Star Citizen Thread v6

Status
Thread Closed: Not open for further replies.
Looking at what Star Citizen allows the players to do in it's gameplay and compare it with the gaming landscape you noticed that there's nothing quite like it yet

Indeed, there are very few games which allow the players to do as little as SC does. No mechanics, no content. Of course you're talking about hypothetical game play which exists purely in your imagination, but that's not what SC actually offers real players right now in 2.6.3. It's very fortunate that other games aren't like it.
 
You're assumption that a crowdfunded game CEO manager that increases the scope, increases it's features and strives for a huge increase of the overall quality of a product could be considered a "scam" is indeed quite amusing.

It seems that you are too emotionally invested in Star Citizen to have a coherent discussion about it, hence the multiple unfounded "scam" accusations.

Putting words in my mouth with fake "statements" is not the right way to engage in any meaningful discussion so excuse me but I'll have to rightfully ignore them. My only suggestion to anyone that feels the project is not interesting anymore that they ask for a refund and avoid crowdfunding gaming projects altogether in the future.

Ahh, the old "I don't need to address what you wrote because you are clearly too emotional!!" The easy way to scurry out of having to address someone's points without justification used by emotionally abusive partners, dishonest politicians, and now oddly, SC fanboys. In reality, I'm not emotional at all, I've long since given up on the project. One doesn't need to be wreathed in emotion to accurately counter someone who keeps repeating the same poorly thought out justifications. My counter points come from just observing the situation and recognizing the reality of it, no emotion needed.

Alas, you think I put words in your mouth, but the words were yours and yours alone. I just cut out the fluff and condensed them into bite sized bits so I didn't end up writing a six thousand word essay. Since all you do is bounce back to those same bullet points and dare not stray from far from the script I won't repeat them again.

All I ask ifs that you explain, in as simple a manner as possible, how someone can take money to create thing A, and then refuse to create it and instead create something entirely different with that money, and have it not be a bait and switch.

If I take money up front in return for a banana split and then I spent the next four years trying to provide you with home grown squash with nothing to show but dry dirt and some unsprouted seeds, please justify how I did not scam you.
 
Last edited:

Slopey

Volunteer Moderator
It was never going to have player-driven economy, it was always set up the same was as ED. With the economy controlled by the NPC, with NPC's outnumbering players 10:1.

Player driven economies are a myth anyway because it assumes players will conform to ways of behaviour which won't trash the economy, which of course - they won't.

Those implementations don't take into account a bunch of players purposely entering into a loss making or futile transaction to screw over the market. You couldn't do that in real life without a ton of cash, and disrupting societal norms - not to mention oversight bodies who would step in and prevent the market movement anyway - but in a game where anything goes, they'll do it.

It's been tried before and failed miserably every time. In multiple MMOs. A purely player driven economy always ends up as a nightmare.
 
A purely player driven economy always ends up as a nightmare.

From experience - that's purely because so many people want to be CEO's or dread pirates or F34R M3 PvP-Pro-Bros, whilst almost nobody is content to be a mere dung shoveller.

Economies collapse without dung shovellers.

Star Citizen will be absolutely no different.
 
Player driven economies are a myth anyway because it assumes players will conform to ways of behaviour which won't trash the economy, which of course - they won't.

Those implementations don't take into account a bunch of players purposely entering into a loss making or futile transaction to screw over the market. You couldn't do that in real life without a ton of cash, and disrupting societal norms - not to mention oversight bodies who would step in and prevent the market movement anyway - but in a game where anything goes, they'll do it.

It's been tried before and failed miserably every time. In multiple MMOs. A purely player driven economy always ends up as a nightmare.

Well, there is EvE.

But one thing is funny. SC fans bang on about goons dissing the game now, but should it ever be released, i'm sure the goons will be in game in numbers and doing exactly what you suggest.
 
Well, that filled another lulzbucket.

If they are going to the effort of modelling something like that, shouldn't, you know, their face be in some horrible form of agony, not sat there with a stupid smile on their face.

That avatar is smiling because he got a refund email from Paypal :D

Either that, or he's overjoyed because he's just bought an Idris :D
 
Last edited:
Why are these "Star" threads even on the boards..
That game won't be playable until you are 40.


And even then have you seen the price points..?
I recall watching a game expo session for that game,,,
Seemed like a lot of hopes and dreams.
 
Well, there is EvE.

But one thing is funny. SC fans bang on about goons dissing the game now, but should it ever be released, i'm sure the goons will be in game in numbers and doing exactly what you suggest.

Actually EVE prices are controlled (partly) by the insurance rates set by the Dev.
 
This has to be one of my favorite threads and the hardest to keep up with.

But I think what I've come away with here is that most all of us want SC to succeed here. Or at least we want to see what comes of it. We have hopes and we have doubts and even those who are extrem fans of Roberts and SC can't help but wonder.

I'm no lawyer (but I did stay ... just cheap humor) but if,eventually, Roberts doesn't come through with something (other than an Alpha or Beta) then he might spur a very large law suite. Keep in mind, of course, that I'm just guessing.

By the way, while I'm babbling, what game has the record for longest development in comparison to SC (trying my best to stay on topic).

Chief

Heart of Darkness took ten years to make in the end, and that was a 2D platformer in the vein of Flashback and Another World :D And there's also DNF.
 
From experience - that's purely because so many people want to be CEO's or dread pirates or F34R M3 PvP-Pro-Bros, whilst almost nobody is content to be a mere dung shoveller.

Economies collapse without dung shovellers.

Star Citizen will be absolutely no different.

LOL. So. Much. This.

When everyone suggests player economy, I know *exactly* they want - it is gang wars by proxy, because player economy suggests control over resources, etc. Who cares economy does not work right in game? Most important I can blow this big opponent's ship which he worked endless hours or paid real money for.

Afaik even EVE devs have fingertip on scale.

'Player driven economy' my backside. Give me good, smart NPC driven economy with interesting opportunities here and there and I am set. ED is not completely there yet, but they have lot of components to make it trough. Afaik SC latest trading pitch was also this mixed type of economy.
 
What year release are the true believers saying now?

They don't.

They say: CIG can take as long as they want. I'd rather have a quality polished game rather than something bad and rushed.

Problems:

1) CIG are taking as long as they want.
2) Nobody guarantees a polished quality game even if they take another 50 years
3) Based on content that has been released, it might not be rushed, but its certainly not quality, except for pretty graphics. Pretty graphics a game do not make. In short, its pretty bad even though they are taking their time.
 
Status
Thread Closed: Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom