The Star Citizen Thread v 3.0

[Caspar]

Well. I've made one or two sarcastic comments in this thread about SC - mainly irked about the churn of play house ships for cash. I'm really uncomfortable with the huge emphasis on this before the the various tech demonstrations are pulled together in to a game.

However - that being said, I also want to say some positive things about it just for the record.

* Although I'm not sure I agree with the order in which things have been done (the ED phased approach to delivery suits my mentality much more) - I am impressed with what Chris Roberts is trying to achieve and I think his motivations and ambitions are genuine. I have a huge amount of respect for him, especially after ploughing many hours in to works such as Freelancer!! His project - his way, who am I to argue.

* If FD are planning to deliver walking around in ships, there is no better example than SC. The attention to detail is really something else and, probably because of Chris' own experiences, they're almost film like in terms of quality and realism. You simply cannot be anything other than impressed by what they have delivered there.

* Having seen a recent PAX demo and reviewed the new SC damage modelling approach, I'm genuinely impressed. If that translates to more than just graphical impact (flight model disruption / sub system failure etc etc) then they may have nailed something that really has irked me about space sims for the last 20 years - i.e. the 0-100% hull structure thing. Reducing damage to a counter really spoils immersion for me. FD have done some great things in ED and we're starting to see damage models appearing (I watched a half wrecked Anaconda trying to limp out of a fight in the last Beta) but more more more.

I got access to SC with my last graphics card purchase and was given a dirty little hangar and a single man fighter / racer ship. I'd love to step up and try a Cutlass or a Freelancer but absolutely no chance of throwing real world money at SC, especially as it looks like it's a long way from going gold.

 

[Kryoten]

Just took the leap and pledged for a Mustang Alpha. Here's to the success of space games!

 

[skypine27]

I'm an SC backer and I look forward to trying it.* But I'm actually less impressed with SC given the huge amount of money that has been thrown at it, and its release schedule. I'm more happy to see a game that comes out on schedule, mostly works, and adds features and improves, as long as there's an indication that it can continue doing so. SC's going to have to really stomp on the boost when they get it out the door.

(* I'm 53. I'd like to try it before I'm ... say... 60)

SC reminds me of Waterworld.

Waterworld wasn't a bad film by most standards. Interesting story (future earth where world is covered by 99.9% water though some people believe DryLand is real). Cool villian (Dennis Hopper captaining a derelict oil tanker that is eventually revealed to have been the Exxon Valdez!). Decent scenery and effects and ideas (though I think more than 1 scene should been devoted to the amazing/monstrosity sea creatures that would inhabit a world covered with water). But.....

It went way past its projected release date. And kept going over budget. It became the butt of late night TV show host jokes. "Waterworld is under water!!". And when it finally DID get released, it cost 175 MILLION dollars to make! (The most expensive movie ever made at that time, 1995.)

So now people (and critics) finally get to see this hyped up, over budget and past release-date movie. And it turns out it was just an average/decent movie but that simply wasn't enough after all the fuss it had created, and all the money it cost to make. It was deemed a flop/failure.

Waterworld simply never lived down the stigma: "That's ALL we got from the most expensive movie ever made?!??"

I see the same thing happening with SC. It will probably be an overall decent game. But considering it will likely arrive past its due date (I don't really expect a complete game until 2017) and exceed 100 million (and maybe even tie Waterworlds 175 million budget!), there will be a never ending supply of people saying "THIS is ALL we got from a xxx million dollar game?!?"

