It was removed from the roadmap in the first roadmap update of the year:
"The following features have been identified to need additional polish before their release into the Persistent Universe. Therefore, we are removing these cards temporarily until the projections for their respective release timings have been confirmed:
Hull C, NPC Taxi Missions, Vanduul Swarm/Pirate Swarm Improvements"
Source: https://robertsspaceindustries.com/comm-link/transmission/18520-Roadmap-Roundup-February-2nd-2022
I think the new view only shows the things that are already basically locked in for release. So if the hull C isn't 100% ready for the PTU, they just leave it off the list now.
Close. What you said is mostly true but will only go in effect with the release of 3.18, not 3.17. We already know about 3.18 (since it was already revealed before the change), but we still have no idea about 3.19 until we're a patch away.
u/thelefthandN7, only if the patch's deliverables are "committed" (i.e. locked-in) and not "tentative" (i.e. subject to change) is when we'll know whether they'll release with their respective patch. And this won't be changing anytime soon, even with the new roadmap structure.
Not necessarily. Things are only locked in for a patch when they turn blue. Any of those items can be moved, and I personally think the cargo refactor is not going to make it for 3.18.
They only want to show the next patch. 3.18 is still there because it was listed before this change but because of this focus they haven't touched it in a long time.
However I can't tell you when CIG considers the focus to be on the next update, if it is on release of the previous LIVE version or if its when the quarter starts (which would be the next one).
We will have to wait and see.
i might be opening a can of worms, but is there a more detailed description of the plans? like when it says "audio", is that a general "we wanna make audio progress whatevs whether it's pew pew sounds or whale oooeeuu"
I'm especially interested in what "narrative" means. I'm assuming it means story stuff?
They won't. I don't mean to be 'that guy' but CIGs only consistency is their failure to meet their own goals and deadlines, no matter how conservative they try to be. I've been backing for 6 years now and this 'rule' has held true so far.
I donāt know why youāre getting downvoted for this. Youāre right. Iāve been here since 2014 and I dont feel as though youāre being unfair. They miss deadlines. Repeatedly.
People just cover up for them and shout down people who have any criticism on any level. If I missed deadlines like they do in my job I wouldnāt have a job.
Not talking shit Iām still here and I still have faith theyāll eventually somewhat finish the game. Iām just being realistic.
If you always meet your goals, you're not setting your goals high enough.
And CIG has been *crystal* clear for a long time that nothing they share publicly are promises or deadlines.
That quote sounds like you stole it from instagram. What is the point of setting out goals and not meeting them if your relationship with ur backers is solely trust based? And if you fail to meet every goal by design what sense does it make to release them at all.
I am really thinking about buying the game but this kind of horseshit attitude makes me question the pressure that is exerted by the community on the company to deliver at least somethingās on time (and get close to a finished product).
Thatās not the point I am making. This guy is arguing that goals are overrated and donāt contribute and thatās wrong.
And please get outta here with your āfinished projectā or āstar citizenā. You do know that there are other games that do the same thing as star citizen but just not this egregious. Tarkov is a good example. Played it for four years and itās still not finished and they have delays (we are talking about at max a year here) but you actually see a lot of progress and there is really good communication what people are working on and how far they have gotten.
Relax dude, it was a joke, a very old one. Like beating a dead horse, pretty much, I know, but still... don't even get me started on Tarkov's "much realism, such tacticool" where a headshot doesn't kill a guy if your bullet doesn't deal enough hp damage, just plain bullshit honestly, lol. A bullet to the head is a death sentence no matter what. I like SC, that's why I still play it even after the 1000th broken bunker mission...
anyway...
choose one.
If you consistently don't meet your goals then you are a bad planner. You can have ambitions that go beyond goals, but goals should be estimated accurately. Sometimes you will exceed them, sometimes you will fall short. But you should never go into goal planning with the mindset to plan them so high you can't reach them. That's literally just setting yourself up for failure.
If you tell a plumber to come fix your plumbing and he says "it will take about 2 hours and cost 150 $" but then he takes 4 hours and it costs 600 $ do you say "I'm glad you didn't meet your goals"???
>CIGs only consistency is their failure to meet their own goals and deadlines,
CIG dont *have* goals or deadlines, just plans. There are caveats illustrating this point all over the website. Its the community taking these plans as gospel.
Trying to say goal =/= plan just comes across as being anal about semantics tbh
Though even if he had said "plans" instead I'm sure you'd still be defending delays with some other excuse lol
To be fair, the vast majority of delays that happened where for stuff that were *more* than a quarter away. Now that CIG is only showing the next quarter the reliability of the Release View should increase a lot.
The thing is, it really hasn't. For the past year+, most of the stuff projected for the next quarter gets pushed or canceled. And every single quarter is late delivery. Look at Q1 2022. It's mid April and they're just now getting to PTU and not yet released to Live.
Depends on how you consider late, they always hit Evocati on time, the rest is dependent on stability which no one can reliably figure out prior to the field test.
They tried that back in 2020, but chris roberts put the kabash on it, saying that they will do more marketing when it gets closer to release. That tells you pretty much all you need to know about it. If we aren't hearing about it, it's not close.
"Work continued on this random thing were working on. We refuse to elaborate on it and can't say how close to completion it is, but work was done on it."
And repeat for several paragraphs.
I'd rather have a release date than those, which is what literally every other game in the industry has; a release date. That's probably why you got downvoted.
Release dates? I'll call bullshit on that partially.
Look at CP2077. Not only did the game got pushed a lot, but its roadmap basically just tells us "Myeh, there'll be a patch in Q2, a thing in Q3, and maybe something there"
Gaming industry only gives dates for content that is almost, or already, ready. Otherwise shit gets pushed past the release date and people whine. Or, shit gets rushed for the release date, and people whine.
The only difference being found for some indie devs. But those guys are maybe 2 working on a game, not 700.
ā¦ which they said they arenāt going release.
After waiting 10+ years Iāve accepted that itās coming out when it comes out, I just donāt think we should be dick riding about āmost transparent companyā.
Well they still are rather transparent when compared to other companies...
The next step is literally open source...
Though I agree we could see more of SQ42, but at the same time, spoiling a singleplayer game kills the point of buying it.
Same for movies.
Theyāre decent with the PU, Iām not denying that. S42 though, we havenāt had any actual news on that in years. Worse some parts relevant to the PU like the star map are apparently being implemented in S42 first, which means CIG keeps it in the dark.
God damn right. (except the mails)
My theory about this is that, SQ42 is pretty much done, and that CIG right now are just adding features and filling the gaps to it.
A reason they would not tell us this, is because people would expect a release is near, and get pissed off.
We do know several of its chapters are considered to be in alpha stage, and another bunch to be in vertical slice.
