (or if lifetime insurance is still a thing... it may not be, I haven't been keeping up that closely with it)

During the original funding run, you could add any ship to your pledge for a set fee, some of which were over $100. Did I go for it? No, I wasn't interested. But at the same time, I'm sure as hell not going to tell them they can't offer that up in exchange for funding capital.
 
2013-06-30 02:56:25 PM  
*sigh* when does the closed alpha test for this thing start? I pledged months ago to the most basic level that'd let me get into that, and I've heard nary a peep about the actual release schedule, just more marketing stuff about ships.

I'm praying this doesn't turn into another MechWarrior Online-type situation where they have a brilliant design in beta and then progressively ruin the shiat out of it before release day.
 
2013-06-30 03:11:49 PM  

State_College_Arsonist: Can't wait to see a release version of Star Citizen.  I'm getting the itch to play Privateer again.


I've been thinking of getting that from GOG.

How does it stack up against Elite?  (Which I played on an Atari ST and loved it)
 
2013-06-30 03:16:47 PM  

Cthulhu_is_my_homeboy: *sigh* when does the closed alpha test for this thing start? I pledged months ago to the most basic level that'd let me get into that, and I've heard nary a peep about the actual release schedule, just more marketing stuff about ships.

I'm praying this doesn't turn into another MechWarrior Online-type situation where they have a brilliant design in beta and then progressively ruin the shiat out of it before release day.


Interactive hangar coming in August, actual flight/combat testing scheduled for December.
http://www.joystiq.com/2013/03/29/star-citizen-adding-modules-up-to- 20 14-beta-launch-hangar-modu/
 
2013-06-30 03:22:15 PM  
*rtfa*

*shutupandtakemymoney.jpg*
 
2013-06-30 03:25:10 PM  

Cthulhu_is_my_homeboy: *sigh* when does the closed alpha test for this thing start? I pledged months ago to the most basic level that'd let me get into that, and I've heard nary a peep about the actual release schedule, just more marketing stuff about ships.

I'm praying this doesn't turn into another MechWarrior Online-type situation where they have a brilliant design in beta and then progressively ruin the shiat out of it before release day.


Then you haven't been watching the website.
Dogfighting alpha is this winter, The Squadron 42 single player missions are due next summer, and the fullscale persistent galaxy is due winter 2014 or early 2015.


deadsanta: I'm leery of getting on board, every time I read an interview with the designer his "vision" of what the game requires jumps by like $5 million. Now he needs 12 million just to get a working alpha game with a minecraft release, with more $$$ to release two additional versions?

That seems like money isn't being well spent, like he needs a CFO the way GRRMartin needs an editor.


The additional versions were always coming, just not at release due to funding/investors. Originally there was a group of investors that were willing to fund the game, as long as Chris Roberts (of wing commander, privateer, and freelancer fame) was able to show that there was a demand still for this kind of space sim. That's why the original goal was 2mil. The investors would provide the rest, and the game would be made with a traditional publishing model. Since they broke 2 mil in like the first week, it REALLY proved the demand, so Roberts said "well, if we can raise more, we won't need to go to a publisher" (ie, no rushed out the door product to meet deadlines). so they set stretch goals.... and smashed them all. He's able to put more features into the game at release by hiring more designers, programmers, etc.

So now, there are NO investors, the entire game is going to be community funded, as well as self published. So, nobody in a suit is going to dictate any terms on how or when the game is being made.

As far as Roberts goes, the guy is a gaming Legend. He worked on all the wing commander games, strike commander, starlancer, freelancer, privateer. And he used to work for Origin Systems which published the Wing Commander as well as the Ulitma series. Once Origin got bought out, he left and created Digital Anvil and made some great games there. He eventually sold Digital Anvil to Microsoft, who promptly took a shiat on it.
Roberts then went to make movies for awhile (the punisher, lord of war, outlander), but said he'd come back to gaming when the tech was far enough along that he could make a game he really wanted to play.
So now we're at that level. And he's back.
This is a guy who really knows the gaming business, inside and out. He's been a dev as well as a publisher. So don't you worry about his ability to deliver.

If you don't want to buy any ships, you're not required to. It's just for those people that want to contribute to the game, and start of with a ship they don't have to work their way up to. Saves time that way, and on day 1, not everyone will be in the n00b ship.

/got my bounty hunter card, comes with the 300i
//even won an Anvil Gladiator Bomber from one of the contests.
 
2013-06-30 03:35:05 PM  
I still have zero interest in this game. I've just never been into first person action games. Give me a nice slow strategy game any day.
 
2013-06-30 03:41:57 PM  
Personally I think SC looks pretty unimpressive compared to how promising X:Rebirth is.
 
2013-06-30 03:43:12 PM  
As an original backer, the only reason buying ships using real money is tempting is for the lifetime hull insurance.  Not having to buy a whole new ship (just having to re-upgrade it) if some wanker blows me up is awful tempting.  Already got it for the Aurora just for pledging, but... some of those other ships sound mighty awesome.
 
2013-06-30 05:23:58 PM  
I kicked in at one of the higher levels.   The extra ship is nice,  but honestly this was more of a case of supporting the product and the designer.  I grew up on the WIng Commander series, still my favorite games of all times.    The value to me is helping see this product to market in the first place (And in my hands, muahahha!)
 
2013-06-30 05:27:49 PM  
I never, ever pre-pay for any game, movie, or musical album. I sit back and wait for people to test it out, find out if it sucks or not, and then scream about it on the Internet. I let the suckers take the hit for me.

Pre-ordering individual games, movies, or albums is just plain stupid. Kickstarter isn't a pre-order, though, so I hope the investment turns out to be worth it for those who backed it. If it's not, I don't want to hear them whining online like the Ouya backers who didn't get their backer consoles fast enough. You weren't buying a console; You were backing a project and getting a complimentary console for your support.

Incidentally, I'm glad I didn't financially back Ouya. I had one (retail) for a couple days, and ended up returning it because it's just not  there  yet.  I like Android, but it's one hell of a buggy system to base a game console on, and while I had hopes that Ouya would be different, it turned out to be yet another Android PC with a custom launcher and all that Android fickleness in the background. It would drop my WiFi, ignore my Ethernet connection, freak out when I connected external devices, and otherwise be a real pain in the ass. The games that launched with it are okay, but nothing to write home about. It was good at emulation, but then so is the Wii and a dozen other TV devices. The build of XBMC that currently exists for Android has all the Android weaknesses, and choked a bit on 1080p video (and I couldn't get a USB remote to work with it, either; I don't want to control XBMC with a gamepad).

So just be careful, Kickstarter backers. Realize you're not pre-ordering a game; You're giving money to someone to enable them to attempt to make a game. Whether or not the game is good, or even ever released, is another story.

I will sit back and wait. When I hear glowing reviews of Star Citizen, then I'll wait a little longer for it to be on a Steam sale. I don't pay $60 for games unless they're amazing.
 
2013-06-30 05:29:36 PM  
...been in for awhile now, costing me my kickstarter virginity.
 
2013-06-30 05:37:28 PM  
I will be buying it, but holding off for now, too many other things to spend money on.
 
2013-06-30 05:40:04 PM  

ZeroCorpse: So just be careful, Kickstarter backers. Realize you're not pre-ordering a game; You're giving money to someone to enable them to attempt to make a game. Whether or not the game is good, or even ever released, is another story.

I will sit back and wait. When I hear glowing reviews of Star Citizen, then I'll wait a little longer for it to be on a Steam sale. I don't pay $60 for games unless they're amazing.


To add to that, the game release is slated, as someone mentioned, about a year and a half out yet.
Old news is one thing, but this....this is a bit ridiculous even for fark.
 
2013-06-30 06:09:07 PM  

Vertdang: Then you haven't been watching the website.
Dogfighting alpha is this winter, The Squadron 42 single player missions are due next summer, and the fullscale persistent galaxy is due winter 2014 or early 2015..


I'll admit, I haven't. I found their site to be really painful to navigate and I haven't felt like delving into the forums.

I've been relying on e-mail newsletters and those, sadly haven't been as informative as I'd hoped. Maybe I missed the one with the dates.
 
2013-06-30 06:40:19 PM  

Vertdang: This is a guy who really knows the gaming business, inside and out.


No, this is a guy who knew the gaming business inside and out up until about 2003, and has missed most of the changes that have happened over the past decade.

Higher polygon counts? Who cares?
 
2013-06-30 08:10:48 PM  

poot_rootbeer: Vertdang: This is a guy who really knows the gaming business, inside and out.

