Game Discussions Star Citizen Discussion Thread v12

rootsrat

Volunteer Moderator
rootsrat
rootsrat said:
Played a bit today, no issues really, apart from one time when SC just decided to randomly freeze my entire PC during a live stream, had to do a hard reset.

Working as intended! Other than that it was pretty good. Did some mining with Golem. My health dropped from 100 to 86 at one point for no reason whatsoever :D

Debunked "There are no loading screens in SC, but there are lots in Elite" comment. Told everyone about the blades drama. Good stream overall :ROFLMAO:
Click to expand...
BTW. I swear CIG trolls their community.

The place I went to sell the ore was called... FAITHFUL DREAM something or other depot. No joke! :D
 

VR Golgot

VR Golgot
Insider Gaming's latest gossip...

Loading…

insider-gaming.com

Nothing earthshaking in there, we know about all 3 departures. (And it feels odd to class producers as 'integral').

This bit is intriguing though...

According to those familiar with the situation, the takeover resulted in staff from Turbulent wanting more lucrative roles within Cloud Imperium Games. It eventually saw some staff, described as unqualified for the roles “failing upwards” and taking over key positions which has become hugely unpopular interally.
Click to expand...

Benoit is the most public Turb figure involved with SM :unsure:

---

EDIT: Lol, all 3 of the leavers have now joined CCP / EVE projects 😁
 
Last edited:

VR Golgot

VR Golgot
Viajero said:
Him or the other co-owner. Can’t remember his name. Although not necessarily involved with meshing.
Click to expand...

The other co-owner is Marc Beaudet and he's 'SVP studio operations'. Doesn't really fit.

There are quite a few Lead / Director crowns that have slipped over to Turbulent heads, so it could be pointed at others. Not sure how many overlap with Meshing though yeah. The majority are in Art / Design areas etc.

Guillaume is another good fit perhaps:

guilly.PNG


There are some other Tech Leads around in adjacent realms (Live Tools etc).

(Benoit's lack of experience has always been interesting though, for someone in a CTO role etc)
 

Viajero

Volunteer Moderator
Viajero
VR Golgot said:
The other co-owner is Marc Beaudet and he's 'SVP studio operations'. Doesn't really fit.
Click to expand...
Why not? The article "lucrative roles" reference does not seem specific to meshing, no?

Either way I presume aswell that the "lucrative roles" reference could possibly extend to other positions, not just related to the ex owners. Meshing or otherwise. But since Turbulent was acquired I see that unlikely unless it was the co owners vouching for those directly.
 
Last edited:

VR Golgot

VR Golgot
Viajero said:
Why not? The article "lucrative roles" reference does not seem specific to meshing, no?

Either way I presume aswell that the "lucrative roles" reference possibly extend to other positions, not just related to the ex owners. Meshing or otherwise.
Click to expand...

Yeah true more broadly. Just meant re the Meshing scenario. They imply the two trends are related.
 

VR Golgot

VR Golgot
Knebel writes a Letter to the Chairman...

Decrying (in the politest possible terms) the 'fire sale' monetization of late, and how it lends weight to those nasties who suggests SC might be P2W and a scam ;)

Letter to the Chairman​

[Concern]

Dear Chris & Cloud Imperium Games,

This open letter is addressed to you, and everyone who is interested in an open exchange of honest feedback and potential improvements.


Preface:
I want to clearly emphasize from the start: I have no intention to spread negativity or cause harm. On the contrary — we all share a common goal: to make Star Citizen the best space MMO ever created. Naturally, i also want Cloud Imperium Games and everyone involved to succeed and shine alongside the game itself.

I warmly invite everyone who supports the content of this letter to express their agreement and join us in constructive dialogue.


Making money doesn't have to be unpleasant:
Since the Kickstarter campaign in 2012, it has been clear that Star Citizen and Squadron 42 would be extraordinary projects. No publishers, no external investors—just the passionate support of an enthusiastic community. This unprecedented path enabled both the company and the games to flourish. I have always felt that this was the right approach, because special projects require special foundations. The fact that over $800 million has been raised so far proves that monetization has been successful thus far. Nevertheless, there are limits.

Today, there are a lot of items available in the Pledge Store, and as long as they are game packs, optional subscriptions, ship purchases, upgrades, and cosmetic items, that's perfectly fine and understandable for financing the game, at least until the game reaches Release 1.0.
However, we've noticed that monetization has steadily expanded, pushing boundaries of comfort for many, most recently exemplified by the introduction of Flight Blades. It feels increasingly like a step too far, resembling a "fire sale". Such aggressive monetization may harm the relationship with your most loyal, long-term supporters and also the public image, as we have seen.

While the game itself has made outstanding progress since 2018, marketing strategies have become more aggressive, featuring sharp price hikes, broken promises, increasingly frequent sales as well as excessive sales of game content. If this continues, it could permanently damage Star Citizen's and CIG's reputation, not because of gameplay issues, but because of the perception of excessive monetization and a developer who seems far too greedy.

It’s not a coincidence that Star Citizen already faces persistent negative labels externally—such as "Pay to Win", "Webshop Game", or even accusations of being a "Scam".

Until version 1.0, i believe all items available through real-money purchases should also be accessible in-game, ideally from day one, and also for ships and ground vehicles shortly thereafter (in the following Patch). Allow your players to freely decide if they wish to support the project financially instead of creating indirect pressure. Special cosmetics, skins or visual extras can be a compelling reason to purchase ships with real money, precisely because these do not influence gameplay itself.

All modifications and other gameplay-relevant items should only be earned within the game. Another point would be to separate FPS equipment from its skins. This way, players can earn equipment in the game while purchasing optional skins in the Pledge Store. This would improve actual game progress without allowing players to bypass it through the Pledge Store.

For the 1.0 release, a meaningful approach would be offering only game packages, cosmetic items, and skins for real-money purchases. Ships, vehicles, armor, and modifications should exclusively be reserved for in-game progression.

To be very clear: any real-money purchases affecting core gameplay or progression should be avoided.
An MMO in which core progression can simply be bought with real money has no sustainable future.
This might work in mobile gaming, but for PC gaming and especially MMOs, it usually results in negative reviews, damaged trust, and diminishing player interest.


Communication is Key:
I highly value your commitment to open development — few studios provide as much transparency as Cloud Imperium Games.
However, communication challenges persist, particularly regarding community interactions and clear development updates.

The public roadmap appears minimally maintained, and the progress tracker feels largely abandoned. Currently, it is difficult to clearly understand the development priorities or how resources are allocated. Updates sometimes highlight features already well-known or even live for weeks.
There is considerable potential for improvement here. Those financing the development deserve clear insights into the use of their contributions. Enhanced transparency on upcoming patches and features, would greatly strengthen trust. For example, Alpha 4.2 is currently in Evocati PTU, while the roadmap still lacks elements from the already-released version 4.1.1.

A clearly structured roadmap with a reliable six-month outlook, coupled with an actively maintained progress tracker, would foster greater transparency, healthy collaboration, and meaningful opportunities for community feedback.

Additionally, communication about other changes, such as adjustments to the referral program or the introduction of new monetization like Computer Blades, could benefit significantly from earlier, clearer, and more proactive announcements. Unexpected price hikes, especially after promises to avoid such surprises, cause understandable frustration within the community.

Also the significant reduction in CIG broadcasts, such as "Inside Star Citizen" & "SC-Live", is certainly understandable in light of the "quality offensive", but it significantly reduces communication. There were only 5 ISCs and 4 SC-Lives in the first half of the year. It would be good if this concept were reconsidered.

I am asking for genuinely open dialogue on equal footing. Engage proactively with the community, speak directly with us, and bring us along in decisions. This journey isn’t just yours — it’s ours too.

Furthermore, i suggest reconsidering certain practices, such as concierge members who have already contributed over $1,000 needing an additional subscription to participate in public testing servers. Reexamining the “Sharpening the Tools” issue and the wave system could significantly enhance satisfaction and goodwill among your most dedicated supporters.

Let us actively participate in key decisions rather than being surprised after the fact.


In closing:
The journey has always been challenging, and we have walked alongside you because we believe in this incredible Project — even when decisions have felt questionable or unclear.

Yet, trust between Cloud Imperium Games and the community has suffered and urgently needs rebuilding. Improving the game’s and company’s public perception is also crucial. To achieve your ambition of creating the ultimate space game and growing beyond a niche audience, now is the time to critically reconsider and adjust certain practices.

The potential of Star Citizen and Squadron 42 remains enormous, and I continue to wholeheartedly support this remarkable project. I look forward positively, optimistic for meaningful and beneficial changes — for all of us.

I sincerely hope this open letter serves as a constructive contribution to our shared goal.


With best regards and optimism for our common path forward,
- Knebel

robertsspaceindustries.com

Letter to the Chairman - Star Citizen Spectrum

Dear Chris & Cloud Imperium Games, This open letter is addressed to you, and everyone who is interested in an open exchange of honest feedback and potential improvements. Preface: I want to...
robertsspaceindustries.com robertsspaceindustries.com
Click to expand...

1000 upvotes in 3 hours... (assuming the site hasn't glitched again ;))

But probably $100,000 spent in the store...
 

rootsrat

Volunteer Moderator
rootsrat
VR Golgot said:
Knebel writes a Letter to the Chairman...

Decrying (in the politest possible terms) the 'fire sale' monetization of late, and how it lends weight to those nasties who suggests SC might be P2W and a scam ;)



1000 upvotes in 3 hours... (assuming the site hasn't glitched again ;))

But probably $100,000 spent in the store...
Click to expand...
Funnily enough, "knebel" in Polish means gag. As in a thing you put in someone's mouth to prevent them from speaking 😅

I read that thread earlier and I literally lolled.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom