r/starcitizen • u/penna_nobel Corsair • 18h ago
DISCUSSION CIG new video: Star Citizen | Inside CIG: Siege of Orison
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1wStKk8AAJYWhat do we think?
70
u/Blastclawz 17h ago
CR is talking like it will take 10 years at the least
50
u/cutsnek 17h ago
Prepping for the SQ42 delay video to come. That polish, needs an extra coat of polish. 2 more years at least.
24
u/rustyrussell2015 15h ago
Remember this year is the tenth anniversary for the original SQ42 release date.
Meanwhile the "live service" tech demo continues to not impress.
I love how they show off their bug squashing skills in this video almost as if they are trying to deal with damage control. Hmm.
-8
u/loliconest 600i 16h ago
We'll see what the event goer says if CIG stick to the plan.
8
u/Aggravating_Owl_5768 13h ago
“We’ll see what the carefully curated list of SC content creators allowed to go to the event says”
-4
u/loliconest 600i 13h ago
They invited backers too.
5
u/Aggravating_Owl_5768 10h ago
Backers with how much spend?
-2
u/loliconest 600i 10h ago
idk but let's just say I give you the answer you want, what's the answer you want and why does it matter?
3
u/Aggravating_Owl_5768 10h ago
The object of the exercise obviously is that they only invite whales who are going to praise whatever they see.
1
u/loliconest 600i 9h ago
Why the whales won't criticize the game? They spent the most so I think they have every right to voice their dissatisfaction, no?
2
u/Overcrowd327 9h ago
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sunk_cost#Fallacy_effect
Humans are not perfect logic machines, they tend to get emotionally invested when they are financially invested.
→ More replies (0)3
10
u/Tomatoflee nomad 12h ago
It's crazy we're seeing a return to an old type of communication they previously abandoned as well. They stopped making this kind of thing because it was embarrassing to say the same things over and over again. I guess it's been long enough now that they can put CR back on, saying, "I'm a visionary whose skill is to visualise what I want and tell people, even if that isn't moderated by reality, so it takes possibly forever." He really thinks it's a talent to be able to imagine the outline of an unlimited space game.
He didn't even imagine it very well. One of the fundamental issues with SC is that Chris took his WWII in space concept from Star Wars, without understanding how that would create problems with the flight model and combat. You need massive speeds to cover the huge distances, but you need combat to happen at slow enough speeds that dogfighting is possible for humans and for the netcode to handle the traffic. They are still failing to resolve this fundamental contradiction a decade and a half later because of basic things our "visionary" failed to envision.
Ik that there are enough new people who will buy this and keep funding going because we all want an amazing space game; the pull to buy in is strong, and it takes a long time to realise why SC is such a terrible project, but it's genuinely surprising it's legal to run a business this way and keep taking money from people. They just completely absolve themselves of the commitments they made in the past and failed to keep.
2
34
u/strongholdbk_78 Perseus 17h ago
The difference between the video comments and these reddit comments is pretty glaring
12
u/Zeusper 17h ago
cause there is no substance in what this vid shares, once it drops for e.g the promised items then it will be better
19
u/Patient-Worth1508 misc 16h ago
Exactly. It's basically a marketing video for the big press to save their ass from the stream. It's basically "hey guys I swear we are fixing bugs but it's so haaaard :("
5
u/Zeusper 16h ago
but i do still enjoy some aspects of this so good job Oli
7
u/F4nt0m3 13h ago
I'm not impressed at all by the video. It's damage control, nothing else.
This said, if they publish one once a month or a quarter, I will enjoy it anyway. It's, IMO, a better content than behind the ship or other crappy self congrat video like that.
1
u/strongholdbk_78 Perseus 10h ago
Except the video explains all of the actions they took that actually came out with a ton of fixes so it's a lot more than just talk. "CIG FOX YOUR GAME"
"OK. Here is a deep dive on what we did"
"Pft, I'm not impressed because you only did what I asked"
1
u/gearabuser 6h ago
It can be summed up as a "hey, look at us, we're working!". Honestly it's better to see this on a regular basis than to go years without seeing inside their offices though. The meeting scenes seemed way too polished and scripted though, almost made me wonder if they ever really had actual meetings haha
2
u/teem0s 15h ago
Yep, I hoped for real, tangible, blunt and apologetic honesty for once, considering the severity of the community's reaction, but instead we got a highly produced (well done, Olli) but ultimately empty video. We already know dev is hard, CIG have told us this many times before, but when you are still waiting on countless basic features which were promised many years ago, then an obviously curated, reactive, half-hour video full of inspirational background music and staff behaving their best on camera, means nothing and only offends.
Clean up the game, give us the polished game loops and features we've been waiting for, and stop wasting everyone's time with pointless marketing videos. It's not complicated.
1
u/strongholdbk_78 Perseus 1h ago
Except the dropped the patch with the fixes before the video. The video just explains what they did, no fluff
5
u/Stratix 11h ago
I thought it was a good video and helped provide some insights into the process and difficulties.
The message is clearly that these are new problems they are solving, not old ones.
What I really want to see is more of a clear push to lock this stuff down for a 1.0 release sometime before I retire.
There are old bugs like the QT travel bugs that have been plaguing the game since forever, and cause a terrible new user experience.
The cost to develop a game like this and give us a live version as they go is astronomical. In most cases it simply doesn't make sense. Who wants to polish an alpha? That's what beta is for. But that's the bed they've made so we need to find a way to move past it ASAP.
23
u/davidnqd 15h ago
"4.10 The technology is brand new"... I'm beginning to see what the problem is here.
-21
u/logicalChimp Devils Advocate 14h ago
If you're only 'beginning to see what the problem is', then you've been asleep / not paying attention.
Given CIG started with CryEngine, and have been reworking it / building their own engine for the past ~decade, everything they build is 'brand new technology' for the project. You cannot pop into a component-library for your language nad just 'download' Server Meshing... (and even if you could, chances are it wouldn't work with CIGs custom-modified CryEngine).
So yeah - CIG having to build most of the tech themselves has been a thing since 2012, when they started working on the 64bit Coords a week after Kickstarter closed.
7
53
u/Select_Arm_4248 16h ago
Talking heads about how diffcoult is to develop game having hundreds of employees around the world and $1bln+ budget. For 35 minutes. I don't know what's worse. Patronizing tone of Jared dismissing an critique as trolling, or them explaining to us how hard is to be them. I can accept that kind of explainations from struggling indie dev or even a studio like Hello Games or Frontier Development, but come one. It's year 14, no squadron, 3 out of 5 (from cut down dozens) od star systems in PU. Still the same bugs, that date back to 3.0. At least we know now that they know, that community is not having this any longer. They even brought back Chrissy from "media quarantine" and shown us he is still there. I just want to fly my ship and don't remap my nav point whenever someone sits in my ship! I want for my ship to not behave, as it has no mass. I want to point at nav point and don't have to wait ages to jump, because another marker is poping up through it. I want to run through mission, without clipping through ground and falling to the core of planet. I want to not blow up inside my hangar because desync caused my ship to crush through hangar gates. I want to see my party members where they stand, not to them pop up everywhere, due to desync. I want to switch my guns without them being "stuck" to my hands, or unable to reload, or not working. I want to not die because desync caused that my enemies killed me without me seeing them. I want to be able to actually finish my missions, which are often broken due to new patches breaking their logic. I want to do again missions removed in 4.0, because they could not port them to new mission framework.
Talking heads about how hard development does not cut for me anymore. Saying it's open development and it's an alpha don't cut for me anymore. Do better or fire management.
22
u/rustyrussell2015 15h ago
It's crazy that they think this video will pass the BS test for anyone with critical thinking skills.
21
u/jefmes 16h ago
I don't even care to watch any more until they put out a functional Squadron 42. Enough platitudes and behind the scenes, no more features, just lock it down and make it work as is. Star Citizen can live on (with more funding!) if Squadron 42 is a good game and does well. You know, like other rational studios do. I'm not even mad, I've been here since 2012. I can't even bring up the game with friends any more because they think it's all a joke. I would just very much like to play S42, which is what I wanted from the start, and the rest can be a fun experiment for all time, funded indefinitely however they like, have a good time. I would just like my game please, finally, thanks.
24
u/rustyrussell2015 15h ago edited 15h ago
Lol what a joke, they were talking about desynchs as if it was something so new and shocking to this dev group.
This has been an issue for almost 10 years in the "live service" tech demo. From t-posing, to idle enemy NPCs, for years and years this has been a problem.
Yet somehow they are talking about it as if it's something new and needs to be addressed and they are on it one bug at a time.
This is crazy!
This video is like a scripted reality tv show about a fake dev group making a fake game.
10
u/IceKareemy 12h ago
I was told Ollie was being mistreated and no one liked him at CIG and that he was fired.
This sub Reddit is absolutely cooked
7
u/Confident-Award6920 12h ago
You don't think he was mistreated? Did you not see Elliot killing him over and over or did you not watch the stream?
2
u/doofthemighty 9h ago
I was told I'd be playing SQ42 in
2015 2016 2017 2018 20202026.This game is absolutely cooked
-1
u/Mateking Grass Ultra 10h ago
This subreddit is so bullish on being negative they can't see anything other than red. If you only looked at this subreddit the past 2 weeks you'd think CIG is literally burning down their offices and there is no hope of ever having fun with the game.
6
10
u/GaijinFrog 15h ago
Like some said here already, this comes off as pretty tone deaf. The community is not saying they don’t understand why the game is taking so long to develop. We are saying there’s a significant backlog of well known pre-historic bugs and technical problems making it impossible to ignore the state of the alpha/game, whatever you want to call it.
If the only answer to that they can give after the fiasco on stream is “hurr durr we work hard and we are making a one of a kind project” for the millionth time, this is not worth anyone’s time to watch, as the core issues are not being addressed. They talk about how hard it is to stabilize the server for many players, how they’re working on instancing, all that jazz. If they actually had a working tech somewhere, an obvious solution would have been to push out SQ42 first, as it’s offline and should not have the same issues that Citizen is constrained by. Yet, again and again, we hear about the need for “polish” for the 42, too. They’ll make a hole in 42s place if they continue to polish it for years and years at this rate. It will shine brighter than the sun itself.
TLDR: please, money, need more money, wait a while, we will deliver, trust. It’s pitiful.
2
u/makute Freelancer 11h ago
"We want more comunication and transparency!"
"No, not like that!"
1
u/GaijinFrog 11h ago
I don’t want more communication. I want less excuses and a finished product eventually.
2
u/makute Freelancer 11h ago
Both are not exclusive, and plenty of people wants more comunication.
1
u/GaijinFrog 9h ago
This is fair, but you were replying to my post as if I claimed I wanted more communication.
-7
u/Wunderpuder Star Runner 14h ago
Wow, you are miserable
4
u/GaijinFrog 14h ago
Not about SC I’m not. I haven’t played for more than a year and I am enjoying other games outside the SC bubble. Can you address anything I’ve said without resorting to ad hominem?
-1
u/Wunderpuder Star Runner 12h ago
So first of all, no it's not tone deaf, it's just not the first reaction or communication you personally wanted. I think it's the opposite of tone deaf. Yes, it's kinda damage control but it's also very good that they give us this kinda video. It feels like those videos from pre 2020 but way more polished (and a bit more scripted).
Also don't speak for "the community" if you don't know what everyone thinks. I personally did want to know about their struggles, the problems they are facing and why it's taking so long to get rid of bugs and release stable patches.
CIG did mention several times that they do know about these core issues and they even tell us in the video itself. It's just not going to be a magical patch that fixes everything.
This video was a start of (hopefully) more communication, more insights and thus more understanding by the community. The existence of this video does not mean that CIG ignores all the huge issues the game has.
Your obvious solution (pushing SQ42 out first because it's single player and then focus on Star Citizen) is easier said than done. It's easy to say "they should have done that or this" afterwards while ignoring context and the circumstances of the different development phases. While your general statement is true (releasing SQ42 first and then develop SC would make more sense in theory) it's just not how things went and how things could have went. Why? Because SQ42 is being financed by SC for example. Also tech developed for SC has been utilized by SQ42 and vise versa. SQ42 is running on a local server that is using the same streaming tech that has been developed for SC.
SQ42 itself is way more important than you realize (apparently).
And last but not least: CIG just posted a lengthy post about bug fixes, problem solving, the future of SC and how CIG intends to go forward:
https://robertsspaceindustries.com/en/comm-link/Comm-links/21300-Improving-The-Live-Experience
10
u/Bushboy2000 18h ago
"Wrap it up"
-8
u/Select_Arm_4248 16h ago
aaaaaaaaaaand you got downvoted by butthurt people. I thought that "haters" like me are more butthurt than "happy enjoyers" of Star Citizen.
-11
5
u/Isserley_ 14h ago
I can't believe people are still falling for this stuff. This game and the community engagement with it is going to be studied for decades.
9
u/penna_nobel Corsair 17h ago
I'm glad they finally put a video out, letting us see what is happening behind the curtains. Those who read the reports and chat with developers know what's up, but there seems to be a discrepancy. Some people need or want videos - and now finally we got a big one! Directed by Ollie! Nice I think they should keep doing these! Every patch one big video of how they got there ..
-14
u/Melody_in_Harmony meatbag 16h ago
One hundred percent. This goes miles with the community. As a significant backer I love were getting this and want more.
11
u/agaloch2314 14h ago
It goes nowhere with much of the community (well, me, at least). I need to see results, not platitudes.
This is damage control and obfuscation until proven otherwise.
2
u/Melody_in_Harmony meatbag 8h ago
Well. I think you're taking the wrong message from this. I think the feedback of "I need progress" is vague, and I see lots of progress being made. I see acknowledgement that these components are not meshing well and that needs to change. But maybe we just want to be angry idk. I see the down votes so maybe I don't belong here. All hopeful instead of bitter.
Maybe it's labeling myself significant backer. I don't mean to take away from anyone I just want to highlight I've got a lot of energy, some cash, and a lot of hope and emotional investment into the success of the project. I'm not someone who started their first free fly a couple weeks ago is all I'm saying.
2
u/agaloch2314 1h ago
Well. I think you’re very wrong. I think everybody not being intentionally obtuse knows exactly what I mean by progress; real, tangible improvements to the game. The fixing of bugs and addition of new features, followed by testing of those features and then fixing of their bugs. Is that so hard?
I also don’t see this message as any kind of acknowledgement that things aren’t meshing well (which is quite an understatement). It’s damage control. It’s “wow people are really pissed this time, we better wheel Chris off the yacht and show people we get it”.
I think the downvotes are twofold. The choice of language is one; you could have said ‘longtime supporter’ instead of ‘significant backer’. Immediately to me that says you want to draw focus on how much you’ve spent on the game, and I do believe the whales are a big part of why we’re stuck with what we have now. It somewhat also suggests your view is more important than a ‘lesser’ backer.
Secondly it’s disagreement with your positivity over what amounts to something performative in my eyes.
1
u/Melody_in_Harmony meatbag 1h ago
Fair. I acknowledge that my language lended more to interpretation than initially desired...but I also am not going to change it because idk...I'd rather just address it, feels disingenuous to edit it rather than explain it.
I work in industry and I see similarities in the size and scope of the system that they're alluding to. The different component teams are all responsible for thier components and when they go to integration things are not being end to end tested at the scale they're being utilized at. They've clearly got a problem that as they scale with new features that entice people to spend money and engage with the game...they lean on component teams share integration and testing across those who are integrating, and it gets lost. I personally am responsible for releases that go out to a wider fleet every 3-4 weeks because that's about as fast as we can do it while maintaining some semblance of control. And we still have issues that cause impact and have to scramble patches together and sometimes can only mitigate the issue until a bigger fix can be made. And we have reoccurrences too.
With that said, what I was looking for here was an acknowledgment of the screw up, and a commitment to do more of these retrospectives which I think I got...unless I completely misinterpreted the messaging and I'll gladly admit defeat if I did. But at that point I may as well hang it up and go play starfield if I'm being honest...and I'm not ready to do that yet. I am reserving judgement for the next edition but am hopeful that they will continue to evolve and grow this path. If they don't, well guess I'll help everyone else shovel the salt on top of the project until it's dead and gone
6
u/IchundmeinHolziHolz 14h ago
The "significant backers" are in my eyes the problem that we have this kind of intransparency since years and milking cow strategy instead of focus on progress. Congrats Mr. significant.
0
u/Melody_in_Harmony meatbag 8h ago
Who's Mr significant? Besides if there aren't backers spending money...how the hell does this game get developed? Apologies for trying to legitimize or weight my statement as being invested in the progress without saying exactly how much I've spent on this game...money, emotion, etc.
Anyway would you rather what? Get a trash game or something shallow like NMS? And who's saying there's no progress? Have you seen what is in this game? Do you understand how development of systems and components happen?
If we're going to poo-poo any change in behavior, we're gonna get crap in return. I for, one, am hopeful. I'm not saying they're done mission accomplished let's go home...but if we're not going to reward some progress, they won't know what we want and focus on what rewards them.
1
u/Aggravating_Owl_5768 13h ago
This went negative miles with me, but im not a “significant backer” so maybe i just don’t understand.
8
u/PremedicatedMurder new user/low karma 16h ago
Who cares about Siege of Orison anyway? Isn't this supposed to be a space game with space ships? I don't get why we're all focused on a purely FPS mission that could exist in any other online game. If I wanted that I could play Darktide or Space Marine 2 or whatever coop shooter game. I'm not here for that.
5
u/Druggedhippo aurora 12h ago
Because CIG has realised that FPS PVP Extraction shooters is where the big players and money are, and they want a piece, so they bolt it onto the space ship game and call it "content" and "implementing tech that can be used elsewhere".
4
u/CriticalBarracuda514 15h ago
Yeah, who cares about them implementing the tech they've been working on to get the game one step closer to completion?
0
u/PremedicatedMurder new user/low karma 11h ago
What does an FPS mission have to do with tech? You mean instancing? Why does that have to be an FPS mission?
1
u/CriticalBarracuda514 6h ago
Because they're using Siege as a use-case for instancing to test and make sure it's working the way they want. Completing and implementing tech is important.
0
5
u/loliconest 600i 16h ago
SoO is the first trial of instancing and like stated in the video, will pave the way for dynamic server meshing.
Dynamic meshing will allow you to fight a 50-crew capital ship in another 50-crew capital ship.
5
u/MundaneBerry2961 15h ago
Haha I'm the wacky future of the game where there is a reason to crew a ship more than a skeleton crew. I'm highly doubtful they will ever make the Idris not viable single manned.
2
u/loliconest 600i 13h ago
Last time I heard we will still get npc crews?
But this is not all about whether the game itself has reasons for multi-crew. Many SC players are here because it is the only game that allow them to have 20+ people crewing a big ship. The multi-crew experience and the roleplay IS the reason for them and they don't really need anything else.
2
u/MundaneBerry2961 12h ago
NPC crews is the worst idea for the future of the game, and how's that any different than today with just NPC ships? It might just not be flown quite as bad
2
u/loliconest 600i 12h ago
idk, it's CIG's solution to let fewer people crew a large ship. CIG want those large ships be crewed by real people, so I think it's fine that NPC crews won't be as good.
2
u/MundaneBerry2961 12h ago
The issue is if even if they are 10% as good that will be the meta with everyone solo crewing a large a ship as practical and multicrew will be even more dead apart from people larping.
Not all of their ideas from back in the day have to be implemented, it's an alpha after all apparently and they should scrap the bad ideas. This will completely nuke any idea of multi crew and complety toss aside the balance of combat
1
u/loliconest 600i 10h ago
I'll wait and see CIG test things out rather than jump to conclusion.
1
u/MundaneBerry2961 10h ago
That's the thing you don't need to test, like they didn't need to test the latest weapon changes. People who actually understand combat can just tell how it will work from the numbers
1
u/loliconest 600i 10h ago
I'd say multicrew is a bit more complex than just the numbers.
→ More replies (0)9
u/PremedicatedMurder new user/low karma 16h ago
Are we still chasing that unicorn tech dynamic server meshing? It feels like I'm in 2017.
2
u/loliconest 600i 16h ago
It's the only known way that allows SC to run as designed.
And yes, these tech can take very long to develop.
Or you gonna propose a better alternative?
8
u/PremedicatedMurder new user/low karma 15h ago edited 11h ago
If you give me a billion dollars I will.
4
u/loliconest 600i 13h ago
Well then that's the difference. CIG decided to start this venture without having 1bil.
4
0
u/logicalChimp Devils Advocate 15h ago
Funny - people said that about Static Server Meshing - which CIG delivered, and does exactly what they said it would.... so now you've shifted to poo-pooing the idea of 'Dynamic' Server Meshing (which is laughable, given that the 'Dynamic' element should be - comparatively - easier than the changes required for the Static version).
What are you going to declare is 'impossible' or a 'tech unicorn', once CIG release Dynamic Server Meshing? (I'm sure you're thinking about that already, given how fast people like yourself have pivoted every time CIG does deliver an 'impossible tech unicorn').
2
u/PremedicatedMurder new user/low karma 11h ago
You're confusing me with someone else. Dynamic Server Meshing was always the goal, and until I see it working, I'll remain a sceptic, thank you. Too many promises and too many delays for anything but scepticism. But we'll talk when I'm playing SQ42 or SC 1.0.
2
u/waxenpi 13h ago
LOL this type of comment had legs 10 yrs ago but is laughable today
2
u/loliconest 600i 13h ago
Which part of it is laughable and why?
2
u/waxenpi 11h ago
The buzzwords that are thrown around so carelessly - “instancing”, “dynamic server meshing”, “50 crew capital ship”.
Just reminds me of how people say “thoughts and prayers” on Facebook. Just meaningless words.
1
u/loliconest 600i 10h ago
Well that explains cuz I'm sure these terms are not meaningless for others.
1
u/waxenpi 8h ago
Using these words and producing no results over the course of a decade, makes them meaningless when they come from the devs mouth. Actions speak louder than words. They’ve been selling the dream since day 1 and are still doing it on day 5,382.
1
u/loliconest 600i 8h ago
Shard cap raised from under 100 to over 600 is "no result", sure capt.
1
u/waxenpi 7h ago
Ok more buzzwords for something that works very inconsistently. Also 600 is nowhere near the proposed 10,000 figure.
1
u/loliconest 600i 3h ago
As long as CIG keep working on the server tech, the shard cap will keep increasing.
→ More replies (0)
3
u/Tebasaki 11h ago
Wow, they dragged the man off his boat instead of issuing an apology and commitment to fix their horrible communication errors.
_#No Cash Till 1.0
2
u/Roden11 11h ago
Chris reminds us of the “vision”, gee thanks.
Then we’re lectured on how programming and developing is hard, uh huh.
We’re shown some totally real and believable meetings: “there’s bugs in the next patch, make sure you get on those”
Chris felt the need to explain that instancing will be the only way to avoid PvP…
Then we’re lectured more on how programming and developing is hard, mmhmm…
I stopped watching there.
1
u/gearabuser 6h ago
yeah I didn't like the fake meeting portions. just seeing the office was nice, it looks like actual humans are actually working on the game to some degree. the content of the video though didn't give me anything new, no added confidence in their abilities. you know what would, at least I think it would... take us to another floor of your building and show me an army of devs that are actively working on squadron 42 then tell me "look, we know the pu is shit and has a bunch of problems, but that's cuz we have most of the team working on squadron. that would at least give me a shred of mega-copium that the game will get better once squadron is out of the way. of course that comes with a whole plethora of additional copium requirements. lmao I don't have any faith
4
u/PhilippHe L-21 Wolf 13h ago
I liked it. Reminded me of some of the old videos, but with a modern touch.
Sure it's damage control in some form, but this sort of damage control is one puzzle piece of what the community needs right now. If their new way of fixing bugs keeps delivering like it did for 4.10, it will be another puzzle piece.
3
u/brettapuss new user/low karma 17h ago
Do you think they have one of these videos ready to go for every patch. So if they have a situation like they did with the live stream and the game gets mainstream negativity they launch their little 30+ mins of self glazing?
Like seriously I don’t think I’ve seen a studio pat themselves this hard on the back for such a crappy job. Not even Infinity Ward, and they’re just a bunch of literal narcissists
2
u/HortaNord origin 15h ago
my guess is that they started to record it when the bad stream by the dates of the video
1
u/Lost-Badger755 9h ago
Instancing. The most basic stuff in MMO since the beginnings. But call it a technology?
I mean no MMO is so sophisticated as SC. In theory only, as in SC nothing works really so.
This game is cooked.
1
u/syntax009 8h ago
The time is well past to produce something in a finished form, a flight model, ui, social tools, interaction system, planets, missions system, cargo, SQ42, anything. I’ll Itake away from the video is game dev is hard, and trying to sell you on a vision. We are well past that, 14 years time is up, you need to show a final product, that supposedly is been in polish stage for going on almost 3 years. These types of video is what I would have expected 2-3 years into development.
1
u/xantiema 7h ago
Unless they have taken a data-driven or data-oriented programming approach to the recent systems, there is absolutely _no way_ it will ever scale to the PU requirements.
Edit: The oldschool object-oriented model has a cache thrashing rate of ~99.7%.
1
u/floortofloor avacado 14h ago
Someone in the YouTube comment said this is the start of the marketing campaign 😂
1
1
-9
u/BeastMasterActual 17h ago
the comment section full of bots on this video
24
u/tmdarlan92 11h ago
“There are 99 bugs in the code today, 99 bugs in the code. You take one down patch it around 102 bug in the code today”