No, this is a guy who knew the gaming business inside and out up until about 2003, and has missed most of the changes that have happened over the past decade.

Higher polygon counts? Who cares?


To be fair, there haven't been many great advances since 2003, and those that have been made have been largely predictable.

Hardware has stagnated as Sony and Microsoft have moved to flog their dead horses for as long as possible and the greatest revolution in gameplay in the last 10 years was probably portal. Which successfully delayed half life three by another 7 years at least.
 
2013-06-30 08:25:57 PM  

Dave The Slushy: poot_rootbeer: Vertdang: This is a guy who really knows the gaming business, inside and out.

No, this is a guy who knew the gaming business inside and out up until about 2003, and has missed most of the changes that have happened over the past decade.

Higher polygon counts? Who cares?

To be fair, there haven't been many great advances since 2003, and those that have been made have been largely predictable.

Hardware has stagnated as Sony and Microsoft have moved to flog their dead horses for as long as possible and the greatest revolution in gameplay in the last 10 years was probably portal. Which successfully delayed half life three by another 7 years at least.


Mostly this, graphics have gotten better, but that's about it.

Portal was an innovation of sorts in game design, but nothing revolutionary that changed gaming.

I think the next breakthroughs will be...and the term is already as overused and rendered almost as meaningless as "cloud" so pardon me..but it'll be the persistant world.

Trees grow and get cut down, land can change, area's can flood, etc.  Players can build and destroy.  Not just build as in spawn a prefab building/section, but can create structures.

Minecraft touched on it, and StarForge looks to be going in a very similar direction. Second Life was an overcomplicated pre-cursor

But what I'm thinking of is something more akin to MadMax or Fallout on an MMO scale.  You erect basic structures and tack on stuff that you scavenge.  Similar to the way people created objects in Halo's Forge feature by repurposing items from the menus.

You find corrugated metal and fence posts, metal plates and all sorts of other scraps and parts and build with them in the style of the walls around New Vegas.

But it's an MMO, so these things can be destroyed by adequate use of force.  Vehicles that have armor plating situated on them as you design, not simply a new substitute or attached model.

It will fail miserably at first of course, because few gamers will work together long enough to create defensible settlements, but IMO, that's where we're headed with games of such a nature. That's some of the only real innovation that's left to the sandbox game genre.
 
2013-06-30 08:28:48 PM  
So basically, it's a more expensive Eve Online?
 
2013-06-30 08:29:34 PM  

omeganuepsilon: I think the next breakthroughs will be...and the term is already as overused and rendered almost as meaningless as "cloud" so pardon me..but it'll be the persistant world.


upload.wikimedia.org

Been done.
 
2013-06-30 08:36:16 PM  

RexTalionis: omeganuepsilon: I think the next breakthroughs will be...and the term is already as overused and rendered almost as meaningless as "cloud" so pardon me..but it'll be the persistant world.

[upload.wikimedia.org image 257x358]

Been done.


The last nintendo i played was 64, the last one I owned was NES.

So I have no idea what that is.  But I meant more towards the MMO persistant world(which they all advertise as persistent, just because the server is always there) being a changing and malleable landscape.
 
2013-06-30 10:20:34 PM  

RatMaster999: State_College_Arsonist: Can't wait to see a release version of Star Citizen.  I'm getting the itch to play Privateer again.

I've been thinking of getting that from GOG.

How does it stack up against Elite?  (Which I played on an Atari ST and loved it)


I never played Elite, only read about it.  I do recommend Privateer to anyone interested in an open-universe space sim.  I spent hours and hours flying around the starting system, just dog fighting Retros and pirates.  Lots of fun.
 
2013-06-30 11:14:54 PM  
Let me know when World of Battleships is live.
 
2013-06-30 11:15:38 PM  

omeganuepsilon: I think the next breakthroughs will be...and the term is already as overused and rendered almost as meaningless as "cloud" so pardon me..but it'll be the persistant world.


Might be my misunderstanding of the term, but what you want is well beyond a persistent world game.
A present day persistent world is just a server that stays up all the time hosting the same game.  The next step for that is using "cloud" (oooOOOooo) technology to make it so you aren't logging into a server or an instance so much as logging into "the game". You and your friends sharing the same scenery with everyone in a seamless fashion.
An MMO today (which is usually persistent but static) hosts a gameworld that doesn't actually change that much. Even there you've still got things like the economy and quests to balance. Trying to scale that up to where the scenery itself is changeable and destructible... and it do it smoothly and without risk of griefers taking over the place... that's a tall order.

/What Roberts is proposing is sort of a go between.  Its persistent and static, but with episodic changes. Which is as good as you can expect these days.
/That said: a minecraft MMO would be awesome until it devolved into a landscape of lava covered spawnpoints and golden penis statues.
 
2013-06-30 11:21:21 PM  
http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shadowbane
 
2013-06-30 11:32:53 PM  

way south: An MMO today (which is usually persistent but static) hosts a gameworld that doesn't actually change that much. Even there you've still got things like the economy and quests to balance. Trying to scale that up to where the scenery itself is changeable and destructible... and it do it smoothly and without risk of griefers taking over the place... that's a tall order.


Griefers seem to be the real fly in the MMO design ointment. Anything interesting you allow players to do in the gameworld seems to become just another avenue for immature farkwads to ruin other people's day. On the other hand, keeping the lid on griefers, hackers, trolls, etc. requires either pervasive moderation or bland, consumption-focused game elements.

And I don't know how you solve that problem. What are you going to do, make the game invitation-only? While that would probably work for keeping the riffraff out, you'd be shooting yourself in the foot, financially-speaking. And that sort of speaks to the heart of many of today's problems with gaming: the interests of a good game and the interests of running a business seem to be fundamentally at odds with one another.
 
2013-06-30 11:55:53 PM  

way south: That said: a minecraft MMO would be awesome until it devolved into a landscape of lava covered spawnpoints and golden penis statues.


That would be cool.

I've always thought that player griefing could be minimized by AI-controlled agents that act defensively and impede destructive players to some extent. Each faction would have a certain number of agents that would repair walls or fortifications (or build new ones according to the battle lines). If enemy players tried to do things like dig huge trenches filled with lava just outside the enemy base to trap them in, the players would soon find themselves overwhelmed by AI forces. Kinda like guards in WoW. But these agents would also repair the damage, fill in the trenches, and return it to normal.

So players could grief if they wanted to, but it would be hard and take a concerted effort, and ultimately the damage would be automatically reversed.

/working on a minecraft-like engine.
 
2013-07-01 12:00:33 AM  

way south: that's a tall order.


That is why I think it'll be the next breakthrough.  You could avoid some griefing by setting it up somewhat like eve.  Safe zones where the NPC's just destroy whoever tries to pull shiat, and then graduate slowly into nullsec.

Dot abandoned cities all over the world so you're not starting completely from scratch, rid players the ability to warp and fast travel, and you could build in obscurity for quite a while, and then branch out, recruit, etc.

Or recruit in a haven and then go hunting.  Could add a IFF technology contract into weapons so you don't wake up in a bathtub on ice with no weapons and stitches right about where your liver is.

Seriously, I think the post-apocalyptic scenario would be one of the most versatile worlds for this.  A loot heavy world, if you can kill the mutants and bandits that live near it. A reasonable technology level to really aid in immersion in balancing mechanics.

I've always loved the sandbox games, but often find it a shame to never be able to really "move".  maybe a couple houses in towns to buy(ala skyrim/fallout), but you could never really have any affect on the world itself, a lot of really cool scenery goes to complete waste, or you have to kill to move into someone else's area, etc.

A game where we could grab some land or a cave system and make it our own would be really unique, one of the few things I can think of that would be true innovation.

way south: The next step for that is using "cloud" (oooOOOooo) technology to make it so you aren't logging into a server or an instance so much as logging into "the game".


As complicated as that would have to be, I don't see a pay-off aside from the fact that it wouldn't go down like a single server would, but it would have glitches galore and/or be burdensome.  IE you either split up all the information on a traditional system to all of the users(so that when the users disconnect that information blanks until a default is referenced)....OR every user has a whole copy of what used to be on just one server, which makes for a LOT of traffic while syncing and updating.

Either way is really up for grabs as far as exploits and hacks go.  And you thought an interactive persistant world was problematic due to users...
 
2013-07-01 12:28:06 AM  

Cthulhu_is_my_homeboy: And I don't know how you solve that problem.


Consider a post apocalyptic world of the future.  That allows for technology that is game canon.  Hidden in bunkers are the old powers that never died off, call them Goverments, for lack of a better term, capricious or even insane self labeled Gods, world leaders that bred for generations underground, they all have a touch of crazy.  They have even better tech, vehicles, etc..  These are eve's equivalent of safe zones.

Griefers ?
Creative in game mechanics that mesh with canon
Government contracts. Pay for elite AI assassin squads in armored military vehicles to be hitmen and/or guards.  Random person seeing them fly by attempt to follow, because you know they are going to blow people up and not loot anything.

Particularly nasty large group?  Professional PVPers that signed up for contract work like the assassins above. and/or GM's.  AI Air support.

PVP griefers(those who  lose all loot on their body, equipped and inventory, when they die, including keys to safe boxes and storage facilities.  After they've been marked, say killed the same guy at location X so many times.

Contracted area's under the protection/justice/revenges of the Government.  Sometimes Governments may even work together to punish or eradicate the rubbish.

Just some shotgunned idea's I've talked about with friends and family gamers.  Not too detailed, just general concepts or routes to go about it.

It could be done by a clever enough design team.  Make it somewhat fair but not so protected it's care-bare, I would want lots of good PVP, but when people are being victimized they'll have options.  I hate nothing more than noob griefers and the like.  Make it tough enough and shiatstains will quit, and the game can adapt security measures once it kind of evens out.

The key is to inspire a real sense of loss for unsanctioned pvp.  If you want to go serial killer, you're going to run some very real serious risks.  I can appreciate what Eve tried to do with loss in pvp, but I don't think they did it well, too heavy handed with immortal cops, but you step to the next zone over, nothing.

Another idea I've always been keen on is making Ammo fairly valuable and hard to come by.  If you hoard and wheel and deal you can build up a small stock, but bullets are more highly sought than gold.

/the genre is imagined as Fallout, very roughly, but inspired by a long series of trashy pulp books, Deathlands, that I read before I even knew what fallout was.
//many idea's are straight from the books, or what could have happened in the books
 
2013-07-01 12:35:35 AM  

StoPPeRmobile: [s.uvlist.net image 640x400]


I played the hell out of Psi-5 Trading Company on my C64 back in the day.
 
2013-07-01 12:56:51 AM  

RockofAges: God dammit! Deathlands rules. I grew up on them. This thread is killing me with nostalgia. I built a 75 vnum area in Ack!MUD for Deathlands, actually. Muties and all.


HA!

It's almost a shame there's so many of them, well over a hundred iirc.  I read them every month, if available where I was, they were pumped out so fasst.

I lost so many in moves that I gave the last of them away when I left the service..  I found a torrent of the first 66 and much to my dismay, that's right about where I left off with hardcopies, I had only missed the first few books and a few more through that whole set.  That's a helluva lot of 3.99's, especially if I were to go back and buy them all again.  Not paying 400$+ for a book series though.
/was stationed overseas at the time and they would get them in all out of order, and then 3 sequential books at a time, and then nothing....frustrating because there was jack and shiat to do over there.

Such a perfect world for a RPG or MMO.
 
2013-07-01 03:15:25 AM  

germ78: So basically, it's a more expensive Eve Online?


only if you don't count eve's monthly fee.
SC doesn't have one, and it's more fighter combat with a flightstick than a clicky cruiser game.
 
2013-07-01 03:41:47 AM  
"Legitamate" greifers will get bounties on them. Ilegitamate greifers that use hacks will get eaten by a giant space slug.
 
2013-07-01 06:08:29 AM  
I've always thought that player griefing could be minimized by AI-controlled agents that act defensively and impede destructive players to some extent. Each faction would have a certain number of agents that would repair walls or fortifications (or build new ones according to the battle lines). If enemy players tried to do things like dig huge trenches filled with lava just outside the enemy base to trap them in, the players would soon find themselves overwhelmed by AI forces. Kinda like guards in WoW. But these agents would also repair the damage, fill in the trenches, and return it to normal.

So players could grief if they wanted to, but it would be hard and take a concerted effort, and ultimately the damage would be automatically reversed.

/working on a minecraft-like engine.


EVE's police (called CONCORD) work something like that. In the so-called High Security sectors, you cannot shoot random players without getting your own ship blown up by the police. You CAN declare war on player-run corporations (read: guilds) and gain the ability to shoot them after 24 hours, and you CAN shoot anyone you like on low- or no- security sectors. This gives players the ability to choose, to some extent, how much risk of player douchery they want to experience/do. (It should be noted as well that, within the game rules set by the developer, any and all griefing is not only tolerated, it's encouraged and sometimes even reported on as news).

