Besides those facts wait to be proven, the endless nurture vs. nature debate, you are probably right. This 'game' is so far from being innovative or creative imagining a future where mankind (omg, MANkind) found ways to travel vast distances in space that a little bit of novelty would stick out like the broken thighbone of that local skateboarder that tried to jump that set of stairs (10 steps!) in the office building I am working in. I mean seriously, all people do in a few hundred years is killing, buying, selling and consuming commodities? Are there no novel forms of art, science, philosophy, identities, youth cultures, games, political systems, anything but war and cash etc.? Why does this world resemble so much of the stereotypical frontier myths in the US? (we probably all know the answer already, but hey)
The Star Citizen Thread v5
- Thread starter Brett C
- Start date
- Status
Besides those facts wait to be proven, the endless nurture vs. nature debate, you are probably right. This 'game' is so far from being innovative or creative imagining a future where mankind (omg, MANkind) found ways to travel vast distances in space that a little bit of novelty would stick out like the broken thighbone of that local skateboarder that tried to jump that set of stairs (10 steps!) in the office building I am working in. I mean seriously, all people do in a few hundred years is killing, buying, selling and consuming commodities? Are there no novel forms of art, science, philosophy, identities, youth cultures, games, political systems, anything but war and cash etc.? Why does this world resemble so much of the stereotypical frontier myths in the US? (we probably all know the answer already, but hey)
Not a big fan of discourse analysis, but hey, on the start page of Star Citizen they tell you that more than 1,6 Million active citizens are part of this influential movement. It is huge. And then it says the following: "Help us make Star Citizen a reality! Become a backer of the next generation of space-man."
The 1.6m is complete . That's the number of accounts, so just signing up to their forum or playing a free weekend adds to it. They do not have 1.6m paying customers.
I'd argue the same criticism has to be then leveled at Elite Dangerous. Bigger ships, bigger guns, bigger discoveries and what crafting there is (aka engineer grinding) only serves to let you do any of the former in a bigger and better fashion. Or rather: I don't think it has to be leveld at either game.
Yes, those are activities not typically associated with women. But there's no way to make them any less stereotypical (unless you have a good idea how to do so?). Both games in this case are build to cater to the desire to have those experiences. If women are upset that these games don't cater to their desires as much as that of most men, what would one do about it? Tone down how the games cater to these stereotypical "male" desires and they're not the games they were anymore. Telling males to not enjoy these games, because they don't cater equally to women is a problem in and of itself: who are we to tell people what they may enjoy or not, regardless of gender? If there's a specific activity women would want to see in these games, that's a suggestion to be made to the devs and it would probably be prioritized depending on the audience.
In short, no amount of "pink paint" is going to turn an adrenaline heavy power fantasy into a game catering to the activities/cultures you mention. If a game is about these things on the other hand, there's probably not as much focus on power fantasies and adrenaline in the first place.
The base mechanics of Star Citizen or Elite are unlikely to ever cater in equal measure to women and men. What one can do however, is to avoid making these games unnecessarily hostile to the group that's already less interested in them in the first place. Which may mean having female avatars that women can actually identify with and treating women who do happen to enjoy those power fantasy games the same as their male counterparts, not like a slobbering pack of under-sexed male wolves.
Last edited:
I am not advocating for any kind of intervention in the concept of Star Citizen, just naming the obvious, its a stereotypical dude-universe (to be more precise, a white, western, heterosexual dude-universe). It is a conceptual problem with no solution in sight and I would not want to be responsible for them to reach out to new markets and drag more people into that farce. It is much more fun to see that broship sink, to be honest.
That is odd, yes, but it comes across as something one would say with a deliberate attempt at zeerust, or at least some kind of fake nostalgia. The hyphenation implies the separate enunciation of each syllable, making it come across as a little cartoonish. I think it's innocuous.
- - - Updated - - -
Not wanting to be that guy, but even if you're right, is there anything wrong with it being a ... a... Bruniverse? If it caters to just one market, is that in itself reprehensible? I mean, I don't find it more appealing than any other universe, but wouldn't I just not buy it if it didn't appeal to me?
Star Citizen specifically may cater to exactly that demographic, but I'm a bit unsure whether you might not especially like to watch its demise because of a personal grudge towards that demographic.
If so, more power to you, but the reasons why SC is in the place it is, is not specific to the demographic, I think. Take any inner desire of a certain demographic, design a fantasy product catering specifically towards it that you can't quiet deliver, create a hype around it, collect money for realizing this product by means of ever more ludicrous promises catering to the demographic's desires and work towards and inevitably deliver something that doesn't pay the checks your mouth wrote. We'd probably have a very similar picture in any demographic, unless it specifically excels at critical thinking.
Last edited:
Star Citizen specifically may cater to exactly that demographic, but I'm a bit unsure whether you might not especially like to watch its demise because of a personal grudge towards that demographic.
If so, more power to you, but the reasons why SC is in the place it is, is not specific to the demographic, I think. Take any inner desire of a certain demographic, design a fantasy product catering specifically towards it that you can't quiet deliver, create a hype around it, collect money for realizing this product by means of ever more ludicrous promises catering to the demographic's desires and work towards and inevitably deliver something that doesn't pay the checks your mouth wrote. We'd probably have a very similar picture in any demographic, unless it specifically excels at critical thinking.
Please no psychological remote diagnoses based on forum posts
Actually I would say it has quiet a bit to do with it. I mean the whole story of that game is full of analogies to US-frontier-masculinities. Chris Roberts the lone fighter for a better gaming world, the successfull business-guy who never lost the connection to the hard programming-work on the ground, the 'hard' work to achieve something truly innovative whereby innovative is mostly huge and big (huge detailed ships and levels), a game by men for men, by rebels for rebels, true heroes who stand for their ideals even if that means risking your existence or fighting against enemies much more powerful than you are (megacorporations, states, etc.). This is the vibe that is underlying this whole project and, in my opinion, lead it to the absurd state at the moment. Male Overconfidence and the complete inability to admit things went wrong. It is even more funny to see how these tendencies are visible on all sides of this crazy debate surrounding the game, the Derek and the guys from Something Awful are in that same boat. You don't back down as a real man, never. In other words, it is also about male honour and the fight and feared loss of it that might lead the fanbase and its enemies to sometimes extreme, uncompromising positions. It is very exciting, too, I mean to see in the end who will leave this fight as a fool, the fans prominently represented by Chris Roberts or the antifans prominently represented by Derek Smart, there is much at stake!
Last edited:
How can you be sure... especially considering the current population is dude-only
...Masculine burly dudes with form-fitting spacesuits... sounds just a tad suspicious to me tbh :V
For realsies though, I think you're taking this projection of what the SC universe is like a tad too far, incorporating a lot of assumptions in the process which makes for a very muddied set of arguments to support your standpoint.
Can not having female avatars not be a problem in its own right without imagining anti-female, pro-stereotype evil motivations behind the picture at large?
Separate the issues at hand from the weak political statements
Last edited:
Not really news but i found it a curious little detail
Freelancer depressurization effect once turret is blown - 2.6
Source:https://www.reddit.com/r/starcitize...ancer_depressurization_effect_once_turret_is/
and because there are not real news for today
Big Benny's Stonehenge
Freelancer depressurization effect once turret is blown - 2.6
[video=youtube;FdoDmb3N5XM]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FdoDmb3N5XM&feature=youtu.be[/video]
and because there are not real news for today
Big Benny's Stonehenge
[video=youtube;gIpe289k3i0]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gIpe289k3i0[/video]
Last edited:
How can you be sure... especially considering the current population is dude-only
...Masculine burly dudes with form-fitting spacesuits... sounds just a tad suspicious to me tbh :V
For realsies though, I think you're taking this projection of what the SC universe is like a tad too far, incorporating a lot of assumptions in the process which makes for a very muddied set of arguments to support your standpoint.
