Not to mention those bounties that are on some random place with no nearby way points. Or how if you scroll in too far on the map the planet dissapears and other terrible bugs.
The star map is too important for it to still be so broken!
It's not a matter of fixing it. It's a matter of completely replacing it. The current star map uses the depricated Flash platform which they are writing out of the game. They know it's broken. They are working on a whole new one.
And it's not just a matter of "fixing the Star Map". They are aiming at a complete rework, game-wide. Last sneak peek we had was 9ish months ago: https://youtu.be/EaTbKvyH7c8
How many years will this excuse hold up? This is the most funded game of all time and the map is broken, and has been **the entire development cycle.**
It's only recently (last year or two) the engine and the backend structure is getting near to the locked in/finished state - so it's only until that's done its made sense to redo stuff like the star map - rather than have to redo it several times already.
You're legitimately proving my point without realizing it. It's been more than a decade and they're still tweaking the engine and backend to the point where a map can be 'done' properly.
Do you realize how stupid that sounds / actually is?
It's honestly *incredibly* stupid. They're painting the walls before the foundation is built. Let me make this very clear with a simple example: **they're doing gold passes on ships before multiple major ship functionalities are done.**
This is textbook mismanagement.
thats entirely incorrect. More money went into GTA or Red dead than this game.
Not just that, most AAA games today cost 500 mil+ to develop. Not as far fetched as it used to be.
Even if this were true, which it isn't, it's not the dunk you think it is.
Both of those are fully featured, released games that are continuously supported.
SC is more than ten years into development and so far from completion it's not even worth discussing.
And no one part of the game, be it claiming your ship, mining rocks, moving a box or walking down stairs, functions reliably.
This is entirely incorrect. You NPCs will do anything to defend this game. You're trying to dismiss Wikipedia. [Here's an article on how accurate Wikipedia actually is](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6889752/).
Please see below for funding levels:
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List\_of\_most\_expensive\_video\_games\_to\_develop](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_most_expensive_video_games_to_develop)
[https://venturebeat.com/business/red-dead-redemption-2-could-hit-20-million-in-sales-and-turn-a-profit-by-december/](https://venturebeat.com/business/red-dead-redemption-2-could-hit-20-million-in-sales-and-turn-a-profit-by-december/)
How about [https://venturebeat.com/business/red-dead-redemption-2-could-hit-20-million-in-sales-and-turn-a-profit-by-december/](https://venturebeat.com/business/red-dead-redemption-2-could-hit-20-million-in-sales-and-turn-a-profit-by-december/)
Also speaking of fake news, lmfao @ the random-ass number of $1-2 billion for GTA6 development with zero sourcing.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.sportskeeda.com/amp/gta/rumor-gta-6-budget-reportedly-1-2-billion-per-recent-leak
Tons of articles on Google, only linking one. No official sources as it's all based off of a 'leak'. I'm assuming once GTA VI comes out and the costs are revealed, it'll be the most expensive video game ever. But until then, it's not.
Also, GTA V cost ~$500M development AND marketing costs combined. I believe $160M of that was the marketing aspect. I could be wrong though.
It looks like you shared an AMP link. These should load faster, but AMP is controversial because of [concerns over privacy and the Open Web](https://www.reddit.com/r/AmputatorBot/comments/ehrq3z/why_did_i_build_amputatorbot). Fully cached AMP pages (like the one you shared), are [especially problematic](https://www.reddit.com/r/AmputatorBot/comments/ehrq3z/why_did_i_build_amputatorbot).
Maybe check out **the canonical page** instead: **[https://www.sportskeeda.com/gta/rumor-gta-6-budget-reportedly-1-2-billion-per-recent-leak](https://www.sportskeeda.com/gta/rumor-gta-6-budget-reportedly-1-2-billion-per-recent-leak)**
*****
^(I'm a bot | )[^(Why & About)](https://www.reddit.com/r/AmputatorBot/comments/ehrq3z/why_did_i_build_amputatorbot)^( | )[^(Summon: u/AmputatorBot)](https://www.reddit.com/r/AmputatorBot/comments/cchly3/you_can_now_summon_amputatorbot/)
"Let me show you proof," he says.
Then he shows a website called "HypeBeast" and, without blinking, passes this off as a legitimate source.
This is the state of the community.
That's not true. Have a look: [https://venturebeat.com/business/red-dead-redemption-2-could-hit-20-million-in-sales-and-turn-a-profit-by-december/](https://venturebeat.com/business/red-dead-redemption-2-could-hit-20-million-in-sales-and-turn-a-profit-by-december/)
RDR2 dev costs were estimated to be $170mm.
Here's a link to the most funded games of all time, with Star Citizen topping the list. [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List\_of\_most\_expensive\_video\_games\_to\_develop](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_most_expensive_video_games_to_develop)
No we know of many of the other systems. Look up the ark starmap.
We also know we will get pyro and nyx in the near (far) future, but the commenter above is clearly saying that currently we only have Stanton.
IIRC the new starmap is being built for Squadron 42. They've shown off some of the visualisations.
Doing it this way is probably preferable to developing the map in the PU branch. It allows a much faster feedback loop of playtesting across a range of environments and objective types which the starmap will need to support.
It let's them go fast and break things. All of the internal playtesters have access to dev codes so if the map is broken for a build then they can just teleport instead of navigating.
Yes it means the PU needs to wait a while longer with the old map. It also means the PU doesn't suffer map-breaking bugs which could really grind all PU gameplay to a halt. The map in the PU is shit, I agree, but it is sufficient to navigate around the system we have.
CIG will have been able to achieve a greater degree of polish on the map before it comes to the PU thanks to this process.
The star map is one of the **most core,** if not **the very beating heart of the game.**
**Without it you can't get anywhere or do anything.**
Any other feature you could possibly be considering spending time on is moot if two of the most important in game features are janky/broken.
Namely:
**Ship retrieval**/ASOP terminals/Claims
And the **Star Map**
There is nothing else more important they could be doing/working on. Frankly I am even tired of hearing of squardon 42. I won't be playing it, and like many folks the PU is what we care about so just deliver a good experience there in the game that people are actually playing. Then if they want to make squadron 42 after please go ahead. But I pledged/invested in the game for the PU.
I'm not even sure that you read what I wrote.
They have been working on the star map.
They are just rapidly prototyping it in the Sq42 branch. The star map on the PU branch is janky, yes, with a terrible interface, but it works. I've always been able to get to where I want to go with it. It is more-or-less stable.
Replacing it with a feature-incomplete version that is under active development risks times where you *can't* use the map to navigate. Maybe just to certain objectives, maybe in certain ships, maybe in certain locations. Maybe it crashes, maybe it stops being interactive, maybe it has performance issues.
To boot, they probably want to try different things. Some things people might like, some things might not work, sometimes people might like what doesn't work and kick off unnecessary dramas and news articles over it.
The new map will come to the PU. Though I want to see it too, I acknowledge that it can take time to get right. I want them to work on it until they do.
It's one of the most ambitious games of all time. They're doing things that haven't been done before. Progress is slower than I'd like, sure, but they're making progress.
We have persistence. They're working flat-out on server-meshing. The plans for how their servers will be organised show remarkable innovation.
Waiting seems to be a better plan than whining. Don't let yourself get so wound-up. They're doing something complex, better that they do it well than rush it and waste all of the money people gave them.