But enough about EVE. SC looks very promising, and if I had more money at the moment, I'd have invested in it. I respect all the folks expressing caution, but man, does this one look good so far.
 
2013-07-01 08:42:34 AM  
So what about Notch's next big game 0x10c? It's a space game...
 
2013-07-01 09:27:18 AM  
Good to know; don't give anything to EA, everything they touch turns to suck.


Also, still think the name is horrible.
 
2013-07-01 10:00:55 AM  

omeganuepsilon: A game where we could grab some land or a cave system and make it our own would be really unique, one of the few things I can think of that would be true innovation.


You can do that already with active methods.  The thing is that the more powers you allow a player, the more you have to reign them in somehow, and scenery modification is a massive power.
I think with a game like minecraft we'd get further by weeding the griefers out the players pool than by game rules. But in the end an automated ranking/flagging system is just another system to abuse.

If I had the skill to make a game, one thing I'd like to try is slowly resetting scenery over time.  Allowing players to add and modify things but then fading those changes out as objects time out during the week.
At the very least it would force people to keep maintaining their bases and put a cap on how much griefing one person can accomplish with the money and time on hand.

omeganuepsilon: As complicated as that would have to be, I don't see a pay-off aside from the fact that it wouldn't go down like a single server would, but it would have glitches galore and/or be burdensome.


It can pay off if you split massive pools of players into smaller and smaller groups and move them to different servers seamlessly.
It takes a massive system to host thousands of players, but half of them are in situations that could be hosted peer to even run in single player mode.  Getting some guy soloing in a cave to host his own damn instance takes the load off the big machinery.
You could run an MMO on p2p money if you can sort out the details of transfer.

/I've got a sneaking suspicion this is what the Destiny crew is up to.
 
2013-07-01 10:27:16 AM  

RexTalionis: Already got my Star Citizen card.

[i1212.photobucket.com image 600x393]


Just a Merc huh...
As a Rear Admiral i may have some work to through your way when things get rolling.


That's right... I have no life and disposable income Woo Hooo..... so sad and lonely
 
2013-07-01 11:13:01 AM  

mitEj: RexTalionis: Already got my Star Citizen card.

[i1212.photobucket.com image 600x393]

Just a Merc huh...
As a Rear Admiral i may have some work to through your way when things get rolling.


That's right... I have no life and disposable income Woo Hooo..... so sad and lonely


You spent $250 bucks on a game that isn't even out yet?
 
2013-07-01 11:17:23 AM  

way south: Getting some guy soloing in a cave to host his own damn instance takes the load off the big machinery.


That is the way a lot of games function already, only minimal information goes back to the server.
Also, many servers don't load up a zone unless someone is in it or offload the running off it in peer to peer fashion, which sounds more like what you're talking about.

True cloud computing has drawbacks for anything resembling a persistent world with multiple users, it becomes very bandwidth heavy.  I don't think you'd see seamless transitions that you're dreaming about

A central server, for example only has to have bandwidth enough to support users actively playing.

You split that up and each piece has to talk to the other pieces, and the users. The smaller each node is, the more it would have to stay in constant contact with other nodes, and requires more redundancies because users will come and go quite often.  A cloud of sufficient size becomes totally unusable, ultimately slower than any given users machine, because of this travel time and bulk of information.

I think you are over estimating the processing burden of a given single server.  Most of the power needed for the game to operate is required at the end user, the graphical interface.  Take xbox live for example, 18 people can play in a single game(say, CoD), with one of them being host and even running his own GUI.  The xbox itself is not a powerhouse before the 3d engine and textures and mechanics are loaded up.  There is very little left for serving the game, and still, the drawback in that situation is people's ping's to host and people's bandwidth.

In a dedicated server type of tame, there is no gui, not insofar as it has to render anything in 3d, it's merely a management of inventories/xp system/drop tables and a floating coordinate for the player(with orientation for some fps type games) and AI(and the ai scripts).. All the rendering and animation is done client side, and with many instanced games, all but inventories/xp/droptables can be done client side with negligable loss to security.

In other words, very very simple math procedures and data shifting.
 
2013-07-01 12:47:48 PM  

Cthulhu_is_my_homeboy: way south: An MMO today (which is usually persistent but static) hosts a gameworld that doesn't actually change that much. Even there you've still got things like the economy and quests to balance. Trying to scale that up to where the scenery itself is changeable and destructible... and it do it smoothly and without risk of griefers taking over the place... that's a tall order.

Griefers seem to be the real fly in the MMO design ointment. Anything interesting you allow players to do in the gameworld seems to become just another avenue for immature farkwads to ruin other people's day. On the other hand, keeping the lid on griefers, hackers, trolls, etc. requires either pervasive moderation or bland, consumption-focused game elements.

And I don't know how you solve that problem. What are you going to do, make the game invitation-only? While that would probably work for keeping the riffraff out, you'd be shooting yourself in the foot, financially-speaking. And that sort of speaks to the heart of many of today's problems with gaming: the interests of a good game and the interests of running a business seem to be fundamentally at odds with one another.


There are ways.  IMHO, the best way is to create context within the game for griefers to be a part of the game.

For example, I was working on the design for a Wild West MMO that included player founded towns.  One of my ideas was for each town to be able to purchase a bank, where the residents of the player town could 'bank' their money.   That money would earn X interest (don't worry, we had plenty of sinks in the economy).

The bank, as an entity, could establish a percentage of their assets as "stealable" (I forget the exact term, it was better than 'stealable' :) ).  Those assets would earn an additional percentage of interest, but was at risk to player character bank robbers.    Robbing the bank would be a difficult event to pull off (bank was only open if a certain percentage of town residents were online, an alarm  would be 'sounded' to all residents, player-characters with 'tracking' skill would be provided paths to their current location, PC "robbers" could only engage in combat with those PCs who have first engaged them, etc.).  Think the Northfield Raid for the James/Younger gang and you'll get an idea of the average bank robbery we were shooting for.

If the town didn't want to participate, fine.  They set "stealable" to zero and didn't have to worry about it.  On the opposite end of the scale were "frontier" settings, where law had little to no recourse.  (there were a lot more rules, but you get the idea).

TL;DR - identify griefer behavior likely within your world, and design it into the game in a way that griefers and non-griefers alike will enjoy it.  This won't rid you of all problem-children, but give lots of them something productive to do and will enrich your world (IMHO, the best "wandering monster" is a 15 year old asshole :) ).

/unfortunately, the game lost funding
//too bad, too, cuz we had some really cool ideas
 
2013-07-01 02:14:26 PM  

RexTalionis: mitEj: RexTalionis: Already got my Star Citizen card.

[i1212.photobucket.com image 600x393]

Just a Merc huh...
As a Rear Admiral i may have some work to through your way when things get rolling.


That's right... I have no life and disposable income Woo Hooo..... so sad and lonely

You spent $250 bucks on a game that isn't even out yet?


What part of no life and a lot of disposable income did you not get :)
 
2013-07-01 03:52:36 PM  

GRCooper: /unfortunately, the game lost funding
//too bad, too, cuz we had some really cool ideas


Its always  fascinating to hear the thoughts that get tossed around.
Sometimes the best ideas never make it into product, and its a damn shame.

Still, I'd wager a few internets someone will always find a way to mess with the system.
Lure robbers into a town with $1 in the bank then string barbed wire around the exits, or setup a fatal funnel in some corner of the bank to nail every townsperson that tries to intervene.
People are bastards like that.

On another note, more starship sales videos:   http://youtu.be/N55HcZwTbYs
 
2013-07-01 04:09:33 PM  
Still, I'd wager a few internets someone will always find a way to mess with the system.
Lure robbers into a town with $1 in the bank then string barbed wire around the exits, or setup a fatal funnel in some corner of the bank to nail every townsperson that tries to intervene.
People are bastards like that.



I would not take that bet.  No way, no how ;-).  You are 100% right - every design decision for an MMO (or even just multiplayer) needs to be run through a filter of "How would I take advantage of this design to screw people over", and you'll never think of every way.

/as an aside, though - the amount stealable had to be a minimum amount, and that amount for each bank was public information.  There were a lot more rules for the entire banking/robbing system (from Posse formation, what happens if the robbers make camp (log out), etc.), and many of them came from thinking about ways the system could be abused.
 
Displayed 67 of 67 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report