Star Citizen Thread v6

Status
Thread Closed: Not open for further replies.

Tuub t Tute

T
Well Gamescom starts 22nd August, so that is only another 2 and a half weeks slippage. Considering they are averaging about a week delay per week since announcing 3.0, it isn't a $150M stretch goal to expect them to have it as a "big reveal" to crack open the funders' wallets.

Hmmm, Maybe they could have a star system open only to the Concierge backers... call it something like Funder's World? Has an original ring to it...
 

Ian Skippy

Ian Skippy
Tuub t Tute said:
Well Gamescom starts 22nd August, so that is only another 2 and a half weeks slippage. Considering they are averaging about a week delay per week since announcing 3.0, it isn't a $150M stretch goal to expect them to have it as a "big reveal" to crack open the funders' wallets.

Hmmm, Maybe they could have a star system open only to the Concierge backers... call it something like Funder's World? Has an original ring to it...
Click to expand...

I still think they'll release whatever they have at gamescon. I suspected from the start that the planning/schedule was just a delaying tactic to appease the backers while they keep plowing through this mess, and release whatever they have at gamescon. They'll probably send it live during the presentation, so people will be excited enough to fall for the new ship sales without realizing how mediocre it is. :p
 

killminster

killminster
Stigbob said:
Star Citizen's potential failure could really hurt the space-games genre though. Show a bean counter a failed $150 million plus space game and they'll simply say no in future.
Click to expand...

I don't agree. It's potential/likely failure isn't because its a space game it's because of the people in charge of the company.

The fact people are still falling over themselves to throw money at a SC and lap up the utter garbage they get in return shows that there's quite a gap in the market and a lot of enthusiasm for space games just waiting to be tapped.

It's failure will only hurt the pockets those bought in and the reputations of those who so royally screwed it up.
 

Stigbob

Stigbob
killminster said:
I don't agree. It's potential/likely failure isn't because its a space game it's because of the people in charge of the company.

The fact people are still falling over themselves to throw money at a SC and lap up the utter garbage they get in return shows that there's quite a gap in the market and a lot of enthusiasm for space games just waiting to be tapped.

It's failure will only hurt the pockets those bought in and the reputations of those who so royally screwed it up.
Click to expand...

Pirates of the Caribbean was the first big budget pirate movie made since the 50's or the 60's, because pirate films started flopping. Nothing scares an industry away from a niche like an expensive flop and it can last for decades, long enough for the people holding the purse strings to retire.

As I understand it FDEV did a limited crowdfunding campaign to prove there was interest to investors to make ED, and that was before any theoretical collapse of Star Citizen it was just on the back of a fair few years of no-one risking it on the genre.

Star Citizen's collapse doesn't need to change the industries mind, it just needs to remind it of it's preconception.
 

killminster

killminster
Stigbob said:
Pirates of the Caribbean was the first big budget pirate movie made since the 50's or the 60's, because pirate films started flopping. Nothing scares an industry away from a niche like an expensive flop and it can last for decades, long enough for the people holding the purse strings to retire.

As I understand it FDEV did a limited crowdfunding campaign to prove there was interest to investors to make ED, and that was before any theoretical collapse of Star Citizen it was just on the back of a fair few years of no-one risking it on the genre.

Star Citizen's collapse doesn't need to change the industries mind, it just needs to remind it of it's preconception.
Click to expand...

Again I beg to differ.

Cutthroat Island came out in 1995, ok it was still a flop, and there have been god knows how many Treasure Island adaptations since the 60s (two in 1972!) amongst many other pirate films.

Like I said the SC debacle, if that's what it turns out to be, shows there is plenty of people interested in the genre.

The failure of SC shouldn't put off anyone else from having a go at a space game if they think there's money in it any more than Cutthroat Island put Disney off making Pirates of the Caribbean.
 

Osmanthus

O
killminster said:
Again I beg to differ.

Cutthroat Island came out in 1995, ok it was still a flop, and there have been god knows how many Treasure Island adaptations since the 60s (two in 1972!) amongst many other pirate films.

Like I said the SC debacle, if that's what it turns out to be, shows there is plenty of people interested in the genre.

The failure of SC shouldn't put off anyone else from having a go at a space game if they think there's money in it any more than Cutthroat Island put Disney off making Pirates of the Caribbean.
Click to expand...

Can confirm Cutthroat Island was bad, but yes it was a big budget 90s film and didn't really affect the success of POTC.

Star Citizen's (probable) failure will point less to crowdfunding's flaws than to Roberts' profound incompetence; those two things are coupled because the former allowed the latter to go on for so long.
 

Stigbob

Stigbob
killminster said:
Again I beg to differ.

Cutthroat Island came out in 1995, ok it was still a flop, and there have been god knows how many Treasure Island adaptations since the 60s (two in 1972!) amongst many other pirate films.

Like I said the SC debacle, if that's what it turns out to be, shows there is plenty of people interested in the genre.

The failure of SC shouldn't put off anyone else from having a go at a space game if they think there's money in it any more than Cutthroat Island put Disney off making Pirates of the Caribbean.
Click to expand...

Treasure island is a classic especially the muppets version, not a genre film though the classics always do reasonably well but don't exactly grab blockbuster status. Cut-throat island wasn't an expensive film IIRC.

Customer numbers are not the concern even though there's only a small pool of space game genre fans in comparison to things like COD, it's investors (actual investors not I bought a game and think I'm an investor customers) who really count and like to bet on sure things.

Pirates of the Caribbean was considered a massive risk by Disney because of cut-throat island and the preceding decades, they went ahead because they have the financial might to go for it without needing outside funding and it paid off hugely. But it was never regarded as a sure thing.
 

Harbinger

Volunteer Moderator
Harbinger
sleutelbos said:
I still think they'll release whatever they have at gamescon. I suspected from the start that the planning/schedule was just a delaying tactic to appease the backers while they keep plowing through this mess, and release whatever they have at gamescon. They'll probably send it live during the presentation, so people will be excited enough to fall for the new ship sales without realizing how mediocre it is. :p
Click to expand...

I agree to this with one proviso. It will be a PTU release to a select few (+subscribers) so that they can use it to generate lots of additional paid subscriptions.
 

Rolan

Rolan
Star Citizen: Bugsmashers! - Nox Your Normal First Person View
[video=youtube;VcYWTd0JTaE]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VcYWTd0JTaE[/video]
 

CmdrKull

C
Rolan said:
Star Citizen: Bugsmashers! - Nox Your Normal First Person View
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VcYWTd0JTaE
Click to expand...

Bug Smashers being used to promote ship(ish?) sale. It has a real telethon vibe going on. Although some bugsmashers have been face-palm-worthy, It's the only video series I watch even semi-regularly because I enjoy the raw technical glimpse it offers. Starting off a bugsmashers episode praising how well the nox sale is currently going... well, like I said the whole thing came off as a telethon or infomercial (Its the difference between informing your backers in order to be open and informing your backers because you can squeeze out a bit more cash).

3.0 is definitely the line for whether I give the project any more time (including this thread) but they've created such a deficit for themselves. The tech has to be so great that I can look past the oil-slick yet reeks of desperation sales tactics.
 

Leper Messiah

Leper Messiah
Agony_Aunt said:
I don't think anyone is saying that delays aren't the norm in the business.

Its how CIG hype things are just around the corner and then fail to meet their own hype, and not just once or twice, but time and time again.

"Its great, we have it almost ready, yeah, just soon, you will see something at (event) and we hope to release on or around (date), in the meantime, here is a ship sale!" - then it doesn't happen, and it gets announced it will come later, but its all ok, because they are refactoring (Y) and they have this great new system which will be better than anything ever done before (insert made up word for something that has been done many times before). And then months pass, and the cycles begins again.

That is the reason for the snark and skepticism.
Click to expand...

