Game Discussions Star Citizen Discussion Thread v12

[Viajero]

One is in alpha, the other is released. Having more bugs in an alpha is not a surprise (except in this thread )

Not really. SC is already released. The main difference is that SC is crap, while Star Field is just good.

It is not a surprise that a crappy released game has tons of bugs though. Many crappy, broken games out there, SC is just one of them.

 

[Cmdr Esteban]

One is in alpha, the other is released. Having more bugs in an alpha is not a surprise (except in this thread )

And do you think it is acceptable for a game with several hundred million dollars of funding behind it to still be in Alpha after 11 years of development*?

*I am using the word ‘development’ here in its broadest possible meaning.

 

[Agony_Aunt]

But even so... when do you expect Star Citizen to be released?

No "when" questions allowed!

 

[cigwatch]

One is in alpha, the other is released. Having more bugs in an alpha is not a surprise (except in this thread )

This is such a smart dig, Citizen! Well done!

 

[Viajero]

And do you think it is acceptable for a game with several hundred million dollars of funding behind it to still be in Alpha after 11 years of development*?

*I am using the word ‘development’ here in its broadest possible meaning.

Dont get bogged down with the "alpha" terminology. "Alpha" has as many meanings as people using the term so that leads nowhere. In this case, for SC, "alpha" is just a term CIG likes to use to obfuscate the fact that eventhough SC is a released game, it is also buggy, incomplete and broken.

 

[ZeeWolf]

One is in alpha, the other is released. Having more bugs in an alpha is not a surprise (except in this thread )

Since Star Citizen has no plan to ever be anything other than "Alpha" is that a badge of poor quality?

If they do have a plan to move into Beta or beyond why aren't they communicating that with backers, aren't they supposed to be "open"?

If they have no plan to leave Alpha, then the the term is misleading since Alpha by it's very position in the Greek alphabet denotes a "testing phase" that should have a schedule to move into Beta or release - which means they are happy to sell a product at full price with expensive assets, in a much worse state than if they had crunched a rushed release years ago.

In both cases they are scamming customers indicating they are either "open" when they are not, or simply using the term to mislead customers into thinking that a better product is inevitable. Which is an awful thing for the industry don't you agree?

It's a shame the game never seems to be in a state that stands up on it's own merits and doesn't require you being here defending the work that CIG fail to defend themselves. SF seems to be a pretty good example of a game, in a box, that gets reviewed and doesn't need a legion of sunk cost invested "fans" to do the promotion work.

 

[LittleAnt]

And do you think it is acceptable for a game with several hundred million dollars of funding behind it to still be in Alpha after 11 years of development*?

*I am using the word ‘development’ here in its broadest possible meaning.

Yes it's acceptable.
SF has 8 years of development, a lot of money (bought for $7.5 billion by MS) with almost 0 challenging tech added to the engine.

 

[LittleAnt]

Since Star Citizen has no plan to ever be anything other than "Alpha" is that a badge of poor quality?

That's what haters say. That CIG will never leave the alpha stage. The reality is that CIG, like every other game company, want to release a product. Having spent 11 years in alpha doesn't change this fact. SQ42 will be released and Pyro/SM is coming....

 

[Garix]

"There are none so blind as those who will not see, there are none so deaf as those who will not hear and there none as dumb as a SC fanatic"

Confusions

 

[VR Golgot]

There's so much that can be said about a decade-long project which is riddled with intractable bugs, most notably in areas it considers to be unique technologies. (Although also in staple gaming features such as ladders or grenades).

But for this week, I think I'll just go with this quote from a claimed CIG dev

It always seems that ships and feature development are in direct conflict... dont get me started on bug fixing. There are thousands of bugs, by the way... nothing is prioritized effectively. It's all about the money.

Being unable to address the bugs amassing in your code, while commited to many more feature additions with no 'beta' date in sight, is not a good or normal alpha situation to be in.

Pity those poor devs who are probably struggling to clean up the SQ42 branch as we speak

 

[cigwatch]

There's so much that can be said about a decade-long project which is riddled with intractable bugs, most notably in areas it considers to be unique technologies.

Issue with a physics grid in a freshly pre-released Starfield: BUGTHESDA
Same manure for almost a decade in a permanent alpha: NEVER BEEN DONE BEFORE

 

[varonica]

Yes it's acceptable.
SF has 8 years of development,

You said it yourself, "development" NOT "alpha", these are two entirely different things. Starfield went through development, through Alpha and released a finished product, Star Citizen is still sitting in Alpha.

a lot of money (bought for $7.5 billion by MS)

And are you really trying to conflate the 7.5b MS paid for an entire studio with the 600m spent on a single game by CIG? How many successful games has Bethesda released again? How many successful games has CIG released?

 

[LittleAnt]

Issue with a physics grid in a freshly pre-released Starfield: BUGTHESDA

It's not an issue. I think if you stay in the cargo while the ship go in space, you simply reach the z limit allowed for a player and stay in place while the ship continue its trajectory outside of the max z limit.
And freshly released = several years in alpha/beta.

 

[TiberiusDuval]

And freshly released = several years in alpha/beta.

Real not a scam software tends to be done in such way.To be comparable to SC it would need to be permanently at alpha stage, and custome...ah testers need to milked out of obnoxious sums of money.

 

[Asp Explorer]

How many successful games has CIG released?

Has CI-G actually released a single product?

 

[Viajero]

That's what haters say. That CIG will never leave the alpha stage. The reality is that CIG, like every other game company, want to release a product. Having spent 11 years in alpha doesn't change this fact. SQ42 will be released and Pyro/SM is coming....

Meh, that is what SC cult members and gullible white knights say. The real and humbling fact so far is that 11-12 years on, CIG is still calling SC "alpha" even after having released it already. And if Pyro/SM is released it will also probably be under that same "alpha" obfuscation.

 

[Skizomeuh]

Has CI-G actually released a single product?

Hyper Vanguard Force IV?

Well, and that is what SC cult members and gullible white knights say. The real and humbling fact so far is that 11-12 years on, CIG is still calling SC "alpha" even after having released SC already. And if Pyro/SM is released it will also probably be under that same "alpha" obfuscation.

Scratch a little and even gullible will admit it's still more prealpha than alpha.

 

[Viajero]

Scratch a little and even gullible will admit it's still more prealpha than alpha.

I think you misspelled "crap".

 

[Surefoot]

Has CI-G actually released a single product?

That cardboard receipt some people got with whatever subscription I cannot recall of ? And was there a mug ? there was a mug I think. Maybe a few tee shirts too. Or do you mean software products

 

[thistle]

You said it yourself, "development" NOT "alpha", these are two entirely different things. Starfield went through development, through Alpha and released a finished product, Star Citizen is still sitting in Alpha.

You're right, but it could be argued Star Citizen is still in the equivalent of Starfield's development stage. The only element in alpha is the marketing.