With all the glazing videos ive been seeing from the cig cult members in the past 24hrs its very refreshing to see someone actually be critical of something wrong right now. Thank you.
One of the ways you can tell if someone is worthy of respect or not is if they are praising the UI rework. We're coming up on the end of the 12th year of development and it's a big triumph to have a somewhat usable UI after their third try? No, it's risible that it's taken them this long, and anybody praising them fails at critical thinking.
@@RN1441I saw the 2019 SQ42 trailer for the first time yesterday (yeah, idk how I missed it either) and was struck by how much cleaner the faked UI the gladius had was than either the current or rework UI. Flight, systems, essential targeting. All you need for a gun run, no more no less. Really struck me how not that everything we have or see coming is.
The ship design really does suck in SC. Sure, they look cool (for a definition of cool) but they would look even cooler if they were also functional. And pleasant to play rather than the difficult to manage cargo bays or poorly placed turrets or whatever happens to be wrong with a ship.
All the more frustrating because gameplay could overcome most of these problems. Ex: Just let one gunner sit at a station and control several turrets at once. Congratulations, wonky turret placement basically solved, and better gameplay! This is such a simple idea it was literally in Freelancer 2003 (called turret mode)
clearly guy behind concept is amazing his work is absolutely beautifull and looks like a funny guy... probably only thing what is good in SC is it looks pretty but nothing works my best moment was at 2:12 argo raft designed to hold 5 containers i was like wow this looks like usefull practical ship but of course in game we get less and less to the point i have to ask why those ships are not more efficients why only 3 cargo to transport when you can do more... and it was nice to see that concept was thinking about usability not only make it pretty or make it restricted so we can sell bigger ships instead...
Some thoughts. Every time they show us ingame cinematics where ships drifting in air, moving from turbulance and have inertia and mass. But still not in the game. All cinematics complitely false in that way. Also about cargo. Again, it seems that CIG never designed their ships to have detacheble physicalised entities in case of cargo crates. There are too many obstructions to access containers easily. In my opinion, it say, again, that they still don't have finished design-document for their game and just improvise. It's an absolute production chaos. How can anyone do such massive work and hope to finish it, without accessing risks and have a strict plan?.. Retorical question.
Dieing in 3 hours to starvation makes up for the lack of realism in ship design. Soon we'll have to go to the toilet every 20 minutes, so lack of realism is fixed.
0:13 : We are approaching citizencon - Made me google when citizencon 2024 is, feels like 2023 wasn't too long ago. And wow, It's in October. Yeah that's coming up real quick. Pretty sure most promises that were made in 2023 aren't happening. My personal (low) expectation: Evocati Q4 for Pyro, PTU Q1 2025. Nothing else new this year aside from some ship sales, some unannounced ships for sale at the IAE and fixes to make cargo elevators work "better"(TM)
Why does the RAFT have silly crane like deployers that do not even work, instead of a simple grav plate grid, when I have to move containers in place with a green magic ray of lifting? The Reclaimer arm came with a very, very old concept, but the RAFT has been released barrely a couple of years ago, being one of the most recent multi crew ships in the game. Cannot CIG even has a basic comprehension of what the game mechanics will be like 10+ years in development? I can hear the ship design boss asking: add some dockyard shenanigan to make the ship look "industrial".
The Hammerhead section of this ISC was particularly hard to watch. The ship is explicitly designed to be a flak screen, but we don’t have flak cannons for some reason, so we’ve had the entire existence of the HH in a state where it gets effortlessly soloed by a gladius. They implemented MM to counter this, but the flight model wasn’t what made killing big ships with fighters so easy, so it didn’t end it. I’d low key blow a dev to find out if the Bengal they use for tours has functional weapons for its S7 Flak mounts. I’m so frustrated by this bizarre design omission that I’m obsessed with knowing if the weapons exist already or not. Not that it would take more than minutes to implement it, considering all else they’ve already made.
the talon is probably one of the ships that i actually like. it's whimsical in design but it doesn't really add anything negative by doing so. take the syulen, it's 3 large "wing" thrusters are like a huge target shield. the talon is just a little bird. not too hard to hit, not too frail. it just gets nerfed into uselessness but that's not a problem stemming from making it look like a metal bird.
The atmospheric room system is alledgedly already built into all ships and exists in the game code, just with the atmosphere states set to immutable as the ability to replenish lost atmosphere is missing.
@moonfly1 this was not my point, my point was: Most spaceships in Star Citizen, especially newer ones, are not build with an atmospheric room system in mind. You don't want to depressurize half your ship for one person going into EVA (e.g. Cutlass). You want to have an airlock between an elevator that goes to the outside and interior of a ship, Hull C doesn't have one, top level raft doesn't have one. Many more bad examples. If I wanted an atmospheric room system I would have made sure my ships are build with it in mind. Chris doesn't care because he seems to think reworks of reworks of reworks of reworks don't cost time and money.
@@Camural Whats the basis for that comment. Cutlass isn't supposed to open its ramp in space, the blue and red have separate modifications to their variants for that. This is an intentional design choice by CIG, not what you're trying to make it out to be, i.e "not made with the room atmo system in mind". If you don't want to depressurise half your ship, you don't open the door, that's the intent. Not all ships are made equal, you should understand this. Black doesn't need a rework, its built as intended, and as you know already had its reworks to the current standard, which is as its intended to be.
CIG should really hire some folks who design real ships or airplanes. Hell, even some Space Engineers vets. They have to think about the practicality of the ships they build in the game.
@WarguyPlayz the Raft and Mole have one of the best interior designs in Star Citizen but there are still problems: -see through toilet/bathroom door -an airlock, which is very nice, but it ends 4m above ground, there is not even a ladder down to the ground -The front engine thrust exhaust is hitting the rear engines (ok this is exterior) -top level of Raft has no airlock, if you call the elevator down in space or on a moon without breathable atmosphere the top level is exposed to the vacuum of space or non breathable/toxic atmosphere. This isn't rocket science, this is common sense. I never understood why a company with so many employees is so bad at very basic things. The guy who made the Raft design mistakes has colleagues, supervisors and Chris checks everything, still this went through, why?
They can't show even a shred of logic in development you expect they'd be able to display any when it comes to actual content? Pretty clear by now if someone were to try they'd be fired before long because that would clash with Roberts and his in-house fan club.
For all the issues that plague Star Citizen they do have talented artists. Gavin released a film in 2020 named "Archive" and I personally really enjoyed it. I don't watch a lot of smaller indie films but I thought his was really good.
The problem with the rule of cool is that when you're working on a so-called "simulation" game, anything that has such poor design practicality that it becomes dependent on magic or suspension of disbelief will seem ridiculous. It really gets on my nerves when CIG completely disregards so many simple design considerations, especially when they do it years before they have a plan to manage it.
@disky01 Star Citizen is a game, so "rule of cool" is fine in my opinion. However, when "rule of cool" collides with game mechanics and game play, it has to go. Chris: "We still want an atmospheric room system", Fine, I like it, but why don't you build ships with an atmospheric room system in mind? Just think a little bit when designing ships, this would only take a few minutes more. Instead, Chris/CIG don't give any focks, they still design even new ships poorly and then have to spend time reworking their spaceships. Chris you are wasting our money with reworks of reworks of reworks of reworks ... Or ships like the Hammerhead with the hole in the neck that doesn't serve any purpose, that is only there because an artist thought: "This looks cool". This hole increases surface area that needs to be armored and could be a room instead, for example an armory or a med bay, something Hammerhead doesn't have. With a little bit of thinking, a little bit of thinking in advance, Star Citizen could be a much better game.
I play SC from my couch on a 4k TV and can already read it no problem. Well, no more problem than everyone else, anyway, given how awful the UI lighting is. I believe they’ll probs do a console port, it’s just even *that* doesn’t excuse bad UI design.
@mitcharbiter3371 even games need some level of logic and consistency, otherwise it is a pure magic game. In addition, Chris and CIG devs always talk about "Immersion" and "Fidelity". Also: Designing ships that wouldn't work with an atmospheric room system but still wanting to have an atmospheric room system is very bad practice. It basically says: We don't care, we will just release ships and will rework them later as if reworks are free, don't cost time and money.
@@Camural True, but why are people able to suspend disbelief for some games but not for others. I understand we've been sold XY and Z but are only receiving X (for now at least - and albeit, very late) however, the point of the video was to showcase the work of ship artist Gavin Rothery. You call him out for being a bad designer which I find disrespectful considering the skill required to design something which will actually come to life once fully developed. Growing up, I devoured countless books (hardcover with glossy images) featuring star ships on distant planets and systems. Many were beautiful or weird looking (or both) and many designs bordered on the incredulous but that's what an artist does. They create images and concepts of things which might be impossible or improbable. Let's not read too much into their designs. I really enjoy your content, pointing out the stupid and sometimes hair-brained decisions CIG has made and bugs that persist; they deserve the criticism. This time, however, I believe the criticism was a bit harsh. He's an artist and art, whether it be a bowl of flowers or a star ship, is very much a reflection of the person creating it.
I liked the story of the designer reacting to seeking Mark interact with a fighter he designed. That’s a cool human moment. Aside from that 30 seconds, yeah, pretty awful. Should have been a RUclips short.
too many artists, too few who actually know what they're doing. on nother note, all these clowns that act offended when you point out the consolification and the very blatant goal of console porting seeping through every corner of the game will just pretend they never threw a tentrum at you on spectrum. completely shameless, just like any of the MM fangirls.
![Eminem - Like My Shit [Official Audio]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/vx_IMvFkrfA/mqdefault.jpg)
Raft MKII. Holds 160 scu! lol
@-NateTheGreat 320 SCU stacked on top of each other, there is space.
For only 300 USD + a golden ticket!
The raft should carry more. Then it would have a reason for being so slow.
With all the glazing videos ive been seeing from the cig cult members in the past 24hrs its very refreshing to see someone actually be critical of something wrong right now. Thank you.
One of the ways you can tell if someone is worthy of respect or not is if they are praising the UI rework. We're coming up on the end of the 12th year of development and it's a big triumph to have a somewhat usable UI after their third try? No, it's risible that it's taken them this long, and anybody praising them fails at critical thinking.
@@RN1441I saw the 2019 SQ42 trailer for the first time yesterday (yeah, idk how I missed it either) and was struck by how much cleaner the faked UI the gladius had was than either the current or rework UI.
Flight, systems, essential targeting. All you need for a gun run, no more no less.
Really struck me how not that everything we have or see coming is.
The ship design really does suck in SC. Sure, they look cool (for a definition of cool) but they would look even cooler if they were also functional. And pleasant to play rather than the difficult to manage cargo bays or poorly placed turrets or whatever happens to be wrong with a ship.
All the more frustrating because gameplay could overcome most of these problems.
Ex: Just let one gunner sit at a station and control several turrets at once. Congratulations, wonky turret placement basically solved, and better gameplay!
This is such a simple idea it was literally in Freelancer 2003 (called turret mode)
clearly guy behind concept is amazing his work is absolutely beautifull and looks like a funny guy... probably only thing what is good in SC is it looks pretty but nothing works my best moment was at 2:12 argo raft designed to hold 5 containers i was like wow this looks like usefull practical ship but of course in game we get less and less to the point i have to ask why those ships are not more efficients why only 3 cargo to transport when you can do more... and it was nice to see that concept was thinking about usability not only make it pretty or make it restricted so we can sell bigger ships instead...
Some thoughts. Every time they show us ingame cinematics where ships drifting in air, moving from turbulance and have inertia and mass. But still not in the game. All cinematics complitely false in that way.
Also about cargo. Again, it seems that CIG never designed their ships to have detacheble physicalised entities in case of cargo crates. There are too many obstructions to access containers easily. In my opinion, it say, again, that they still don't have finished design-document for their game and just improvise. It's an absolute production chaos. How can anyone do such massive work and hope to finish it, without accessing risks and have a strict plan?.. Retorical question.
Liebe deine Videos, gibt’s immer was zu lachen. Finde ich gut, dass du die Entwicklung von SC mit Humor nimmst. Das macht es erträglicher.😉
Dieing in 3 hours to starvation makes up for the lack of realism in ship design. Soon we'll have to go to the toilet every 20 minutes, so lack of realism is fixed.
0:13 : We are approaching citizencon - Made me google when citizencon 2024 is, feels like 2023 wasn't too long ago. And wow, It's in October. Yeah that's coming up real quick. Pretty sure most promises that were made in 2023 aren't happening. My personal (low) expectation: Evocati Q4 for Pyro, PTU Q1 2025. Nothing else new this year aside from some ship sales, some unannounced ships for sale at the IAE and fixes to make cargo elevators work "better"(TM)
I can't wait to hear what unfulfillable promises they make for 2025.
Why does the RAFT have silly crane like deployers that do not even work, instead of a simple grav plate grid, when I have to move containers in place with a green magic ray of lifting?
The Reclaimer arm came with a very, very old concept, but the RAFT has been released barrely a couple of years ago, being one of the most recent multi crew ships in the game. Cannot CIG even has a basic comprehension of what the game mechanics will be like 10+ years in development?
I can hear the ship design boss asking: add some dockyard shenanigan to make the ship look "industrial".
The Hammerhead section of this ISC was particularly hard to watch. The ship is explicitly designed to be a flak screen, but we don’t have flak cannons for some reason, so we’ve had the entire existence of the HH in a state where it gets effortlessly soloed by a gladius.
They implemented MM to counter this, but the flight model wasn’t what made killing big ships with fighters so easy, so it didn’t end it.
I’d low key blow a dev to find out if the Bengal they use for tours has functional weapons for its S7 Flak mounts. I’m so frustrated by this bizarre design omission that I’m obsessed with knowing if the weapons exist already or not.
Not that it would take more than minutes to implement it, considering all else they’ve already made.
the talon is probably one of the ships that i actually like. it's whimsical in design but it doesn't really add anything negative by doing so. take the syulen, it's 3 large "wing" thrusters are like a huge target shield. the talon is just a little bird. not too hard to hit, not too frail. it just gets nerfed into uselessness but that's not a problem stemming from making it look like a metal bird.
The inferno cannon should be along the centre line of the ship for dealing with the recoil efficiently.
The atmospheric room system is alledgedly already built into all ships and exists in the game code, just with the atmosphere states set to immutable as the ability to replenish lost atmosphere is missing.
@moonfly1 this was not my point, my point was: Most spaceships in Star Citizen, especially newer ones, are not build with an atmospheric room system in mind.
You don't want to depressurize half your ship for one person going into EVA (e.g. Cutlass).
You want to have an airlock between an elevator that goes to the outside and interior of a ship, Hull C doesn't have one, top level raft doesn't have one.
Many more bad examples.
If I wanted an atmospheric room system I would have made sure my ships are build with it in mind.
Chris doesn't care because he seems to think reworks of reworks of reworks of reworks don't cost time and money.
@@Camural Whats the basis for that comment. Cutlass isn't supposed to open its ramp in space, the blue and red have separate modifications to their variants for that. This is an intentional design choice by CIG, not what you're trying to make it out to be, i.e "not made with the room atmo system in mind". If you don't want to depressurise half your ship, you don't open the door, that's the intent. Not all ships are made equal, you should understand this. Black doesn't need a rework, its built as intended, and as you know already had its reworks to the current standard, which is as its intended to be.
CIG should really hire some folks who design real ships or airplanes.
Hell, even some Space Engineers vets. They have to think about the practicality of the ships they build in the game.
@Roboticus_Prime_RC or hire an architect.
I wish the RAFT was better. Outside of the thrusters hitting the thrusters, its a good design with a good interior.
@WarguyPlayz the Raft and Mole have one of the best interior designs in Star Citizen but there are still problems:
-see through toilet/bathroom door
-an airlock, which is very nice, but it ends 4m above ground, there is not even a ladder down to the ground
-The front engine thrust exhaust is hitting the rear engines (ok this is exterior)
-top level of Raft has no airlock, if you call the elevator down in space or on a moon without breathable atmosphere the top level is exposed to the vacuum of space or non breathable/toxic atmosphere.
This isn't rocket science, this is common sense.
I never understood why a company with so many employees is so bad at very basic things.
The guy who made the Raft design mistakes has colleagues, supervisors and Chris checks everything, still this went through, why?
Yes IT IS A GAME. I agree with you on the function and form CIG does not see this or ignores it due to the cool factor. This is a shame.
They can't show even a shred of logic in development you expect they'd be able to display any when it comes to actual content? Pretty clear by now if someone were to try they'd be fired before long because that would clash with Roberts and his in-house fan club.
For all the issues that plague Star Citizen they do have talented artists. Gavin released a film in 2020 named "Archive" and I personally really enjoyed it. I don't watch a lot of smaller indie films but I thought his was really good.
The problem with the rule of cool is that when you're working on a so-called "simulation" game, anything that has such poor design practicality that it becomes dependent on magic or suspension of disbelief will seem ridiculous. It really gets on my nerves when CIG completely disregards so many simple design considerations, especially when they do it years before they have a plan to manage it.
@disky01 Star Citizen is a game, so "rule of cool" is fine in my opinion.
However, when "rule of cool" collides with game mechanics and game play, it has to go.
Chris: "We still want an atmospheric room system",
Fine, I like it, but why don't you build ships with an atmospheric room system in mind?
Just think a little bit when designing ships, this would only take a few minutes more.
Instead, Chris/CIG don't give any focks, they still design even new ships poorly and then have to spend time reworking their spaceships.
Chris you are wasting our money with reworks of reworks of reworks of reworks ...
Or ships like the Hammerhead with the hole in the neck that doesn't serve any purpose, that is only there because an artist thought: "This looks cool".
This hole increases surface area that needs to be armored and could be a room instead, for example an armory or a med bay, something Hammerhead doesn't have.
With a little bit of thinking, a little bit of thinking in advance, Star Citizen could be a much better game.
CIG lies.
Every episode of ISC is a filler episode.
Eye Candy with no purpose, no essence and usage as with most of the ships CIG creates! Make a game instead of just trying to push ships!
I play SC from my couch on a 4k TV and can already read it no problem. Well, no more problem than everyone else, anyway, given how awful the UI lighting is.
I believe they’ll probs do a console port, it’s just even *that* doesn’t excuse bad UI design.
You're trying to apply logic to a game.
@mitcharbiter3371 even games need some level of logic and consistency, otherwise it is a pure magic game.
In addition, Chris and CIG devs always talk about "Immersion" and "Fidelity".
Also: Designing ships that wouldn't work with an atmospheric room system but still wanting to have an atmospheric room system is very bad practice. It basically says: We don't care, we will just release ships and will rework them later as if reworks are free, don't cost time and money.
@@Camural True, but why are people able to suspend disbelief for some games but not for others.
I understand we've been sold XY and Z but are only receiving X (for now at least - and albeit, very late) however, the point of the video was to showcase the work of ship artist Gavin Rothery. You call him out for being a bad designer which I find disrespectful considering the skill required to design something which will actually come to life once fully developed.
Growing up, I devoured countless books (hardcover with glossy images) featuring star ships on distant planets and systems. Many were beautiful or weird looking (or both) and many designs bordered on the incredulous but that's what an artist does. They create images and concepts of things which might be impossible or improbable. Let's not read too much into their designs.
I really enjoy your content, pointing out the stupid and sometimes hair-brained decisions CIG has made and bugs that persist; they deserve the criticism. This time, however, I believe the criticism was a bit harsh. He's an artist and art, whether it be a bowl of flowers or a star ship, is very much a reflection of the person creating it.
This isc was so bad... no usefull informations
I liked the story of the designer reacting to seeking Mark interact with a fighter he designed. That’s a cool human moment.
Aside from that 30 seconds, yeah, pretty awful. Should have been a RUclips short.
too many artists, too few who actually know what they're doing.
on nother note, all these clowns that act offended when you point out the consolification and the very blatant goal of console porting seeping through every corner of the game will just pretend they never threw a tentrum at you on spectrum. completely shameless, just like any of the MM fangirls.