The Star Citizen Thread v 4
- Thread starter Yaffle
- Start date
- Status
It's incredible when all a company needs to do is to throw a "subject to change" on anything they sell and when your wine tastes like monkey , they have a horde of white knights defending them because of those three words.
Incredible how people refuse to defend buyers and instead defend the greedy company.
Let's all hold hands and happily walk down 1984 street.
Incredible how people refuse to defend buyers and instead defend the greedy company.
Let's all hold hands and happily walk down 1984 street.
It's incredible when all a company needs to do is to throw a "subject to change" on anything they sell and when your wine tastes like monkey , they have a horde of white knights defending them because of those three words.
Incredible how people refuse to defend buyers and instead defend the greedy company.
Let's all hold hands and happily walk down 1984 street.
Eh
In my own very personal opinion, there should be no sympathy for people who shelled out money for conceptual digital fantasy space ships who are then disappointed with the final product. Especially when buying those concepts is not tied to any sort of guarantee (unlike a KS backer reward).
Now, fundamental changes to the game, that is a different story as everything is in service of delivering the stated concept.
I wasn't talking about the efficiency of quantity of moles in a 3d model point of view, just the idea of taking that as a bad thing... is totally the opposite. Why would anyone in their right mind blame them for that? xD
I can understand many critics, I may don't like some things, not that they eliminate a seat in a ship but the miscommunication in why has that happened and why no one was informed of that. That's the bad part. A ship may change from the concepto art to the final 3d model, they just have to tell us that that has happened.
Always all of this IMHO.
P.D.-I don't believe this has nothing with the coop, private servers and all of that, this is miscommunication(possibly between them and with us).
Last edited:
It's incredible when all a company needs to do is to throw a "subject to change" on anything they sell and when your wine tastes like monkey , they have a horde of white knights defending them because of those three words.
Incredible how people refuse to defend buyers and instead defend the greedy company.
Let's all hold hands and happily walk down 1984 street.
I'm not sure what you expect. It's a complex game in relatively early stages of development. This is the stage when you're implementing concepts and finding out what works and what doesn't for various reasons. Elements are added, cut, and modified from the original vision.
Well as certain movie stars are busy - SC will just have to wait until they are free again before they can possibly complete filming and release product
let's say another 4 years or so Well as certain movie stars are busy - SC will just have to wait until they are free again before they can possibly complete filming and release product
Yes, you're right. I evidently know nothing about game development
Stop charging for stuff you're not sure about then. If you must, charge once you are sure.
Stop defending these horrible practices that do nothing but damage the industry.
OH DEAR the poor guy floating in space got Hit & Run! He got stuck on ship's front!
[video=youtube;AJqBTt4u3aQ]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AJqBTt4u3aQ&feature=youtu.be&ab_channel=Myre[/video]
[video=youtube;AJqBTt4u3aQ]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AJqBTt4u3aQ&feature=youtu.be&ab_channel=Myre[/video]
I'm still blinking and trying to process how 4 years in is still the early stages of development. Maybe once they get that pipeline properly established around year 9, content will really start to flow! So many basic systems aren't in, so many things the designers claim they are only just starting to "think about," so many vague and ridiculous mechanics like "Death of a Spaceman" that I don't see ever making it into a playable state.
My enthusiasm has been indefinitely delayed. I think what we have in the PTU now is basically what we'll have in Squadron 42, not nearly the WIP-no-really-everything-will-totally-change-and-they'll-add-gameplay-and-component-overclocking-and-space-farming-in-beta fans claim. S42 will be THAT uninspiring combat, that janky FPS, with a bunch of cutscenes bolted on and a huge USE icons floating around. Especially if it's really going to be delivered this year. Do any of the devs actually believe that?
My enthusiasm has been indefinitely delayed. I think what we have in the PTU now is basically what we'll have in Squadron 42, not nearly the WIP-no-really-everything-will-totally-change-and-they'll-add-gameplay-and-component-overclocking-and-space-farming-in-beta fans claim. S42 will be THAT uninspiring combat, that janky FPS, with a bunch of cutscenes bolted on and a huge USE icons floating around. Especially if it's really going to be delivered this year. Do any of the devs actually believe that?
Last edited:
Does CIG really still say early stages of development? (like in the last quarter or so)
I ask because SQ42 is supposed to be out this year and I don't consider under 10 months to release to be early stages of development.
Perhaps in reference to Star Citizen, it is okay since that one is still a ways out and has a higher demand on developed assets, but if they are saying early stages of development for SQ42, I'd have some real concerns about a 2016 launch.
I ask because SQ42 is supposed to be out this year and I don't consider under 10 months to release to be early stages of development.
Perhaps in reference to Star Citizen, it is okay since that one is still a ways out and has a higher demand on developed assets, but if they are saying early stages of development for SQ42, I'd have some real concerns about a 2016 launch.
No, they have not said they are on the early stages of development.
I think SQ42 is doable late this year/ early next year. I say early next year because it is CIG. You know dates and stuff. They need to lock down the flight model, weapons, components, radar/stealth, the one system they are going to use, the ships, damage/repair, FPS, and the story/animations. I'm probably missing a few.
They won't need mining, salvage, bounty hunting, exploration, fuel gathering, etc mechanics.
I really hope they are further along on the assets needed. I am somewhat hopeful based on the leaks last year and some new information that's been coming out (Idris being brought into the engine/game). I'm just not that confident right now. I do enjoy the mini PU so far.
Yet they have mechanics that don't even have finalized design documents
- - - - - Additional Content Posted / Auto Merge - - - - -
Is that the only reason you're saying next year? Really?
I mean from what you've played and seen you really think they'll release be able to release a AAA single player game in 10 months?
I imagine those are mostly related to activities in Star Citizen. Though, no telling what degree of freedom you are allowed in the "over-world*" of SQ42. In all likelihood, it will be a fraction of all the activities that would be available to you in Star Citizen.Yet they have mechanics that don't even have finalized design documents
*My hunch is that it will be much like Freelancer with scripted mission sequences spread about an open world with gates that unlock through progressing the storyline.
My guess would be far more like Wing Commander where you get assigned a ship for each mission. Perhaps if you're very lucky you get to choose one of two and a choice of load-outs. Jumps would take place between missions and would comprise a cut scene. Such a game wouldn't require any work to be done on the PU at all.
I'm finding it strange that CIG seem to be having so much trouble with persistence. Freelancer had it. You could buy new ships, and guns, and everything. Of course it was a single player game, so they didn't have to mess with SQL and databases and all that difficult stuff but could record it in a file, but it still seems a bit odd.
It was very noticeable to me that when Batgirl asked Mr Lesnick flat out about when the persistence was coming he refused to answer. Just gave a vaque "it's coming" but not even a hint of when.
I'm finding it strange that CIG seem to be having so much trouble with persistence. Freelancer had it. You could buy new ships, and guns, and everything. Of course it was a single player game, so they didn't have to mess with SQL and databases and all that difficult stuff but could record it in a file, but it still seems a bit odd.
It was very noticeable to me that when Batgirl asked Mr Lesnick flat out about when the persistence was coming he refused to answer. Just gave a vaque "it's coming" but not even a hint of when.
Maybe the security and governance required when you mix persistence with RMT (monetisation) is causing them headaches?
Yet they have mechanics that don't even have finalized design documents
And that's called game development.
Features go from Planned, to Design, to Production, to release. So yeah much of the things that are related to activities and later in the road features to come, are planned.
There's the plan, the concept, and then when it's time to start working on the feature. Like jump-points, planned since always, and months ago entering the design stage, along with persistence.
As checking the studio reports clearly shows, it's when they say X feature is under a design stage that we know that it's actively under development to come to the game already.
Last edited:
- Status