Can not having female avatars not be a problem in its own right without imagining anti-female, pro-stereotype evil motivations behind the picture at large?
Separate the issues at hand from the weak political statements
Yes, it is an interpretation that is, like always, debateable and I love debates.
Btw, I don't say that there are any evil intentions involved. The exclusion of certain groups, their lifeworlds and interests is often not an intentional act, but the result of a dynamic or certain perspective on the world. That is why it is possible to criticize things without condemning the people in these contexts or attacking anyone personally. I think Norbert Elias made many good points in that regard
Very arcadey...feels it is just an effect, not tied to anything regarding how ship works. If it's more than that, then it's cool though. Hating that weapon sound though.
Yes, it is an interpretation that is, like always, debateable and I love debates.
Btw, I don't say that there are any evil intentions involved. The exclusion of certain groups, their lifeworlds and interests is often not an intentional act, but the result of a dynamic or certain perspective on the world. That is why it is possible to criticize things without condemning the people in these contexts or attacking anyone personally. I think Norbert Elias made many good points in that regard
Yet by applying labels everywhere irrespective of whether or not that label is just, you are condemning people all the same.
That's what I mean... there's enough to debate without forcing every separate issue to be a part of a bigger context.
This is my problem with a lot of the forced narrative some of the more notorious "new-wave feminists" apply in general, by turning everything into a problem, the end result is only that the actual problems get ignored.
Last edited:
Utter nonsense.
I among others facepalmed with the white faces spiced up with a few "ethnic" looking ones, and failing to even do a 50/50 gender split for the first batch of Power Players.
These were the first "faces" we got to see, and they were important for painting a vision about how the world of Elite looks, especially at the top. Strangely, it looked very caucasian, and a little male dominated. It is important and useful to give players people they can identify with, where they can see themselves reflected.
In the far, far future of Elite, I'd have expected to see a good mix of features and skin tones, and probably some strongly androgynous elements thrown in. What we got instead was something that looked like it came from the eighties.
And this was said right at the start, so don't give me that rot of "cmplaining for the sake of complaining" and not offering any fixes.
In that case, I'm afraid it's a case of you being offended, not their character choices being offensive. Because I got the exact opposite vibe from that roster or characters.
I never liked this, the must unreal way of dealing with discrimination. I can't imagine a world where EVERYTHING has to be 50/50.
It's imposible in my mind, I can understand a more or less even number, 60-40 for example, in either way(color skin, gender, whatever) can be realistic and believable. 50/50 no, at least in my opinion.
Last edited:
The demand for Star Citizen representation amongst the under-represented groups living in mud huts with no broadband or clean water must be huge.
I don't think it should be entirely surprising that CR is limited to appealing to his own demographic.
Is it short-sighted? Yes. Flawed? I'm not so sure. I don't think there is anything wrong catering to one specific demographic. As a minority and son of immigrants, I'm more than appreciative of vendors who cater goods to my demographic that my majority white neighbors wouldn't like (in some cases, even offended by the presence of "ethnic" products).
I just don't see the fault in targeting a specific demographic if that is the group of people you know best to extract money from. Now, I know we could get into the issue of white male culture dominance [in videogames] is an extension of historical white oppression over minorities and women but that line is exasperating and I'd rather approach things from an egalitarian and cosmic perspective at the start. Putting a considered and appreciated history behind us and looking for a platform where we can hear each other is the only way forward that results in lasting progress.
There is definitely room and profit to be found in appealing to more people and to welcome all to the specific challenges each game can provide. I just never expected CR to push the boundaries in terms of characters or plot. Sq42 is just a rehash of Wing Commander (and its antiquated tropes) and SC is the playground in that Universe.
Is it short-sighted? Yes. Flawed? I'm not so sure. I don't think there is anything wrong catering to one specific demographic. As a minority and son of immigrants, I'm more than appreciative of vendors who cater goods to my demographic that my majority white neighbors wouldn't like (in some cases, even offended by the presence of "ethnic" products).
I just don't see the fault in targeting a specific demographic if that is the group of people you know best to extract money from. Now, I know we could get into the issue of white male culture dominance [in videogames] is an extension of historical white oppression over minorities and women but that line is exasperating and I'd rather approach things from an egalitarian and cosmic perspective at the start. Putting a considered and appreciated history behind us and looking for a platform where we can hear each other is the only way forward that results in lasting progress.
There is definitely room and profit to be found in appealing to more people and to welcome all to the specific challenges each game can provide. I just never expected CR to push the boundaries in terms of characters or plot. Sq42 is just a rehash of Wing Commander (and its antiquated tropes) and SC is the playground in that Universe.
Ships sells in PU : I believe you are confused to what the PU is. The PU is for testing not progression like AC. The PU is only a year old with persistence only being added a few months ago. Remember with a traditional game development you would not be playing the PU right yet until it was much further along. Also, as i posted before ship sells is the main source of income for CIG, with that fact it would be safe to assume that CIG will push this revenue stream as much as possibly to get the game done. Trying to seem like its somehow a "dirty trick to drive sells" is a waste of time being that CIG has stated that is there primary revenue source.
Pay to win: I dont go by "what everyone says" thats a waste of time and rings of liberal non sense. The "fact" is by definition if you can earn everything on sale in game it makes it not pay to win. imo however SC has a "pay to skip" that MANY MANY backer want. That may not be to your liking but the ships sells shows you are in the minority.
" Isn't it about enjoying the journey not paying idiotic amounts of money to skip the content" : that is your opinion and I respect your opinion but I do not agree with it. I played EVE for years and there never was an end game and the progression was more of a gate then a journey. Once you got the bigger better ships you had the ability to do more solo and in large orgs, that was a ton of fun. One reason I stopped playing Elite was the feeling that progression to bigger ships imo was the only thing there. Sure there's PP and arena but if you arent into that there's literally nothing else to do but grind for upgrades and more ships. Some love this gameplay, and thats cool.
"So in effect, paying for a significant time advantage over someone who doesn't pay, which might as well be called pay to win." : by definition I do not believe thats pay to win. EVE has had the ability to use real money to purchase ships ingame and there get the balance part right enough, i hope SC does the same.
"I hate the way wallet warriors try to justify this 'pay for advantage gameplay' especially when you're dealing with things that cost so much money and are purported to take a significant amount of time to obtain. They open their wallets so they don't have to put themselves through the grind but they're more than happy for everybody else to do so.":
This seems more of a problem you have with people with money then a video game. What about the people that have unlimited time in their lives to play said game? They will pose the same disadvantages toward you, will you then want to cap play time in games so its an even playing field?
The money backers have put toward the game is for the "dream" or "sales pitch" CR gave us a long time ago. If anyone is not willing back a game while its in development with only "plans" to bank on then Star Citizen is not a game they should invest resources in. those people should wait for the game to be finished.
"And who are you planning to wage these large scale fleet battles against? Inter-org politics is pie in the sky stuff when they are still struggling to lock down the very basic mechanics needed to allow for the grind you want to skip."
The game is still in development so your statement is already known to all the backers. The only thing I can tell you is CR has already stated CIG is working on the instancing tech to allow large number of players to playtogether in said battles. it hasnt been done before. We will see what comes from it.
"It's a good thing you're in no hurry to see a return on the thousands of dollars you've put into the game, and it's not surprising you're working so hard to keep up the "everything's fine" pretense":
not that everything is fine, more like i am not a game developer, I leave that to the company I backed thats why I gave them my money and not making the game myself. The progress I have seen so far makes me believe CIG can get it done with enough time and money of course. If that scares anyone thinking of backing then you shouldn't back this type of project.
Last edited:
- Status