The Star Citizen Thread v 3.0

[Zetta]

Seriously I think the biggest crowd that thinks the Flight Model is broken is from the ED community. That could be because ED has a different flight model and everything that isn't like ED can be perceived as broken to ED players. I am following the SC news for years and years and the people who actually play AC all compliment the Flight Model and I do so too. Reason is simple. It's fun and it's realistic. It's also a work in progress with many things to be improved on even more. Until now I have not noticed any problem as I was flying that stemmed from the Flight model itself.

I disagree, that seems like tarring everyone with the same brush. This is just one place where all such comments are kept together, nothing more. There are many comments from non-ED fans on the official forums about the FPS-style flight model, hell there's one right there in the screen-grab about the FM being finished.
I also disagree that it's realistic, tiny thrusters that produce as much, if not more thrust than massive engines stand out as a prime example of non-realism.
If you find it fun then great but you can't deny that other people might not find it fun.

 

[jcrg99]

Seriously I think the biggest crowd that thinks the Flight Model is broken is from the ED community. That could be because ED has a different flight model and everything that isn't like ED can be perceived as broken to ED players. I am following the SC news for years and years and the people who actually play AC all compliment the Flight Model and I do so too. Reason is simple. It's fun and it's realistic. It's also a work in progress with many things to be improved on even more. Until now I have not noticed any problem as I was flying that stemmed from the Flight model itself.

If its so good, why any new patch gets an average of only 5k having played it (in general the same users), and to be more specific, just a few hundreds playing regularly, regardless they selling more and more "alpha access" (hundreds of thousands since AC release)?

It's good that you like, that people from the CIG Forums and die-hard fans have not too much to talk against that (Actually even in that minority we see people disliking) but clearly, very clearly, who has been approving is a minority, because logic says that if something is good and "only ED players think that it's bad"... you know... people who bought access to that would play it more.


P.S.: People if want to be smarter must to look to their actions, not to their talking. Their current actions are another clear revelation that they have been wondering why people have not been playing, refusing to play and, most importantly, those who try do not keep playing for more than a few minutes, sometimes seconds only, and do not come back... REC did not help... Free weekends with trial time with different ships did not help... and apparently the interest on playing have been decreasing, instead increasing, as new patches are added... and now, apparently they think that the reason would be the lack of a tutorial to help beginners. I wonder how long more will take them so they figure out the real reason, because I can bet that a tutorial won't help too much, just as the REC and free trial times didn't.

 

[Skizomeuh]

They will show how wrong you are by 2030.

And on my last breath I'll then say "RSI", Citizen Kane's "rosebud" style

 

[Pomerlaw]

Seriously I think the biggest crowd that thinks the Flight Model is broken is from the ED community. That could be because ED has a different flight model and everything that isn't like ED can be perceived as broken to ED players.

I played SC before ED and didn't like the flight model. I'm a bit dissapointed they seem to have settled for this model, while a couple of changes would have made a big difference (remove the instant acceleration, edit gimbals, remove mouse commander gameplay).

 

[Neo-ST]

Seriously I think the biggest crowd that thinks the Flight Model is broken is from the ED community. That could be because ED has a different flight model and everything that isn't like ED can be perceived as broken to ED players. I am following the SC news for years and years and the people who actually play AC all compliment the Flight Model and I do so too. Reason is simple. It's fun and it's realistic. It's also a work in progress with many things to be improved on even more. Until now I have not noticed any problem as I was flying that stemmed from the Flight model itself.

Wrong.
I played AC before ED (since I wasn't in the alpha or premium beta period) and immediately found it utterly disgusting.
I also immediately voiced my dissatisfaction and concerns on official forums and got nothing but ridiculed.

First there were ignorant idiots who said "Oh, it's a pre-pre-pre-pre-pre-Alpha, can't you see?!", "This is only the first iteration, don't be stupid!", "Hey, it's CR's vision, he knows what he's doing!", etc.

Then there was (and still is), a completely another level of...I don't know even how to call them, delusional religious fanatics - who don't see anything problematic with current flight model or the targeting system.
Their comments usually boil down to convincing others that everything's fine, and instead they're the problem: "What are you talking about? The flight model is just fine.", "It's so realistic, it's just perceived as bad.", "You are doing it wrong", "Me and my whole org just love it!", "Have you tried actually playing the game?", "I like it as it is, please CR don't change anything!", "SHUT UP AND TAKE MORE OF MY MONEY!!!", etc.

In reality, dissatisfied people simply chose not to play this good looking garbage and hope for improvements in the future instead of wasting their time and energy arguing with such people.

That's why when a rookie plays AC for the first time with his joystick, expecting hell of a good experience, and finds it mediocre at best - he comes to see the forums and maybe ask for opinions, what he'll see is not people like him, who don't like it as well, but fanatics who will make sure to assure him the problem is everywhere else but in the game.

