I just want to see a future where crashing a ship doesn't always cause it to explode, rather break apart and not necessarily instakill anyone on board :)
@@0xC47P1C3 Exactly. It amazes me how many people are convinced CIG is doing anything original. All they are really doing is doing everything the hard way and stringing people along by making them think this is all 'new' tech. It's ridiculous and clearly a cash grab and all the SC Cultist have drank the Kool aid.
I'll belive once I see it ingame. The ammount of games that had destructible enviroments during development and cut it, including cyberpunk 2077 (where it was kept JUST in a wall in the first mission because it was shown there many years before) makes me feel this is easier said than done.
Games either focus on this 100% from day one and do things like make their environment out of voxels (Valheim, Space Engineers, etc.) or otherwise heavily plan around it (Red Faction) or it just doesn't get done. Salvage munching was planned to be a physicalized process for a decade before it turned in to a ray gun, so I expect this will be more wasted effort down the 'sounds cool' hole.
@RN1441 salvage will be more physically physicallized In-game. But server meshing is needed to not drag latency. Just like the claw on reclaimer will be a functioning claw when it's rework comes and meshing
And even more sad how many games HAD IT WORKING and then just abandoned the tech in favor of more stable graphics fidelity. I legit stopped playing Battlefield because Battlefield 3 basically abandoned all the cool destruction Bad Company 2 invented.
Orgs that are wanting to have big fleet actions are going to want big salvage and repair operations to get materials and possibly take and repair the downed valuable ships. It’s definitely going to make operations post-fleet-fight very interesting and strategic
As with many systems they've talked about before, it sounds very interesting.. especially for things like salvage. But also as with many systems they've talked about before.. I'll believe it when I see it.
Salvage was also physicalized destruction and claw munching for like a decade before it turned in to a dissolving ray. Sure would be nice if they had learned their limitations from that experience, but here we go again.
honestly i hope we get something like that if we're gonna get a destruction sim introduced, could do some creative destruction and had some cool moments where id use the buildings i toppled as a new escape path/ cover
I've been thinking the same thing for a while now. It might make sense in a single player game but in an MMO that has full persistence maybe not so much. They might have been so busy wondering if they could to not stop and think if they should.
@@Billy-bc8pk Its definitely showing what can be done if the time is taken to do it. Money is a factor too. The funding model shows, that if a studio can create something the gaming community really wants, than its possible to eliminate the corpo's from the equation. To many games look the same to me. And the survival genre has been beat to death. Looks like Once Human stepped away from zombies a bit.
The Young's Modulus - A property of the material that tells us how easily it can stretch and deform and is defined as the ratio of tensile stress to tensile strain - “my boy is wicked smart” - Good Will Hunting
I think with the bigger ships, they'll probably go the route of making it look believable but not as in depth as the smaller ships. Like place points where a bunch of random looking parts come spewing out if that section explodes. That kind of thing.
Star Citizen's controller support is broken and never works the way it should. Getting into M&K has been a chore, but I'll get used to it. The future definitely looks bright for both Star Citizen and Squadron 42. The addition of destructible environments sounds promising.
I don't think everything will have Maelstrom destruction built in. It's simply to complex on the computation for both servers and clients. Obv. I can't know it won't work but glancing over the computational complexity of similiar existing system it seems very unlikely.
@@OnlyThis-1 There comes a point where the problem can't be solved by just throwing more servers at it. Every extra server you add to simulate an area comes with a significant latency overhead to anything. Remember that all servers close to each other have to replicate the state of neighboring servers which adds a lot of synchronization.
Tomato mentioned CG. As an old aviation guy, it would be nice to see cargo loading and CG become important in the handling characteristics of ships in flight.
My biggest question that has never been addressed is what happens when players have destroyed everything? There HAD to be a system for rebuilding everything or the vast majority of players will never be able to destroy something themselves.
I think point of data is a really good one, the tech could work in single player, but on an mmo its a whole different ball game. Thanks this was very interesting
Correction Space Tomato: the demo of 2015 was not a demo about how it was supposed to work but how it already worked in game. You can see hundreds of videos testing this tech ingame when it was introduced and it's still the same tech that is used for the ships right now. The issue is that it doesn't look that good when you destroy a ship right now because of multiple reasons like bugs, interaction with ship guns etc.. but the biggest issue is servers. Everything is delayed so it doesn't look that fluid most of a time but it's the same system used since arena commander days :)
@@SpaceTomato Yes, it can be pretty hard to know if you were not there at the time because many sources can conflict, especially with SC. The video of the damage model was part of the Star Citizen PAX East Presentation. In the first versions of Arena Commander, the ships used a traditional damage system: 25%-50% damage, etc., and the ship would break into multiple parts with damage on them. I remember it was not great. The new model replaced that with textures that cover all the ships, which are used for everything related to hull damage or more recently for salvage. The system was more procedural with damage states (you can put holes in the ships and even see through them, small part of the wings can brake and small bit spawn and fly away etc...) That was crazy at the time, especially compared to what we had before. The video was to showcase that.
I think Bad Company's damage system is still the best to this day. Even better than the damage systems of all the sequels within its own franchise, where they inexplicably dialed it back. It may actually be matched by the damage system within The Finals. (If I'm not mistaken they may have some former Dice devs). As much as I'd look forward to seeing it, I cant see a damage system, to the level of Bad Company or The Finals implemented in SC. The open world and persistence would just create too many edge cases for CIG to cover. Can every wall in a settlement, for example, be destroyed. If not, why not - selective logic would be extremely immersive breaking in SC (while BFBC or the finals dont need to worry about that). If yes, how long does the settlement remain completely destroyed? when does it make sense for the settlement to be respawned? How is that respawning explained in the world logic? With the kiosks within that settlement destroyed, how does that impact the economy when a commodity cannot be bought/sold there? Does destruction only happen in settlements? Can it happen at outposts? If it only happens in one POI type and not another, how is that explained away? *Deep breath*
I think BF BC 2 was definitely better than the first. Actually during this video it was hard to find examples that showed the first one outdoing the second. One of the clips is from the second game. They did an amazing job with those games!
Don't fall for the lie, that it takes a mutli thousand dollar PC to play it. Until last December I played it with an AMD FX8350 just fine. My recent build was $1500, and plays extremely well.
They're typically forced to sign very comprehensive NDA's as part of their employment at the major publishers, so it makes it difficult. Also, CIG has many positions open currently on their website, and they will be forced to do massive layoffs 2025 if they don't pull up their pants.
It would have been nice to see Maelstrom's effects on the ship, as a way to control combat speeds and motion. And it would have made sense too ... fly fast then flip and burn in the other direction? Those wings and weapon mount points might snap off. The ship is a combination of multiple components, rather than being a single entity.
It’s great they have all this stuff and SC is a beautiful game. However the stability, playability, latency delays and server issues are so severe. The improvements in 3.23 feel so marginal. I was sort of lost when Theaters of War never happened and Sean Tracy had his chance to find a place for all vehicles and ground combat could that come together.
I love the idea, but also worry about getting too comlex to actually run. Small vs large trees and fences being knocked down is one thing but that diagram reinforces my worry.
I hope with this structural salvage would change greatly, a pet peeve of mine is how ships are broken apart in set pieces, I wish to be able to fracture a ship how I would want.
The lingering question in my mind: how will they "reset" destructibles. Knowing online games... we'd be in a permanent dilapidated universe if they don't allow for frequent rebuilding of persistent but interactable locations.
Would be cool if repairing destroyed buildings is a mission. Like if an outpost is destroyed by a player for some reason, that creates a mission you can take to repair the outpost.
it's not that much data, i think it's probably generated by the modeling software where you would "paint the weights" where each color would represent "breakability" so you can just paint the model with the fragility you want. as for the game client, we have beefy gaming rigs, this won't be a problem at all, all part of pushing the envelope.
This is a type of feature that didn't need to be so complex, given the history of bugs that always occur when you change everything everywhere in the game. I hope it takes a long time or that they only release it after 1.0
Agreed. This is exactly the type of pointless scope creep that consumes millions of dollars and is eventually abandoned without another mention. And then they finally have to implement armor in a sensible way.
Maybe in v2. By that time the general state of PC gear, servers, networking, AI, etc. might be up to handling that much info but I agree that the full vision is not close. I've been thinking about this a lot lately in re: ships - they just shouldn't explode like they do, or at least very rarely. If you think about the way fuel tanks are constructed now (e.g. propane tanker trucks, etc.) they're designed to vent, not blow. There's no reason to have a design in which the failure of a component or even heavy incoming fire means the absolute destruction of the ship. It should just break down to the point of system failure, leaving an intact but inert hull in various stages of breakdown. I know "soft death" (I dislike that term) was supposed to address this, but ships are still way too fragile. Old space shuttle designs aside, things in our world do not tend to get obliterated on failure, even in the case of military equipment. It would solve a lot of the playability issues in the game if we could more reliably live off of (and recover) our ships - if they got shot up or disabled, the hulk (with our stuff) would remain in a state such that the towing / repair gameplay was meaningful, and we wouldn't have to essentially start over a few times a session because the ship just automatically blew up when the HP got to a certain low level.
Yea so Battlefield definitely didn't do it first lol... Idk who did but, Red Faction was the first for me. And that was in 2001 lol. The whole area could be reduced to rubble... As a kid running in a mech suit bumping into building and ripping the side off with heavy metal music playing in the background.... I was in....Heaven, lol.... IYKYK. ☺️
I'm not sure that bigger means more. If a Gladius comes apart into 200.... 1000 pieces.. I stopped counting those nodes after 15 minutes.... A Caterpillar might break apart into 200....1000 larger pieces. It will still be alot, but on a different scale. Then go up to the Javelin, which breaks into 200....1000 colossal pieces.. Then fly through the wreckage... Epic times
I still dont really "believe" maelstrom will actually happen or work (with ships, im sure it will work with inanimate obstacles like walls etc). We've seen it work in stuff like Battlefield Bad Company 2 where even craters in terrain was pretty cool, and most walls could be blown out. But actual operating vehicles and game entities, it seems too good to be true. Even something with an advanced physical damage model as War Thunder still dont have tanks getting dynamic holes "cut" in them with half of the side falling off, its still all pre-baked damage meshes it swaps to. The most that happens is a turret is blown off (which again is not dynamic remodelling per say). The closest "full" destruction including some parts of entities, is probably Red Faction & Red Faction 2. Those games were, and STILL ARE, unmatched in destruction tech. So what CIG is talking about legit sounds revolutionary. More than just pre-defined wing chunks spawning. I want it to be true but i just cant imagine how. I hope it is true.
CIG said many times before that tons of the landscape will not be destructible as it would be a huge problem to the game. AN some places maybe modestly destucable for missions only.
SC cant make an ai walk across the room. Invisible ship pieces are a constant hazard. But they want to model a level of detail on destruction that is beyind absurd. There is no way their crappy databases or broken servers will ever be able to handle this. Unless every sngle player and ship will get its own server...
I wonder if there will be a mechanic in place that rebuilds the destroyed things? It would be a shame if every ruin, outpost, or derelict settlement was blown straight to hell in the first few hours after they are introduced!
Will Maelstrom be the system that prevents a small ship like the Gladius damaging and destroying a multi-crew ship like a Hammerhead because of Armor values? If so this needs to happen as soon as yesterday. Multi-crew is in a very bad place right now according to buzzcutpsycho.
Multi-crew is in a bad spot for a number of reasons. Armor alone won't fix this. The issue with multi-crew has to do with a mix of things. Such as turrets not being able to move fast enough or accurately enough, multu-crew ships being too fragile, no escape pods or alternatives when the ship does go down, high likelihood of total loss of crew on ship death, team breakup when ships go down and team dies, lac of mukti-crew goals, added strength of ship does not scale as well as having multiple indivisual ships, desynch, and a few others which im blanking on. Armor alone will not fix this. But for refrence, the best multi-crew ships right now are the reclamer, and to a lesser extent the mole. The Idris from the event last month also wasn't too bad, but that was from a firepower prespective alone. Hopefully, CIG will get these addressed, and with a little luck all of this will be. But i'm not holding my breath, CIG has proven its not a fast developer, we may not see these 'fixes' for years. And even when they are rolled out finally CIG's reputation for getting them out without a horde of bugs isn't exactly great.
Space stations need to have powerfull shields so it cannot be sniped and damaged. Ground locations should have shilding as well. Destroying a spacestation should take real serious damage. Im talking like javelins and Idrises. Giving enough time for people to leave and also giving a global CDF mission to protect the station. If player manage do destroy and kill players / NPCs whithin the station, they should get a tier 10 CS. Sentencing them to days or even week in jail if they get caught, and the bounty mission reward should really worth it. About player stuff, they shouldn't been lost upon destruction of a station, rather be temporarily unavailable until repaired. Upon destruction or just damage the server should pop up repair missions for players to help fix the station. To me that's a truly dynamic universe.
As to what would benefit a player destroying an space station. Maybe damaging the cargo section enough so pirates could take cargo. Or just some crazy, rare, high tier Vaughn mission
So in simple terms to sum this all up is that the stretch that they are trying to reach isn't in our life span period nor our kids or great grand kids this will never be possible or come to smooth fps no time soon 😪
Ita still cey engine. You can put a body kit on a fiero but its not a Ferrari its a Pontiac. The only reason they can market "star engine" is amazon made cryengine open source freeware.
Destructible environments in match-based games is fine but in persistent games it's just dumb. Two months into Star Citizen being live and the entire universe will be a bunch of rubble because pew pew is fun.
Sounds like another fantastic inside the mind of Chris Roberts moments. Where it all sounds cool but in practice it’s impractical and stupid. My expectation is this gets limited to vehicle collision with the landscape and certain nascent destructible objects.
see i have no problem with the UI and Missions teams, Flight model team is on point too but could improve tech in atmosphear to have soft snapping to LAYERS of air pressure which reduces in GRIDs lower to the ground and eventually repalce AIR with EARTH and in earth we have layers of mud and rock etc because i want layers of mud with trace mineral content for plants to grow and have a RNG based plant simulation system where grass you plant on planers from other planerts might become diffrent things based on the amount of moons and stars in the planets orbit. LIKE At this point in time you "Gamer/influencer" are at the "i need to be shown" phase and you remain here and just keep doing what you're doing but at the high end above CIG Star citzien wants feeding more Tech it's got a few more demands before it can become self sufficent and become it's own self regulating universe. then have creativty for players to create enviroments and player items like clothing styles using a innovative system using fabric stitching and a Mesh Pattern framework to create clothing (second life does something along these lines already tho it's LOW tech it works and is all streaming) so Maelstrom is most likely similar to how The Cut take system works in Metal gear Rising and materials hopfully can be CUT directly out of Quarry zones owned y players or leased by the Quanta, to cut LARGE 8SCU size bricks or 32SCU size bricks like you can cut them at angles make primitives and lay them to make simple stuctures but they have to be structurally designed if they improve the phyisics on every planet you might find some structures work on some planets but not others abut you can make blueprint designs maybe in a MFD or MOBI hud and cut them to shape in the fabricators to make things like statues and door ways to stack together and desighn your own enviroments if we have MUD SAND other loose element materials too we can over time get more simulations in to smaller zones the simulation scales down to the area and maybe make your own homes with places to install electrics plumbing and equipment which all could work I could even design 140p TV set for simple 8bit color programs maybe like i would like to see API plugins so peoiple can upload scripts that play litle movies or games on the MFD huds but to do these things they need to have modularity and expantion options as wel as a safe way to have user data processed in to code for use in game
Celebrating CIG getting destructable environments is like rewarding the slowest kid in the class for tying his shoe laces which are replaced by velcro. Everybody else has done it already and CIG is late to the party. This should be the standard and is notrhing special.
My biggest issue with this stuff is, it all looks nice and such but it's a WHEN. When I log into the game now, the game is NOTHING like these demos. This was over a year ago I logged in- I feel like the game still needs another 5 + years to actually be a game then just a Space game where I shoot other people in.
Yes it is cool but... considering how much resource it is going to take I think its not worth it. As you said it will take an incredible amount of processing power to handle a big battle and I dont even mention the effort that developers give for that. The effort, time and money that could be used to create returns in terms of gameplay and fun. For example I want to see more detailed missions, lore and little stories that make the verse more immersive, better fps gunplay, interesting locations or game loops like agriculture, hunting or whatever you can think of. The point is an interesting and fun experience is more favourable than an accurate physics simulation based on material science.
But if it's an all encompassing system then it would handle not only damage for ships but any entity in the game including players. If you can make one system work for multiple things that's better than 10s or hundreds of bespoke systems for each thing. Especially something like agriculture, it needs to have wear and tear along with a resource system. If you make a bespoke system just for plants, what about animals, or mineral deposits etc. CIG has mentioned multiple times that they more bespoke things they add they slower the game runs, so where ever they can they make a system that can do more than one thing
@@Sentrme no you don’t, they change systems entirely which creates this endless loop where the game will never leave alpha…..you people continue to get scammed and now have an almost unplayable game
It’s not as much about realism with maelstrom as it is gameplay. Right now ships explode. You have little to no time to survive. If they want to make death hardcore in star citizen, we need ships to shutdown and break apart. Not explode 100% of the time. Not to mention destroying cover in fps combat. Salvaging gameplay. And alot of other gameplay mechanics
I think all of these tech engine things coming together and making the game better and more fun. Also the engineers who make these are into physics and systems modeling not into quests and narrative driven gameplay.
I love the idea of losing a wing in combat and being able to crash land on a moon like daymar and then repair it enough to fly it back to my hangar safely for a proper repair Sounds like great fun in terms of game mechanics
@@Wfdnelson Absolutely. Gives ships like the Vulcan, SRV, etc. purpose to come and fix ships, resupply them, even tow them if the damage is bad enough and a spot repair just isn't possible. It's exciting to think about. 🙂
