The Star Citizen Thread v5
- Thread starter Brett C
- Start date
- Status
Did you read the post all the way through? Or are you just lashing out because I happen to enjoy a game currently drowning in a tsunami of hype backlash?
No. I'm saying that my enjoyment of NMS is unrelated to any hype the game had before release. I wasn't invested in it and I didn't pay attention to it. As such, I couldn't care one whit about it, other than in the generalised form that all hype is stupid, and people who contribute to it are even worse. What Sean said or didn't say has no bearing on my relation to the game.
If you want to be angry at Sean, then go right ahead. Meanwhile, I'll play a good game and no amount of Sean and Sony and all the NMS hypers (hype:ists?) being taken to task for their nonsense will change this.
Moreover, what I'm saying is that NMS is a perfect example why we shouldn't take Chris at his word or assume anything they show will have any connection the final product. What he says is just hype, and it does mean absolutely nothing. Hence why it's such a laugh riot that that's all they have going for them: nothing. Imagine what the backlash will be in their case unless they change… oh… everything about the production of SC.
So you agree with me then. Good.
No, it's the one thing I'm criticising NMS fanboys for too. Again, read the whole thing through and don't jump to conclusion just because I happen to enjoy the final product.
Last edited:
It isn't uncommon behavior for someone with a Chris Roberts level of ego. In order to keep his own spirits up he has to constantly make sure he is topping the competition (even if only in appearance). Best to just ignore the self-aggrandizing behavior of a narcissist. We know where the other games stand, we've played them. Not sure if CR plays any other games, but with as behind schedule as SQ42 is, he shouldn't be playing anything else anyway.
They are right now on 2.5.0J, there seems to be some texture issues around GrimHex and something like that but yesterday people were talking about this build being more or less stable so... It may be released these first days of the week.
I don't even think he plays his own game personally let alone anyone else's.
So you are projecting your emotions on others? Not a good start. Why should I care if you like a game? I will give you a hint, I don't, I never even brought it up.
You are the one that blamed the hype on the players, and when I pointed out that the Dev's are the ones in fact that created the hype (by stating what content would be in the game, most people do not think of this as hype but features) you created apologies for that, saying it was just hype and that we should ignore it. If everything the Dev says is hype then no one would ever know what the game actually is. Funny how you were not just talking about your relation to the game, you were talking about other players. So I responded to your post about other players. Did I say anything about your enjoyment of the game? Nope I did not. I am not sure why you are so focused on yourself when the discussion was on hype surrounding the game.
I am not angry at Sean, again that emotion projection kicking in, I just think its appropriate for Dev's to be held responsible for the statements they make and the hype they generate.
By your own statements there should be no backlash, after all its just hype and and means nothing. So you can't hold anything they say ageist them, its the players fault if they believe what the developers say. Because if what the Dev's say means nothing and we all know it means nothing, then you can't complain if the final product is nothing like it. After all its not a lie if everyone knows its a lie. So you can't complain if the current build of SC is not exactly like what they have claimed.
No one is jumping to conclusion, yet another projection on your part? Actually you are criticizing them for holding the Dev's responsible for their statements, something I disagree with and why I posted.
And no I don't agree with you. What you said was an example of when players don't hold the Dev's responsible for what they said. But holding them responsible is something I think they should do.
- - - - - Additional Content Posted / Auto Merge - - - - -
I am not sure he even uses a computer, past the very basic web browsing. It was clear from that video that he was seeing the game for the first time. The first thing he did was complain about the text box, something that was in the game for months. If he actually played the game then he would have known about that before release (that builds release).
Last edited:
I think it's best to go into a game with no mans expectations (lol) and just see what the game has to offer. If you already imagined what you want in the game then you won't be surprised at all to see it if it's there but you set yourself up for disappointment.
My advice to anyone - Wait for reviews but don't read any spoilers. Wait for the price to drop. Don't make any expectations about the game.
Some game s like COD or Armed Assault you always know what you're getting. Games like The Forest (for eg) are different. I didn't know anything about that game and me and my mate have been having one of the best gaming experiences from it having to learn it all ourselves.
Not knowing about a game just makes the experience so much more when it turns out to be a good game. Overhyping a game, expecting things that aren't going to be there or imagining gameplay or scenarios does nothing but fuel disappointment.
Sadly that is the state we have gotten into. But is it imagining gameplay when the Dev says its in the game? While I agree that players make up their own expectations and such, I mean just look at SC and the crazy things some players expect to be able to do. But not all expectations are the players creation. Lets say you are selling a vehicle, you claim it will have 4 wheels everyone expects it to have 4 wheels. But when it releases it has 3. If we were talking about a game people would blame the costumers for expecting to get 4 wheels on their vehicle, while with any other product people would scream scam. Why should game creators be held to a different standard?
Why is game development considered "magic" and beyond the reasoning of normal mortals.
When CR says there will be PG birds, people expect PG birds. When CR does not deliver PG birds he should get criticized for not delivering PG birds. Sure you can be skeptical that he will deliver on what he says, and you can even believe he is a lair, but that does not change what he said or the expectations the created. Just look at this thread, there are people that do think that he will deliver on what he has said, while others do not. Neither one changes what was promised and stated to be in the game.
Last edited:
It's about money. They want money. Period.
No, I'm saying that you should read what I write rather than make up an entire agenda on my part based on my opinion on a game.
No. I blaming the disappointment some people feel on the hype, which was in part created by the players. I said that I don't care what the hype was or who was responsible for it at as far as determining whether or not I enjoy the game. The two are unrelated. You are lashing out because I don't care about something that does not affect my enjoyment.
I'm saying that you shouldn't listen to hype. I'm saying that you shouldn't contribute to hype. I'm saying that doing either will end badly — for everyone.
Well, guess what? Everything the dev says is hype, and you can't know what the game actually is until you play it. Remember all those pages of back and forth over whether the gamescom stuff is “in the game”? There's a reason why that debate comes up every time SC fans want to hype Chris' latest brainfart.
No. I was talking about how funny it is that, when you ignore the hype and judge the game on its own merits, it turns out to be a good game. All I said about other players was that they hadn't done that, and look what happened…
You have a very strange way of showing not-anger.
Correct on the first part. Ridiculously non-sequitur on the other. Yes, there should be no backlash because no-one should be falling for hype these days. But from this does not follow that you can't hold it against people what they say. But this is not limited to the developers — if you think even for an instant that the players are free of blame, you're being very blind about how these things work. But more to the point: what either party says is of absolutely no consequence to how good the game itself is. In NMS' case, the game is good; the hype is not something you should care about in judging that.
No. This is just some nonsense you've invented for yourself so that you can be angry. I'm criticising them for contributing to the hype. I'm holding them responsible for their statements. If you stopped being upset about my enjoying the game for a moment, you might discover that you agree with me about pretty much everything I've said (well, maybe except my opinion of the game, which is why this is the only reason I can think of that you're lashing out).
I don't think it started that way. I think they had a good working idea of what type of game to make and the original Kickstarter actually looked like something that could be made with Cryengine. Sadly has the money rolled in that changed. I truly think that the first year after the kickstarter (two years in development) was just a focus on bringing in money, when it became clear that they had a chance of fully funding the game with crowdfunding money. Just look at how little was produced and how nothing was done. AC was not delayed because of netcode (after all they released it with the built in one anyway), but because they had nothing to give to players. Just look at the gameplay for that Dec, and how little there was, there was no way they could release that to the public, not after ED hit it out of the park with its amazing Alpha.
As the problems with development started to build and the team faced more and more problems, with the release date getting pushed out over and over again (internally). I think CR saw his history repeating, he saw that SC was going down the road of Freelancer, and the fear of running out of money before finishing started to kick in. So he did the stupidest thing he could, he chased the money in hopes of having money fix the problem. But all that did was delay development even more, making it necessary to bring in more money. And the only way to bring in more money was to promise more things, making development take more time that required more money.
Just look at the first two years after the kickstarter, the first year was focused on bringing money in, then year two hit and it was like "oh ya we need to make a game". Ship sales ended, CIG stopped focusing on making money and went on the build game mode. But as time stretched on and nothing was getting produced (CIG knows how junky its code is, and how bad its release of AC really was), CIG again focused on making money, seeing their funds dropping and with no end in site for finishing development, CIG had to keep going somehow. That somehow was doing the one thing they are good at doing, bringing money.
Now we are in a state that CIG have promised the world and taking money on that promise.
It didn't start that way. But changed to that objective very earlier in the development, when they figured out that would make a lot more money (personally) through this method than developing traditionally, delivering and hoping for good sale results to get their profit.
They knew about at what cost that would be. But the amount of money been offered was big. They couldn't lose this chance. Something that NEVER will be reproduced again in the game industry, by anyone, not even themselves (in case of trying to do the same with some new project).
Roberts and Ortwin are old foxes.
It amazes me when people claim that Roberts is a dreamer, like if he was some kind of passionate teenager, ignoring all his history in the business in the last 20 years and how he made a life and money, through what methods.
Both are venture capitalists and are maximizing their profit.
And do not make mistake. They know what they are doing. And they are pros in the matter of development too. Excelent producers/developers IF the objective was to produce/develop (an objective that they only had when were working under the eyes of Origin/EA).
If they were hold accountable and had someone in their neck giving the orders, do not make mistake. Both would be excellent choices to be in the team. They are top aces of the job that they are doing. So as some of their major associates... all old foxes.
Its just that their objective, as I said, it's not to release. Simple. It's to keep a show for longer as possible and profit on it for as long as possible, as well as taking advantage of all this media and attention to increase their networking, business contacts both in the game and movie industry, and things like that, for their future. They know since 2013 that SC as a game, to be sustainable, profitable, to keep a company, is . And they don't care, because they are succeeding in the same way and method the succeeded in the past failed ventures.
People are very very very, ridiculously naive when they look to their attitude. If they look with their feet in the ground, realistically, and considering who are those people, for real, not the character played on stage from the beginning, they would understand why they do what they do.
Last edited:
Burying the NMS hatchet — we agree aside from a petty quibble about the final game. So anyway…
One is the more obvious problem that the nature of the game changed rather drastically during that time period, so whatever good working idea they had was lost pretty much immediately. The other is that, no matter how good the idea was, the simple fact is that Chris is not good with money — his entire industry (both industries, really) history provides ample evidence of this. No-one in a position to remind him of this did so, so chances are that the good idea was in dire financial straights right out the gate because they did not have a realistic expectation of what it would cost.
As the game ballooned and development debt was accumulated because they were to busy chasing money, like you describe, that discrepancy between the real and the expected cost imperceptibly ballooned as well. So chances are that they're not just going down a spiral of ever increasing costs of ever expanding promises, but also down one where they consistently misjudge those costa, making the target they're chasing far larger than they imagine.
Pretty much, but with two significant caveats on the “didn't start that way” and “good working idea.”
One is the more obvious problem that the nature of the game changed rather drastically during that time period, so whatever good working idea they had was lost pretty much immediately. The other is that, no matter how good the idea was, the simple fact is that Chris is not good with money — his entire industry (both industries, really) history provides ample evidence of this. No-one in a position to remind him of this did so, so chances are that the good idea was in dire financial straights right out the gate because they did not have a realistic expectation of what it would cost.
As the game ballooned and development debt was accumulated because they were to busy chasing money, like you describe, that discrepancy between the real and the expected cost imperceptibly ballooned as well. So chances are that they're not just going down a spiral of ever increasing costs of ever expanding promises, but also down one where they consistently misjudge those costa, making the target they're chasing far larger than they imagine.
Last edited:
Yeah, I agree, it makes him look weak and insecure, and is very unhelpful in setting the tone for SC followers.
Realistically, he's in a place where he cannot present the game as an "also-ran", which means he does need to highlight what it can offer that people can't already get Right Now in an existing game that they can buy on the spot. Successfully doing that without talking down the competition is a tight rope to walk; I really don't hold it against him if he stumbles or chooses to err on the side of rousing his supporters. He's between a rock and a hard place and I'm really glad I'm not in his shoes. Best case scenario: He eventually delivers a game that manages a similarly mostly-enthusiastic fan reception as Elite did and the last 5 years were a struggle that ultimately mostly worked out ok. Worst case scenario: He wastes 5 years of his life (and ten years of his health) living a waking nightmare he created by trying to chase a dream, as he watches himself systematically destroying his reputation and digging it deeper trying to hold it together, causing millions of people to despise him forever, while other companies demonstrate that his dreams were achievable, just not by him. Right now the stakes are high and whether he was ungenerous in focusing on perceived weaknesses in the competition probably barely registers on his list of concerns.
(Besides, those "weaknesses" don't even register as weaknesses to me - I already know that atmo planets are coming in a future season of Elite, and right now I assume that a future season of Elite has greater certainty than SC of not being a mess.)
Last edited:
In other words, you agree with me about pretty much everything I said other than that the game is good. So let's drop it, ok?
The money started to come only because they started to add stretch goals in the top of the main design. They hyped the thing through that and through their speech of we vs. evil publishers. At this point, they were abandoning the feasibility of the project, for the sake of the money. Started to deceive people, pretend that were features "thought to be included before and part of the design already researched/investigated along an year", building excuses on the top of excuses, etc.
As I said, Roberts and Ortwin are old foxes of monetary ventures. They go to where the money is. They are not attached to brands or companies. They don't care with that. They abandon all that if money calls. Always was this way, and was no different with this venture under the aka Star Citizen, RSI.
He is not stupid too. He knew what all that would cause. Notice for example, some of his interviews in the earlier days. There was one, where he made clear that the Cryengine was an excelent choice to make the game that he was interested to make "because it was just set in space" and because he didn't need to make other stuff, in planets, cities, etc. He also know that after announcing a project, making it taking longer, would get stale. He knows the drill. Still, made the decision of pursuit the money, regardless all that.
They are selling a game and a game development, but in fact, their business is a show. A kind of TV Reality Show, where the point is to entertain people through "behind the scenes" of a game development. Meanwhile they sell goods related to that show, t-shirts, virtual ships, etc. They know that the show, in some point, won't be "renewed".
But while they have a few whales sustaining, giving how their prices for items are high, it will continue, regardless NEVER bringing anything near of what they hyped or promised, and that considering the reality of the game industry, competition, etc., they are totally ruined, IF, their objective was to deliver a game. It's not. Their objective is money. And deceiving consumers, desperate for a Space Sim, game devs desperate for a salary and a few angel investors is a lot easier than to deceive publishers and actors/directors/producers from Hollywood, things that Ortwin and Roberts spent their entire career doing.
Last edited:
I wouldn't be surprised if, secretly, Roberts considers the PTU to be the MVP. After all you've got space combat, you've got FPS, you've got missions. You've got shopping. I don't believe there will ever be a "Star Citizen v1.0", it's just going to continue to be an open-ended set of updates which will gradually add little bits and pieces, mostly bugs. Just witness the starry-eyed joy that met the announcement that they would be moving to "3.0", as if the number makes any difference whatsoever, other than to give them an excuse to deliver it later than they would have done with 2.7. And they'll keep running their annual dog and pony shows to fund it. But the last thing they want to do is draw a line and say "this is Star Citizen". As I think was alluded to in this thread before (props to whoever it was), right now the game is Schrodinger's cat and every stupid, delusional, unfounded idea that people have about what they'll be able to do in the game (along with the nonsense that Roberts has come up with) is coexisting inside the box, and as long as that's the case people will keep throwing money at CIG. It's in no one's interests to open the box.
So it will be interesting to see how they handle Squadron 42, because so far they've shown virtually nothing, and somehow they have to transition to a finished product. But going episodic means they can apply the same "you may not be able to do XYZ right now, but it's coming in a future episode. No, not the next one, maybe the one after that" development process they're currently applying to SC.
So it will be interesting to see how they handle Squadron 42, because so far they've shown virtually nothing, and somehow they have to transition to a finished product. But going episodic means they can apply the same "you may not be able to do XYZ right now, but it's coming in a future episode. No, not the next one, maybe the one after that" development process they're currently applying to SC.
Refractored?
Yup and those post illustrate how those mechanics are suppose to work. You are right that they don't show how they work within the game but AFAIK, no design doc that I have seen does either. So IMHO, you point is both circular and moot.
Open development =/= free open-source; don't know how you came to that association. That whole "backers are like publishers" pledge was and is misinterpreted and used as ammo for people who take issue with the way CIG is developing this game. That whole pledge was about CIG solely being accountable to their backers in terms of keeping them up to date with the development of the game and nothing more. IMHO, any other interpretation is being disingenuous to the fundamental idea behind that pledge.
Again they are modifying the engine while also creating the art assets. How hard is that to understand?
Let me ask you this, you think that Geralt in the original Witcher was their first and final 3-d model? How about Trevor in GTAV or Master Chief in Halo....,etc? No, it wasn't because it's an iterative process where you tweak and adjust things.
This is but one way to create/test a game. You may like it and think it's more logical but that doesn't discount the fact that it's just another way. Just like with anything in life, there are multiple ways to do something and their way may not be the way that you or others would do it.
- Status