That's what has been going on since AC was first released and I don't think they are doing the game (or the whole community) a favor.

It's fun and it's realistic.

Seriously, Mr. Nowak? Are we trolling now? Neither ED's or SC's flight model is realistic. The difference is, one is fun, the other one is not.

 

[Toumal]

Seriously I think the biggest crowd that thinks the Flight Model is broken is from the ED community. That could be because ED has a different flight model and everything that isn't like ED can be perceived as broken to ED players. I am following the SC news for years and years and the people who actually play AC all compliment the Flight Model and I do so too. Reason is simple. It's fun and it's realistic. It's also a work in progress with many things to be improved on even more. Until now I have not noticed any problem as I was flying that stemmed from the Flight model itself.

You obviously never bothered to read my post then. Shame.
I don't mind having a different flight model. At all. I don't mind having authoritative yaw for a twitchy game like SC. I don't like everything about ED's handling, though I can live with it to be honest.

What breaks the game in SC IMHO is the aim coupling. Your choice of input is either Mouse or die. And yes, I don't find the flight model in SC particularly fun. And all this talk about "it's so super realistic" just gives me the creeps.

I don't want SC to be a bad game. I'd like them to fix the control issues. Otherwise it'll end up much like Arma: Great premise, wonderful models, terrible to control.

 

[Helfix]

Seriously I think the biggest crowd that thinks the Flight Model is broken is from the ED community. That could be because ED has a different flight model and everything that isn't like ED can be perceived as broken to ED players. I am following the SC news for years and years and the people who actually play AC all compliment the Flight Model and I do so too. Reason is simple. It's fun and it's realistic. It's also a work in progress with many things to be improved on even more. Until now I have not noticed any problem as I was flying that stemmed from the Flight model itself.

See, this is my entire problem with Mr. Nowak, Ripley and other posters here who defend SC. They immediately jump to conclusions such as the one you just made about only people from ED community complain when in reality what you just stated was complete fallacy. The facts are, while CIG was still in its early stages of getting funded, <$2 million, there were countless threads posted about the gameplay, mouse controls, freelancer easy point and click and many issues. All of whom were addressed by CIG as things that would never happen. Even with those assurances, as time went on, there were still countless threads raising those concerns. So in fact, when AC did get released back in June of 2014, you bet there were a crap ton of posts on forums because what people feared even before development started came to fruition.

Even now, there are countless threads on these topics and a lot of them are being censored under Katamari threads. The only people who are not complaining and are putting others down are people who use mouse controls and those are the facts. Why? Because they want to retain their easy mode advantage. They don't care about balance or complexity or skill, just that it's easy and that they can retain the advantage compared to other controllers.

Everyone else, joystick players and quite a few mouse players who use vjoy are trying to get CIG to actually balance the game properly where it takes skill and actual flying, not point and click aim.

The current flight mechanics are nothing but a FPS set in space with arcade controls like in Freelancer/War Thunder. The entire leader boards are dominated by mouse players because the only way to stay competitive is to use the mouse. The best joystick players who utilize all the tools and crutches given to them by CIG can't break into top 10, hell the top 25 barely has 1-3 joystick players. The irony of all of this is that CIG negated their entire flight model by having Freelancer style mouse controls.

The bottom line is, these issues were a major topic even before Elite started its kickstarter let alone Alpha and they are still a major topic because FLIGHT is the CORE of the game.

 

[kilvenny]

@Helfix
Actually I am not sure "FLIGHT is the CORE of the game" any more. I was chatting to a guy at work the other day and he started talking about a space based FPS shooter he had seen. It turned out it was Star Citizen! That isn't the impression any poster on this thread would have, so how come he was left thinking that? What I am trying to say is somewhere between the KS and today the emphasis changed towards FPS which fits the flight model and the engine.

 

[Clawhammer]

As i understood right most people that say that they dont like the flight model want gimbels removed or auto like in ed. For that change they dont have to rewite the entire game... That are simple balance changes...

 

[Mr.Nowak]

@Helfix
Actually I am not sure "FLIGHT is the CORE of the game" any more. I was chatting to a guy at work the other day and he started talking about a space based FPS shooter he had seen. It turned out it was Star Citizen! That isn't the impression any poster on this thread would have, so how come he was left thinking that? What I am trying to say is somewhere between the KS and today the emphasis changed towards FPS which fits the flight model and the engine.

The emphasis never changed the scope did. CR always wanted to do a first person universe. Where you can seamlessly get in and out of your ship. Where you are not a ship but a person and the ship is your vehicle. He talked about this many many times over since 2012.

 

[jcrg99]

The only people who are not complaining and are putting others down are people who use mouse controls and those are the facts. Why? Because they want to retain their easy mode advantage. They don't care about balance or complexity or skill, just that it's easy and that they can retain the advantage compared to other controllers.

You search for logic and reason where only exists people pretending, for the sake of defending, not the game, but whatever Chris Roberts decide to make, be related to the game, be related to the way on making money with the game. They all embraced the "spread the word" vibe, the need to fund the game, and never let it go. Probably never will, because Roberts is taking care on keeping them this way through speech, weekly shows and catch phrases, for obvious reasons.

So.. NO! It's not because those people want easy mode advantage or whatever, that they jumped in your throat there. They will defend whatever Roberts do and say. Just that.

By the way... Just saw another "unexpected" event that certainly will cause more delays in things predicted by Roberts to the end of this year (don't worry, he will find another excuse, obviously):

 

[Troels]

@Helfix
Actually I am not sure "FLIGHT is the CORE of the game" any more. I was chatting to a guy at work the other day and he started talking about a space based FPS shooter he had seen. It turned out it was Star Citizen! That isn't the impression any poster on this thread would have, so how come he was left thinking that? What I am trying to say is somewhere between the KS and today the emphasis changed towards FPS which fits the flight model and the engine.

I believe that change happened right around November 24th 2014:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FXnNwUmnl3o&feature=youtu.be&t=310

 

[bliss]

Scott Manley having a bit of fun

[video=youtube;dkKy4ddfH4Q]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dkKy4ddfH4Q[/video]

 

[Ralph Vargr]

This game is going to be ready by 2030?

 

[Viking]

Free to fly racing ships, for a week: https://robertsspaceindustries.com/comm-link/transmission/14663-Test-Drive-The-Racing-Ships

I believe that change happened right around November 24th 2014

Well, it's not that the game has changed its focus to FPS. It has embraced FPS as part of its scope. While it is true that the FPS module was first announced at PAX Australia last year, it had been in the works then for some time. I'm not sure exactly when it was put in the scope though.

Gamers today are highly segregated. Some like adventure games, some first person shooters, some SIMs, some space sims, and a few like maybe two or three of the above. So naturally, someone who spend their time playing FPS games will listen when they hear about a new game with FPS elements. That is an intended effect too. I often hear people saying "I want to play a space sim but have no interest in FPS. Why do they even bother to put that into a space sim is beyond me. If I want to play FPS I'll fire up a FPS game I have." and others say "Wow, a space sim with seamless FPS gameplay? I want it now! But socializing in bars? LOL! It doesn't belong in a space game!" while yet others say "Oh, a game where I can do other things than just PVP and fight all the time. What a relief!"

That's the problem with today's gaming world, IMO - thinking of single genre games like it was the most natural way of making games. It only became this way because nobody made a game with most/all genres into one game before. The gamers didn't ask, so the publishers didn't make it. Now, CIG is doing just that, and people are confused. "What are they making? A space sim? But ... I see FPS and this and that ..." Even the media is confused and don't understand what this is. People react negatively because they don't understand, or don't want it. They even don't want others to experience something they don't like themselves - for some strange reason I don't understand - so they try to talk others out of it too.

It's simple: A First Person Universe (FPU), where you can be anyone you want and do anything you want, within some limits, but the limits are fewer than in any other game. After Star Citizen is released, the scope will continue to grow. While this is intimidating and scary to some people, others look forward to see a more and more complete universe. It'll be like Second Life in space, only with more to do than in Second Life.

 

[Ralph Vargr]

Yes, a first-person universe is the target market for Star Citizen. Some will want different flight mechanics, and ships, but that is the main idea.

For reasons of enlightened self interest, I hope the Star Citizen franchise grows. *Why*, I will leave as an exercise for the student.

 

[Vasea Azure]

The more I play it the less I enjoy it because of the simple fact that if I want to actually kill something I have to resolve to M and K and leave my hotas. Also Trackir is still broken and you just moving your head and not your helmet. To be honest it feels almost like a bad version of Star conflict game. What do they exactly do with this insane amount of money?

 

[Neo-ST]

What do they exactly do with this insane amount of money?

Promote it, to attract more money.

 

[Vasea Azure]

Promote it, to attract more money.

I`m affraid so. At least we can try out few racing ships for free this week, so thats good I guess

 

[Dante80]

Btw, the Hull Series is coming in a concept sale next Friday.

https://forums.robertsspaceindustries.com/discussion/253293/misc-hull-series-sale-friday-april-24/p1

Don't know the price range yet, or the actual line up. We are speculating that Hull A,B,C will go on sale, D may be offered in a very limited fashion, and E will be a persistent ship like the Bengal so not for sale.

If I could wager a guess, I think the price ranges will look like the following..

Hull A : 200$
Hull B : 275$
Hull C : 350$
Hull D (if it materializes) : 800$