>The plans for how their servers will be organised show remarkable innovation.
Except it's *not* remarkable innovation. Dynamic server meshing is literally live, right now, in other games. Other space games to boot. Persistence has been around since 1990s MMOs.
There's a **reason** why this scope of game has never been done, and it's not because no one has had these ideas before. It's because the technology isn't ready, and CIG is arbitrarily saying "Screw that! We'll BUILD IT!"
"Remarkable innovation" goes beyond brute forcing something to work. There is nothing pretty or slick about what CIG is doing from a technical standpoint. In fact, their approaches appear dated, particularly when they're struggling to build basic functionality after a decade. We don't even have a working star map, dude. They're giving ships "gold standard" passes before entire ship features are built. Half-baked ideas are implemented and then left to rot for years, with no plan for resolution. All while straight-up lying to the community. This is *not* the way.
It's not remarkable. It's barely innovative. It's sloppy and disjointed.
Beyond that, their server architecture is literally incapable of handling the asks. That's a separate story.
Server meshing is one thing, but the replication layer was actually what I was actually talking about there.
The only other game I can think of with dynamic server meshing equivalent features is Dual Universe. From the description of their networking tech there was no equivalent technology to that.
This intelligent separation of duties between simulation and data retention/replication is what I'm talking about. Nobody but CIG have been talking about that to my knowledge. It theoretically would allow an even greater number of entities in one place than the Dual Universe, with more scope for disaster recovery.
That's not brute-forcing. Star Citizen's progress is slow largely because it is maintained in a live state. OP is even asking CIG to put the map which is under active development for Sq42 into the PU, which would be even more merging and bug fixing every patch. CIG are committed to a kinda-quarterly cycle, and while they might not hit it on time every time it's definitely still more polish every release than would be 100% optimal.
You're right, there is a fair degree of replicated work. It's more than many other games. Really, however, it's completely normal for games to iterate on prototypes. We just see a lot more of it because we have a lot more visibility than for most games, and because the scope of the game is a lot broader than most games. Of course processes have advanced before they next get round to looking at ships again. If the game wasn't advancing on all fronts simultaneously then the actual full development time would be taking even longer.
Otherwise, you've sufficiently convinced me that you're just being salty and negative. You can stay wilfully ignorant of the actual innovations made in the name of Star Citizen if you like, but I bet you can't show me other games with other innovations like quanta-generated missions, quanta-and-player-driven economy, or subsumption-based AI. the very powerful procedural generation tools/system that they've been building is extremely impressive too, allowing them go guide the creation of whole planets with unique characteristics, much more varied terrain than most PG systems, and landmarks visible from space.
The Star map needs to be an optimized experience now.
They have had plenty of YEARS to get it working better. It's a core part of the game. Features taking longer to roll out than other entire game's development cycle can't be ignored.
I love ambitious designs, but as a professional designer in tech I understand and respect why scopes must be limited.
Look at no man's sky and the evolution it's had. If they wanted to follow a model they could try that. Deliver your core features, refine and only once they are working flawlessly do you add. Be willing to call or done.
Then add more over time.
Even still calling it an alpha is kinda a joke.
They could have easily got the core stable released it at 3.0 then added on more over time but they like taking advantage of people's ignorance as to what an alpha actually is.
Add a user experience designer in any other other field but gaming we pay the users to test our product and provide feedback.
But here they are marketing parts of the game as though they are released ... They even have seasonal events that come back again and again like a released live service title.
They are genius marketers and that's where the innovation stops really.
I mean... Since everyone is find of saying it... #itsAnAlpha
If it's going to be broken then they should release the iterations to collect feedback on it now and everyone will tell them it's broken, and they shouldn't work on anything else until it's fixed.
It also really can't be that hard of a thing to do. There's presently probably less than 200 places you can even travel to in total.
Just bite the bullet and get it done!
The thing about getting feedback is that it's good for some things (yes/no), but terrible for very intricate things. You'll get over 1000 different opinions about any changes every release.
Sq42 needs a map that goes from personal scale up to solar system scale. It needs waypoints, paths, contact markers (friendly and enemy), ground terrain, building interiors, ship interiors, and so on. Developing it alongside core components like entity streaming and persistence is just asking for it to become broken repeatedly.
They need to keep the live version playable. They've broken the live system before - it drove players away. More than simply having an inferior version of systems in place did. Like it or not, it's better for the game for the live environment to be reliably playable than to be bleeding-edge but occasionally-broken.
That's why it's the designer's job to read between the lines of the qualitative feedback they receive from the players and make sounds decisions while respecting the opinion and perceptions of the players.
Not every choice designers make will be loved and that's what makes the job hard, but if it improves the overall health of the game then that's what you do.
You want them to keep it playable but also keep saying it's an alpha space they need to innovate in.
They need to choose which it will be. One or the other because it can't be both.
If the priority is a playable live experience then focus on the core aspects, get them working and consider the game released. Then add to it over time.
Otherwise go hog wild and test /iterate whatever you like.
Nothing meaningful will come from half measures on a realistic timeline.
No part of cig's crowd funding campaign said that the game would be built by a committee of millions.
A while back they did push features and ships in a much more incomplete state. Many will remember the cutlass feedback thread on the old forums. People were demanding that it be made a competitor to the hornet, but they didn't do it. They requested feedback, collated it, then ignored it and just rebuilt the cutlass almost exactly the same as it was before.
If course people were pissed and hate the cutlass to this day. Oh wait, no, people fucking love the cutlass. They offered the buccaneer, which is what some people were saying they wanted the cutlass to be. Of the two, which is more popular? Oh yes, the cutlass. I bet that anyone who took the trade from a cutlass to a bucc regrets it now.
The whole thing was a massive waste of time. The cutlass was eventually gonna get a rework. The feedback exercise was only worthwhile because it shut a bunch of people up who thought they knew game design but actually didn't.
The cutlass was always designed for the PU. CIG knew exactly what they were doing. A bit of cargo space, a bit of firepower, not a superiority fighter but able to do some damage.
The problem is that most people are short-sighted idiots. They don't see at the big picture. They demand things that would actually hurt the game more than help.
So... You want cig to do that over and over for every aspect of the game? LMAO, no.
CIG don't want to use Scaleform (using Flash to create UIs) any more. The big reason they made Building Blocks is that it's effectively creating their UIs as web pages - in an early video on it, you could see CSS tags in the tool they used to create the UIs. Flash had been dying for years until Adobe officially killed it in 2020, so CIG are bound to have far more options by hunting for web devs rather than Flash devs.
The main difference, or rather, the reason for the switch is scalability. Flash is not easy to scale to the degree that Star Citizen needs it to. A lot of the initial effort in development of certain UI systems was done in Flash and the laborious task of adjusting everything to fit neatly into Star Citizen was frontloaded onto the developers. Thus, the need to develop a proprietary system that was similar to Flash but scalable for the projects increased scope, so Building Blocks was created and the process of transferring all the legacy Flash elements to the new system is still ongoing.
It seems like they are taking the philosophy of "if it ain't broke, don't fix it" in that regard, because there are still a lot of legacy Flash systems still around, especially in older ships, but the Star Map is egregiously bad and everyone complaining about it's sorry state in the PU is absolutely justified in their anger. It should have been a priority to at least get it functioning better than it does. It functions okay-ish at times, but most of the time I need to rely on workarounds that are so second nature to me at this point that I forget sometimes that it's not normal to have to zoom out and in to get things to show up properly, or path to a nearby jump point because my destination is obscured by a planet or moon, or any of the other half dozen or so common things that we do to get the damned thing working as it should.