Thing is I don't listen to hype, hence why I still liked NMS! Humans have an infinite capacity to mislead and hence I take everything with a pinch of salt and don't go all "daddy pwomised me horsey" that I saw with the aforementioned NMS! And I am the most depressing cynical person around (I'm certain that mankind is doomed, and that's serious I kid you not), this is just a game. I don't understand the levels of snark at times!

GaryII said:
I do not see a lot of madness here, except when personal attack starts and people predict that CIG will go bankrupt tomorrow...

At least for me similar concerns like:
crazy feature creep, lack of any planning all those refactorings points to this..., overcomplected design, selected game engine that seems can not handle all that fidelity, team lacks talant and/or experience to make this game...
can add also shady marketing practices to get more money from backers

are very valid concerns...

Problem with SC fans are that they can not accept ANY criticism of the game.
Click to expand...

That's why I'm staying away from the Pro SC forums, it's clear things are not tickedy booh, I just can't find anywhere that has the happy medium of levelled criticism (yes there IS a lot of that here, I just get fed up of wading through the crud sometimes and then lose interest in it all for a while, then stupidly come back for info which I know I will only get good info in a handful of posts and have to wade through 100 post of the same old circular arguments!)

Bottom line, as above....it's just a "game".

But I'll skedaddle (again as I'm adding nothing to the thread beyond complaining I need to trawl through crud like what I'm posting, so I'll show myself out and slink off.......
 

Stigbob

Stigbob
Leper Messiah said:
I don't understand the levels of snark at times!
Click to expand...

Continual disappointment can do that I want to be wrong about SC being a failure already, but CIG keep waving huge red flags at me. We're all big old space game fans watching $150 million burn that could have gone on a number of other top notch space games it's not good for our genre.
 
Last edited:

ZeeWolf

ZeeWolf
The Nox looks a bit dull. They couldn't have come up with a more simple chunk of polygons to float people around the surface quickly on. No wheels, no traction. I guess at the very best people will be able to do a few jumps here and there? It just feels a bit lazy, especially for a project that is always shouting to the rafters about its exciting ships, like they were looking for the simplest craft to implement without endlessly having to debug it and tune it.

While I'm sure wheels are totally redundant in Star Citizen verse - it would still make things more interesting, though even more of a challenge to develop. I would have thought bouncing around the surface is always going to be more fun than simply skimming/hovering over it. I'm not just thinking of EDs SRVs which aren't perfect but are fun to tumble around in at least, but also the big-trak rover in mass effect among others. I'm not exactly chomping at the bits to hover over height maps for hours on end.

I have a feeling the moons in 3.0 are going to be pretty sterile experience with some very detailed specific set pieces like bits of FPS maps which will probably look great for the first two weeks but don't do much and look very old-hat a year from now when we realise the pain staking development time required to put those kinds of assets in and they haven't come up with any new stuff.
 
Last edited:

MTBFritz

MTBFritz
Skizomeuh said:
It's been a while since we heard of wheeled vehicles, isn't it? I guess they hit another technical wall.
Click to expand...

One of the last ATVs showed footage of a 6wheel rover, all in-editor of course ran pretty slick but on a textured landscape, no sign of the famous procgen surface.
 

ZeeWolf

ZeeWolf
The mission giver in today's ATV seems to have lost a few thousand "fidelitys" since the - not at all smoke and mirrors - version Roberts was playing at Gamescon last year. I think his body is going through that table a bit too. I mean he still looks quite good - although somewhat more like any other game, but it's blatantly obvious they are trying to put something "in game" that looks as good as something Chris Roberts was standing in front of a full year ago and claiming was "in game" then. I just hope they can scale it and we don't end up with just he one guy running through the same animation. I still want to know what happens if you end up with a queue of players waiting to collect missions from him.

It's too bad this isn't coming out on consoles, they could simply blame the "changes" between the trade show demonstrations and consumer hardware on dumbing down forced on them by Sony :)

Also the terrain looks a bit meh so far.
 
Status
Thread Closed: Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom