Return to “Dev Logs”

Re: Sunday, February 12, 2017

#47
Lum wrote:It was sarcastic.... :ghost:

Or... NMS performs now in another level which I don't know... :problem:
The tech I really like, is the galaxy map in Elite Dangerous. 400 billion stars(with names)that we can scroll through! very cool.

And the map doesn't have to represent a galaxy full of stars...it could represent a asteroid field or a fleet of warships! And instead of 100 thousand light years wide...it could be 100,000 miles wide..like the Oort cloud....each asteroid 5 miles apart.

100 or a 1,000 star ships is cool...but I think 1000 years in the future 1 trillion citizens of SOL are going to want their own space ships and just like there is 1.2 BILLION cars on Earth now!!

So when I play Elite:D and see 30 starships and 2 or 3 stations in a trillion mile system(because that's all the server can handle!)...I realize how limited PC's are and we are decades from a decent solution. :(

Re: Sunday, February 12, 2017

#48
BFett wrote:
Cornflakes_91 wrote:
BFett wrote: I'll see you in August. :P
How many times similar statements of you have been wrong? :ghost:
Theoretically? 1, though technically zero since I've always said that if Josh starts working on features then it will take 6 months to finish LT. Since Josh hasn't worked on features and instead has been working on the "Fundamental Problem", I have been wrong exactly zero times.

If Josh actually starts working on finishing up LT, we can start the timer and see how far off my guess has been.
http://forums.ltheory.com/viewtopic.php ... 57#p110798

http://forums.ltheory.com/viewtopic.php ... 83#p121683

http://forums.ltheory.com/viewtopic.php ... 75#p107269

:ghost:

im too lazy to search for more references.

also: dino is right, we made a bet :ghost:

Re: Sunday, February 12, 2017

#49
Right... the bet was that in theory if Josh was working on the game during the great silence, I would have won the bet. Instead Josh was having difficulties, not working on LT gameplay and thus I lost the bet.

I have said multiple times that it will take 6 months of development ON GAMEPLAY features to finish LT into the 1.0 state that was promised during the Kickstarter. That stance has NEVER changed.
Image

Re: Sunday, February 12, 2017

#50
BFett wrote:
Right... the bet was that in theory if Josh was working on the game during the great silence, I would have won the bet. Instead Josh was having difficulties, not working on LT gameplay and thus I lost the bet.

I have said multiple times that it will take 6 months of development ON GAMEPLAY features to finish LT into the 1.0 state that was promised during the Kickstarter. That stance has NEVER changed.

Well.. come back in July right?
Josh is at least 90% on gameplay now.
Image Image

Re: Sunday, February 12, 2017

#52
BFett wrote:
Silverware wrote: Well.. come back in July right?
Josh is at least 90% on gameplay now.
March April May June July August.

I'm not counting February because half of it has already been used up.
we are what, ten days into Feb?
That six months surely is plus or minus a few weeks?

Also, dont you wanna see the results JUST before release? Thats where all the hypejuice is :V
Image Image

Re: Sunday, February 12, 2017

#53
Silverware wrote:
BFett wrote:
Silverware wrote: Well.. come back in July right?
Josh is at least 90% on gameplay now.
March April May June July August.

I'm not counting February because half of it has already been used up.
we are what, ten days into Feb?
That six months surely is plus or minus a few weeks?

Also, dont you wanna see the results JUST before release? Thats where all the hypejuice is :V
14 days in according to my calendar. Yes, plus or minus a few weeks, not exactly :P
Of course I want to stay here and watch the party proceed. That's where all the fun is at.
Image

Re: Sunday, February 12, 2017

#54
Aside from the fact that it's very hard to estimate how long something will take even if you're the guy coding it, let alone someone who isn't involved in the planning nor detailed project structure and can't program (i.e. if you're correct about the 6 months it'll be a coincidence :P ),
getting to work on features 100% for an extended period of time is a complete utopic thing which is never gonna happen anyway. (see: actual development timeline)
Issues arise. Such is the way of computering. If working for half a year without ever getting an unexpected problem was a thing LT 2 would've been released already.
Warning: do not ask about physics unless you really want to know about physics.
The LT IRC / Alternate link || The REKT Wiki || PUDDING
Image

Re: Sunday, February 12, 2017

#55
Dinosawer wrote:Aside from the fact that it's very hard to estimate how long something will take even if you're the guy coding it, let alone someone who isn't involved in the planning nor detailed project structure and can't program (i.e. if you're correct about the 6 months it'll be a coincidence :P ),
getting to work on features 100% for an extended period of time is a complete utopic thing which is never gonna happen anyway. (see: actual development timeline)
Issues arise. Such is the way of computering. If working for half a year without ever getting an unexpected problem was a thing LT 2 would've been released already.

s/coincidence/really bloody good guess/
Image Image

Re: Sunday, February 12, 2017

#59
Damocles wrote:Rust even outperformed a C implementation on this Benchmark site:

http://benchmarksgame.alioth.debian.org/u64q/rust.html

On this Benchmark-site there are several objectives to solve with sourcecode in many different languages and their performance respectively.
Nice read.
... In a single instance, to do with regex, one would assume that this specific test was therefore incorrect.
Likely an optimized C compile, and a poor c implementation.


However those stats are still fairly impressive, if accurate.
Image Image

Online Now

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 6 guests

cron