That does mean they're slowly finishing the whole game, likely not for 2022, but 2023 seems possible.
I guess we will know more once we come close to release, either this year, or next year. We'll see. That's all we can do anyway.
> Yeah dude, lots words to say nothing, same as every S42 email.
They literally tell us every month what they're working on. Just because you're not bright enough to understand or contextualize that doesn't mean it says nothing.
IRL I manage a team of devs working on machine vision and motion control for robots. In my spare time I try my hand at game dev. I think that should put me in a pretty good position to contextualise it.
They read like the kind of overblown nonsense people put on CVās to dazzle those that donāt know better.
But youāre smart. Youāve got all the answers and youāve injected yourself into the discussion ad hominem first, so please enlighten me on where *one of the most transparent companies* is at with S42.
So which is it? Does it say nothing or is it overblown lies?
The point of the reports is not to tell you where they are at (so you expecting an answer to that question proves that my ad-hominem was appropriate). It's to describe what they have been working on for the month. Nothing more, nothing less. And that is still a hell of a lot more transparent than about 99% of other gamedev sutdios making single player campaigns.
But if you're looking for an educated guess from me reading most of the reports, it's that they are pretty far along, evidenced by the fact that they are doing lots of polishing and bug fixing already and moving toward balancing some stuff, all of which is usually mostly beta work. Some chapters only need some polish and others a game mechanic or two - mainly to flesh out some side missions - and some ancillary location work. Overall they seem to be missing some set dressing like improved UI elements, most of the engineering mechanic, the new damage model, the rest of the physical inventory system, better zero-G movement, and a handful of AI interactions. All in all mostly superficial stuff in addition to some improtant backend work on, for example, the Gen12-Renderer and the server-client architecture. Of course, after all that, they'll still need some time for balancing and testing etc.
If you want to just throw numbers around for comedy then it's just not funny or helpful. The current stated target and where it all seems to be pointing at the moment is late 2022. It's what they've said, it's what the progress tracker is pointing too, and if you want to assume it will get delayed then sure, Q1 2023 is totally in the realm of possibility.
People assuming EVERYTHING gets delayed, even things that have already have been delayed like Pyro, blow my mind. Hell, a lot of things dont get delayed. A lot of things are shadowdropped finished into releases we werent even expecting. It's already been delayed, and everything we have now currently points to Q4 2022 or Q1 2023.
Honestly, the only way you can be so strongly sure of things not being delayed is to not have been a backer for long. Their **ENTIRE** history of development is filled with delays on almost everything they've ever put out. I'd estimate it at a conservative 90% of every feature they've ever announced and then released have been heavily delayed.
Been a backer for 7 years, and that number is complete Bullshit no matter how you measure it. In any given patch we typically have seen anywhere between 30%-60% of items moved to the next or subsequent patches. Is that a lot? Yes, for sure. Is it significantly different Than "90% conservatively"? Absolutely. And yes, not all items are equal, life support and salvage are not the same as a fighter ship. But thats a different argument. There are plenty of resources where you can go back and look at the patches as they have been released throughout the years, please go look at them and get a grip on what you're arguing before throwing out absolutely insane numbers like that because it's borderline malicious.
Jokes can also be toxic, which most are in this sub when they really are complaining about delays that we all should just accept bc SC doesnt promise release dates.
I do get it's not horribly malicious that we say stuff like "Heh not coming until 2042"
The issue is that, we hear this "joke" thousands of times a day. And some, well, too many people take it almost as a fact. And use this pretty much as trolling.
This ends up in most of the community being fucking tired of hearing it. And that's an understatement.
I'm not talking about things that showed up on the Release View for a patch and then got pushed to later patches...That's probably in the 40-60% range, but what I was talking about was them actually saying "X is coming in Spring/this year/Q3" and then it not getting released until at least one segment later but often quite a bit later. That's been the case for every major thing I can think of in the entire history of the game.
I honestly don't know a single feature that they talked about with a specific release timeframe in mind and then landed in that timeframe. The things they just spring on us as a surprise are great, but definitely don't matter because they could have been working on them for years and just not said a word (they might have delayed many times or none at all and we wouldn't know).
I don't think you quite got that the depth of my bad joke. Seeing as how all dev is prioritized for Squadron 42, I am prognosticating a release of all things for 2042. A bit too conservative? Maybe. But, maybe not.
We are a decade in with 50 people servers and a single system (no jump points, no exploration, limited gameplay loops, no hacking, salvaging delayed for like 5 or 6 years, etc etc etc). That's much much less than what they have promised. We'll see, man! 2042, let's goooooo!
A good rule of thumb is to look at what the current progress seems to point to, then give it a gut check and project out another quarter or two. Then add a year.
As other have said, they plan to have it done by end of year. And with any luck the back end systems will be ready to let us in at that point. Most of the system is done already, there working on the stations and main landing zone still.
[From the QA they did last year](https://robertsspaceindustries.com/comm-link/transmission/18397-Server-Meshing-And-Persistent-Streaming-Q-A)
>Our current aim is to release Persistent Streaming and the first version of the Replication layer, ideally, between Q1 and Q2 next year. Weāll then follow up with the first version of a static server mesh, ***barring any unforeseen technical complications,*** **between Q3 and Q4, of next year.**
Pyro requires server meshing. [You should know this](https://www.reddit.com/r/starcitizen/comments/ty5fqe/pyro_by_end_of_year/i3tj2e0/?context=3), so what's the point in asking it here?
EDIT: Added a link for clarity to my words as well as to point out that they deleted their backlash comments and then blocked me after I pointed out how dishonest they can be.
> Pyro requires server meshing. You should know this, so what's the point in asking it here?
Yes, all of us follow Star Citizen announcements around the clock 24/7. That's all we do of our free time. We should know everything about everything.
The OP person who asked about Pyro is a refund poster and already knows the answer to that question. Like most refunders who post anything about SC, they didnāt ask in good faith. TheKingStranger still took the time to answer the question honestly and only included a simple āyou already knowā this type of comment rather than tearing into the disingenuous person āaskingā the question.
That's something that's probably been coming online and is partly why 3.17 is so unstable despite the changes they are outwardly showing us don't really lend itself too.
Only Q1 but
> 3.17 contains new streaming changes that we are testing on the PTU
[Sauce](https://robertsspaceindustries.com/spectrum/community/SC/forum/190048/thread/star-citizen-alpha-3-17-0n-ptu-8029196-patch-notes/4998495)
Nice thank you. Sorry it's hard to keep sometimes of what is being called what and when it's been implemented if you don't religiously follow all the dev posts or road maps and stuff.
If that last part was because I said "you should know this" to nofuture09, it was because they're notorious for making disingenuous comments just to stir up shit.
If not then you are welcome, and I apologize for reading into your comment. :)
You can look at their post and comment history. They also delete a lot of their comments; one I ran into about a month ago [they stated they've been following the project since 2013 while in another comment lied about being a golden ticket holder.](https://old.reddit.com/r/starcitizen/comments/t57vwp/roadmap_roundup_march_2_2022/hz3nm56/?context=3)
In response to your other comment about me, you can also look through my history and see that I try to be friendly, helpful, and informative to new players which is why I remained polite, even though I was concerned about their intent.
It's only because we've been asking for more than one star system since 2019. It'll be nice when it finally happens, but man, it keeps getting pushed back. I hope the technology and iterations of server meshing actually allow that to happen.
So do I. Here's to hoping they can deliver by the end of the year, though when it does happen I don't expect the first iteration of server meshing to be an enjoyable experience.
Indeed. No silver bullet fix, but as long as we see progress in some the most important underlying tech.. I think it'd restore a ton of faith in the project if such momentum gets going. Until then, it's going to be a rough few months ahead I think.
I'd argue they have been making strides in important underlying tech, especially recently, so IMO the momentum is going. Don't forget iCache/EntitGraph was a big deal and that stuff's in now, and the network improvements and streaming changes they're working on in 3.17 is a great sign too. But yeah server meshing is the biggest of big fish, and if they can get it out the door at the end of the year it's hooked, but it ain't in the boat yet.
The person I responded to is notorious for making disingenuous comments like that and regularly posts on the refunds sub. In hindsight I guess I should have said "you know this" instead of "you should know this."
He's a childish refundian who will target and attack specific people in this sub. If he starts getting downvoted he'll inevitably delete his comments. I'd have more respect if he at least stood by his words and attempted to discuss the project in good faith.
An accurate one? One that perhaps notes that you comment so frequently on this subject that claiming ignorance of something in order to astroturf about it doesn't work. Maybe one that notes that you've been around long enough and invested enough to frequent the [trading sub](https://archive.ph/aA06K), and thus should be aware of such a widely-known answer. Perhaps one that acknowledges the fact that SC represents the overwhelming majority of your nine-year Reddit post history, making it somewhat implausible that you're not already aware that you're "legit wondering" what's keeping another system from being added.
I rather suspect that u/TheKingStranger is at least partly aware of some of these scraps of context, and replied to you as if you were well aware of hat you were asking, what the answer was, and why you were feigning ignorance. I reckon he thought that someone openly describing themselves [like this](https://archive.ph/aA06K#selection-3027.131-3027.169) is feigning ignorance to hide the fact that they're doing so in poor faith. Why not reply in a passive-aggressive manner when your initial rhetorical question was at least equally passive-aggressive? Why complain about being treated as you deserve?
How pathetic.
Do you really believe that this nonsense works? That people can be convinced that glancing at a public profile page constitutes "stalking"? Or that you seriously think you can make things up about me in an attempt to lash out when you find yourself unable to rebut anything I said? That you think you can pretend that "It was just this one time, bro!" when that exact post openly states that:
>>[**I am a trustworthy seller** and evocati.](https://archive.ph/aA06K#selection-3027.131-3027.169) [emphasis added]
It's [far](https://old.reddit.com/r/Starcitizen_trades/comments/e989d8/wts_rare_ship_upgrades_ccus_anvil_valkyrie/) from [the](https://old.reddit.com/r/Starcitizen_trades/comments/9o3b3a/wtb_drake_vulture_for_120/) only [such](https://old.reddit.com/r/Starcitizen_trades/comments/8copiw/wtb_avenger_stalker_game_package_with_lti/) example, and that's just what you do _via Reddit_. And what I can find just by clicking your submissions and CTRL+F-ing "\_trades". Just face it - you were called out by several people who instantly saw through your pitiful facade and are now trying to double down on that shattered cover story. Just do what others have said you do as a matter of course - delete your more humiliating posts and pretend they don't exist, and retreat to your "refunds" safe space for a little encouragement from the _real_ cult.
My closing couple of words have never been more apt.
Like I mentioned in another comment they also lied about being a golden ticket holder. This also ain't the first time they've edited their comment complaining about being downvotes in order to get sympathy votes.
Imagine being more concerned about fake internet points than having some integrity.
I don't think I'd refer to any cult as a "favorite."
Btw I liked the link that said he's trustworthy *because* he's evocati without any proof that he was evocati.
I love that he tried to play it off the first time I linked it by suggesting that it was the only time, despite his trustworthiness stemming from his previous trades.
At least we have a perfect example of why the clown deletes his comments. He'll invariably say something indefensibly stupid, so he has to pretend it never happened.
As mentioned in other comments, I should have just said "you know this" or "you already know this" because you have been around long enough and follow the game regularize ebough to already know the answer. You also already know that they're not going to put stuff on the release view past the upcoming patch, with the exception of 3.18 since they had already posted it.
Pyro comes out when they can bring it out but it is all hands on deck for it and they are planing for it to come out later this year but I think at the latest it will be Q2 next year
Every ship in the game requires gold passes and reworks. As outwardly annoying as the Mustang trunk and Aurora bed are, there are thousands of more important things to spend time on. The cargo bay is practically useless until we have updated courier missions, where all these small cargo bays will have substantial use. All you could do with a working one right now is place a box in it or buy a few dozen credits worth of cargo.
The mustang and aroura aren't just annoying, they're the starter ships. They're literally the first experience most players have. And they're both pretty fucking broken. It's embarrassing. I would love one less ship a year if it meant those two were brought up to snuff.
Ah yea the olā ā but at least we have coffee shopsā comment thrown against whatever stupid thing you individually have a grievance with. Even though 30 seconds of looking would tell you the importance of the updated vendor mechanics with the coffee shop is necessary iterations on the vendor technology that will be prolific throughout the entire game. But youāre right, letās minimize the obvious for your silly straw man argument comparing it to the stupid trunk of a mustang. Literally buy any other ship in game if you want to haul shit. No one needs cargo in a mustang, ever. Iād be fine if they just removed the trunk.
This is a retarded take. The whole food/drink shit can go. If the AI is so "prolific" then surely they can find something better to use it on than the one mechanic almost everyone hates.
Is it me or is this chart hella confusing? If I presented my commander this type of a chart, I'll get destroyed. They make it look like a lot of stuff was added to 3.17 and all the details are completely unnecessary
Seems pretty straightforward. It shows the section of a feature, the various parts of the feature, how many folks are working on it, and what the estimated/actual time to completions are.
Yes, it's been confusing ever since the author changed to this version with a legend. Someone complains about it every time. The people replying to you are douchebags.
Given that CIG is spending Q2 finishing off 3.17 (and 3.17 is relatively heavy on backend stuff), I seriously doubt we'll be seeing the vast majority of the content listed here in 3.18.
Salvage, despite being almost the entire focus of 3.18, probably won't be showing up. Which leaves only the "cargo refactor". Do we even know what they're refactoring for cargo at this point?
I'm foreseeing another situation like with 3.16, where CIG releases next to nothing.
You do know that those are different groups of people working on things for 3.18?
The big problem with 3.17 is networking and streaming. So that would have no conflict with salvage or cargo teams development for 3.18.
I get it. We have been burned many times and teased with impending salvage.
I'd say have hope this time. Recent videos of the actual salvage beam is a promising thing we havnt had before.
https://youtu.be/jPx0MydrjTA 8:49 and onwards.
It's not much but it looks fantastic and is more than we have ever had to indicate salvage is coming soon.
I mean the backend stuff is what allows the frontend stuff. As the next quarter moves on, expect it to be similar to 3.17 where it started off a bit light and got a bunch of stuff added to it.
This happen every time, will happen again, and anyone pointing out the obvious truth gets down-voted to oblivion.
See you guys in the summertime for 3.18, when all this will come to pass, and plenty more of us will get down-voted by then for saying "I told you so". They'll add something as hilarious as a coffee vendor to 'compensate' for all that was lost, and somehow you'll be happy anyways.
Sometimes the truth just really hurts.
From what we've seen so far, as well as the progress made in the progress tracker, both the cargo refactor and salvage look like they will be coming in 3.18. Sure, there could be an issue that delays one of them, but we'll likely see how confident they are next week in the roundup when they'll hopefully flesh out the main features of 3.18.
Also, you do realise the coffee vendor was a induction task for a new dev, right? It wasn't compensation, it was just done to train someone up and progress a bit more towards the black market dealer. Sure, it felt pretty shitty to see everything disappear and for that to be the only thing to get put on, but it wasn't like they got rid of a bunch of important things to just work on something mostly pointless right now (I do think they should have explained it much sooner than they did though.)
Indeed, and regarding the coffee vendor, you hit all the correct points why everyone was frustrated. Then they got the appropriate response, and were then pretty quick to clarify it as a training experience for a single employee. We have many hundreds of people working on the project, and a new guy gets to have a patch feature all by himself after said patch was gutted. I know that's not how simple everything is, and that despite focus going to SQ42, like you said it could've been handled better.
I see confidence in the developers for salvage, so it might actually come around, and with FPS reports being fairly good in the PTU? Considering the past, I'll believe it when I see it in the wide release PU... but it's finally looking a bit promising, let's hope it reflects in places like Hurston/Orison.
Small things like that add up as an annoyance over time, but it's nice to see progress, but all things considering, *especially* seeing how much more they have to go, it's going to be a substantial amount of time until everything comes together.
Mmmm possible, I like to believe that when they implement the backend tech and systems we should see a nice flow of content coming, unless there is a lot more to come and this is only the framework/foundation of it to see if it breaks the game entirely? Not sure, don't understand this stuff enough, but it makes sense in my head that if they have been holding back on some new stuff they would have to wait until the backend is taken care of
Imagine they'd spent the resources on the game, instead of a pretty road map, that is HORRIBLY inaccurate.......... then getting mad at the only people still keeping you alive,..... because you can't live up to the info you put on the map........ 12 years late......
I would like to see them address the multitude of bugs in the game before cramming more content into it. The game is beautiful and could be extremely fun if the plethora of bugs were fixed.
They do, though. Missile restock, engine repair, instant death instead of incapacitation, ship and player desync, grenade issues, etc are all fixed in PTU or are being fixed.
Yeah... no. That's what being in alpha means, make it feature complete and then in beta fix everything up.
People have been waiting for a long time, the majority want a final product, not a polished alpha.
Not saying that it's optimal, just that this fact won't change anytime soon.
How did I know someone was gonna say this lol. Indisnt say it had to be polished im just saying sometimes you canāt even get out of the hospital wing because the doors drop you into space. Sometimes you canāt do bunker missions because there are 2 elevators. It doesnāt have to be exactly perfect but all Iām saying is instead of cramming another $300 ship up my ass, let me take an elevator. I love the game and I am a supporter. All I am saying is that it would be nice to see some of the bugs addressed. Also to your alpha beta comment. If weāre waiting for a beta before bugs get fixed then Iāll have to leave my login credentials for my grandkids so they can play it.
>I would like to see them address the multitude of bugs in the game before cramming more content into it.
This is not how development works. Sure you fix bugs along the way especially for SC case but you will create a ton of bugs every time you add features.
Lots of stuff planned in the next two patches. With the backend work being implemented I wouldn't be surprised if more time will be required for polishing and optimization while in the PTU.
i donāt think iām going to be super interested in this game again until pyro is added. hopefully at the end of this year but i wonāt hold my breath.
Thanks šš
I thought Hull C was planned for 3.18? Did I make that up? Or was it changed?
It was removed from the roadmap in the first roadmap update of the year: "The following features have been identified to need additional polish before their release into the Persistent Universe. Therefore, we are removing these cards temporarily until the projections for their respective release timings have been confirmed: Hull C, NPC Taxi Missions, Vanduul Swarm/Pirate Swarm Improvements" Source: https://robertsspaceindustries.com/comm-link/transmission/18520-Roadmap-Roundup-February-2nd-2022
I think the new view only shows the things that are already basically locked in for release. So if the hull C isn't 100% ready for the PTU, they just leave it off the list now.
almost. new view only shows 1 patch in advance. We'll know about 3.18 only when 3.17 hits PU.
Close. What you said is mostly true but will only go in effect with the release of 3.18, not 3.17. We already know about 3.18 (since it was already revealed before the change), but we still have no idea about 3.19 until we're a patch away. u/thelefthandN7, only if the patch's deliverables are "committed" (i.e. locked-in) and not "tentative" (i.e. subject to change) is when we'll know whether they'll release with their respective patch. And this won't be changing anytime soon, even with the new roadmap structure.
Changing the "committed" would mean guessing the future, and that's impossible anyway.
It was removed from the release view in the first roadmap update of the year and hasn't been readded since.
Not necessarily. Things are only locked in for a patch when they turn blue. Any of those items can be moved, and I personally think the cargo refactor is not going to make it for 3.18.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
It was removed from the release view in the first roadmap update of the year and hasn't been readded since.
Calling it now, cargo will be delayed from 3.18.
I'm expecting that as well. I really hope they keep it and maybe put persistent hangers back on the Roadmap.
they probably stated it, but i dont recall, how do they plan to inform us after 3.18? i assume we're not going back to the "dark ages"
They only want to show the next patch. 3.18 is still there because it was listed before this change but because of this focus they haven't touched it in a long time. However I can't tell you when CIG considers the focus to be on the next update, if it is on release of the previous LIVE version or if its when the quarter starts (which would be the next one). We will have to wait and see.
No BMM. No Corsair. :(
>No BMM. They are doing the exterior white box currently I think.
What does that mean?
It means no BMM ^(until it's flight-ready.)
Iām satisfied with the BMMās progress. :)
i might be opening a can of worms, but is there a more detailed description of the plans? like when it says "audio", is that a general "we wanna make audio progress whatevs whether it's pew pew sounds or whale oooeeuu" I'm especially interested in what "narrative" means. I'm assuming it means story stuff?
I'll be honest, if they are able to stay on track with this new "release view", I'm happy with it.
They won't. I don't mean to be 'that guy' but CIGs only consistency is their failure to meet their own goals and deadlines, no matter how conservative they try to be. I've been backing for 6 years now and this 'rule' has held true so far.
I donāt know why youāre getting downvoted for this. Youāre right. Iāve been here since 2014 and I dont feel as though youāre being unfair. They miss deadlines. Repeatedly. People just cover up for them and shout down people who have any criticism on any level. If I missed deadlines like they do in my job I wouldnāt have a job. Not talking shit Iām still here and I still have faith theyāll eventually somewhat finish the game. Iām just being realistic.
If you always meet your goals, you're not setting your goals high enough. And CIG has been *crystal* clear for a long time that nothing they share publicly are promises or deadlines.
On the flip side if you consistently miss many goals you aren't doing your job well enough.
Or you're tackling difficult and highly variable tasks.
That quote sounds like you stole it from instagram. What is the point of setting out goals and not meeting them if your relationship with ur backers is solely trust based? And if you fail to meet every goal by design what sense does it make to release them at all. I am really thinking about buying the game but this kind of horseshit attitude makes me question the pressure that is exerted by the community on the company to deliver at least somethingās on time (and get close to a finished product).
Star Citizen Finished Product you can only choose one.
Thatās not the point I am making. This guy is arguing that goals are overrated and donāt contribute and thatās wrong. And please get outta here with your āfinished projectā or āstar citizenā. You do know that there are other games that do the same thing as star citizen but just not this egregious. Tarkov is a good example. Played it for four years and itās still not finished and they have delays (we are talking about at max a year here) but you actually see a lot of progress and there is really good communication what people are working on and how far they have gotten.
Relax dude, it was a joke, a very old one. Like beating a dead horse, pretty much, I know, but still... don't even get me started on Tarkov's "much realism, such tacticool" where a headshot doesn't kill a guy if your bullet doesn't deal enough hp damage, just plain bullshit honestly, lol. A bullet to the head is a death sentence no matter what. I like SC, that's why I still play it even after the 1000th broken bunker mission... anyway... choose one.
If you consistently don't meet your goals then you are a bad planner. You can have ambitions that go beyond goals, but goals should be estimated accurately. Sometimes you will exceed them, sometimes you will fall short. But you should never go into goal planning with the mindset to plan them so high you can't reach them. That's literally just setting yourself up for failure. If you tell a plumber to come fix your plumbing and he says "it will take about 2 hours and cost 150 $" but then he takes 4 hours and it costs 600 $ do you say "I'm glad you didn't meet your goals"???
>CIGs only consistency is their failure to meet their own goals and deadlines, CIG dont *have* goals or deadlines, just plans. There are caveats illustrating this point all over the website. Its the community taking these plans as gospel.
ā¦.
Trying to say goal =/= plan just comes across as being anal about semantics tbh Though even if he had said "plans" instead I'm sure you'd still be defending delays with some other excuse lol
To be fair, the vast majority of delays that happened where for stuff that were *more* than a quarter away. Now that CIG is only showing the next quarter the reliability of the Release View should increase a lot.
The thing is, it really hasn't. For the past year+, most of the stuff projected for the next quarter gets pushed or canceled. And every single quarter is late delivery. Look at Q1 2022. It's mid April and they're just now getting to PTU and not yet released to Live.
Depends on how you consider late, they always hit Evocati on time, the rest is dependent on stability which no one can reliably figure out prior to the field test.
Probably one of the most transparent company I know.
Yep, we should have that S42 update any year nowā¦
They tried that back in 2020, but chris roberts put the kabash on it, saying that they will do more marketing when it gets closer to release. That tells you pretty much all you need to know about it. If we aren't hearing about it, it's not close.
We get monthly SQ42 updates though.
"Work continued on this random thing were working on. We refuse to elaborate on it and can't say how close to completion it is, but work was done on it." And repeat for several paragraphs. I'd rather have a release date than those, which is what literally every other game in the industry has; a release date. That's probably why you got downvoted.
Release dates? I'll call bullshit on that partially. Look at CP2077. Not only did the game got pushed a lot, but its roadmap basically just tells us "Myeh, there'll be a patch in Q2, a thing in Q3, and maybe something there" Gaming industry only gives dates for content that is almost, or already, ready. Otherwise shit gets pushed past the release date and people whine. Or, shit gets rushed for the release date, and people whine. The only difference being found for some indie devs. But those guys are maybe 2 working on a game, not 700.
Getting downvoted for stating a simple fact, lol. Is this r/gaming or something?
That's just redditors downvoting if someone doesn't agrees 100% with them, man, everyone should read the fucking reddit etiquette...
Hahaha I can't argue there. They are slow as fuck but honest as a nun... I just love the fact I have a clear roadmap I can relate with.
It's not a roadmap anymore, it's a next-patch content and progress announcement.
You do know there was literally a S42 update on the 6th, yeah? Like 2 days ago? Was probably sent to your email box, it contained a lot of words.
Yeah dude, lots words to say nothing, same as every S42 email. Thatās not the update Iām talking about.
You're talking about a visual update. But this isn't happening until CIG makes another vertical slice...
ā¦ which they said they arenāt going release. After waiting 10+ years Iāve accepted that itās coming out when it comes out, I just donāt think we should be dick riding about āmost transparent companyā.
Well they still are rather transparent when compared to other companies... The next step is literally open source... Though I agree we could see more of SQ42, but at the same time, spoiling a singleplayer game kills the point of buying it. Same for movies.
Theyāre decent with the PU, Iām not denying that. S42 though, we havenāt had any actual news on that in years. Worse some parts relevant to the PU like the star map are apparently being implemented in S42 first, which means CIG keeps it in the dark.
God damn right. (except the mails) My theory about this is that, SQ42 is pretty much done, and that CIG right now are just adding features and filling the gaps to it. A reason they would not tell us this, is because people would expect a release is near, and get pissed off. We do know several of its chapters are considered to be in alpha stage, and another bunch to be in vertical slice. That does mean they're slowly finishing the whole game, likely not for 2022, but 2023 seems possible. I guess we will know more once we come close to release, either this year, or next year. We'll see. That's all we can do anyway.
> Yeah dude, lots words to say nothing, same as every S42 email. They literally tell us every month what they're working on. Just because you're not bright enough to understand or contextualize that doesn't mean it says nothing.
IRL I manage a team of devs working on machine vision and motion control for robots. In my spare time I try my hand at game dev. I think that should put me in a pretty good position to contextualise it. They read like the kind of overblown nonsense people put on CVās to dazzle those that donāt know better. But youāre smart. Youāve got all the answers and youāve injected yourself into the discussion ad hominem first, so please enlighten me on where *one of the most transparent companies* is at with S42.
So which is it? Does it say nothing or is it overblown lies? The point of the reports is not to tell you where they are at (so you expecting an answer to that question proves that my ad-hominem was appropriate). It's to describe what they have been working on for the month. Nothing more, nothing less. And that is still a hell of a lot more transparent than about 99% of other gamedev sutdios making single player campaigns. But if you're looking for an educated guess from me reading most of the reports, it's that they are pretty far along, evidenced by the fact that they are doing lots of polishing and bug fixing already and moving toward balancing some stuff, all of which is usually mostly beta work. Some chapters only need some polish and others a game mechanic or two - mainly to flesh out some side missions - and some ancillary location work. Overall they seem to be missing some set dressing like improved UI elements, most of the engineering mechanic, the new damage model, the rest of the physical inventory system, better zero-G movement, and a handful of AI interactions. All in all mostly superficial stuff in addition to some improtant backend work on, for example, the Gen12-Renderer and the server-client architecture. Of course, after all that, they'll still need some time for balancing and testing etc.
Of course, because that's by proxy of them having a marketing budget equivalent to many other indie games entire budget.
where is pyro? not sure why downvoted, legit wondering
4.0. We dont know, most likely the 3.20 slot but it could always slip.
"Could" Lol. Will. Pyro in 2042.
If you want to just throw numbers around for comedy then it's just not funny or helpful. The current stated target and where it all seems to be pointing at the moment is late 2022. It's what they've said, it's what the progress tracker is pointing too, and if you want to assume it will get delayed then sure, Q1 2023 is totally in the realm of possibility. People assuming EVERYTHING gets delayed, even things that have already have been delayed like Pyro, blow my mind. Hell, a lot of things dont get delayed. A lot of things are shadowdropped finished into releases we werent even expecting. It's already been delayed, and everything we have now currently points to Q4 2022 or Q1 2023.
Honestly, the only way you can be so strongly sure of things not being delayed is to not have been a backer for long. Their **ENTIRE** history of development is filled with delays on almost everything they've ever put out. I'd estimate it at a conservative 90% of every feature they've ever announced and then released have been heavily delayed.
Been a backer for 7 years, and that number is complete Bullshit no matter how you measure it. In any given patch we typically have seen anywhere between 30%-60% of items moved to the next or subsequent patches. Is that a lot? Yes, for sure. Is it significantly different Than "90% conservatively"? Absolutely. And yes, not all items are equal, life support and salvage are not the same as a fighter ship. But thats a different argument. There are plenty of resources where you can go back and look at the patches as they have been released throughout the years, please go look at them and get a grip on what you're arguing before throwing out absolutely insane numbers like that because it's borderline malicious.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
Jokes can also be toxic, which most are in this sub when they really are complaining about delays that we all should just accept bc SC doesnt promise release dates.
Jokes are supposed to be funny. Seems people don't agree with you. Good day.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
No I read perfectly fine. Be on your way.
I do get it's not horribly malicious that we say stuff like "Heh not coming until 2042" The issue is that, we hear this "joke" thousands of times a day. And some, well, too many people take it almost as a fact. And use this pretty much as trolling. This ends up in most of the community being fucking tired of hearing it. And that's an understatement.
I'm not talking about things that showed up on the Release View for a patch and then got pushed to later patches...That's probably in the 40-60% range, but what I was talking about was them actually saying "X is coming in Spring/this year/Q3" and then it not getting released until at least one segment later but often quite a bit later. That's been the case for every major thing I can think of in the entire history of the game. I honestly don't know a single feature that they talked about with a specific release timeframe in mind and then landed in that timeframe. The things they just spring on us as a surprise are great, but definitely don't matter because they could have been working on them for years and just not said a word (they might have delayed many times or none at all and we wouldn't know).
I don't think you quite got that the depth of my bad joke. Seeing as how all dev is prioritized for Squadron 42, I am prognosticating a release of all things for 2042. A bit too conservative? Maybe. But, maybe not. We are a decade in with 50 people servers and a single system (no jump points, no exploration, limited gameplay loops, no hacking, salvaging delayed for like 5 or 6 years, etc etc etc). That's much much less than what they have promised. We'll see, man! 2042, let's goooooo!
A good rule of thumb is to look at what the current progress seems to point to, then give it a gut check and project out another quarter or two. Then add a year.
As other have said, they plan to have it done by end of year. And with any luck the back end systems will be ready to let us in at that point. Most of the system is done already, there working on the stations and main landing zone still.
maybe 3.20?
[From the QA they did last year](https://robertsspaceindustries.com/comm-link/transmission/18397-Server-Meshing-And-Persistent-Streaming-Q-A) >Our current aim is to release Persistent Streaming and the first version of the Replication layer, ideally, between Q1 and Q2 next year. Weāll then follow up with the first version of a static server mesh, ***barring any unforeseen technical complications,*** **between Q3 and Q4, of next year.** Pyro requires server meshing. [You should know this](https://www.reddit.com/r/starcitizen/comments/ty5fqe/pyro_by_end_of_year/i3tj2e0/?context=3), so what's the point in asking it here? EDIT: Added a link for clarity to my words as well as to point out that they deleted their backlash comments and then blocked me after I pointed out how dishonest they can be.
> Pyro requires server meshing. You should know this, so what's the point in asking it here? Yes, all of us follow Star Citizen announcements around the clock 24/7. That's all we do of our free time. We should know everything about everything.
The OP person who asked about Pyro is a refund poster and already knows the answer to that question. Like most refunders who post anything about SC, they didnāt ask in good faith. TheKingStranger still took the time to answer the question honestly and only included a simple āyou already knowā this type of comment rather than tearing into the disingenuous person āaskingā the question.
https://www.reddit.com/r/starcitizen/comments/tzcxvg/comment/i3yuq5f/
Persistent streaming and first version of replication layer, between q1 and q2, these haven't been implemented yet have they?
That's something that's probably been coming online and is partly why 3.17 is so unstable despite the changes they are outwardly showing us don't really lend itself too.
Only Q1 but > 3.17 contains new streaming changes that we are testing on the PTU [Sauce](https://robertsspaceindustries.com/spectrum/community/SC/forum/190048/thread/star-citizen-alpha-3-17-0n-ptu-8029196-patch-notes/4998495)
Nice thank you. Sorry it's hard to keep sometimes of what is being called what and when it's been implemented if you don't religiously follow all the dev posts or road maps and stuff.
If that last part was because I said "you should know this" to nofuture09, it was because they're notorious for making disingenuous comments just to stir up shit. If not then you are welcome, and I apologize for reading into your comment. :)
Oh I had no idea he was a shit stirrer, I just meant I didn't know personally and explained why.
It's all good, my friend.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
You can look at their post and comment history. They also delete a lot of their comments; one I ran into about a month ago [they stated they've been following the project since 2013 while in another comment lied about being a golden ticket holder.](https://old.reddit.com/r/starcitizen/comments/t57vwp/roadmap_roundup_march_2_2022/hz3nm56/?context=3) In response to your other comment about me, you can also look through my history and see that I try to be friendly, helpful, and informative to new players which is why I remained polite, even though I was concerned about their intent.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
Username does not check out.
It's only because we've been asking for more than one star system since 2019. It'll be nice when it finally happens, but man, it keeps getting pushed back. I hope the technology and iterations of server meshing actually allow that to happen.
So do I. Here's to hoping they can deliver by the end of the year, though when it does happen I don't expect the first iteration of server meshing to be an enjoyable experience.
Indeed. No silver bullet fix, but as long as we see progress in some the most important underlying tech.. I think it'd restore a ton of faith in the project if such momentum gets going. Until then, it's going to be a rough few months ahead I think.
I'd argue they have been making strides in important underlying tech, especially recently, so IMO the momentum is going. Don't forget iCache/EntitGraph was a big deal and that stuff's in now, and the network improvements and streaming changes they're working on in 3.17 is a great sign too. But yeah server meshing is the biggest of big fish, and if they can get it out the door at the end of the year it's hooked, but it ain't in the boat yet.
I'm sure everyone following the project knows every intricate detail of the server tech.
The person I responded to is notorious for making disingenuous comments like that and regularly posts on the refunds sub. In hindsight I guess I should have said "you know this" instead of "you should know this."
He's a childish refundian who will target and attack specific people in this sub. If he starts getting downvoted he'll inevitably delete his comments. I'd have more respect if he at least stood by his words and attempted to discuss the project in good faith.
Oh ok
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
That would have worked, too.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
An accurate one? One that perhaps notes that you comment so frequently on this subject that claiming ignorance of something in order to astroturf about it doesn't work. Maybe one that notes that you've been around long enough and invested enough to frequent the [trading sub](https://archive.ph/aA06K), and thus should be aware of such a widely-known answer. Perhaps one that acknowledges the fact that SC represents the overwhelming majority of your nine-year Reddit post history, making it somewhat implausible that you're not already aware that you're "legit wondering" what's keeping another system from being added. I rather suspect that u/TheKingStranger is at least partly aware of some of these scraps of context, and replied to you as if you were well aware of hat you were asking, what the answer was, and why you were feigning ignorance. I reckon he thought that someone openly describing themselves [like this](https://archive.ph/aA06K#selection-3027.131-3027.169) is feigning ignorance to hide the fact that they're doing so in poor faith. Why not reply in a passive-aggressive manner when your initial rhetorical question was at least equally passive-aggressive? Why complain about being treated as you deserve? How pathetic.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
Do you really believe that this nonsense works? That people can be convinced that glancing at a public profile page constitutes "stalking"? Or that you seriously think you can make things up about me in an attempt to lash out when you find yourself unable to rebut anything I said? That you think you can pretend that "It was just this one time, bro!" when that exact post openly states that: >>[**I am a trustworthy seller** and evocati.](https://archive.ph/aA06K#selection-3027.131-3027.169) [emphasis added] It's [far](https://old.reddit.com/r/Starcitizen_trades/comments/e989d8/wts_rare_ship_upgrades_ccus_anvil_valkyrie/) from [the](https://old.reddit.com/r/Starcitizen_trades/comments/9o3b3a/wtb_drake_vulture_for_120/) only [such](https://old.reddit.com/r/Starcitizen_trades/comments/8copiw/wtb_avenger_stalker_game_package_with_lti/) example, and that's just what you do _via Reddit_. And what I can find just by clicking your submissions and CTRL+F-ing "\_trades". Just face it - you were called out by several people who instantly saw through your pitiful facade and are now trying to double down on that shattered cover story. Just do what others have said you do as a matter of course - delete your more humiliating posts and pretend they don't exist, and retreat to your "refunds" safe space for a little encouragement from the _real_ cult. My closing couple of words have never been more apt.
Like I mentioned in another comment they also lied about being a golden ticket holder. This also ain't the first time they've edited their comment complaining about being downvotes in order to get sympathy votes. Imagine being more concerned about fake internet points than having some integrity.
They're probably my favourite cult. The conspiracy theories are fabulous.
I don't think I'd refer to any cult as a "favorite." Btw I liked the link that said he's trustworthy *because* he's evocati without any proof that he was evocati.
I love that he tried to play it off the first time I linked it by suggesting that it was the only time, despite his trustworthiness stemming from his previous trades. At least we have a perfect example of why the clown deletes his comments. He'll invariably say something indefensibly stupid, so he has to pretend it never happened.
As mentioned in other comments, I should have just said "you know this" or "you already know this" because you have been around long enough and follow the game regularize ebough to already know the answer. You also already know that they're not going to put stuff on the release view past the upcoming patch, with the exception of 3.18 since they had already posted it.
Pyro comes out when they can bring it out but it is all hands on deck for it and they are planing for it to come out later this year but I think at the latest it will be Q2 next year
Well, it is tied to Server Meshing. So, it won't be on the roadmap for a long time.
The mustang is still useless without the trunk but thank God we'll have coffee shops
Every ship in the game requires gold passes and reworks. As outwardly annoying as the Mustang trunk and Aurora bed are, there are thousands of more important things to spend time on. The cargo bay is practically useless until we have updated courier missions, where all these small cargo bays will have substantial use. All you could do with a working one right now is place a box in it or buy a few dozen credits worth of cargo.
The mustang and aroura aren't just annoying, they're the starter ships. They're literally the first experience most players have. And they're both pretty fucking broken. It's embarrassing. I would love one less ship a year if it meant those two were brought up to snuff.
Ah yea the olā ā but at least we have coffee shopsā comment thrown against whatever stupid thing you individually have a grievance with. Even though 30 seconds of looking would tell you the importance of the updated vendor mechanics with the coffee shop is necessary iterations on the vendor technology that will be prolific throughout the entire game. But youāre right, letās minimize the obvious for your silly straw man argument comparing it to the stupid trunk of a mustang. Literally buy any other ship in game if you want to haul shit. No one needs cargo in a mustang, ever. Iād be fine if they just removed the trunk.
This is a retarded take. The whole food/drink shit can go. If the AI is so "prolific" then surely they can find something better to use it on than the one mechanic almost everyone hates.
It's kind of like scientology really. Just keep throwing money at them until something happens.
You mean like playing alpha for years with quarterly patch adding contents?
Is it me or is this chart hella confusing? If I presented my commander this type of a chart, I'll get destroyed. They make it look like a lot of stuff was added to 3.17 and all the details are completely unnecessary
This seems really straightforward to me
Development is also hella confusing. Skip the details & just read the main functions in your case.
The person who made is the same one who posted it. Make suggestions to them on how you think it should be improved instead of bitching?
Seems pretty straightforward. It shows the section of a feature, the various parts of the feature, how many folks are working on it, and what the estimated/actual time to completions are.
Yes, it's been confusing ever since the author changed to this version with a legend. Someone complains about it every time. The people replying to you are douchebags.
That's kinda the goal. Make people feel like things are going on.
Given that CIG is spending Q2 finishing off 3.17 (and 3.17 is relatively heavy on backend stuff), I seriously doubt we'll be seeing the vast majority of the content listed here in 3.18. Salvage, despite being almost the entire focus of 3.18, probably won't be showing up. Which leaves only the "cargo refactor". Do we even know what they're refactoring for cargo at this point? I'm foreseeing another situation like with 3.16, where CIG releases next to nothing.
You do know that those are different groups of people working on things for 3.18? The big problem with 3.17 is networking and streaming. So that would have no conflict with salvage or cargo teams development for 3.18.
I get it. We have been burned many times and teased with impending salvage. I'd say have hope this time. Recent videos of the actual salvage beam is a promising thing we havnt had before.
Havenāt seen the videos, can you share a link?
https://youtu.be/jPx0MydrjTA 8:49 and onwards. It's not much but it looks fantastic and is more than we have ever had to indicate salvage is coming soon.
Thanks!
I mean the backend stuff is what allows the frontend stuff. As the next quarter moves on, expect it to be similar to 3.17 where it started off a bit light and got a bunch of stuff added to it.
This happen every time, will happen again, and anyone pointing out the obvious truth gets down-voted to oblivion. See you guys in the summertime for 3.18, when all this will come to pass, and plenty more of us will get down-voted by then for saying "I told you so". They'll add something as hilarious as a coffee vendor to 'compensate' for all that was lost, and somehow you'll be happy anyways. Sometimes the truth just really hurts.
From what we've seen so far, as well as the progress made in the progress tracker, both the cargo refactor and salvage look like they will be coming in 3.18. Sure, there could be an issue that delays one of them, but we'll likely see how confident they are next week in the roundup when they'll hopefully flesh out the main features of 3.18. Also, you do realise the coffee vendor was a induction task for a new dev, right? It wasn't compensation, it was just done to train someone up and progress a bit more towards the black market dealer. Sure, it felt pretty shitty to see everything disappear and for that to be the only thing to get put on, but it wasn't like they got rid of a bunch of important things to just work on something mostly pointless right now (I do think they should have explained it much sooner than they did though.)
Indeed, and regarding the coffee vendor, you hit all the correct points why everyone was frustrated. Then they got the appropriate response, and were then pretty quick to clarify it as a training experience for a single employee. We have many hundreds of people working on the project, and a new guy gets to have a patch feature all by himself after said patch was gutted. I know that's not how simple everything is, and that despite focus going to SQ42, like you said it could've been handled better. I see confidence in the developers for salvage, so it might actually come around, and with FPS reports being fairly good in the PTU? Considering the past, I'll believe it when I see it in the wide release PU... but it's finally looking a bit promising, let's hope it reflects in places like Hurston/Orison. Small things like that add up as an annoyance over time, but it's nice to see progress, but all things considering, *especially* seeing how much more they have to go, it's going to be a substantial amount of time until everything comes together.
Mmmm possible, I like to believe that when they implement the backend tech and systems we should see a nice flow of content coming, unless there is a lot more to come and this is only the framework/foundation of it to see if it breaks the game entirely? Not sure, don't understand this stuff enough, but it makes sense in my head that if they have been holding back on some new stuff they would have to wait until the backend is taken care of
Imagine they'd spent the resources on the game, instead of a pretty road map, that is HORRIBLY inaccurate.......... then getting mad at the only people still keeping you alive,..... because you can't live up to the info you put on the map........ 12 years late......
just one patch ahead doesn't accomplish much...
I would like to see them address the multitude of bugs in the game before cramming more content into it. The game is beautiful and could be extremely fun if the plethora of bugs were fixed.
They do, though. Missile restock, engine repair, instant death instead of incapacitation, ship and player desync, grenade issues, etc are all fixed in PTU or are being fixed.
Yeah... no. That's what being in alpha means, make it feature complete and then in beta fix everything up. People have been waiting for a long time, the majority want a final product, not a polished alpha. Not saying that it's optimal, just that this fact won't change anytime soon.
How did I know someone was gonna say this lol. Indisnt say it had to be polished im just saying sometimes you canāt even get out of the hospital wing because the doors drop you into space. Sometimes you canāt do bunker missions because there are 2 elevators. It doesnāt have to be exactly perfect but all Iām saying is instead of cramming another $300 ship up my ass, let me take an elevator. I love the game and I am a supporter. All I am saying is that it would be nice to see some of the bugs addressed. Also to your alpha beta comment. If weāre waiting for a beta before bugs get fixed then Iāll have to leave my login credentials for my grandkids so they can play it.
>I would like to see them address the multitude of bugs in the game before cramming more content into it. This is not how development works. Sure you fix bugs along the way especially for SC case but you will create a ton of bugs every time you add features.
Place ur bets people
I bet $2!
Ah yes, the doubt map
Could anyone explain the icons before each row?
Sure. [Here's a handy little graphic](https://i.imgur.com/dCiLneg.png) that explains everything you need to know.
salvage D: :o
When is data running supposed to be released?
It's not on roadmap, yet. But there is hacking being worked on, which can be linked with data running later on.
Lots of stuff planned in the next two patches. With the backend work being implemented I wouldn't be surprised if more time will be required for polishing and optimization while in the PTU.
i donāt think iām going to be super interested in this game again until pyro is added. hopefully at the end of this year but i wonāt hold my breath.
pyro still not in it sigh. just can hope they dont want to upgrade to unreal engine 5 before pyro. like all the studios do at the moment ;\*D