The Star Citizen Thread v5

Status
Thread Closed: Not open for further replies.
In the end it won't matter. The whales will continue giving large amounts of cash for jpegs, and the faithful will continue as they have been. A game will be made, what it'll end up actually being is anyone's guess. CIG is too big to fail in the eyes of the faithful, so they will give their last penny before seeing even one of CIG's studio shut down. What it really comes down to is the version of the game they've got in their heads doesn't clash with whats out right now. Sure it's a bit boring, but look! There's a new patch on the horizon!

Lets get back to SC if all of you don't mind, I'm getting tired of the (drama)
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I think in a light of SC/CIG criticism it should be pointed out that majority of ED players critical to SC doesn't really want to see SC to fail. For them mostly it is another space game, a bit different scope, a bit more story driven MMORPG style. What really triggers most of them - and me - is constant barage of:

* How ED is boring and SC/NMS/next wunderkid will come and destroy it;
* How SC is most amazing game ever developed (like, really?);
* How CR is perfect visionary and can do no wrong (ohh yes, I am aware I have similar bias towards FD and David. Even then though I have been critical to lot of their suggestions and ideas);
* How everything CIG does is unique and "first ever" (ProcGen - I mean, really? PG was blasted by CR low hack job and not worthy of his concepts. It took several years to change his mind lol);

This article doesn't bring much for us to the table - we worry more about 2.2 beta than what's going on with CIG to be honest. Yes, it confirms some of suspicious about lack of basic mgt/comms skill with CR and CIG leadership. It is hard to deliver product in such atmosphere and frankly if I were SC backer I would get worried because all these mistakes costs a lot.

In nutshell, for rest of us outside CR reality bubble is very hard to compete with dream CR has sold to his followers. And that's frankly my biggest issue. It is like craving for that perfect looking girl while ignoring awesome/fun ones around you.

Spot on.
 

Crowdfunding (and then pledges-er, I mean pre-purchases) took Chris Roberts across the Rubicon, and now, 4+ years later, it looks like gaming site are staring at the laurel wreath and whispering in his ear, "All fame is fleeting."

The RSI/CIG/Foundry studios must be feeling pressure to deliver something, ANYTHING, more tangible than trailers and QoL (for certain parameters of "Q") stuff to their backers and prove to the media that there's something substantial to this ever-growing timeline.

And if the media has no bearing on this project, and neither does outside opinion, then we wouldn't see the mess in the comments section of every mildly critical (and critical does not necessarily mean negative) article.
 
Last edited:
You seem to be saying that the kickstarter funds were used to build a crowdfunding campaign, rather than a game? Or am I misunderstanding you?
That's that I figured. It' basically confirmed by Kotaku now.

What does CIG/RSI do to communicate to us that the game is on track? Are we all really just dumb cows drooling at the sight of another demo running off of a dev machine (I know I'm guilty of that from time to time)?
The latest demo didn't impress me, I saw right through it. Just like the disappointing Morrow tour.

Why don't they communicate that it is on track...you know, with like, dates and stuff? All I see right now is a project with no end and incomplete deliverables. Save me from the darkness, I want to see the light but all I can see is brown.
The main problem is, that there is still no honesty.

They try to drag everyone along instead of stating the real state of the project, the mistakes made, the amount of wasted money and how much they need in the upcoming years and the changes they plan to implement (including exchanging top personnel) to get it back on track. Then and only then IMHO there might be a slight chance to see a 2019-2020 release.

I don't see anything of the above happening and it might be way too late for that already.

It might not work either. "Reputation management" companies are pros in voting each other up and gaming reputation systems (see Reddit for a perfect example.) All I see come from this is increasing spam (fake content) in other Elite forum sections to prepare accounts for specific threads, while we lose the occasional SC backer, who found one of the few places where you can actually talk freely about Star Citizen. I think a proper terms of service change where commercial use of a forum is banned and will be charged with money for advertising is more appropriate. But I'm not here to discuss forum moderation, so feel free to remove this section of the post.
 
I disagree with this, first ED was 100% as promised from day one -offline mode. It simply cant come as a surprise to anyone.
CR received a huge amount of free money from private people, FD didn't and needed to make money from day one.

If you go back to the Kickstarter promise timeline, Elite was released very late, and should have only had a 1 month Alpha and 1 month Beta phases. Frontier also used the Kickstarter money to leverage venture capital interest.

If you cast your mind back to just before, and just after launch, a lot of people were saying that Elite was 'unfinished' them. More had bought into the 'vertical slice' or 'these things are placeholder' arguments. And I do think a lot of people were surprised at what got released. Even though it was obvious nothing much would change from Gamma to 1.0.

As to whether RSI will have the cash to ever actually finish their magnum opus, well, that remains to be seen doesn't it? It is surprising that people are still throwing that much cash at the project. In the meantime, I'll be happy playing 'incomplete' Elite. :)

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

Where I don't agree with you though is the assessment that SC *seems* to be making real progress now.

You obviously follow SC far more closely than I. It was an outside impression looking in, that they seem to have more to show these days that actually feels like there is a tangible game somewhere, rather than just (all) flashy art and videos. <Shrug>

Bottom line for me is that both games have, and will disappoint in some aspects, both have the potential to amaze in others. It's also madness to want either to fail. Nor do I believe that either Roberts, or Braben, are scamming people - they do both seem passionate about what they do, even if delivery is a bit problematic. ;)
 
Last edited:
Ahh, the "stick the head in the sand and ignore the issues presented to me" defense. A classic from you Briguy, as to be expected.

Carry on being you, you are most amusing to watch defending the actions of Chris Roberts to the hilt. :)

I'm not sticking my head in the sand, I'm blatantly saying that I have no power over how someone runs their company and choose to spend my time/energy on other things that I can control; but continue to think that, I couldn't care less.

I never once defending the actions of CR, I have defended the actions of CIG as a whole which is a bit different than "defending the actions of Chris Roberts to the hilt".
 
Thanks for sharing the article

A lot of them is more down to CR, than crowdfunding. Plenty of other developers have down the crowd funding route that didn't devolve into offering every possible features to players.

“It was clear that CryEngine wasn't up to the task,” the source told Kotaku UK. “CryEngine was a fine pick when $500,000 was all they were looking for and they needed tech to build a game on. You can't build your own engine for $500,000. But you can with $100 million. In order to make Star Citizen work it needs proprietary tech. A lot of what was happening was to do with rewriting CryEngine in order to make it do what was needed. That obviously slowed everything down”.
Someone better tell those guys over at Infinity Battlescape. An probably at Hello Games as well because I very much doubt they spent anywhere near 500,000 on their game engines.

Game engine is code and with the right team, a 10 to 15 people, you can do a lot of coding for 500k in a year, by a lot, I mean you probably get a functioning game engine out of it.
 
Last edited:
I'm not sticking my head in the sand, I'm blatantly saying that I have no power over how someone runs their company and choose to spend my time/energy on other things that I can control; but continue to think that, I couldn't care less.

I never once defending the actions of CR, I have defended the actions of CIG as a whole which is a bit different than "defending the actions of Chris Roberts to the hilt".

Now you know they've not just been concealing dumb self inflicted problems for two years but have deliberately given an unrealistic picture of progress to backers whilst blaming Derek and threatening the escapist do you think you've been wasting your time ?.
 
Squadron 42 would have been a perfect project for a first game studio, a game consisting of 20-50 level telling a tight story about a war built mostly on an existing engine.

If they had focus on developing SQ42 and shipping that game, getting their pipeline setup, getting their studio up and running, putting in place a marketing team. Training up engineers on the Cryengine. This would have allowed the company to have grown organically.

I think that was the original long term aim SQ42 and then a MMO at a later date, CR let the money go to his head and pursue both at the same time, as well as trying to set up a world wide game studio and why all of this was happening, they brought in outside contractors to work on parts of the game that hasn't even been fully design yet.
 
That's the thing though, Chris Roberts' brand of "leadership" is not strong at all. It's easy to throw your weight around, brow beat your underlings, make demands that you feel are reasonable even if the deadline is tight, ask for changes to how something looks because of the latest thing you have seen on TV/computer game trade show/movie/etc.

It is easy because there is NO OVER-SIGHT. Nobody watching over HIS shoulder asking how things are going.

Nobody pointing their finger to the ticking hands of the expensive wristwatch as a big deadline races closer.

No big intimating office populated by the "suits" waiting for Chris to explain just what the hold up is with production.

Chris is doing this because he doesn't have any ACCOUNTABILITY for his actions. And that suits him just fine.

And honestly, I'm all for that. I don't care that it would/could take 10 or 20 years to make or how the product is made. Only thing I really care about is progress and there is progress be it minor or major; but I guess that's defending CRoberts...
 
And honestly, I'm all for that. I don't care that it would/could take 10 or 20 years to make or how the product is made. Only thing I really care about is progress and there is progress be it minor or major; but I guess that's defending CRoberts...

Some backers of a certain age would not be happy with that. 20 years    !
 
And honestly, I'm all for that. I don't care that it would/could take 10 or 20 years to make or how the product is made. Only thing I really care about is progress and there is progress be it minor or major; but I guess that's defending CRoberts...


Yes, that's precisely what it is. Thanks for confirming the obvious though.

And who in their right *mind* is going to wait 10/20 years for a game to come out anyway? We're not talking about James Cameron and the creation of the movie Avatar* here, we're talking about a blooming *videogame*.

Please name me a game or even a movie that has come out in the last 20 years, which has taken over a decade to be in active development and production before release, and has gone on to be a success, even remotely?

*(The idea of the Avatar movie was thought up by Cameron in the early 1990's, but it was obvious he couldn't make the movie then with the available special effects technology. It was only towards the middle of the 2000's that he was able to see technology catch up with his "Vision" and it was only because he is a rather good director, had the best special effects houses basically break new ground in 3D effects (and almost $300 million dollars) that Avatar ended up being so successful. Chris Roberts is NOT James Cameron, in any way, shape or form.)

*Edit* As Dementropy rightly points out below, with regards to movies like Avatar or Star Wars, those are all financed privately through the studios own coffers, or even out of the director's own pocket.
Expecting the general public to keep the money tree going for Star Citizen for a decade or more is, quite frankly, stretching credibility beyond the breaking point.
 
Last edited:
Even 10-20 years for a movie doesn't involve taking money from the audience directly before it is released. That, to me, is the major difference between Star Citizen/SQ42 and say, a James Cameron movie or Lucas (just to head that one off at the pass) release. Some people are fine with "however long it takes, so long as there is progress" or "you cannot rush perfection/I'd rather have a *great* game some out of this than a bare-bones product."

On the other side, the one where time does matter, people are aging. People are looking at the list of promises and the threshold for tolerance is being tested. Some people, to paraphrase Roger Murtaugh, are "getting too old for this stuff," and want to actually play a finished thing that somewhat resembles what they initially backed. And yes, to a degree, permissiveness is somewhat the same as support, when other people feel that they are not getting what they put money down for, in the first place.
 
Last edited:
Squadron 42 would have been a perfect project for a first game studio, a game consisting of 20-50 level telling a tight story about a war built mostly on an existing engine.

If they had focus on developing SQ42 and shipping that game, getting their pipeline setup, getting their studio up and running, putting in place a marketing team. Training up engineers on the Cryengine. This would have allowed the company to have grown organically.

I think that was the original long term aim SQ42 and then a MMO at a later date, CR let the money go to his head and pursue both at the same time, as well as trying to set up a world wide game studio and why all of this was happening, they brought in outside contractors to work on parts of the game that hasn't even been fully design yet.
First they appealed to the Wing Commander crowd by explicitly stating that the Star Citizen project is not about a MMO. For example I originally backed for the original Kickstarter pitch of a mission-based SP/MP campaign.

Then instead of continuing development of the originally pitched game ("one year already done"), they deliberately targeted different audiences to get much more money: for example the Freelancer crowd (guess what the first "ship advertisements" were about), then the MMO crowd, later the FPS crowd (which backfired heavily).

Now these crowds outnumber any original backers and everyone of them is dreaming their specific game. That's how they ended up with promising two or more games at once. Because all those conflicting concepts will never fit into one single game.

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

Some backers of a certain age would not be happy with that. 20 years !
It's a ridiculous proposal anyway. It's like promising the BDSSE for the C64 and then releasing it at the same time as Microsoft finally got Freelancer out.

In video games you can't take much longer than three years or your stuff gets outdated quickly.

Just imagine someone wanting to save PC gaming with a goal of 2040. Very likely PCs do not even exist anymore in 2040.
 
And honestly, I'm all for that. I don't care that it would/could take 10 or 20 years to make or how the product is made. Only thing I really care about is progress and there is progress be it minor or major; but I guess that's defending CRoberts...

No. It's just ridiculous. If Roberts had ever even hinted that the game was going to take that long, he'd never have got the funding in the first place. Not that there is any prospect of development continuing over that timescale, even now. The 'whales' aren't going to carry on supporting an increasingly-outdated project forever, and eventually the inevitable refunds, along with continuing development costs will exhaust whatever funds are currently left. I'd say that CIG have 3 more years at the very outside before they face oblivion, if they can't get something out the door and into the market.
 
I think in a light of SC/CIG criticism it should be pointed out that majority of ED players critical to SC doesn't really want to see SC to fail. For them mostly it is another space game, a bit different scope, a bit more story driven MMORPG style. What really triggers most of them - and me - is constant barage of:

* How ED is boring and SC/NMS/next wunderkid will come and destroy it;
* How SC is most amazing game ever developed (like, really?);
* How CR is perfect visionary and can do no wrong (ohh yes, I am aware I have similar bias towards FD and David. Even then though I have been critical to lot of their suggestions and ideas);
* How everything CIG does is unique and "first ever" (ProcGen - I mean, really? PG was blasted by CR low hack job and not worthy of his concepts. It took several years to change his mind lol);

This article doesn't bring much for us to the table - we worry more about 2.2 beta than what's going on with CIG to be honest. Yes, it confirms some of suspicious about lack of basic mgt/comms skill with CR and CIG leadership. It is hard to deliver product in such atmosphere and frankly if I were SC backer I would get worried because all these mistakes costs a lot.

In nutshell, for rest of us outside CR reality bubble is very hard to compete with dream CR has sold to his followers. And that's frankly my biggest issue. It is like craving for that perfect looking girl while ignoring awesome/fun ones around you.
+1 to the above well thought post and one I tried to pen in the past and think I just gave up as not worth the effort. But want to write a bit today after reading the Kotaku article and some good responses here.

A lot of CIG fans and even the Kotaku article also get the scope of Elite totally wrong (probably just because of what they launched with at v1.0). Even before ED kickstarted, FD already spoke periodically of the next iteration of Elite, with ideas for players to start on foot with 100 Cr and have to work up to just get a ship to start flying. EVA, sneaking onto other ships on foot, big cities with NPC walking around, atmospheric planets, 1:1 scale galaxy built on current understanding of stellar processes, with accurately rotating and orbiting bodies that players can free-roam, all that was in the plan from the start of ED but not SC. FD just put them in a logical order and scheduled based on needed precedence, complexity, affordability and priority. FD didn't have the money to build a game for 5 years before releasing it, and it wasn't their strategy for growing the business either.

CR original pitch was a staged approach very alike to ED's. He changed that at some indeterminate point to a big-bang release. He has now walked back to an MVP release. Is an MVP release really able to also deliver everything at once as we so often hear from SC evangelists?

CR lack of self-control and focus on achievable roadmap/timeline are exemplified by the 1886 incident in the Kotaku article. He sidetracked his own team from what they were focused on delivering to spend months in R&D for a new, undiscussed feature of questionable value when so much basic stuff is undone and what is there is horribly broken.

It is also surprising CIG experienced game dev managers at the start of the project let common and understood team issues take root deep enough to take years to correct. My guess is that disarray would still reign supreme if it were not for Erin Roberts.
 
Status
Thread Closed: Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom