The Star Citizen Thread v5

[Osmanthus]

*Sigh* Most of the tech that powers Star Citizen mechanics has been made from scratch by them in the last years if you haven't noticed, they've changed more than 50% of the Engine by now, might as well call it StarEngine.

You keep mixing a real alpha stage because the game was announced before they even have a studio, while normally games under publishers make the sunk work worth of years at closed door and only reveal their "alphas" when the game is pretty much done, Beta is just a free demo to lure potential buyers.

*All* of the tech they used started with development of Cryengine 1 in 2001. You can't have your cake and eat it too, since you cited games based on how long it took to develop their tech. At the very LEAST you should include the beginning of development for Cryengine 3, because why else would CIG need to hire Cryengine experts to work on the Star Citizen engine?

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

Ultimately irrelevant.

None of those titles were developed with cash from customer pre-orders.

If Doom or The Witcher 3 had been scrapped? No risk to the consumer. None.

If Star Citizen fails? Thousands of customers are in the can for it.

Also true. Mice is using a sequence of red herrings, and being phenomenally inconsistent in its arguments, as usual.

 

[Stigbob]

*Sigh* Most of the tech that powers Star Citizen mechanics has been made from scratch by them in the last years if you haven't noticed, they've changed more than 50% of the Engine by now, might as well call it StarEngine.

You keep mixing a real alpha stage because the game was announced before they even have a studio, while normally games under publishers make the sunk work worth of years at closed door and only reveal their "alphas" when the game is pretty much done, Beta is just a free demo to lure potential buyers.

Why didn't Chris Roberts mention that when he gave initial release date of 2014, was he fibbing or does he not understand game development ?.

 

[hairychris]

Also true. Mice is using a sequence of red herrings, and being phenomenally inconsistent in its arguments, as usual.

Precisely.

If this was a publisher-funded game I'd have half an ear open for the popcorn.

As everything that Roberts and CIG does is with backer money, well, that makes me pretty angry out of general principle.

 

[JohnMice]

Ultimately irrelevant.

None of those titles were developed with cash from customer pre-orders.

If Doom or The Witcher 3 had been scrapped? No risk to the consumer. None.

If Star Citizen fails? Thousands of customers are in the can for it.

If it fails it fails, Just like Game Development Crowdfunding involves the risk of the unknown. If you are adverse to risk don't gamble. Simple.

 

[hairychris]

If it fails it fails, Just like Game Development Crowdfunding involves the risk of the unknown. If you are adverse to risk don't gamble. Simple.

So, on the CIG sale page is this made absolutely clear - that the project may fold?

And I really wonder what the legal ramifications of this are.

Nowhere have I seen anyone from CIG say that they may fail.

EDIT: I'm aware of the T&Cs. I am also aware that the vast majority of people don't pick through them line by line.

 

[Komemiute]

It seems my statement generated some controversy and mockery due to poor punctuation and lack of deeper explanation (my bad but I guess I deserved it). Even though, it's good when discussion actually happens in the thread.

So here goes something more elaborate:

Making a game involves a lot of planning and a lot of thought beforehand just like any project. The bigger and more ambitious is the game or project the less certainties you have as with new challenges you get new problems.

That's why delays happen, that's why whole game mechanics / features get tossed constantly and delays happen. That's part of the process, there is no ambitious game that innovated and tried to do "new" things that hasn't had it's fare share of hurdles during development. As much thought you put into planning and try to make sure you cover all the possible fallouts there will allways be something that you miss. That you can not control.

No company, even the most experienced ones is immune to this situation. Making new games that push things forward ir a very very risky decision. Game Developers that try that are actually heroes in my book, they crave to new and better game experiences, they are not afraid to risk their reputation and company to try and do groundbreaking games. But sh*t happens and things go bad, sometimes so bad that there is no other way than canceling the show. Sure, mistakes were made , unexpected hurdles can suddenly apear from the most unexpected places. Management, Publishers, New Tech etc.

Some examples:

DOOM 4 - Start of development: 2008 » Release date: 2016

http://kotaku.com/five-years-and-nothing-to-show-how-doom-4-got-off-trac-468097062

Several identity crises made DOOM development go on and on, change of game design, refactoring, change of dev's, etc
Prop's to them for sticking with it and making it happen, released with good claim.

The Witcher 3 - Culmination of a 10 year work by Project Red

http://www.develop-online.net/interview/the-wild-road-to-the-witcher-3/0207553

“We spent almost two years learning how to organise production and how to effectively run a studio,” explains Iwinski. “It was a much slower start than it should have been and that’s why The Witcher took us a long five years to finish.”

"It was a really tough decision to push back The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt, but gamers don’t care about buggy games shipped on time."Marcin Iwinski, CD Projekt
"Iwinski recognises that, due to the scale and complexity of games these days, exact planning of game development time, including QA, is still “mission impossible”, but there are ways to alleviate potential issues, such as it has enacted with The Witcher 3.

“Looking at our own experience, I would say: set hard deadlines, push for making it happen like there’s no tomorrow, but do not ship until you are convinced the game is ready,” he states."

The Last Guardian: 9 Years in Development

http://kotaku.com/the-last-guardians-designer-explains-how-he-stayed-moti-1782448187

Blizzard MMO Titan Canceled after 10 years of development, then refactored to Overwatch:
http://www.gamespot.com/articles/blizzard-on-cancelled-titan-mmo-we-failed-horrific/1100-6439068/

"Development costs for Titan may have amounted to tens of millions, perhaps $50 million or more. This is not an unusual event, however. Blizzard has cancelled several games in various stages of development in the past. Costs for unreleased games can be significant, but launching substandard games can harm the reputation of a successful publisher such as Blizzard. Expenses for development can be considered R&D, and benefits can include invaluable training, IP and technology that can be applied to other games," explained independent analyst Billy Pidgeon.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jq-HwvYjLLg

https://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2010/08/16/redundancies-at-real-time-worlds/#comment-491791
http://kotaku.com/heres-what-blizzards-titan-actually-was-1638632121

Frontier Developments: The Outsider : https://www.frontier.co.uk/games/outsider/

Development time: 6 years - On Hold/Not Canceled/Canceled:

The Outsider is a true 'next generation' game focussed on a fresh, evolved gameplay experience, delivered with gorgeous graphics and built with key proprietary Frontier technology.

http://www.develop-online.net/news/the-outsider-not-cancelled/0108551

https://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2011/01/20/frontiers-the-outsider-has-been-cancelled/

January 20th 2011 - "Cambridge studio Frontier Developments has not cancelled production on The Outsider, its founder David Braben has told Develop. However, 17 workers at the group have been made redundant as Frontier rethinks its approach developing the game.
“There is still publisher interest in the project, and we haven’t cancelled it,” Braben told Develop.

“The priority has been reduced, but we’re still working on it,” he said.

“A publisher has not cancelled the project”, he later said when asked for clarification.

The Outsider has been in production for six years.

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2...n-says-the-outsider-probably-is-gone-for-good

https://www.engadget.com/2011/10/11/source-frontiers-canned-the-outsider-project-was-actually-t/

Elite 4 (now Dangerous): Announced in 2001 http://wiki.alioth.net/index.php/Elite_4_rumour_mill

2008: Frontier founder confirms that sequel to famed space game will land after The Outsider
Frontier Developments is close to finalising the technology that will power Elite 4, the long-awaited sequel to boss David Braben's space adventure series.Braben confirmed the news during a talk at the Develop conference today.
He said that the game itself "had not been forgotten" and that it would be released after his political adventure game epic The Outsider is released next year.
He admitted that the game itself, which he has repeatedly made refernece to in interviews for the past few years, has had a stop-start production as Frontier keeps testing technology and then rejecting it.
Braben described Elite 4 as a "really amibitious project" but confirmed there was a team actively working on it in order to get it right.

http://www.develop-online.net/news/elite-4-technology-almost-finished-says-braben/0103227

And there's plenty more if you like to go deep into this development reads:

http://gamerant.com/best-games-development-hell-118/2/

http://www.cheatcc.com/extra/top10gamesstillstuckindevelopmenthell.html

http://askagamedev.tumblr.com/post/148699307051/theres-murmurings-that-prey-2-was-canceled-by

Star Citizen:

http://www.gamasutra.com/view/news/..._to_the_delays_in_developing_Star_Citizen.php

http://www.gamasutra.com/blogs/Mich...o_Ground_Matters_of_Scale_in_Level_Design.php


TLDR: Video-Games suffer delays, the more groundbreaking a game is the more delayed it gets. As long as there is $$ and the company can make a fun game delays don't matter. Players don't care about delays if they are having fun.

Bloody hell Johnmice, do you realise that NONE OF THEM asked money in advance for years and years of development/cancellation?
Do you see the macroscopical difference?
That's the whole bloody point,    !

 

[LeSabre]

If it fails it fails, Just like Game Development Crowdfunding involves the risk of the unknown. If you are adverse to risk don't gamble. Simple.

They have more than 2x their 'best case scenario' budget, if they fail after gaining such an amount then its down to their own corporate incompetance and mismanagement.

 

[Komemiute]

If it fails it fails, Just like Game Development Crowdfunding involves the risk of the unknown. If you are adverse to risk don't gamble. Simple.

Oh I see... what about lies and deception? Are those a factor too?

 

[Jezzah]

Like others have said your example with Witcher 3 is a poor choice. Witcher 3 is one of the most complex games out there and if I even thought for a second that SC could be that good well I'd jump on the chance to support it. But that's an aside and is just my opinion. The man point is that they also released witcher 1 and 2 not sitting on their laurels doing just witcher 3 like you've suggested.

They say they took 5 years to make it. I can believe it. It's a brilliant piece of work. It also took 81 million to make. SC has 50% more budget, it has a bigger team and we are knocking on over 4 years later and it's still in the state it is WITHOUT having released 2 other games.

Poor example indeed.

 

[JohnMice]

They have more than 2x their 'best case scenario' budget, if they fail after gaining such an amount then its down to their own corporate incompetance and mismanagement.

You are right, that's why we shouldn't expect them to be pushed to release just because some minority is impatient. The gamers are the investors and they keep fueling the game development. The game receives constant updates and showcases them for the world to see. The gamers keep responding with more backing. Just like Blizzard, the game will be delivered when it's ready and only when it's ready.

 

[Moonax IRL]

*Sigh* Most of the tech that powers Star Citizen mechanics has been made from scratch by them in the last years if you haven't noticed, they've changed more than 50% of the Engine by now, might as well call it StarEngine.

You keep mixing a real alpha stage because the game was announced before they even have a studio, while normally games under publishers make the sunk work worth of years at closed door and only reveal their "alphas" when the game is pretty much done, Beta is just a free demo to lure potential buyers.

Ok, so the choice of using an off the shelf engine (which is now outdated) was a mistake because they had to rebuild half of it. Would it have not been a lot better and time effective to develop a purpose built engine for the project. Can we chalk that up as one big mistake from day 1 by "Yoda" Roberts.

 

[Ian Skippy]

It seems my statement generated some controversy and mockery due to poor punctuation and lack of deeper explanation (my bad but I guess I deserved it). Even though, it's good when discussion actually happens in the thread.

So here goes something more elaborate:

Making a game involves a lot of planning and a lot of thought beforehand just like any project. The bigger and more ambitious is the game or project the less certainties you have as with new challenges you get new problems.

That's why delays happen, that's why whole game mechanics / features get tossed constantly and delays happen. That's part of the process, there is no ambitious game that innovated and tried to do "new" things that hasn't had it's fare share of hurdles during development. As much thought you put into planning and try to make sure you cover all the possible fallouts there will allways be something that you miss. That you can not control.