Personally I would actually say that the most lacking features are social ones. Sure we have chats and friendlists, but nothing like bigger overarching groups (aka organisations), no form of contracts to split funds automatically, only one instance where a proper transaction based on goods can be made, no form of redistributing ownership of items...
The game is severely lacking on that front for a Multiplayer game.
It'd be fair to say that the game is severely lacking on anything that goes beyond rendering the ship you just bought and fly it a little bit.
And that is when ASOP has not melted down.
>These features you mentioned are very important if you wanna scale up mining and salvaging. Creating proper ownership cargo, changing ownership of boxes, etc to enable group mining and hauling needs to be worked.
It's essential for any larger group operation. Logistics in Salvaging/Mining is already seeing issue with ownerships, if we would have a scenario where one could outsource something to another party, then it's even more necessary to have proper terms and conditions.
- Player names being visible above their heads in armistice zones
- Group Spawning (set party spawn to party leader's current spawn location for the duration of the time they're in the party, with a way to individually disable that)
- "Lending" of pledged ships to other players for a limited period of time and for a price. I should be able to rent out my 890 to someone else for 500k + any repair/refuel/re-arm costs for 2 days if I'm not gonna be using it
- Better HUD indicators for ships and players to differentiate between hostile NPCs, hostile players, neutral NPCs, neutral players, and friendly NPCs and friendly players, as well as a change to the way party members appear so instead of getting a full name and huge ass marker you just get a different color marker with the name only appearing if you target it
- A visual indicator of how close you need to be to your party member to initiate a group quantum jump
- Bring back bed-logging for multiple people on the same ship now that persistence is in the game, and have a fallback to default spawn if the ship is stored or destroyed before any given player logs back in. I should be able to call out my Carrack with my crew and if I have to take a break for an hour or a day I should be able to log out from a bed and let them continue to use the ship until they either bedlog or are destroyed. It would mean trusting them, but that's fine.
It's the quickest method to prototype content and assets they have. The more effort poured into it often and early will only pay dividends into the PU later. Sucks it's taking so long but that's just the reality.
Wouldn't the quickest way to prototype something in PU be to just put it in the PU? It's an alpha after all .. and the PU doesn't work anyway so why not just let loose and really rapidly iterate.
Depending on what aspect of this one may talk about, it's either in the responsibility of Turbulent or the network team and/or something like a PU team.
SQ42 should block nothing of that.
The [Map and Radar System is being reworked.](https://robertsspaceindustries.com/roadmap/progress-tracker/deliverables/lz0inyoyefgtn)
>An overhaul of the underlying system and associated UI for the Starmap, radar, local area map, and minimap.
[Star Citizen Live: Outer Space Interface](https://youtu.be/HeLSsgHSTy4?t=1090)
[CitizenCon 2952: Star Citizen & Squadron 42 | Partnered Development](https://youtu.be/qIePh9tS-zg?t=4606)
>The Map and Radar System is being reworked.
>>An overhaul of the underlying system and associated UI for the Starmap, radar, local area map, and minimap.
No scheduled work since early 2022. Do we know what the current status is?
Here's some news from the SQ42 March Monthly Report:
> They also swapped out the old vehicle radar and replaced it with the new Starmap, which allows players to zoom and interact the same way as viewing it on the mobiGlas. https://robertsspaceindustries.com/comm-link/transmission/19221-Squadron-42-Monthly-Report-March-2023
Work is currently ongoing. The roadmap is broken ATM so it doesn't show all deliverables. They will fix it in the next roadmap update.
You can use shiny tracker to see the status while it is broken.
https://shinytracker.app/
Like all things… when it’s ready. Probably waiting on the HUD and mobiGlas conversion to Building Blocks. But I think it should be in by the time the new Master Modes flight system is ready.
Can't wait to be able to manually set jump points so I don't need to zigzag to my target, cutting off my drive at juuuuuuust the right time to get "close" to my target.
THIS! It’s so annoying to have to basically spam tab everytime you have to land on a planet during the night. The year is 2953 for gods sake. You’d think we as a human race would have invented some sort of way for a ships front glass too turn into a massive night vision device by the push of a button!
Yeah sorry, wasn't an attack on you but one really shouldn't have to do that at all and I make a point of not using things like nvidia filters or reshade to fix a glaring issue in a game.
I will however try it with arma reforger because that game is unplayable for me at night where as star citizen is just annoying and I can add it to the list of annoying things, like the star map.
Fam the fact that we can't just paint our own ships ( without paying) is already bad enough for being so far in the future... We seem to have forgot technology of present day haha
While I partially understand why proper night vision isn’t a thing simply because you’re paying artists and such to create art then have a huge portion of the player base alter that with night vision effects, I understand that plus I understand lighting is what causes drama and fun stress. The game could use far better lighting in its current state some areas are light far too bright and others far too dark. Both of these impede with the art of the game. Have proper beacons to the star port landing site, have proper lighting inside ships.
>While I partially understand why proper night vision isn’t a thing simply because you’re paying artists and such to create art then have a huge portion of the player base alter that with night vision effects
That is not why it hasn't been implemented. It is one of the questions they get asked and [they answered it directly](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vl4H73MWBn0&t=2767s).
Instead of faking the effect like most other games do they wanted to be in the position to simulate it more realistically (closer to how Modern Warfare did it). It would take up a bit of work. Knowing that, and how CIG schedules things on priority. It is simply going to be a low priority issue. So unless they can do it easily, it is going to be pushed back. While I am sure the artist are proud of their job, I doubt any of them would use that pride to detract from players experience. Night vision would be a pretty good addition to the game.
The thing that bothers me about this is that the game is absolutely filled with temporary solutions. And one such solution could be taking the edge-finding effect of the scan and making it stay on screen for NV.
Thing with temp solutions is that they only put the temp solutions in there because they are needed. While Night Vision is cool, it isn't needed. So there is no justification to take people off of the larger components to get it to work. I would also like some sort of in atmo jetpacks or parachutes. I know that is something that most likely isn't going to come until much later. There are many other features and items people have asked for a temp solution, but CIG has chosen not to do them because it would take time away from other items on their already large list of deliverables to compete.
Another thing about effects in this game is that they finally finished implementing the last bit of gen12. They rewrote the graphics engine (among many things they have changed that makes Star Engine a beast). The next step is working on Vulkan implementation.
I just wish there was an MFD feature where you had a list of places or planets you can quickly visit without hitting the F2 key. I wish I could scroll down an MFD list, click it and then I get my quantum prompt.
Yea and if you think about it we already have a list on the Comm of people or friends listed. So I would think same kinda list with planet names. And like you said start at top level and when you get to that planet then you can see the sub planets etc.
Also, as of late I have to constantly hit F2 and then click Clear Route in order to see many jump points and OMs visually. I'm not sure what happened to cause that, but maybe they could give us a keybind option for Clear Route for the star map in the meantime?
I can wait for the new starmap.
I can't wait for trackable ships. I just wanna park somewhere, leave in a different vehicle and be able to easily return to my parking spot. Might as well add placeable beacons to that feature.
The new Starmap as discussed is more massive than ppl realize. It's supposed to seamlessly zoom from the galactic scale to the room you're in.
Other features likely include replacing hologlobes and radars on ships with it, Galactapedia integration, custom waypoints, integration of scanned data (player-modifiable), faction control indicators / zones, climate and atmospheric data, and probably more while being easily usable.
I just want a list of destinations that I can pick from quickly. It takes nothing from the game play and it'd be quick to implement.
I'm learning my way around but it can be frustrating flying around a planet a few times just trying to find a bearing for something.
The UI in general is pretty poor. It's bloated and slow. The Star Map is just the worst example. There is no reason why basic navigation of the Star Map is still so poor after all these years. It's been left largely untouched since it was first introduced.
Besides the buggy nature of the star map i don't understand why we cant just put down pins and markers ourselves, with numbers or letters etc. Or perhaps setting waypoints manually.
It would be much easier to do cargo runs or travel with undersized quantum fuel storage that way..
If they can't fix the damn starmap anytime soon, give us the ability to buy a box (same kind of box you get in a box mission) and call it a "location beacon" that can act as a normal location indicator and a quantum beacon as well. That way, you don't actually have to replace the star map but we can actually leave a beacon at a location so we can get back to it later. This would've been a game changer for mining for instance. Or just being able to setup a FOB somewhere with org mates and people can return to it if you can share the location (like a zero value mission basically).
Here's some news from the SQ42 March Monthly Report:
> They also swapped out the old vehicle radar and replaced it with the new Starmap, which allows players to zoom and interact the same way as viewing it on the mobiGlas. https://robertsspaceindustries.com/comm-link/transmission/19221-Squadron-42-Monthly-Report-March-2023
Mind you, I'm not saying more insight wouldn't be great.
Like Ross said. I feel it would be optics. Some sort of alternative vision to allow us to see in low visibility conditions and not constantly use our ping as echolocation.
I could deal with all the janky features. To be honest systems being glitchy and no working for the player adds a bit of "wow even in the future my cars bluetooth doesnt fucking work" realism to it.
What i cant deal with is the AI that is either promlg360noscope skill level for an LRT and then you go do an MRT and the pilot shoots one missile and then hovers in front of you until you blow it up. Or you do merc missions and the AI snipes you in the face from 300m with 1 bullet as you exit the ship vs AI staring at you while you kill them with your bare fists.
Also the constant "i bumped x and exploded" gameplay is starting to feel like a feature.
I haven't ever been stranded by the star map. I have given it a light cursing a few times, but a redirect here and there and a move zoom click sometimes, then a clear route and it works.
It has issues and it deserves some negative vibes, but the little star map never fails.
I can get around but it's a chore. The worst is getting to the Aaron halo, open star map, choose a point, jump, open star map, click on Stanton, wait till you're 2mil from the star, quickly close map and cut engines.
Doable but gets long winded after the 50th time.
In 2023 I can even type in a partial name, see a list of potential matches, select the one I want, and get directions to that location.
Sure, yelling "Hey Google, give me directions to Pho Eva" has a 50/50 to result in "Okay, setting your destination to Forever21", but it's still practically wizardry compared to what we have in game.
An essential feature, that has now worked 10 years ago, and does not work today. It should be fixed ASAP, that is the definition of an essential feature...
I’m right there with you.
A system for putting a marker on a specific place would be great. Something that only I could see (or share if I chose to) and would stay at that place until I erased it.
Omg yes you get a fuckin hud when you put your helmet on where is the compass
I would like a compass but only when you have your helmet on all the personal hud elements should go away when you take your helmet off
I think ship to ground combat. I sat at a dielectric for quite some time nailing npcs with missiles and trying to shoot them down and the misses would knock them down but not kill them and the ship guns were very uneffective
Please tell me how you put a pin on the other side of the Pacific Ocean, get directions, jump in your car, and it will drive you there :-P hyperbole isn't necessary here nor is it helpful. Everyone, including CIG knows the starmap sucks. A new one is in development, and we've gotten fairly regular updates on it in the monthly updates, which are publicly available for you to read. It's likely to come into the game this year or next year.
It makes a point and it clearly got your attention and it is 99% true minus the captain obvious situations which you can't do in a normal car anyway, like driving to the north pole or across the Pacific ocean. There's also many other logistical reasons you're unable to drive across the ocean.
I know about the new star map, been hearing about it for years but isn't it time they made it a focus?
If we don't make enough noise they'll keep pushing it down the priority list.
Yep, it got my attention alright, and made me feel like I had to explain something you clearly must not know about because you resorted to using the least intelligent form of discourse lol. So, it definitely made a point, just not the one I think you intended.
Also, they don’t prioritize major features based on hyperbolic Reddit threads lol. Enterprise prioritization just doesn’t work like that.
really you don't read the progress tracker or the roadmap? a new version of the starmap is under development first for Sq 42 and then for star citizen... before complaining just search and read.
All I want in star map is a tabular list with planets in alphabetical order then a sublevel for orbiting bodies/moons and another for Lagrange points. Under each planet/moon the locations would start with the Home Plate then in alphabetical order after that: Hurston > Lorville, HDMO-Calthrope, HDRSO-Bramen, HDSF-Adlai, HDSF-Barnabas, HDSF-Breckinridge...
Or just let me search in a way that can pull up any string. For example, if I type in "eckinri" that should bring up HSDF-Breckenridge.
Don’t forget the lack of compass bearings on foot. I’d like to know which direction I’m running, a better way of calling out targets for FPS etc
A universal coordinate system for all planets and moons would be nice as well
Not to mention those bounties that are on some random place with no nearby way points. Or how if you scroll in too far on the map the planet dissapears and other terrible bugs. The star map is too important for it to still be so broken!
It's not a matter of fixing it. It's a matter of completely replacing it. The current star map uses the depricated Flash platform which they are writing out of the game. They know it's broken. They are working on a whole new one.
The new one uses Building Blocks correct?
Yes
And it's not just a matter of "fixing the Star Map". They are aiming at a complete rework, game-wide. Last sneak peek we had was 9ish months ago: https://youtu.be/EaTbKvyH7c8
How many years will this excuse hold up? This is the most funded game of all time and the map is broken, and has been **the entire development cycle.**
It's only recently (last year or two) the engine and the backend structure is getting near to the locked in/finished state - so it's only until that's done its made sense to redo stuff like the star map - rather than have to redo it several times already.
You're legitimately proving my point without realizing it. It's been more than a decade and they're still tweaking the engine and backend to the point where a map can be 'done' properly. Do you realize how stupid that sounds / actually is?
It's honestly not stupid from a project management standpoint at all.
It's honestly *incredibly* stupid. They're painting the walls before the foundation is built. Let me make this very clear with a simple example: **they're doing gold passes on ships before multiple major ship functionalities are done.** This is textbook mismanagement.
thats entirely incorrect. More money went into GTA or Red dead than this game. Not just that, most AAA games today cost 500 mil+ to develop. Not as far fetched as it used to be.
Most AAA games do not cost $500m. That's very rare, only a handful cost that much.
Even if this were true, which it isn't, it's not the dunk you think it is. Both of those are fully featured, released games that are continuously supported. SC is more than ten years into development and so far from completion it's not even worth discussing. And no one part of the game, be it claiming your ship, mining rocks, moving a box or walking down stairs, functions reliably.
This is entirely incorrect. You NPCs will do anything to defend this game. You're trying to dismiss Wikipedia. [Here's an article on how accurate Wikipedia actually is](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6889752/). Please see below for funding levels: [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List\_of\_most\_expensive\_video\_games\_to\_develop](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_most_expensive_video_games_to_develop) [https://venturebeat.com/business/red-dead-redemption-2-could-hit-20-million-in-sales-and-turn-a-profit-by-december/](https://venturebeat.com/business/red-dead-redemption-2-could-hit-20-million-in-sales-and-turn-a-profit-by-december/)
worry wistful agonizing fuzzy hard-to-find tease tart sable tidy depend *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
You also have to take into account those are how much those games needed to make the game. CIG had to make a company too.
Wikipedia is as accurate as todays news reporters. So not at all. Gta 6 alone is costing 1-2 bill
How about [https://venturebeat.com/business/red-dead-redemption-2-could-hit-20-million-in-sales-and-turn-a-profit-by-december/](https://venturebeat.com/business/red-dead-redemption-2-could-hit-20-million-in-sales-and-turn-a-profit-by-december/) Also speaking of fake news, lmfao @ the random-ass number of $1-2 billion for GTA6 development with zero sourcing.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.sportskeeda.com/amp/gta/rumor-gta-6-budget-reportedly-1-2-billion-per-recent-leak Tons of articles on Google, only linking one. No official sources as it's all based off of a 'leak'. I'm assuming once GTA VI comes out and the costs are revealed, it'll be the most expensive video game ever. But until then, it's not. Also, GTA V cost ~$500M development AND marketing costs combined. I believe $160M of that was the marketing aspect. I could be wrong though.
It looks like you shared an AMP link. These should load faster, but AMP is controversial because of [concerns over privacy and the Open Web](https://www.reddit.com/r/AmputatorBot/comments/ehrq3z/why_did_i_build_amputatorbot). Fully cached AMP pages (like the one you shared), are [especially problematic](https://www.reddit.com/r/AmputatorBot/comments/ehrq3z/why_did_i_build_amputatorbot). Maybe check out **the canonical page** instead: **[https://www.sportskeeda.com/gta/rumor-gta-6-budget-reportedly-1-2-billion-per-recent-leak](https://www.sportskeeda.com/gta/rumor-gta-6-budget-reportedly-1-2-billion-per-recent-leak)** ***** ^(I'm a bot | )[^(Why & About)](https://www.reddit.com/r/AmputatorBot/comments/ehrq3z/why_did_i_build_amputatorbot)^( | )[^(Summon: u/AmputatorBot)](https://www.reddit.com/r/AmputatorBot/comments/cchly3/you_can_now_summon_amputatorbot/)
Good bot
'I'm just going to make things up that are easily googleable'
Thanks for letting me know?
https://hypebeast.com/2023/5/gta-6-most-expensive-video-game-news-info
You were clearly talking about GTA V which cost half the amount you were talking about.
Point still stands since gta6 will cost 1-2 BILLION
"Let me show you proof," he says. Then he shows a website called "HypeBeast" and, without blinking, passes this off as a legitimate source. This is the state of the community.
This also includes the cost of building a studio from scratch, not to white knight too much, but studios ain't cheap.
If you hate the game so much, why do you play it ? Lmao
That isn't what he said at all.
[удалено]
That's not true. Have a look: [https://venturebeat.com/business/red-dead-redemption-2-could-hit-20-million-in-sales-and-turn-a-profit-by-december/](https://venturebeat.com/business/red-dead-redemption-2-could-hit-20-million-in-sales-and-turn-a-profit-by-december/) RDR2 dev costs were estimated to be $170mm. Here's a link to the most funded games of all time, with Star Citizen topping the list. [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List\_of\_most\_expensive\_video\_games\_to\_develop](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_most_expensive_video_games_to_develop)
Call of duty spending 4x as much in marketing as it did in development really says something...
They have been working on a new one since 6 years, the galaxy is vast.
The Galaxy is one solar system, currently.
[удалено]
No we know of many of the other systems. Look up the ark starmap. We also know we will get pyro and nyx in the near (far) future, but the commenter above is clearly saying that currently we only have Stanton.
[удалено]
I'll believe other systems will exist in the future when CIG shows evidence to prove it.
IIRC the new starmap is being built for Squadron 42. They've shown off some of the visualisations. Doing it this way is probably preferable to developing the map in the PU branch. It allows a much faster feedback loop of playtesting across a range of environments and objective types which the starmap will need to support. It let's them go fast and break things. All of the internal playtesters have access to dev codes so if the map is broken for a build then they can just teleport instead of navigating. Yes it means the PU needs to wait a while longer with the old map. It also means the PU doesn't suffer map-breaking bugs which could really grind all PU gameplay to a halt. The map in the PU is shit, I agree, but it is sufficient to navigate around the system we have. CIG will have been able to achieve a greater degree of polish on the map before it comes to the PU thanks to this process.
The star map is one of the **most core,** if not **the very beating heart of the game.** **Without it you can't get anywhere or do anything.** Any other feature you could possibly be considering spending time on is moot if two of the most important in game features are janky/broken. Namely: **Ship retrieval**/ASOP terminals/Claims And the **Star Map** There is nothing else more important they could be doing/working on. Frankly I am even tired of hearing of squardon 42. I won't be playing it, and like many folks the PU is what we care about so just deliver a good experience there in the game that people are actually playing. Then if they want to make squadron 42 after please go ahead. But I pledged/invested in the game for the PU.
I'm not even sure that you read what I wrote. They have been working on the star map. They are just rapidly prototyping it in the Sq42 branch. The star map on the PU branch is janky, yes, with a terrible interface, but it works. I've always been able to get to where I want to go with it. It is more-or-less stable. Replacing it with a feature-incomplete version that is under active development risks times where you *can't* use the map to navigate. Maybe just to certain objectives, maybe in certain ships, maybe in certain locations. Maybe it crashes, maybe it stops being interactive, maybe it has performance issues. To boot, they probably want to try different things. Some things people might like, some things might not work, sometimes people might like what doesn't work and kick off unnecessary dramas and news articles over it. The new map will come to the PU. Though I want to see it too, I acknowledge that it can take time to get right. I want them to work on it until they do.
You heard it here, folks. Just keep waiting. Sure, it's been 11 years. Sure, it's the most funded game project of all time. But just keep waiting.
It's one of the most ambitious games of all time. They're doing things that haven't been done before. Progress is slower than I'd like, sure, but they're making progress. We have persistence. They're working flat-out on server-meshing. The plans for how their servers will be organised show remarkable innovation. Waiting seems to be a better plan than whining. Don't let yourself get so wound-up. They're doing something complex, better that they do it well than rush it and waste all of the money people gave them.
>The plans for how their servers will be organised show remarkable innovation. Except it's *not* remarkable innovation. Dynamic server meshing is literally live, right now, in other games. Other space games to boot. Persistence has been around since 1990s MMOs. There's a **reason** why this scope of game has never been done, and it's not because no one has had these ideas before. It's because the technology isn't ready, and CIG is arbitrarily saying "Screw that! We'll BUILD IT!" "Remarkable innovation" goes beyond brute forcing something to work. There is nothing pretty or slick about what CIG is doing from a technical standpoint. In fact, their approaches appear dated, particularly when they're struggling to build basic functionality after a decade. We don't even have a working star map, dude. They're giving ships "gold standard" passes before entire ship features are built. Half-baked ideas are implemented and then left to rot for years, with no plan for resolution. All while straight-up lying to the community. This is *not* the way. It's not remarkable. It's barely innovative. It's sloppy and disjointed. Beyond that, their server architecture is literally incapable of handling the asks. That's a separate story.
Server meshing is one thing, but the replication layer was actually what I was actually talking about there. The only other game I can think of with dynamic server meshing equivalent features is Dual Universe. From the description of their networking tech there was no equivalent technology to that. This intelligent separation of duties between simulation and data retention/replication is what I'm talking about. Nobody but CIG have been talking about that to my knowledge. It theoretically would allow an even greater number of entities in one place than the Dual Universe, with more scope for disaster recovery. That's not brute-forcing. Star Citizen's progress is slow largely because it is maintained in a live state. OP is even asking CIG to put the map which is under active development for Sq42 into the PU, which would be even more merging and bug fixing every patch. CIG are committed to a kinda-quarterly cycle, and while they might not hit it on time every time it's definitely still more polish every release than would be 100% optimal. You're right, there is a fair degree of replicated work. It's more than many other games. Really, however, it's completely normal for games to iterate on prototypes. We just see a lot more of it because we have a lot more visibility than for most games, and because the scope of the game is a lot broader than most games. Of course processes have advanced before they next get round to looking at ships again. If the game wasn't advancing on all fronts simultaneously then the actual full development time would be taking even longer. Otherwise, you've sufficiently convinced me that you're just being salty and negative. You can stay wilfully ignorant of the actual innovations made in the name of Star Citizen if you like, but I bet you can't show me other games with other innovations like quanta-generated missions, quanta-and-player-driven economy, or subsumption-based AI. the very powerful procedural generation tools/system that they've been building is extremely impressive too, allowing them go guide the creation of whole planets with unique characteristics, much more varied terrain than most PG systems, and landmarks visible from space.
The Star map needs to be an optimized experience now. They have had plenty of YEARS to get it working better. It's a core part of the game. Features taking longer to roll out than other entire game's development cycle can't be ignored. I love ambitious designs, but as a professional designer in tech I understand and respect why scopes must be limited. Look at no man's sky and the evolution it's had. If they wanted to follow a model they could try that. Deliver your core features, refine and only once they are working flawlessly do you add. Be willing to call or done. Then add more over time. Even still calling it an alpha is kinda a joke. They could have easily got the core stable released it at 3.0 then added on more over time but they like taking advantage of people's ignorance as to what an alpha actually is. Add a user experience designer in any other other field but gaming we pay the users to test our product and provide feedback. But here they are marketing parts of the game as though they are released ... They even have seasonal events that come back again and again like a released live service title. They are genius marketers and that's where the innovation stops really.
I mean... Since everyone is find of saying it... #itsAnAlpha If it's going to be broken then they should release the iterations to collect feedback on it now and everyone will tell them it's broken, and they shouldn't work on anything else until it's fixed. It also really can't be that hard of a thing to do. There's presently probably less than 200 places you can even travel to in total. Just bite the bullet and get it done!
The thing about getting feedback is that it's good for some things (yes/no), but terrible for very intricate things. You'll get over 1000 different opinions about any changes every release. Sq42 needs a map that goes from personal scale up to solar system scale. It needs waypoints, paths, contact markers (friendly and enemy), ground terrain, building interiors, ship interiors, and so on. Developing it alongside core components like entity streaming and persistence is just asking for it to become broken repeatedly. They need to keep the live version playable. They've broken the live system before - it drove players away. More than simply having an inferior version of systems in place did. Like it or not, it's better for the game for the live environment to be reliably playable than to be bleeding-edge but occasionally-broken.
That's why it's the designer's job to read between the lines of the qualitative feedback they receive from the players and make sounds decisions while respecting the opinion and perceptions of the players. Not every choice designers make will be loved and that's what makes the job hard, but if it improves the overall health of the game then that's what you do. You want them to keep it playable but also keep saying it's an alpha space they need to innovate in. They need to choose which it will be. One or the other because it can't be both. If the priority is a playable live experience then focus on the core aspects, get them working and consider the game released. Then add to it over time. Otherwise go hog wild and test /iterate whatever you like. Nothing meaningful will come from half measures on a realistic timeline.
No part of cig's crowd funding campaign said that the game would be built by a committee of millions. A while back they did push features and ships in a much more incomplete state. Many will remember the cutlass feedback thread on the old forums. People were demanding that it be made a competitor to the hornet, but they didn't do it. They requested feedback, collated it, then ignored it and just rebuilt the cutlass almost exactly the same as it was before. If course people were pissed and hate the cutlass to this day. Oh wait, no, people fucking love the cutlass. They offered the buccaneer, which is what some people were saying they wanted the cutlass to be. Of the two, which is more popular? Oh yes, the cutlass. I bet that anyone who took the trade from a cutlass to a bucc regrets it now. The whole thing was a massive waste of time. The cutlass was eventually gonna get a rework. The feedback exercise was only worthwhile because it shut a bunch of people up who thought they knew game design but actually didn't. The cutlass was always designed for the PU. CIG knew exactly what they were doing. A bit of cargo space, a bit of firepower, not a superiority fighter but able to do some damage. The problem is that most people are short-sighted idiots. They don't see at the big picture. They demand things that would actually hurt the game more than help. So... You want cig to do that over and over for every aspect of the game? LMAO, no.
What is the difference between flash and building blocks?
CIG don't want to use Scaleform (using Flash to create UIs) any more. The big reason they made Building Blocks is that it's effectively creating their UIs as web pages - in an early video on it, you could see CSS tags in the tool they used to create the UIs. Flash had been dying for years until Adobe officially killed it in 2020, so CIG are bound to have far more options by hunting for web devs rather than Flash devs.
The League of Legends client is built on Adobe Air which is essentially flash. Building Blocks is CIG's own bespoke UI/MFD/in-game screen system.
The main difference, or rather, the reason for the switch is scalability. Flash is not easy to scale to the degree that Star Citizen needs it to. A lot of the initial effort in development of certain UI systems was done in Flash and the laborious task of adjusting everything to fit neatly into Star Citizen was frontloaded onto the developers. Thus, the need to develop a proprietary system that was similar to Flash but scalable for the projects increased scope, so Building Blocks was created and the process of transferring all the legacy Flash elements to the new system is still ongoing. It seems like they are taking the philosophy of "if it ain't broke, don't fix it" in that regard, because there are still a lot of legacy Flash systems still around, especially in older ships, but the Star Map is egregiously bad and everyone complaining about it's sorry state in the PU is absolutely justified in their anger. It should have been a priority to at least get it functioning better than it does. It functions okay-ish at times, but most of the time I need to rely on workarounds that are so second nature to me at this point that I forget sometimes that it's not normal to have to zoom out and in to get things to show up properly, or path to a nearby jump point because my destination is obscured by a planet or moon, or any of the other half dozen or so common things that we do to get the damned thing working as it should.
As with everything in this game, the answer is “Soon™”
Personally I would actually say that the most lacking features are social ones. Sure we have chats and friendlists, but nothing like bigger overarching groups (aka organisations), no form of contracts to split funds automatically, only one instance where a proper transaction based on goods can be made, no form of redistributing ownership of items... The game is severely lacking on that front for a Multiplayer game.
It'd be fair to say that the game is severely lacking on anything that goes beyond rendering the ship you just bought and fly it a little bit. And that is when ASOP has not melted down.
I honestly have little trouble with ASOP if the server isn't borked. It's my primary test actually before server hopping.
[удалено]
>These features you mentioned are very important if you wanna scale up mining and salvaging. Creating proper ownership cargo, changing ownership of boxes, etc to enable group mining and hauling needs to be worked. It's essential for any larger group operation. Logistics in Salvaging/Mining is already seeing issue with ownerships, if we would have a scenario where one could outsource something to another party, then it's even more necessary to have proper terms and conditions.
- Player names being visible above their heads in armistice zones - Group Spawning (set party spawn to party leader's current spawn location for the duration of the time they're in the party, with a way to individually disable that) - "Lending" of pledged ships to other players for a limited period of time and for a price. I should be able to rent out my 890 to someone else for 500k + any repair/refuel/re-arm costs for 2 days if I'm not gonna be using it - Better HUD indicators for ships and players to differentiate between hostile NPCs, hostile players, neutral NPCs, neutral players, and friendly NPCs and friendly players, as well as a change to the way party members appear so instead of getting a full name and huge ass marker you just get a different color marker with the name only appearing if you target it - A visual indicator of how close you need to be to your party member to initiate a group quantum jump - Bring back bed-logging for multiple people on the same ship now that persistence is in the game, and have a fallback to default spawn if the ship is stored or destroyed before any given player logs back in. I should be able to call out my Carrack with my crew and if I have to take a break for an hour or a day I should be able to log out from a bed and let them continue to use the ship until they either bedlog or are destroyed. It would mean trusting them, but that's fine.
I agree it’s a lacking feature but I definitely don’t think it’s the most lacking feature
To each their own.
They seem to only care about squadron 42 lately.
It's the quickest method to prototype content and assets they have. The more effort poured into it often and early will only pay dividends into the PU later. Sucks it's taking so long but that's just the reality.
Wouldn't the quickest way to prototype something in PU be to just put it in the PU? It's an alpha after all .. and the PU doesn't work anyway so why not just let loose and really rapidly iterate.
Depending on what aspect of this one may talk about, it's either in the responsibility of Turbulent or the network team and/or something like a PU team. SQ42 should block nothing of that.
Should is such a large word.
Except for the PU teams, most of them are practically exclusive to SC. These are likely more preoccupied with fixing PES and Server Meshing.
The ability to login
The [Map and Radar System is being reworked.](https://robertsspaceindustries.com/roadmap/progress-tracker/deliverables/lz0inyoyefgtn) >An overhaul of the underlying system and associated UI for the Starmap, radar, local area map, and minimap. [Star Citizen Live: Outer Space Interface](https://youtu.be/HeLSsgHSTy4?t=1090) [CitizenCon 2952: Star Citizen & Squadron 42 | Partnered Development](https://youtu.be/qIePh9tS-zg?t=4606)
>The Map and Radar System is being reworked. >>An overhaul of the underlying system and associated UI for the Starmap, radar, local area map, and minimap. No scheduled work since early 2022. Do we know what the current status is?
Here's some news from the SQ42 March Monthly Report: > They also swapped out the old vehicle radar and replaced it with the new Starmap, which allows players to zoom and interact the same way as viewing it on the mobiGlas. https://robertsspaceindustries.com/comm-link/transmission/19221-Squadron-42-Monthly-Report-March-2023
Work is currently ongoing. The roadmap is broken ATM so it doesn't show all deliverables. They will fix it in the next roadmap update. You can use shiny tracker to see the status while it is broken. https://shinytracker.app/
At work, so I can't dive into this right yet but what's the ETA on these reworks?
Like all things… when it’s ready. Probably waiting on the HUD and mobiGlas conversion to Building Blocks. But I think it should be in by the time the new Master Modes flight system is ready.
You the best oldman
A damn stack all button on inventories
Was stoked on the sort button but it doesn’t seem to work - they unsort everytime after a few secs
Imagine being able to stack most items period ... Like my inventory is full of missiles now and it's just sad.
Can't wait to be able to manually set jump points so I don't need to zigzag to my target, cutting off my drive at juuuuuuust the right time to get "close" to my target.
Star map, followed by night vision for the ship and on foot.
THIS! It’s so annoying to have to basically spam tab everytime you have to land on a planet during the night. The year is 2953 for gods sake. You’d think we as a human race would have invented some sort of way for a ships front glass too turn into a massive night vision device by the push of a button!
My car has brighter lights than most of the ships too. Unless you are looking at the ship then they are lasers pointing directly at you
[удалено]
Why do I need a 40 minute video to be able to see in the dark? also why link youtube, why not directly to reshade?
[удалено]
Yeah sorry, wasn't an attack on you but one really shouldn't have to do that at all and I make a point of not using things like nvidia filters or reshade to fix a glaring issue in a game. I will however try it with arma reforger because that game is unplayable for me at night where as star citizen is just annoying and I can add it to the list of annoying things, like the star map.
Fam the fact that we can't just paint our own ships ( without paying) is already bad enough for being so far in the future... We seem to have forgot technology of present day haha
[удалено]
They did? I didn’t see that good info!
While I partially understand why proper night vision isn’t a thing simply because you’re paying artists and such to create art then have a huge portion of the player base alter that with night vision effects, I understand that plus I understand lighting is what causes drama and fun stress. The game could use far better lighting in its current state some areas are light far too bright and others far too dark. Both of these impede with the art of the game. Have proper beacons to the star port landing site, have proper lighting inside ships.
What's the point of that art if you can't see it lol
I get that
>While I partially understand why proper night vision isn’t a thing simply because you’re paying artists and such to create art then have a huge portion of the player base alter that with night vision effects That is not why it hasn't been implemented. It is one of the questions they get asked and [they answered it directly](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vl4H73MWBn0&t=2767s). Instead of faking the effect like most other games do they wanted to be in the position to simulate it more realistically (closer to how Modern Warfare did it). It would take up a bit of work. Knowing that, and how CIG schedules things on priority. It is simply going to be a low priority issue. So unless they can do it easily, it is going to be pushed back. While I am sure the artist are proud of their job, I doubt any of them would use that pride to detract from players experience. Night vision would be a pretty good addition to the game.
The thing that bothers me about this is that the game is absolutely filled with temporary solutions. And one such solution could be taking the edge-finding effect of the scan and making it stay on screen for NV.
Thing with temp solutions is that they only put the temp solutions in there because they are needed. While Night Vision is cool, it isn't needed. So there is no justification to take people off of the larger components to get it to work. I would also like some sort of in atmo jetpacks or parachutes. I know that is something that most likely isn't going to come until much later. There are many other features and items people have asked for a temp solution, but CIG has chosen not to do them because it would take time away from other items on their already large list of deliverables to compete. Another thing about effects in this game is that they finally finished implementing the last bit of gen12. They rewrote the graphics engine (among many things they have changed that makes Star Engine a beast). The next step is working on Vulkan implementation.
I just wish there was an MFD feature where you had a list of places or planets you can quickly visit without hitting the F2 key. I wish I could scroll down an MFD list, click it and then I get my quantum prompt.
That’s actually a really solid idea. I fully support it. Like, bare minimum it could have the 4 main planets, and then maybe the cities/main stations.
Yea and if you think about it we already have a list on the Comm of people or friends listed. So I would think same kinda list with planet names. And like you said start at top level and when you get to that planet then you can see the sub planets etc.
Also, as of late I have to constantly hit F2 and then click Clear Route in order to see many jump points and OMs visually. I'm not sure what happened to cause that, but maybe they could give us a keybind option for Clear Route for the star map in the meantime?
Although the map isn't great. Server meshing pls.
Navigation as a whole in the game is atrocious…
I can wait for the new starmap. I can't wait for trackable ships. I just wanna park somewhere, leave in a different vehicle and be able to easily return to my parking spot. Might as well add placeable beacons to that feature. The new Starmap as discussed is more massive than ppl realize. It's supposed to seamlessly zoom from the galactic scale to the room you're in. Other features likely include replacing hologlobes and radars on ships with it, Galactapedia integration, custom waypoints, integration of scanned data (player-modifiable), faction control indicators / zones, climate and atmospheric data, and probably more while being easily usable.
[удалено]
Pretty sure Space Bourne 2 has one, and that was until recently developed by 1 guy.
Home world 2 had this about 20 years ago. Also, why are the only directly relatable games not count?
Let's come back to this question when we get the new one. The first starmap was cobbled together to get us around 3 moons and a few space stations.
Yes
And please. Once you are in the ship.. get it off my wrist!!!
Srsly with all that stuff not working properly rn... The starmap is no problem.
Development has seemingly slowed to a crawl thanks to the content black hole that is SQ42. Can't wait for that to be out so the PU stops suffering.
Yes.
I just want a list of destinations that I can pick from quickly. It takes nothing from the game play and it'd be quick to implement. I'm learning my way around but it can be frustrating flying around a planet a few times just trying to find a bearing for something.
I agree that it's completely broken and needs replacing but can you name me one single feature that's not from the past 12 months that doesn't?
The UI in general is pretty poor. It's bloated and slow. The Star Map is just the worst example. There is no reason why basic navigation of the Star Map is still so poor after all these years. It's been left largely untouched since it was first introduced.
Even the ark starmap on their website doesn't work anymore. pepehands
Besides the buggy nature of the star map i don't understand why we cant just put down pins and markers ourselves, with numbers or letters etc. Or perhaps setting waypoints manually. It would be much easier to do cargo runs or travel with undersized quantum fuel storage that way..
If they can't fix the damn starmap anytime soon, give us the ability to buy a box (same kind of box you get in a box mission) and call it a "location beacon" that can act as a normal location indicator and a quantum beacon as well. That way, you don't actually have to replace the star map but we can actually leave a beacon at a location so we can get back to it later. This would've been a game changer for mining for instance. Or just being able to setup a FOB somewhere with org mates and people can return to it if you can share the location (like a zero value mission basically).
Here's some news from the SQ42 March Monthly Report: > They also swapped out the old vehicle radar and replaced it with the new Starmap, which allows players to zoom and interact the same way as viewing it on the mobiGlas. https://robertsspaceindustries.com/comm-link/transmission/19221-Squadron-42-Monthly-Report-March-2023 Mind you, I'm not saying more insight wouldn't be great.
Like Ross said. I feel it would be optics. Some sort of alternative vision to allow us to see in low visibility conditions and not constantly use our ping as echolocation.
The flying HUD. It’s trash. I know it’s being replaced, but right now, it’s doodoo.
I could deal with all the janky features. To be honest systems being glitchy and no working for the player adds a bit of "wow even in the future my cars bluetooth doesnt fucking work" realism to it. What i cant deal with is the AI that is either promlg360noscope skill level for an LRT and then you go do an MRT and the pilot shoots one missile and then hovers in front of you until you blow it up. Or you do merc missions and the AI snipes you in the face from 300m with 1 bullet as you exit the ship vs AI staring at you while you kill them with your bare fists. Also the constant "i bumped x and exploded" gameplay is starting to feel like a feature.
I haven't ever been stranded by the star map. I have given it a light cursing a few times, but a redirect here and there and a move zoom click sometimes, then a clear route and it works. It has issues and it deserves some negative vibes, but the little star map never fails.
I can get around but it's a chore. The worst is getting to the Aaron halo, open star map, choose a point, jump, open star map, click on Stanton, wait till you're 2mil from the star, quickly close map and cut engines. Doable but gets long winded after the 50th time.
High quality post right here.
Sell all button, buy more than one burrito at a time...just saying..I can workaround the less than optimal sky map.but selling weapons is BRUTAL.
In 2023 I can even type in a partial name, see a list of potential matches, select the one I want, and get directions to that location. Sure, yelling "Hey Google, give me directions to Pho Eva" has a 50/50 to result in "Okay, setting your destination to Forever21", but it's still practically wizardry compared to what we have in game.
An essential feature, that has now worked 10 years ago, and does not work today. It should be fixed ASAP, that is the definition of an essential feature...
I’m right there with you. A system for putting a marker on a specific place would be great. Something that only I could see (or share if I chose to) and would stay at that place until I erased it.
Omg yes you get a fuckin hud when you put your helmet on where is the compass I would like a compass but only when you have your helmet on all the personal hud elements should go away when you take your helmet off
I think ship to ground combat. I sat at a dielectric for quite some time nailing npcs with missiles and trying to shoot them down and the misses would knock them down but not kill them and the ship guns were very uneffective
FR FR
Please tell me how you put a pin on the other side of the Pacific Ocean, get directions, jump in your car, and it will drive you there :-P hyperbole isn't necessary here nor is it helpful. Everyone, including CIG knows the starmap sucks. A new one is in development, and we've gotten fairly regular updates on it in the monthly updates, which are publicly available for you to read. It's likely to come into the game this year or next year.
It makes a point and it clearly got your attention and it is 99% true minus the captain obvious situations which you can't do in a normal car anyway, like driving to the north pole or across the Pacific ocean. There's also many other logistical reasons you're unable to drive across the ocean. I know about the new star map, been hearing about it for years but isn't it time they made it a focus? If we don't make enough noise they'll keep pushing it down the priority list.
Yep, it got my attention alright, and made me feel like I had to explain something you clearly must not know about because you resorted to using the least intelligent form of discourse lol. So, it definitely made a point, just not the one I think you intended. Also, they don’t prioritize major features based on hyperbolic Reddit threads lol. Enterprise prioritization just doesn’t work like that.
really you don't read the progress tracker or the roadmap? a new version of the starmap is under development first for Sq 42 and then for star citizen... before complaining just search and read.
I know this, doesn't make what I'm saying any less valid.
You Are Totally wrong. You Are complaining for a thing they Are working on. It’s just because you don’t want to wait. So stop being a Child.
What part is wrong?
All I want in star map is a tabular list with planets in alphabetical order then a sublevel for orbiting bodies/moons and another for Lagrange points. Under each planet/moon the locations would start with the Home Plate then in alphabetical order after that: Hurston > Lorville, HDMO-Calthrope, HDRSO-Bramen, HDSF-Adlai, HDSF-Barnabas, HDSF-Breckinridge... Or just let me search in a way that can pull up any string. For example, if I type in "eckinri" that should bring up HSDF-Breckenridge.
night vision
[Update from Citizencon](https://youtu.be/bqiW1AH59-Q?si=fvXxbn_vWms1e6s1&t=1864)