The Star Citizen Thread v 4
- Thread starter Yaffle
- Start date
- Status
Some reasonable discussion going on there.
We always get these quiet periods on SC though. Any day now I expect much excitement about the buying of clothes in the PU and numerous threads appearing here on the ED forums inexplicably claiming that the purchasing of virtual attire is the most important thing to happen to space gaming since Wing Commander and why on earth doesn't Frontier add clothes shopping yesterday?
To be honest, I think people will have a lot of other things to talk about, like WHAAAAA My Conda got killed by 3 Eagle NPCS, I only own the base game but I want to go down to the Engineers too WHHAAAA
Edit:
and FD did talk about a long time ago, that they will sell more in the store when it will become actual for the game, like different decorations for your ship, like wood panels etc. and also clothes when we can walk around, so it has been in the plans for along time.
Last edited:
Meh, we're always talking about the same things on a loop though, not talk or talk about is the same thing, difference we save the thread a few pages of the same :B
Clothes, Weapons and possibly (for 2.4) Ship Components
So apparently Mr. Roberts is only worth 36k. What did he do with all that money I wonder? ;-)
http://imgur.com/a/cDAvm
http://imgur.com/a/cDAvm
Wow. That's pretty brutal...
Well that is what happens when no new content is released for 5+ months now. Only so much you can talk about nothing.
Well relatively speaking it's about a 17th of the cost of the completionist package - looks like a bargain to me!
I think they're finally getting it. My hope for SC was that once the bigger ships come out, they'll handle a bit more like big ships instead of the twitch fps controls of the smaller ones. Alas, I have yet to see flight mechanics that feel satisfying in SC.
For every person who gets it, there's a bunch of them that don't.
SC is being built according to the preferences of these people.
hahahha, amazing thing so much nothing to discuss that generates one of the biggest if not the biggest discussion on the whole Frontier Forums.
There's people who like it and people who don't, the FM is being built upon a massive wave of different opinions. Your right is the wrong of others, and vice-versa... I don't want that super duper realistic FM some backers are so obsessed with, and this heights on who is the majority here, the backers who are okay with the current direction of FM's, or the backers who are mad because it's not what was originally meant to be.
dayrth
Volunteer Moderator
This is correct of course, and I can't blame CIG for wanting to attract as many customers as possible. However to be fair to the latter group (and I am one of those), it is not only what was 'originally meant to be' it is what was originally PROMISED. We have some justification for being 'mad'.
Are "these people" in any way related to the mythical people that hold back ED? I'm always hearing about this mythical crowd of people that work closely with Frontier to ensure all of the things random forum people want to work don't work and it's always "those people" that are to blame. Typically with ED it seems to be a mythical group of individuals closely tied to the 1984 release of Elite that don't want "anything modern" in the game and they love all the compromises of P2P networking and instances and they all play on XBoxes. Yeah I'm always hearing about "those people". Whenever anyone tries to have a serious conversation on why things are the way they are for reasons someone always mentions that "those people" are the cause. Yet I doubt anyone can provide any information about where "these people" meet to discuss their master-plans.
I remember the first release of Arena Commander didn't even have proper 6dof and all of that decoupled mode nonsense and there were numerous examples of fans saying "this IS perfect, this IS exactly how it should be" to which CIG developers clearly said "er actually no it isn't" and changed it.
What i can understand on this matter is exactly of, what was originally promised back then, and what it had shaped into, to be understand-able that those backers have reasons to not be happy.
However the current situation is already one of, they can't go back to that expectation of early backers without completely clash with the latter backers, so i think it's "between wall and sword" that is, whatever you do, you're going to get backlash.
Actually in this specific example, FD went with "This is the FM we like and this is how we're keeping it" and they did.
Well good on them but personally the difference from the later stages of AC to 2.0 wasn't that much if you exclude those fancy words for a speed limit (precision mode lol).
What did change a lot towards the better was controller response/feel.
I haven't played SC in ages though but this is what I remember. I might not remember it correctly and there might be more improvement since.
However when backers expect Star Marine and CIG tells them well Star Marine is already in the PU "these people" are the ones who defend CIG on social media.
These "yes everything is amazing, even the bugs!" are the ones I am referring to. Just like the people who keep on buying ridiculously priced ships which gives CIG more incentive to sell more of them and continue doing so.
"See our flight model is amazing, these people say so."
I just gives CIG a leg to stand on.
Of course this just matters to me because I don't agree with "these people". If I did, it wouldn't be an issue.
Last edited:
Well, those developers are FPS developers, not sim developers, they probably never played a real SIM ever. Now, ED and SC are not SIM's as per say, like DCS or IL2, FSX kind of game, they are more like space faring life sims, if you really need to use the word SIM. However one use a more FPS influence direction, and the other are more influenced by flight sims in the mechanics. I like the latter more.
Really? Because I thought the whole point of getting rid of the publisher was so that they could do something true to their vision instead of being forced to pander to the least common denominator. What's the point if said vision is to pander to the generic populace for more money anyway?
Last edited:
- Status