No company, even the most experienced ones is immune to this situation. Making new games that push things forward ir a very very risky decision. Game Developers that try that are actually heroes in my book, they crave to new and better game experiences, they are not afraid to risk their reputation and company to try and do groundbreaking games. But sh*t happens and things go bad, sometimes so bad that there is no other way than canceling the show. Sure, mistakes were made , unexpected hurdles can suddenly apear from the most unexpected places. Management, Publishers, New Tech etc.

Some examples:

DOOM 4 - Start of development: 2008 » Release date: 2016

http://kotaku.com/five-years-and-nothing-to-show-how-doom-4-got-off-trac-468097062

Several identity crises made DOOM development go on and on, change of game design, refactoring, change of dev's, etc
Prop's to them for sticking with it and making it happen, released with good claim.

The Witcher 3 - Culmination of a 10 year work by Project Red

http://www.develop-online.net/interview/the-wild-road-to-the-witcher-3/0207553

“We spent almost two years learning how to organise production and how to effectively run a studio,” explains Iwinski. “It was a much slower start than it should have been and that’s why The Witcher took us a long five years to finish.”

"It was a really tough decision to push back The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt, but gamers don’t care about buggy games shipped on time."Marcin Iwinski, CD Projekt
"Iwinski recognises that, due to the scale and complexity of games these days, exact planning of game development time, including QA, is still “mission impossible”, but there are ways to alleviate potential issues, such as it has enacted with The Witcher 3.

“Looking at our own experience, I would say: set hard deadlines, push for making it happen like there’s no tomorrow, but do not ship until you are convinced the game is ready,” he states."

The Last Guardian: 9 Years in Development

http://kotaku.com/the-last-guardians-designer-explains-how-he-stayed-moti-1782448187

Blizzard MMO Titan Canceled after 10 years of development, then refactored to Overwatch:
http://www.gamespot.com/articles/blizzard-on-cancelled-titan-mmo-we-failed-horrific/1100-6439068/

"Development costs for Titan may have amounted to tens of millions, perhaps $50 million or more. This is not an unusual event, however. Blizzard has cancelled several games in various stages of development in the past. Costs for unreleased games can be significant, but launching substandard games can harm the reputation of a successful publisher such as Blizzard. Expenses for development can be considered R&D, and benefits can include invaluable training, IP and technology that can be applied to other games," explained independent analyst Billy Pidgeon.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jq-HwvYjLLg

https://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2010/08/16/redundancies-at-real-time-worlds/#comment-491791
http://kotaku.com/heres-what-blizzards-titan-actually-was-1638632121

Frontier Developments: The Outsider : https://www.frontier.co.uk/games/outsider/

Development time: 6 years - On Hold/Not Canceled/Canceled:

The Outsider is a true 'next generation' game focussed on a fresh, evolved gameplay experience, delivered with gorgeous graphics and built with key proprietary Frontier technology.

http://www.develop-online.net/news/the-outsider-not-cancelled/0108551

https://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2011/01/20/frontiers-the-outsider-has-been-cancelled/

January 20th 2011 - "Cambridge studio Frontier Developments has not cancelled production on The Outsider, its founder David Braben has told Develop. However, 17 workers at the group have been made redundant as Frontier rethinks its approach developing the game.
“There is still publisher interest in the project, and we haven’t cancelled it,” Braben told Develop.

“The priority has been reduced, but we’re still working on it,” he said.

“A publisher has not cancelled the project”, he later said when asked for clarification.

The Outsider has been in production for six years.

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2...n-says-the-outsider-probably-is-gone-for-good

https://www.engadget.com/2011/10/11/source-frontiers-canned-the-outsider-project-was-actually-t/

Elite 4 (now Dangerous): Announced in 2001 http://wiki.alioth.net/index.php/Elite_4_rumour_mill

2008: Frontier founder confirms that sequel to famed space game will land after The Outsider
Frontier Developments is close to finalising the technology that will power Elite 4, the long-awaited sequel to boss David Braben's space adventure series.Braben confirmed the news during a talk at the Develop conference today.
He said that the game itself "had not been forgotten" and that it would be released after his political adventure game epic The Outsider is released next year.
He admitted that the game itself, which he has repeatedly made refernece to in interviews for the past few years, has had a stop-start production as Frontier keeps testing technology and then rejecting it.
Braben described Elite 4 as a "really amibitious project" but confirmed there was a team actively working on it in order to get it right.

http://www.develop-online.net/news/elite-4-technology-almost-finished-says-braben/0103227

And there's plenty more if you like to go deep into this development reads:

http://gamerant.com/best-games-development-hell-118/2/

http://www.cheatcc.com/extra/top10gamesstillstuckindevelopmenthell.html

http://askagamedev.tumblr.com/post/148699307051/theres-murmurings-that-prey-2-was-canceled-by

Star Citizen:

http://www.gamasutra.com/view/news/..._to_the_delays_in_developing_Star_Citizen.php

http://www.gamasutra.com/blogs/Mich...o_Ground_Matters_of_Scale_in_Level_Design.php


TLDR: Video-Games suffer delays, the more groundbreaking a game is the more delayed it gets. As long as there is $$ and the company can make a fun game delays don't matter. Players don't care about delays if they are having fun.

Basically you're saying that nothing that happens, no facts or anything else connected to reality can ever be used to form an opinion regarding whether SC development is going well or not. No matter how many delays and broken promises, you will continue to say 'that means nothing, it can happen, game development is tough'. You can do that, but it really destroys any kind of meaningful debate because literally nothing in your argument is about SC itself. If you are interested in discussing how the progress is going, answer this:

Star Citizen was supposed to be released, feature complete, in 2014. They pushed that date back to 2016 because of stretch goals. Right now its clear they wont release in 2016 either, or 2017 for that matter. How much of the actual goals of the '2014-version' are already in the game? You have one half of a system, two years after you were supposed to have 100. There is no mining. No exploring. No commodity market or economy of any kind. No smuggling, FPS doesnt even have AI. So the question is:

If you take 3x longer than you originally planned, and do not even a fraction of the originally planned work in that time, while pointing at non-existent extra features as an excuse, does that sound like a well-operated project? Because to me it sure doesn't.

 

[Osmanthus]

The gamers are the investors and they keep fueling the game development.

Investors are entitled to financial information. Oh, or are they donors now?

 

[hairychris]

Investors are entitled to financial information. Oh, or are they donors now?

Backers are not, and never have been, investors. Unless he means "emotionally invested" or similar.

 

[Esvandiary]

You are right, that's why we shouldn't expect them to be pushed to release just because some minority is impatient. The gamers are the investors and they keep fueling the game development. The game receives constant updates and showcases them for the world to see. The gamers keep responding with more backing. Just like Blizzard, the game will be delivered when it's ready and only when it's ready.

The problem here is you're assuming "the gamers" are one big block who want the same thing. What about people who backed during the Kickstarter? People who backed when it was at 30 million, or 40, or 50? Did they all sign up for the scope expanding and the release date heading towards the horizon?

It's hardly some strange, unexplainable phenomenon that some of those people are unhappy at how their money's seemingly been spent - especially when we're this far into development and despite the appearance of how many ships now, there are no sign of numerous basic game mechanics. Exploration? Trading? Mining? Medical facilities? Wasn't there a ship with a hydroponics bay or similar?

This is what has me concerned. Not that it's taking a long time, but that the priorities seem to be completely upside-down and backwards. There are assets and art that will end up having to be redone (again!), because once they finally implement them, the mechanics will need to change when they find that some things don't work during playtesting.
It's already happened, with ships changing seat counts and effectively changing roles (Cutlass, anyone?) - and it's going to happen a lot more as time goes on.