If it had been developed quietly and funded normally (ie, by the dev company themselves, NOT the players) I can imagine the reviews now:
PCGamer: Star Citizen, 6.5/10
Pros:
*Great graphics on a high end system. Really shows off your 34" 3440 x 1440 or large 4K screen (providing you have two flagship NVidia cards in SLI)
*Fast paced ship to ship combat in small ships is exciting and frantic
*interesting play style options with larger ships and different professions
*More social and helpful group of players than EvE Online.
Cons:
*Fast paced ship to ship combat will feel very "arcade-y" and "Call of Duty In Space" to seasoned flight sim players.
*First Person Shooter combat feels "half baked". It offers no realism like the Arma series and lacks the substantial "combat" feel and variety of tactics/weapons/attachments/fire modes/lush environments available in sandbox FPS games like Far Cry 4. It resembles a 1990's corridor type confined shooter and is best avoided. While space maybe beautiful outside, the halls and corridors of a star ship aren't.
Overall:
*Fun space flight game that can be enjoyed by a wide variety of players, only needs a mouse to control everything.
*Pick it up when it goes on a weekend "sale" on Steam.

BUT...Like waterworld, it was NOT developed quietly and cost a HUGE amount of money. So I think critics will be much harsher on what turns out to be a slightly above average game.

 

[Neo-ST]

So now people (and critics) finally get to see this hyped up, over budget and past release-date movie. And it turns out it was just an average/decent movie but that simply wasn't enough after all the fuss it had created, and all the money it cost to make. It was deemed a flop/failure.

Waterworld simply never lived down the stigma: "That's ALL we got from the most expensive movie ever made?!??"

I agree, that's what's very likely to happen to SC.
But in my opinion, it's just one half of the nail in the coffin.
The other half is slow development with large number of people already participating in it.
There's already 800.000+ registered players and they're all seeing SC coming together slowly.
Once it gets "finished", they won't experience it as they would with games being developed behind curtains, then released suddenly.
It ruins the surprise factor.
The game will come out and everybody will be like "ok, looks like this is a full game now".

 

[Nick 'Paradox' Parker]

If it had been developed quietly and funded normally (ie, by the dev company themselves, NOT the players) I can imagine the reviews now:
PCGamer: Star Citizen, 6.5/10
Pros:
*Great graphics on a high end system. Really shows off your 34" 3440 x 1440 or large 4K screen (providing you have two flagship NVidia cards in SLI)
*Fast paced ship to ship combat in small ships is exciting and frantic
*interesting play style options with larger ships and different professions
*More social and helpful group of players than EvE Online.
Cons:
*Fast paced ship to ship combat will feel very "arcade-y" and "Call of Duty In Space" to seasoned flight sim players.
*First Person Shooter combat feels "half baked". It offers no realism like the Arma series and lacks the substantial "combat" feel and variety of tactics/weapons/attachments/fire modes/lush environments available in sandbox FPS games like Far Cry 4. It resembles a 1990's corridor type confined shooter and is best avoided. While space maybe beautiful outside, the halls and corridors of a star ship aren't.
Overall:
*Fun space flight game that can be enjoyed by a wide variety of players, only needs a mouse to control everything.
*Pick it up when it goes on a weekend "sale" on Steam.

There are a few things I have to say in response to this.

I have to say that if SC was developed the regular way way it wouldn't be where it is now or even look the way it does now. CR made it clear that out of a $60 game only $12 of it goes to development. Anyone that has been with the program almost the whole ride already has a very good idea of what that would mean for where the project is today. We saw where the Constellation and Freelancer were quality wise. For a second there the best looking ship out of everything that was available was the M50 with the 300 series close behind out of all the Wave 1 and a couple of Wave 2 ships, and all of that based on the old $21 Million. The money being taken in makes one hell of a difference in areas that most gamers take an interest in. Let's look at the amount of funds Normal development gets to use no thanks to the publishers, and the mount of money CIG gets to use for developing.

EXAMPLES:
Original $21 Million ($4.2 Million Normal development vs $16.8 Million CIG development).
$50 Million mark ($10 Million Normal development vs $40 Million CIG development.)
$75 Million mark ($15 Million Normal development vs $60 Million CIG development.)

FORECAST:
$100 Million mark ($20 Million Normal development vs $80 Million CIG development.)

The more development funds used the more we started to see the work really start to shine. You could really see that the funding was going to development and that point really started to hit home with the Mustangs, Redeemer, Gladiator, Gladius, Retaliator, the upgraded hangars, and with Arena Commander maps. Now we are at a point where the modules are going to start coming together during the late Spring thru the Summer. The wait is proving to be more than worth it. Now I will admit I agree to your thoughts on fighter combat turning into Call of Duty or Battlefield 4 in Space, but I see that as happening as long as CIG keep trying to push the use of ESP and Gimbals. Without those everyone has to learn how to fly their ship but I guess we can't expect 750,000 casual and FPS gamers to put forth the effort to evolve beyond the easymode mechanics they themselves were developed on and love. We also can't expect those same players to ascend beyond those same mechanics and styles to something higher level like ArmA 3 level of ground combat. That of course is CIG fault for not striving to be better than the competition they are supposed to be challenging to be better than what they are now. One thing is for sure though and that is that the amount of money CIG are talking in is not going to give anyone the Waterworld flashback feelings. The full quality and work is there and keeps on coming.

Critics themselves need to be evaluated. As a gamer I call them below lackluster on a lot of the evaluations with the past games they offered praise to. 4 out of 5 stars or 7+ out of 10 for Destiny regardless of the embargo, massive 'It's not ready' bugs AND the balls to push DLCs? 4-5 out of 5 or 9 out of 10 for GTA V? When was the last time they changed anything in that game from the previous version? Not EA, UBISoft, Activision, Bungie, Sony, Microsoft, nor any of the gaming media critics should have anything at all negative to say about Star Citizen's development, schedule, or how much money CIG is taking in. At least that money is going to development and not to commercials of celebrities and FPS Russia playing a game that can't even give itself a proper facelift let alone any real gameplay depth.

People (Critics) with too much concern about the amount of money being taken in and used to finally develop a good sim should really just wait and evaluate after each module that is released. Then they have a better idea if the funds are being used well or not.

- - - - - Additional Content Posted / Auto Merge - - - - -

There's already 800.000+ registered players and they're all seeing SC coming together slowly.
Once it gets "finished", they won't experience it as they would with games being developed behind curtains, then released suddenly.
It ruins the surprise factor.

The last time any gamer experienced a SURPRISE in gaming (Minus simulations) was back when the first Crysis for PC launched. Since then there has been nothing to be surprised about with modern gaming.

 

[huzeeta]

McKetten's Sledgequisition continues.
http://www.twitch.tv/erikmcketten

 

[Viking]

Just took the leap and pledged for a Mustang Alpha. Here's to the success of space games!

Great, and welcome to Star Citizen!

 

[Auditore]

Critics themselves need to be evaluated. As a gamer I call them below lackluster on a lot of the evaluations with the past games they offered praise to. 4 out of 5 stars or 7+ out of 10 for Destiny regardless of the embargo, massive 'It's not ready' bugs AND the balls to push DLCs? 4-5 out of 5 or 9 out of 10 for GTA V? When was the last time they changed anything in that game from the previous version? Not EA, UBISoft, Activision, Bungie, Sony, Microsoft, nor any of the gaming media critics should have anything at all negative to say about Star Citizen's development, schedule, or how much money CIG is taking in. At least that money is going to development and not to commercials of celebrities and FPS Russia playing a game that can't even give itself a proper facelift let alone any real gameplay depth.

People (Critics) with too much concern about the amount of money being taken in and used to finally develop a good sim should really just wait and evaluate after each module that is released. Then they have a better idea if the funds are being used well or not.
.

Don't sweat the critics stuff too much. You could just follow a couple whose opinions you value. You don't even need to have the same taste in games as them because a good critic will let you know if something is worth trying even if they have don't particularly care for it themselves.

The media will always be the media and it's not limited to gaming 'journalism'. At least they are often predictable so there's that.

 

[bliss]

Looks like CIG made the Super Hornet, M50 and 350R subscriber only:

https://forums.robertsspaceindustries.com/discussion/245144/rec-and-limited-ships/p5

The best combat ship and two fastest racers can't be earned by the majority. So much for REC being the answer to the pay-to-win criticism.

 

[Mr.Nowak]

Looks like CIG made the Super Hornet, M50 and 350R subscriber only:

https://forums.robertsspaceindustries.com/discussion/245144/rec-and-limited-ships/p5

The best combat ship and two fastest racers can't be earned by the majority. So much for REC being the answer to the pay-to-win criticism.

Again wrong information limited ships will be rentable as well.

Hey guys - we're still setting up (and balancing out) the REC store catalog. Limited flyable ships will be available in the near future (though not all at once.)

https://forums.robertsspaceindustries.com/discussion/comment/4653080/#Comment_4653080

 

[bliss]

Again wrong information limited ships will be rentable as well.



https://forums.robertsspaceindustries.com/discussion/comment/4653080/#Comment_4653080

[video=youtube;pkAjt6teRyI]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pkAjt6teRyI[/video]

47 mins in.

 

[skypine27]

I don't understand why people even care what you can rent in AC?

Arena Commander is Pay2Win!! So what? It's already like 80% Super Hornet players using mouse aim/ mouse fly (myself included, the few times I bother to actually "play" it). What diff would it make if people could rent them with REC, it would just go to 90% in a Super Hornet. So what.

Once the PU goes live, i'ts a pointless game mechanic anyway, the whole idea of AC. Imagine if ED had some "dogfighting module" you could log into from the main screen. Solo. Open. Private Group. and.. ARENA COMBAT! And it consisted of a "fake" dog fighting meta game where all you did was compete for stats and the leaders, ohh, after say each month, get thrown a special decal and MAYBE even a few credits (but thats being generous)?? I mean, would anyone actually bother to play that mode? Wouldn't you rather go to the nav beacon in Ngaliba to do real PvP??

I understand the need for the AC game mechanic NOW, because its the only forum you can try your ship in actual combat against other players. If they just had Vandal swarm, single and co-op, you would never get an idea of what your ship is like fighting other players in different ships. But once the game goes live, I would think most people would actually want to be "out there" in real space flying, discovering, making credits, doing real PvP, trading, whatever and NOT sitting in a Sim-Pod doing fake dogfights for muh stats.

I always assumed once the PU goes like that the "attendance" in AC will drop to about 20 players who for some reason think "fake" dog fighting for pointless stats (that only 19 other people who still play arena commander will even see) is fun. Maybe you get a Top 10 AC Pilots hangar poster??

 

[huzeeta]

I don't understand why people even care what you can rent in AC?

Arena Commander is Pay2Win!! So what? It's already like 80% Super Hornet players using mouse aim/ mouse fly (myself included, the few times I bother to actually "play" it). What diff would it make if people could rent them with REC, it would just go to 90% in a Super Hornet. So what.

Once the PU goes live, i'ts a pointless game mechanic anyway, the whole idea of AC. Imagine if ED had some "dogfighting module" you could log into from the main screen. Solo. Open. Private Group. and.. ARENA COMBAT! And it consisted of a "fake" dog fighting meta game where all you did was compete for stats and the leaders, ohh, after say each month, get thrown a special decal and MAYBE even a few credits (but thats being generous)?? I mean, would anyone actually bother to play that mode? Wouldn't you rather go to the nav beacon in Ngaliba to do real PvP??

I understand the need for the AC game mechanic NOW, because its the only forum you can try your ship in actual combat against other players. If they just had Vandal swarm, single and co-op, you would never get an idea of what your ship is like fighting other players in different ships. But once the game goes live, I would think most people would actually want to be "out there" in real space flying, discovering, making credits, doing real PvP, trading, whatever and NOT sitting in a Sim-Pod doing fake dogfights for muh stats.

I always assumed once the PU goes like that the "attendance" in AC will drop to about 20 players who for some reason think "fake" dog fighting for pointless stats (that only 19 other people who still play arena commander will even see) is fun. Maybe you get a Top 10 AC Pilots hangar poster??

Ehm, eSports and practicing without taking "real" risks?

 

[jcrg99]

There's already 800.000+ registered players and they're all seeing SC coming together slowly.

The number of registered accounts means not too much and it's totally useless to make a measure of their reality.

It's not difficult to imagine guys like these:
http://www.gamespot.com/articles/guy-spends-22-500-on-star-citizen-has-no-regrets/1100-6426321/
spending all days doing whatever they can to support the game, including registering new accounts with or without pledge associated.

That, and a few years doing that in a daily basis and you can transform easily your population from a very low number to 850k.

There are some evidences that works as a proof of that... like the own aggressive and risky marketing attitude of CIG, the # of watchers of their live streams and weekly shows barely growing, the # of forum users commenting also do not growing, their pools receiving very few votes (and you can even vote with an account without any pledge associated), and so on... but one of the major evidences is their leaderboards which, for the sake of reporting a leaderboard to motivate people buying more expensive ships to win and be a famous community member due that, ends revealing an important data, showing everyone who played in their maps, how many in total, for how long, etc... since AC was released (not intentionally probably, since the objective seems to be just to motivate people to pledge more dollars, not to report sales status):

https://robertsspaceindustries.com/community/arena-commander/leaderboard?mode=BR

The link above shown the most popular map, and it only has 11k users. If you consider that a lot of users are the same individual with different users (and different ships),
this number is even minor. Less than half of that played for more than 10 minutes, summing all tries.

But since AC released, they probably earned about 650k new registered users. Had already about 150k registered users before its release (with Roberts confirming in the past that about 40k never pledged, but ignoring to tell that the rest still included many individuals with multiple accounts).
Meaning that you have to believe that neither the first pledgers, probably the most excited and thirsty fans nor the 650k who came later had interest to play the game released so far, which is extremely difficult to believe from people who pays and "subscribe" to be part of an alpha/beta.
It's pretty much like to believe in fairy tales or to live in a deep level of denial.

The number of people playing do not grow in any acceptable/reasonable proportion when compared with the counter of registered users of their website.

For those who consider this project as a "massive" success, or that the team is doing the right thing that everyone loves because the ultimate proof is that their counters grow in popularity, no matter what, with new 1k/2k individuals "registering" every single day, Spock would say:

"His pattern indicates two-dimensional thinking."

Based on that, we can understand that the surprise effect (lack of that) is not a problem, considering that the huge majority does not listen to them or play their game, whatever quantity of people they really have (I imagine something around 100-150k).

 

[Ragnarokas]

Most people are in it not for being tester´s of a alpha game but for a polished experience with meaning, like mining, exploration, trading etc. In my case im just waiting for the Single-Player experience ala Wing Commander without any spoilers whatsoever, after the SP will venture into the online part and see what's all about, for only $15 bucks it's a good deal to say the least.

 

[Neo-ST]

The number of registered accounts means not too much and it's totally useless to make a measure of their reality.

It's not difficult to imagine guys like these:
http://www.gamespot.com/articles/guy-spends-22-500-on-star-citizen-has-no-regrets/1100-6426321/
spending all days doing whatever they can to support the game, including registering new accounts with or without pledge associated.

That, and a few years doing that in a daily basis and you can transform easily your population from a very low number to 850k.

There are some evidences that works as a proof of that... like the own aggressive and risky marketing attitude of CIG, the # of watchers of their live streams and weekly shows barely growing, the # of forum users commenting also do not growing, their pools receiving very few votes (and you can even vote with an account without any pledge associated), and so on... but one of the major evidences is their leaderboards which, for the sake of reporting a leaderboard to motivate people buying more expensive ships to win and be a famous community member due that, ends revealing an important data, showing everyone who played in their maps, how many in total, for how long, etc... since AC was released (not intentionally probably, since the objective seems to be just to motivate people to pledge more dollars, not to report sales status):

https://robertsspaceindustries.com/community/arena-commander/leaderboard?mode=BR

The link above shown the most popular map, and it only has 11k users. If you consider that a lot of users are the same individual with different users (and different ships),
this number is even minor. Less than half of that played for more than 10 minutes, summing all tries.

But since AC released, they probably earned about 650k new registered users. Had already about 150k registered users before its release (with Roberts confirming in the past that about 40k never pledged, but ignoring to tell that the rest still included many individuals with multiple accounts).
Meaning that you have to believe that neither the first pledgers, probably the most excited and thirsty fans nor the 650k who came later had interest to play the game released so far, which is extremely difficult to believe from people who pays and "subscribe" to be part of an alpha/beta.
It's pretty much like to believe in fairy tales or to live in a deep level of denial.

The number of people playing do not grow in any acceptable/reasonable proportion when compared with the counter of registered users of their website.

For those who consider this project as a "massive" success, or that the team is doing the right thing that everyone loves because the ultimate proof is that their counters grow in popularity, no matter what, with new 1k/2k individuals "registering" every single day, Spock would say:

"His pattern indicates two-dimensional thinking."

Based on that, we can understand that the surprise effect (lack of that) is not a problem, considering that the huge majority does not listen to them or play their game, whatever quantity of people they really have (I imagine something around 100-150k).

Haven't seen this leaderboard yet (shows how interested I am).
Good one

 

[jcrg99]

Most people are in it not for being tester´s of a alpha game but for a polished experience with meaning, like mining, exploration, trading etc. In my case im just waiting for the Single-Player experience ala Wing Commander without any spoilers whatsoever.

Which could be a reason for some (not most) original backers to pledge when the expectation was a near release of 2 years or when pledging was yet to make sure that the game would be made.

Not for so many people who came later, with a game fully funded project, and buying just to wait such point of having a polished exp, etc., what is well-know that will take years to happen (if ever), and yet, never giving a single try.

While I can understand "some" doing that, in general terms people definitely would give it a try, just to have an idea of how the game performs in the moment with their current internet connection, etc. or would not pledge at all.

Thousand of people coming daily, buying alpha pass, after the production of the game financially safe, and all them having no interest to play, never giving to it a single try? Simply does not make any sense.

Pretty obvious that the counter is totally fake and is very far to represent their population and their grow, or to give to people an idea that what they are doing, in terms of marketing approach is really good for the image of the game and the company in the medium/long term. One can analyse that what they do makes more harm than good for their future...

But that does not mean that the game will fail. It always has the chance to be successful, which in case of SC Persistent Universe mainly, I think that its minimum. It can be kept for years, no doubt, but more like a shadow of others of the genre, that have the trend to be more popular and accessible, than a "massive" success.
True is that Roberts is going to end only with "Ferrari" buyers as players. The "golf club". Pretending to the general public that are a massive success or the best damn space sim ever, all based in whatever millions of fake accounts that they will create themselves all days in the RSI website.

They can release an incredible Squadron 42 campaign and attract, for real, even more people that they falsely claim to have today, which won't be easy, considering that good competitors will exist in the Sci-fi story-driven genre too (Mass Effect 4, for example), probably without so high-level of rig requirements. Very few people would upgrade just to play one game.

Besides, I am not sure (actually i doubt) that they will be able to hold these people, for a future improvement of their Persistent Universe and more capable competitors established for years already, unless these competitors change and start to abandon their own games of regular updates.

That does not sound the trend, at least with Elite: Dangerous, which monetary interest is associated with delivering more results to the game through expansions (Star Citizen is the contrary, as more time they take to release, more money they earn from the evangelized whales/backers buying by their own imagination/hype), but I am sure that epic cut-scenes and and even an average-low level plot with some long/smart missions ala WC/Starlancer, definitely will make a lot of space sci-fan to give it a try, and then going back to play the "PU" games that they are used to and keep improving themselves, possibly letting Star Citizen always behind on realized and delivered meaningful in-game features.

 

[MPC]

Most people are in it not for being tester´s of a alpha game but for a polished experience with meaning, like mining, exploration, trading etc. In my case im just waiting for the Single-Player experience ala Wing Commander without any spoilers whatsoever, after the SP will venture into the online part and see what's all about, for only $15 bucks it's a good deal to say the least.

Indeed. I do not really play that leaderboard stuff since it does not interest me. I play mostly the solo stuff, or freeflight coop which is probably why I'm not tracked on that list. Same goes for my friends, they never play the ranked stuff, just the solo stuff or the freeflight coop. About 7-8 of us pledged for the game back in 2012 including all the alpha and beta perks, but the majority of them have never bothered checking out AC, mostly because as you say they are waiting for a finished product.

Edit: Just to be sure, I checked out the leaderboards, none of my clanm8s are listed there.

 

[Clawhammer]

I don't understand why people even care what you can rent in AC?

Arena Commander is Pay2Win!! So what? It's already like 80% Super Hornet players using mouse aim/ mouse fly (myself included, the few times I bother to actually "play" it). What diff would it make if people could rent them with REC, it would just go to 90% in a Super Hornet. So what.

Once the PU goes live, i'ts a pointless game mechanic anyway, the whole idea of AC. Imagine if ED had some "dogfighting module" you could log into from the main screen. Solo. Open. Private Group. and.. ARENA COMBAT! And it consisted of a "fake" dog fighting meta game where all you did was compete for stats and the leaders, ohh, after say each month, get thrown a special decal and MAYBE even a few credits (but thats being generous)?? I mean, would anyone actually bother to play that mode? Wouldn't you rather go to the nav beacon in Ngaliba to do real PvP??

I understand the need for the AC game mechanic NOW, because its the only forum you can try your ship in actual combat against other players. If they just had Vandal swarm, single and co-op, you would never get an idea of what your ship is like fighting other players in different ships. But once the game goes live, I would think most people would actually want to be "out there" in real space flying, discovering, making credits, doing real PvP, trading, whatever and NOT sitting in a Sim-Pod doing fake dogfights for muh stats.

I always assumed once the PU goes like that the "attendance" in AC will drop to about 20 players who for some reason think "fake" dog fighting for pointless stats (that only 19 other people who still play arena commander will even see) is fun. Maybe you get a Top 10 AC Pilots hangar poster??

I heard that frontier is thinking about a dogfight module too...

 

[jcrg99]

Indeed. I do not really play that leaderboard stuff since it does not interest me. I play mostly the solo stuff, or freeflight coop which is probably why I'm not tracked on that list. Same goes for my friends, they never play the ranked stuff, just the solo stuff or the freeflight coop. About 7-8 of us pledged for the game back in 2012 including all the alpha and beta perks, but the majority of them have never bothered checking out AC, mostly because as you say they are waiting for a finished product.

Edit: Just to be sure, I checked out the leaderboards, none of my clanm8s are listed there.

As I said, that is a pattern that would affect a very tiny group of people when comparing with the thousands and thousands that are supposedly added to their population daily, if you believe in those counters.

People who pledged earlier (in general) as its your case, would have pledged to make the game to be realized. Who came later, with a game already available and/or even buying an alpha access, separated of the usual package, wouldn't have this trend of "I refuse to give it a single try. No! Never! I just want to try the free flight and solo stuff. I do not have a single curiosity to see how it works in my connection! I don't want even to try the coop with my friends!"... Hehehe... Sorry... That does not sound even a trend for original backers. More like exceptional cases.

100 whales or die hard fans creating 10 accounts each one by day, sounds much more believable, than believe that 840k people have your mindset. If they have 10 to 15k (since those people usually repeats in the other maps less popular), and considering people with rig issues, or your mindset avoiding them to give it a single try, you can make a better assumption thinking about 100k-150k players in total, maybe, not 850k, or 668k with alpha access.