That scale mistake was pure incompetence, no reason to sweep it under the rug.
So many mistakes was made due to plain incompetence from the top management. Basically backers paid CIG to tool around.
Star Citizen Discussions v7
- Thread starter Brett C
- Start date
That scale mistake was pure incompetence, no reason to sweep it under the rug.
So many mistakes was made due to plain incompetence from the top management. Basically backers paid CIG to tool around.
They sure seem to exploit the same aspects/weaknesses of the human psyche.
Last edited:
"Everything else is theoretical until proven. And the proof is arriving on the PTU. Thats all really. Yet this is a concept that many many people seem to be unable to grasp"
Yep, pretty much this. I guess we will all see eventually what the result will be.
"Basically backers paid CIG to tool around."
Mistakes are unavoidable in any business. Why would CIG be different? Its not like they wasted resources on purpose, they tried things, didn't work, reworked or removed them, and so on.
"Thats not "hate". Its simply "waiting until whatever was promised actually arrives" before wallets are opened and praise is granted. Its okay to stay optimistic and retain a positive outlook on all this but pleeeeeeaaaaaase stay realistic and away from the mudslinging"
Someone earlier said that CR shouldn't open his big fat mouth because he had no talent and managerial skill, or something like that. This is just mean, and I think it fits the "mudslinging" part. Let's be nicer, we can't see the future, but what we see in the ATV's at least is in the works, and its very likely we will see in the game if not soon, like item 2.0, at least we'll see eventually. You can't just dismiss them.
Yep, pretty much this. I guess we will all see eventually what the result will be.
"Basically backers paid CIG to tool around."
Mistakes are unavoidable in any business. Why would CIG be different? Its not like they wasted resources on purpose, they tried things, didn't work, reworked or removed them, and so on.
"Thats not "hate". Its simply "waiting until whatever was promised actually arrives" before wallets are opened and praise is granted. Its okay to stay optimistic and retain a positive outlook on all this but pleeeeeeaaaaaase stay realistic and away from the mudslinging"
Someone earlier said that CR shouldn't open his big fat mouth because he had no talent and managerial skill, or something like that. This is just mean, and I think it fits the "mudslinging" part. Let's be nicer, we can't see the future, but what we see in the ATV's at least is in the works, and its very likely we will see in the game if not soon, like item 2.0, at least we'll see eventually. You can't just dismiss them.
Last edited:
We dismissed the Gamescom 2016 presentation calling what it was, got alot of heat from certain whiteknights how SQ42 will come out end 2016 how 3.0 will show us at the end of the year how wrong we were. We got hated on for our view on all of this...now one year later look where we are, 3.0 will have LESS then shown while being late a year.
In the end it proved us right AGAIN...
Weeell… that's the inherent problem with modal auxiliary verbs, isn't it?
Yes, ED can add space legs tomorrow — as in, it's possible to and FDev is capable of doing it. Character models exist and making them walk is pretty trivial, especially with the library of animations FDev has built up for their engine in various other games. It would just be the rover but slower, but you'd be walking around.
No, ED can't add space legs tomorrow — as in, there's nothing there to hook it into and it would be a bad idea in general. You can't just slap parts together all willy-nilly and hope that something useful, worth-while, or interesting comes out of it. CCP learned this the hard way. CIG
You're both really making the same point, only from a different modal angle of the word “can”, and that means both of you have put more thought into it than CIG has. They've fallen into every trap that companies that came before them have already discovered when they went down the same rout. Instead of looking at and learning from what others have done, CIG just keeps trudging along, never sitting down to answer that one crucial question: what's it even for? What do we gain from spending all these resources on this interaction model? Is it worth it in terms of the single thing that ever matters: gameplay?
Yeah. But in case you missed my last post, you correct them within days, if not hours. you don't roll them for 5 years.
You seem to have missed the point I was making. It was directly addressed at your observation that people are hating on the individual hard-working people who are trying to deliver Chris Roberts' vision. Personally I have immense sympathy for anybody working under what passes for his leadership. Have you ever read David Jennison's letter about why he left the company? If not, here you go, perhaps it will illustrate what I mean a bit more clearly:
https://www.reddit.com/r/starcitizen/comments/3lyfb1/david_jennison_former_lead_character_artist_in/
(Note - forget the 'allegedly from' at the start of the piece, it has been confirmed to be genuine since that was posted two years ago)
On your last line by the way, that would be fine for virtually any other game but you really need to remember that unlike a lot of other games this one is not having development funded by a studio.
People have paid money on the basis of the stuff that you acknowledge that they have cut back on. I think someone else has already pointed this out to you but although you can decide for yourself what you're prepared to accept in terms of the downscaling of something that you have already paid for, that doesn't actually mean that it is acceptable at all in either a legal sense, or frankly a moral one.
You basically said that they announced stuff and asked people for money on the basis of it, but because actually delivering that stuff is difficult (clue - here's why nobody, including developers/producers who probably crap more talent each morning than Chris Roberts has accrued in his lifetime, has done it before) it's OK if they don't and instead deliver something else.
Seriously, if I tell you I'll build you a flying car and you pay me £100k for it, then I come back to you a year later and say 'OK dreamer, the flying car turned out to be a bit difficult so what I've done is nail a remote controlled plane to the roof of a Ford Focus and stuck six extra cupholders in it, will this do?' are you going to say 'Wow thanks Red, it's OK mate I understand'?
By the way I'm also neither angry nor disappointed. This is another part of the narrative I've seen from people here in the past, trying to frame what are entirely objective comments as if they are some kind of strong emotional response.
I've already said what my feelings about the game are - I would very much like it to be released as it was originally billed but I don't think it ever will be. However I never really thought it actually would be to begin with for all the reasons already mentioned regarding its vast scope, so any disappointment is automatically limited by that. As for anger, I get a little angry when people try to misrepresent what I'm saying as something other than what it is but I can't get angry about the development of the game simply because I don't have an emotional investment in it to begin with. That is in fact the significant difference between someone like me and the people who take a brief break from theorycrafting gameplay experiences in a game they were supposed to be playing three years ago to deliver shrill attacks on people who are only pointing out the increasingly large herd of elephants in the room.
Note - I'm not suggesting that you're doing that, you're certainly far more optimistic than I am but you don't seem to be completely blind to the issues; you're just far more accepting of them than I would be had I paid someone money for a product that increasingly looks like it will fall far short of the promised item.
That is true. However making the same mistakes over and over again is not unavoidable and actually points to systemic failings rather than any individual bit of bad luck or unexpected problem.
You keep saying that it's 'mean' to suggest that Chris Roberts has no managerial skill. This is a man who ended up having his own company bought out from under him by the publishers of the last game he was involved in before SC and being kicked into a 'consultancy' role where he could basically spend his time dreaming whilst capable people actually managed delivery of the work, because they were so tired of his complete inability to stop attempting to add content and actually create and deliver the game. It is not nasty people making things up, it is documented historical fact. A poster earlier provided a lengthy list of his career 'highlights'. These are also facts. He is acknowledged by pretty much everybody who has ever worked with him (again, documented) to be an appalling project manager. This is not cruelty, it is objective fact.
I am a great swimmer but I am one of the worst football players you will ever see. If someone points out that I'm a terrible footballer it's not cruel or mean, it's simply an accurate assessment based on the evidence. Pointing out that Chris Roberts is not a capable leader is no different.
Last edited:
When mistakes are made like that in the real business world it bear consequences, in la la CIG land it do not, because the money keeps rolling in.
Nah. That would be really insulting and require all kinds of adjustments to the swear filter… :x
You realise that the entire year was one massive over-promise, right? That they spent January to June on promising something that kept getting delayed, and which is still uncertain when it will actually arrive? That they've now spent two conventions promising even more features in the future, still with no explanation for how to get there and that they've gone back to an old promise of scheduled releases that they've already proven themselves incapable of following?
It is in the only sense that matters here: that, just because the chef can't make up his mind and wants to give you a triple-calzone with extra pineapple and moose and salmon meat since some other guy asked for it, doesn't mean that everyone who ordered a regular round slab of bread with ham and cheese on it actually agreed to get what they're now getting, nor did they agree on the additional 20,000 minute delivery time because the pizza place did not have any rhubarb laying around when this change was made. Also, the pizza now includes rhubarb even though the tripple-calzone guy said he's deathly allergic to it.
No. No-one said that (although that's a common argument against DS from the backers — we've chosen not to stoop to that level). What was said was that CR has a decades-long history of being big in the mouth while consistently proving that he has no real talent or managerial skill. As in: it is the only thing more consistent than his clinging to this one idea he had 30 years ago, and both have historically proven to get him into trouble on multiple occasions across multiple projects in multiple industries.
If this kind of pattern emerges around a single individual, the reason isn't because people are mean — it's because everyone repeatedly come to the same conclusion when dealing with this one guy.
Last edited:
'OK dreamer, the flying car turned out to be a bit difficult so what I've done is nail a remote controlled plane to the roof of a Ford Focus and stuck six extra cupholders in it, will this d?o' are you going to say 'Wow thanks Red, it's OK mate I understand'
Haha, that wouldn't be pretty. But what if they say instead that they give me the flying car but it wouldn't fly as high or go as fast as they thought initially, but I could wait one or two more years to get it close to the promised specs? Sure, its not ideal, but its acceptable, its a flying char, not something easy to do.
In CIG's case its not yet obvious if the big promises were broken or not. You assume they are broken without having access to the finished product. I just choose to believe they will deliver on most important aspects of what they promised, "the flying car", with seamless planetary travel, FPS combat, multiplayer, multiple ships with various components, and various activities like trading, exploration, combat, to do both on foot and in space, and so far I have no reason to believe they will not deliver the core of what they promised. Sure, some minor aspects might not make it, but I can't blame ambition, even if its exaggerated. First there are dreams that you hope to turn into reality, actually doing it is another matter entirely.
Haha, that wouldn't be pretty. But what if they say instead that they give me the flying car but it wouldn't fly as high or go as fast as they thought initially, but I could wait one or two more years to get it close to the promised specs? Sure, its not ideal, but its acceptable, its a flying char, not something easy to do.
In CIG's case its not yet obvious if the big promises were broken or not. You assume they are broken without having access to the finished product. I just choose to believe they will deliver on most important aspects of what they promised, "the flying car", with seamless planetary travel, FPS combat, multiplayer, multiple ships with various components, and various activities like trading, exploration, combat, to do both on foot and in space, and so far I have no reason to believe they will not deliver the core of what they promised. Sure, some minor aspects might not make it, but I can't blame ambition, even if its exaggerated. First there are dreams that you hope to turn into reality, actually doing it is another matter entirely.
Last edited:
At the same time I fail to see this as outstanding or extraordinary as you seem to do. Being able to play the game at any time is something that most release games allow so is either standard or not worth mentioning. That its also impossible to find matches during the day is something that has been verified in many youtube videos so you claim comes across a little "overzealous". The elephant in the room is of course that Star Marine usually is not worth booting up because of its many issues and lack of content/quality.
So the "crap" you mention in regards to Star Citizen is "well deserved" when it comes to your specific example dont you think?
Funny, thats the same most of us are saying (number of years vary of course) while at the same time disbelieving anything as fact or success until it actually arrives on our harddrives. I think everybody should be able to claim that right without being called hater so what makes YOU any different?
Verified by CRoberts himself and we currently have only access to one unfinished system without planets or actual stellar objects. 5-10 systems is a release-goal. So how can the current demo video feature thousands of systems which are actually ingame as stated by CR? You know what stars are right? Well maybe CR doesnt. That lack of knowledge would explain quite a lot of discrepancies surrounding Star Citizen.
Where do the 7 years come from? care to explain?
....which only proves his point.......I mean.....do you REALLY not see it? (hey just say so, happy to explain in detail)
To be fair this CitizenCon is rather exceptional compared to Gamescom and the last year which were very lackluster and hurting SC confidence with the overly public CIG failures. But yeah, lots of people come out of the woodworks to regurgitate old stuff that has been discussed to death and none of em really brings anything new to the discussion....newbies right?
Last edited by a moderator:
You really should try writing a short book on SC.
I'm certain it would end up being an encyclopedia
Ugh, you had to make me search back in the thread:
https://forums.frontier.co.uk/showt...scussions-v7?p=6082289&viewfull=1#post6082289
Exactly, automated canteen doors custom fabricated to look like something out of Startrek and severely overpriced office furniture fabricated to reasemble aircraft wings are all the norm for companies with $160+ million in liabilities to the public and not a single completed product to their name.
If the shoe fits. Besides, his track record speaks for itself and speaks loudly of brash overspending, poor leadership, taking credit for other peoples work, and not knowing much about games or their engines. Hence why he on more than one occasion, has called SC 'the film/movie'.
Last edited:
In terms of the actual game, ultimately we're both talking about our expectations and I can't prove that yours are wrong or will remain unfulfilled any more than you can do the same with mine. As you say, time will tell.
Really? That's all you have?
Its your turn to see all the approvals from other users of what he said, I won't do it. It starts from page 130.