 

[JohnMice]

Basically you're saying that nothing that happens, no facts or anything else connected to reality can ever be used to form an opinion regarding whether SC development is going well or not. No matter how many delays and broken promises, you will continue to say 'that means nothing, it can happen, game development is tough'. You can do that, but it really destroys any kind of meaningful debate because literally nothing in your argument is about SC itself. If you are interested in discussing how the progress is going, answer this:

Star Citizen was supposed to be released, feature complete, in 2014. They pushed that date back to 2016 because of stretch goals. Right now its clear they wont release in 2016 either, or 2017 for that matter. How much of the actual goals of the '2014-version' are already in the game? You have one half of a system, two years after you were supposed to have 100. There is no mining. No exploring. No commodity market or economy of any kind. No smuggling, FPS doesnt even have AI. So the question is:

If you take 3x longer than you originally planned, and do not even a fraction of the originally planned work in that time, while pointing at non-existent extra features as an excuse, does that sound like a well-operated project? Because to me it sure doesn't.

Star Citizen the game evolved since it was first pitched, easy to understand when the funding skyrocket. It's not about how many planets or game mechanics there should be in the game already but understanding why they take longer to implement, unfortunately for some they will only understand they can actually show them. For example implementing a exploration, cargo transport or mining mechanics basic like Elite did suited it's kind of gameplay, but it's insufficient for Chris Roberts vision in what he wants for Star Citizen. As the latest gamescom demonstration showcased, simple things like fetch quests involve a lot more depth and gameplay mechanics than just text and numbers.

 

[Osmanthus]

Backers are not, and never have been, investors. Unless he means "emotionally invested" or similar.

I agree, but I guess my point is that people like Mice use whatever term they want to when they suit them, even when each term they use means something radically different from every other.

 

[szopin]

Star Citizen the game evolved since it was first pitched, easy to understand when the funding skyrocket. It's not about how many planets or game mechanics there should be in the game already but understanding why they take longer to implement, unfortunately for some they will only understand they can actually show them. For example implementing a exploration, cargo transport or mining mechanics basic like Elite did suited it's kind of gameplay, but it's insufficient for Chris Roberts vision in what he wants for Star Citizen. As the latest gamescom demonstration showcased, simple things like fetch quests involve a lot more depth and gameplay mechanics than just text and numbers.

Except that this was already debunked, all that complex/gameplay emergent involving cargo loading mechanic we were told stories about? Instantly loaded/menu click buy. In the end when they are finally implementing all that it is rudimentary/basic. Took them 5 years to get that menu, clap clap

 

[hairychris]

Star Citizen the game evolved since it was first pitched, easy to understand when the funding skyrocket.

Understandable to a point, but it seems that even core mechanics are still undecided (let alone implemented). This is not good.

It's not about how many planets or game mechanics there should be in the game already but understanding why they take longer to implement, unfortunately for some they will only understand they can actually show them.

Actually it is about number of planets as well. If you promise a massive hand-made environment this will take a huge amount of time to produce, even after the technology is in place (which it doesn't appear to be as there is still discussion about implementing procgen).

For example implementing a exploration, cargo transport or mining mechanics basic like Elite did suited it's kind of gameplay, but it's insufficient for Chris Roberts vision in what he wants for Star Citizen.

The only thing that seems to be relevant to CR's "vision" is more everything. Without parameters. This is not a vision that is in any way able to be realised as scope will simply expand to eat all available budget (oh wait, CIG don't assign budgets to features any more) and still be incomplete when the money runs out.

As the latest gamescom demonstration showcased, simple things like fetch quests involve a lot more depth and gameplay mechanics than just text and numbers.

I found the demo insanely underwhelming. Even the character models were a bit rubbish.

Elder Scrolls and BioWare titles have been doing character-based quests of varying complexity for decades.

 

[JohnMice]

I found the demo insanely underwhelming.

Completely understandable.