The Star Citizen Thread v5

[Tuub t Tute]

2.5 went live yesterday to the general alpha. Biggest addition was the GrimHex Pirate base. So there are now two bases in the test alpha environment.
There have been a couple of new ships to buy, head bob in FPS has been reduced.

Rolan would be able to give you a more expansive and positive response if he is around tonight.

 

[briguy168]

Connies are $250+. What misrepresentation is there though? We have it straight from Chris Roberts' mouth that what they are thinking about is significantly increasing the ship cost in game in comparison to the current pledge cost. Nobody is saying anything apart from that, it just leads to the conversation of the advantage that people are recieving by paying money now vs the disadvantage for people that don't pay money.
Sod his body language, he could have easily have said "We have not finalised the details yet and it would be unfair to give you an answer now when the answer might be quite different next week." It was his choice to put his thoughts out there.

https://robertsspaceindustries.com/pledge/ships/rsi-constellation/Constellation-Taurus = $150 but good job trying to conflate the prices though.

It was always know that the in-game prices were going to be more than what they were worth in conversion of $ to ¤. Anyone who assumed otherwise didn't take the time to find out what was already assumed official or otherwise. You're also making an erroneous assumption that CIG won't balance out prices in terms of cost and TTA (time to aquire). So yes it is a misrepresentation.

I knew you were going to comment about my comment about his body language

So if CR said this would you think "that's an acceptable answer" or would you continue to call him a buffoon because he doesn't know the answers to these questions?

 

[Tippis]

It was always know that the in-game prices were going to be more than what they were worth in conversion of $ to ¤. Anyone who assumed otherwise didn't take the time to find out what was already assumed official or otherwise. You're also making an erroneous assumption that CIG won't balance out prices in terms of cost and TTA (time to aquire).

Has anyone actually made any comment on that or is it just an assumption that it is erroneous?

 

[Dementropy]

https://robertsspaceindustries.com/pledge/ships/rsi-constellation/Constellation-Taurus = $150 but good job trying to conflate the prices though.

It was always know that the in-game prices were going to be more than what they were worth in conversion of $ to ¤. Anyone who assumed otherwise didn't take the time to find out what was already assumed official or otherwise. You're also making an erroneous assumption that CIG won't balance out prices in terms of cost and TTA (time to aquire). So yes it is a misrepresentation.

I knew you were going to comment about my comment about his body language

So if CR said this would you think "that's an acceptable answer" or would you continue to call him a buffoon because he doesn't know the answers to these questions?

Can you please tell me what the "official assumptions" were? Either there's an official statement, or there's speculation. Well, with the exception of that one ship that was sold as having two seats, and then had only one DESPITE official statements prior to release. Oh, and the official statements about Star Marine being right around the corner (as documented on justagamemode.com ).

So, yeah. When even the statements and "official assumptions" from CIG turn out to be incorrect, a lot of people are going to be incredulous.

 

[Ian Skippy]

So if CR said this would you think "that's an acceptable answer" or would you continue to call him a buffoon because he doesn't know the answers to these questions?

If I were to take dozens of millions of credits based on a plan I definitely have and will finish in 2014, I am pretty sure I would know the answers in 2016. I'd expect the same from Chris Roberts. Is that unreasonable? I am interested in your opinion, because you clearly, as you said a few posts back, 'are not defending Chris Roberts or CIG'.

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

Can you please tell me what the "official assumptions" were? Either there's an official statement, or there's speculation. Well, with the exception of that one ship that was sold as having two seats, and then had only one DESPITE official statements prior to release. Oh, and the official statements about Star Marine being right around the corner (as documented on justagamemode.com ).

So, yeah. When even the statements and "official assumptions" from CIG turn out to be incorrect, a lot of people are going to be incredulous.

Dont forget the stretch goal that promised to deliver SC before the normal deadline of end 2014 if it were reached. [squeeeee] "Whats that? I promised to deliver a product at a specific point and you paid me extra for it? Sorry man, some other dude gave me even more and told me it was okay to give you the finger."

Official Statements my foot.

 

[Soliluna]

2.5 went live yesterday to the general alpha. Biggest addition was the GrimHex Pirate base. So there are now two bases in the test alpha environment.
There have been a couple of new ships to buy, head bob in FPS has been reduced.

Rolan would be able to give you a more expansive and positive response if he is around tonight.

Thankyou! I love your inclusion of "positive" it really fits the atmosphere of anything surrounding Star Citizen lol I'll take a look at those.

 

[Zetta]

https://robertsspaceindustries.com/pledge/ships/rsi-constellation/Constellation-Taurus = $150 but good job trying to conflate the prices though.

It was always know that the in-game prices were going to be more than what they were worth in conversion of $ to ¤. Anyone who assumed otherwise didn't take the time to find out what was already assumed official or otherwise. You're also making an erroneous assumption that CIG won't balance out prices in terms of cost and TTA (time to aquire). So yes it is a misrepresentation.

I knew you were going to comment about my comment about his body language

So if CR said this would you think "that's an acceptable answer" or would you continue to call him a buffoon because he doesn't know the answers to these questions?

The Constellations range from $150 to $350 with the average being $250.

Sure, it was rumoured that prices would probably increase but it was never actually confirmed. But that's besides the point, it's the times involved and how much they benefit people who have opened their wallets that's of importance.
Let's not forget that there were also comments from Roberts about how it would take 60 hours to earn a constellation, at one point it was going to be a week's worth of gameplay.

If a Reclaimer is going to be in the region of 200+ hours, that's pretty excessive. You're talking about a buy to play game with free to play levels of grind.
Personally I believe they should keep the hull costs down and make the fitments the expensive part. It allows people to view new ships as a sensibly reachable target which keeps them motivated to play, they then have the choice of spending time fitting it out as they see fit. Otherwise you slave your butt off for the hull and then slave it off some more for fittings.

Don't put words in my mouth, I haven't once called him a buffoon. I said that if he felt awkward addressing the question he could have avoided it by giving a plausible excuse. We wouldn't know if they were any closer to making a decision or not so we would have no choice but to take him at his word.

 

[jcrg99]

So if CR said this would you think "that's an acceptable answer" or would you continue to call him a buffoon because he doesn't know the answers to these questions?

How possibly he does not know the answer to this question, considering that he promised the full game release for earlier 2014 (and by 2014 was talking about a full release 2015, and by 2015 was talking about a full release 2016) and this specific question is not like something that would change due the raise of the scope or something, since its a simple and basic premise/logic of the game?

 

[Zetta]

Has anyone actually made any comment on that or is it just an assumption that it is erroneous?

I said that his comment of "increasing the prices significantly" could be construed as a 3x increase, purely for the sake of argument (otherwise he would have simply said doubled) and because a 3x increase had been rumoured by the playerbase before.

 

[Pharaelga]

The Constellations range from $150 to $350 with the average being $250.

Sure, it was rumoured that prices would probably increase but it was never actually confirmed. But that's besides the point, it's the times involved and how much they benefit people who have opened their wallets that's of importance.
Let's not forget that there were also comments from Roberts about how it would take 60 hours to earn a constellation, at one point it was going to be a week's worth of gameplay.

If a Reclaimer is going to be in the region of 200+ hours, that's pretty excessive. You're talking about a buy to play game with free to play levels of grind.
Personally I believe they should keep the hull costs down and make the fitments the expensive part. It allows people to view new ships as a sensibly reachable target which keeps them motivated to play, they then have the choice of spending time fitting it out as they see fit. Otherwise you slave your butt off for the hull and then slave it off some more for fittings.

Don't put words in my mouth, I haven't once called him a buffoon. I said that if he felt awkward addressing the question he could have avoided it by giving a plausible excuse. We wouldn't know if they were any closer to making a decision not so we would have no choice but to take him at his word.

The model you described sounds an awful lot like ED. I dont think they are going with linear progression. Each ship has an assigned role. Personally i dont want the headache of owning a large slow moving ship when i enjoy being a Merc/bounty hunter.... With the way the gameplay is setup currently, large multicrew ships are close to useless solo in a PVP environment.

No grind for the 'best' ship because unless I want to haul cargo or have a team to operate with those ships, they are pretty much useless.

I think many of us coming from ED don't understand the fact that it is the role that defines what ship you purchase in SC, whereas in ED like most space games before it... you are the ship and getting a 'better' ship is the goal.

 

[Tippis]

I said that his comment of "increasing the prices significantly" could be construed as a 3x increase, purely for the sake of argument (otherwise he would have simply said doubled) and because a 3x increase had been rumoured by the playerbase before.

Yeah, that's the problem, isn't it?

With all these things, there's at best some throw-away comment that the community turns into a guesstimate that then becomes perceived as some kind of “truth”… and then, two weeks later, another throw-away comment is made to suggest something else or, worse, some word beginning with “re-” is used so no-one knows what's what any more.

There are so many vague statements and claims with questionably backing to them that it's possible at any point to cobble together almost any supposed end-state you'd like and have some obscure reference to kind-of-almost back it up. And history has shown time and again that the official statements aren't really worth relying on either since they, too, will change on a whim even when its' printed in black and white white-on-bitmap.

 

[Hydrino]

The model you described sounds an awful lot like ED. I dont think they are going with linear progression. Each ship has an assigned role. Personally i dont want the headache of owning a large slow moving ship when i enjoy being a Merc/bounty hunter.... With the way the gameplay is setup currently, large multicrew ships are close to useless solo in a PVP environment.

No grind for the 'best' ship because unless I want to haul cargo or have a team to operate with those ships, they are pretty much useless.

I think many of us coming from ED don't understand the fact that it is the role that defines what ship you purchase in SC, whereas in ED like most space games before it... you are the ship and getting a 'better' ship is the goal.

Mumbo jumbo.
I am not the ship in ED. There is no "best ship", like there is grind only if you have that mindset.

Nothing wrong with multi-purpose ships. Beluga will be for combat? Not.

 

[Zetta]

The model you described sounds an awful lot like ED. I dont think they are going with linear progression. Each ship has an assigned role. Personally i dont want the headache of owning a large slow moving ship when i enjoy being a Merc/bounty hunter.... With the way the gameplay is setup currently, large multicrew ships are close to useless solo in a PVP environment.

No grind for the 'best' ship because unless I want to haul cargo or have a team to operate with those ships, they are pretty much useless.

I think many of us coming from ED don't understand the fact that it is the role that defines what ship you purchase in SC, whereas in ED like most space games before it... you are the ship and getting a 'better' ship is the goal.

But much like Elite, it's players who seek the progression, it's not the game that pushes it on you. I don't believe that getting a better ship is the goal in Elite at all but anyway, for a lot of people progression is par for the course in MMOs, they grew up with it playing WoW or whatever.
Are bigger ships useless without a team? Yes player crews will do the job better but NPCs are also available so there's still plenty of avenues for solo gameplay.

 

[milligna]

This you are the ship stuff sounds so weird and defensive... mindlessly parroting some dated gibberish Chris Roberts said once to sneer at other games as if it even MEANS anything. In Elite, playing as a person piloting a ship in incredible VR where i'm free to look around the cockpit at will and experience everything with proper scale and depth is one of the most immersive experiences available in modern gaming. I look down and see my body and my hands on the HOTAS. In what universe am I roleplaying as a ship!? It's the purest possible vision of "Holy cow, I'm flying a spaceship!" that has yet been made by humans. To pretend SC's janky avatars clipping through geometry and then clunkily animating into a cockpit is somehow superior to ED as they are just doing dreadfully pedestrian, old timey you are the ship sniff sniff is quite funny to read considering the reality of the situation and how they are in fact pioneering immersion in space sims and leading the industry in VR... Not just talking about it, not just promising it to get some extra cash on the back of Oculus' early success and then changing the subject, DELIVERING IT FROM THE START.

Plus we all know "space legs" are planned and even the staunchest SC fan will PROBABLY admit to themselves (tho certainly not to us, mustn't show lack of faith!) that ED's season 3 (and probably 4!) will arrive well before SC launches, reaches beta, or even adds most of the gameplay systems needed.

Getting the better ship is the goal? Elite HAS a goal? Nonsense. For tedious min maxers, sure. I've been playing for ages and never bothered with Anacondas and the like. The game is just as fun in a Sidewinder, they don't cripple you like the Aurora or gate ships behind paywalls. Paying for seasons makes way more sense... if I saw a Frontier store with $500 ships on it, exit stage right!

You are the ship! Another one of CR's moronic constructions that need to be chucked in a dumpster along with his drop-in co-op, VR support, mod support, and 2014/2015/2016 release dates. Maybe that stuff made sense to spout in 2013, but it's time to retire the catchphrase. VR happened and CR missed the bus because a dog ate his engine.

 

[Maruun]

Haha, yeah, all it now needs is to be spoken by Chris with voice dubbing by Donald Trump.

"Its gonna be the best HUD, a Chris Roberts HUD. I've experts, people with, eh, like, know stuff about HUDS and they, and they should know, they are the best in the field, this is the best HUD ever. And I made it. Oh, we missed the deadline btw. Sorry for that."

By the lookf of it he already builds the Paywall...

 

[Vasious]

Prices are always going to be a hard thing to balance in terms of gameplay but also internal consistency.

The Price difference between Aurora to a Hornet (Civilian) needs to make sense, when in comparison to the Separate ships guns (and other components) that one can buy to fit them, to the price of Side-arms and Clothes.

Otherwise you get into a weird situation where clothing can cost more than Personal defence weapons which cost more that ship mounted weapons, and an Aurora is purchasable for the same price as 4 sets of clothes.

Then balancing in mission rewards into all that.

Elite falls down here as you can get a mission to deliver 4 tons of clothes to a system 6 light years away for 45,000 CR
4 tons of clothes has an average market value of 1580 CR so there is no way that mission would ever be anything but a terrible loss of the faction issuing it, but worst still, for 45,000 CR you could buy a E-Rated Sidewinder, 4 tons of clothes, and deliver then with over 11,000 CR left over.
It doesn't make sense from an in game sense, and we see players ship entire lots of ships from a few missions, a cobra after a hour and so forth, and that feeds the credit inflation, as we have seen in game over the last few year.


Star Citizen now has to balance ship costs, and income, with the one devil of if it is too long and hard to earn, then it is a mountain too hard to climb for those that didn't purchase big ships, but on the flipside, they don't want it to be too fast lest all the work on the small ships being wasted as people skip them

 

[Pharaelga]

But much like Elite, it's players who seek the progression, it's not the game that pushes it on you. I don't believe that getting a better ship is the goal in Elite at all but anyway, for a lot of people progression is par for the course in MMOs, they grew up with it playing WoW or whatever.
Are bigger ships useless without a team? Yes player crews will do the job better but NPCs are also available so there's still plenty of avenues for solo gameplay.

I agree they should definitely make hireable NPCs but those NPCs shouldn't make that multicrew ship OP with one player. They should have stormtrooper aim...

There is nothing in the alpha currently that really sets up any progression. From what I've gathered is that progression in SC is supposed to be more reputation based. I.e. in order to purchase military hardware you must have blank rep with the military/organization.

 

[Backer42]

Fundamentally, the problem with the whole discussion is that no-one seems to know how the economy is supposed to work. What are the faucets and sinks; what are the market dynamics; what is stuff actually worth, not so much in credits but in effort (which is what will eventually determine value in any player-influenced system).

Star Citizen's economy works with real world currency. Stuff is worth what it is worth in real dollar, simple as that. No in-game fake economy necessary for that. Therefore there isn't one. Stuff tends to optimize itself.

How will things work in SC? There's no way to tell because no-one is telling and/or it hasn't even been decided yet.

The markets have already decided. Most game developers ban trading to make their make-believe economy work, CIG OTOH endorses it for more income. That means, there will never be a proper "year 2942 economy", because real markets will always leverage it.

 

[1500]

Prices are always going to be a hard thing to balance in terms of gameplay but also internal consistency.

The Price difference between Aurora to a Hornet (Civilian) needs to make sense, when in comparison to the Separate ships guns (and other components) that one can buy to fit them, to the price of Side-arms and Clothes.

Otherwise you get into a weird situation where clothing can cost more than Personal defence weapons which cost more that ship mounted weapons, and an Aurora is purchasable for the same price as 4 sets of clothes.

Then balancing in mission rewards into all that.

Elite falls down here as you can get a mission to deliver 4 tons of clothes to a system 6 light years away for 45,000 CR
4 tons of clothes has an average market value of 1580 CR so there is no way that mission would ever be anything but a terrible loss of the faction issuing it, but worst still, for 45,000 CR you could buy a E-Rated Sidewinder, 4 tons of clothes, and deliver then with over 11,000 CR left over.
It doesn't make sense from an in game sense, and we see players ship entire lots of ships from a few missions, a cobra after a hour and so forth, and that feeds the credit inflation, as we have seen in game over the last few year.


Star Citizen now has to balance ship costs, and income, with the one devil of if it is too long and hard to earn, then it is a mountain too hard to climb for those that didn't purchase big ships, but on the flipside, they don't want it to be too fast lest all the work on the small ships being wasted as people skip them

Actually ED does not have credit inflation as the price of useful goods (none trade goods) is fixed. Ship prices do not go up, equipment prices do not go up, so there is ZERO inflation. For there to be inflation the price of good would have to increase. Take PLEX's in EVE online, they have been going up in cost since they were introduced.

A bigger problem with SC is the income discrepancies between the ships. You have a starter ship that has at max 10 ton cargo space (or what every the current unit of measurement is for SC, they changed it so often that I stopped caring, Ok looked it up 7,550.00 Kg), then compare it to the Hull-e with 3,241,052.00 Kg. Both ships could be purchased with cash, so the Hull-e has 429.2784 times the cargo space as the starter ship. Now think about the income difference between those, and just how much of an advantage it will be.

 

[Pharaelga]

Actually ED does not have credit inflation as the price of useful goods (none trade goods) is fixed. Ship prices do not go up, equipment prices do not go up, so there is ZERO inflation. For there to be inflation the price of good would have to increase. Take PLEX's in EVE online, they have been going up in cost since they were introduced.

A bigger problem with SC is the income discrepancies between the ships. You have a starter ship that has at max 10 ton cargo space (or what every the current unit of measurement is for SC, they changed it so often that I stopped caring, Ok looked it up 7,550.00 Kg), then compare it to the Hull-e with 3,241,052.00 Kg. Both ships could be purchased with cash, so the Hull-e has 429.2784 times the cargo space as the starter ship. Now think about the income difference between those, and just how much of an advantage it will be.

With that large ship comes an immense cost to run it and protect it. So yeah the guy running the ship could face an immense loss carrying out such a large operation.

Fuel in game is already kind of pricey....