Star Citizen Discussion Thread v11

[Mr.Nowak]

Hilarious, in fact.

Right? Hilarious. People enjoy Star Citizen. Who would have thought.

[citation needed]
Maybe wikipedia is common enough?

Space flight simulation game - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

List of space flight simulation games - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Potential is not reality. If we're going to talk about potential, then guess what? All the games you mentioned have — at worst — the same potential, and almost all of them have vastly vastly more because they are made from infinitely more solid and proven foundations. They have already achieved things that CI¬G can't even dream of ever accomplishing.

Potential is the reason why the game has the funding it has. Eve burned the space legs and proc gen potential a while ago. Elite still hasn't implemented atmo planets. X4 isn't going online. NMS isn't going massively online. While some of them are working to break out of their shell like Elite. Other's have consolidated and won't take the risk. Both design wise and financially.

SC is taking all the risks and it's sweet time. But it is actively working towards these goals and sharing progress on them.

I don't follow NMS closely enough to tell, other than to say that there's no reason for them to. It would serve no purpose so I sure hope they aren't. But for the other two, absolutely yes. Hell, EVE isn't even working towards it — it is already based on procedural generation. It was procedurally generated TWO DECADES ago. It was re-generated one decade ago to add in more detail.

Proc Gen of planets that you can't land on? Ships that have no interiors? Eve's simulation is complex beyond anything I have seen for sure. That is why I loved playing it.

 

[PiLhEaD]

Network OCS Stall Fixes, Projectile Manager, Client to Server Actor Networking Rework, On Demand Physicalizing v2, Particle Lighting v3, Asynchronous Disconnection Refactor, Planet v4, SOCS...

I'm not saying that this represents no progress, but I have to note that only Projectile Manager and SOCS appear to be new.

All the rest seem to be bug fixes, reworking, or updates on what was there before. For the avoidance of doubt - I'm not saying fixes/reworkings/enhancements aren't good/necessary/helpful.

However, as an outsider this all reads as very technical stuff - and what I'd expect to see is a large list of meaningful game-play that's been added.

Things like: an in-game scalable sequencer for making music and complex event-triggering, starship upgrades, starship salvaging, new terrain editing, first person exocraft, additional VR functions, new space map, improved inventory management, new upgrades, new base building parts, more storage, personal refiner, AS WELL AS improvements to performance and a myriad of bug fixes - all of which were added to another space game very recently.

So, you know, things that dramatically grow and improve the game as played. I think when I start seeing large steps along these lines then I might pay more than a passing interest.

As an aside, is there any update on SQ42?

 

[Mr.Nowak]

Agree game needs more core gameplay focus. It will be interesting how the prisons will add to the law gameplay. SQ42's roadmap updates don't look good at all. You can check the current situation here: https://robertsspaceindustries.com/roadmap/board/2-Squadron-42

--

Ah more news! Financials for 2018 dropped.

Source: https://cloudimperiumgames.com/blog/corporate/cloud-imperium-financials-for-2018

 

[StuartGT]

https://www.reddit.com/r/starcitizen/comments/ed6qbo/_/fbfz782

Source: http://reddit.com/r/starcitizen/comments/ed6qbo/will_we_get_a_statement_of_cloud_imperiums/fbfz782

 

[VR Golgot]

I never meant to sell anything to anyone. For the past years I keep telling people to do research before getting Star Citizen. That is an Alpha with it's set of issues. It seems like you are really misunderstanding my position and attitude.

Nah, I understand pretty well. I see your occasional criticisms, but I also see that you'll chuck any old positive you can find into this thread as a form of 'balance'. (The reddit screenshots contrasting 3.8 with a BF map from 2012 was a particularly amusing one recently )

Certainly, purely in terms of this thread, it's you who's misunderstanding what kind of impact that kind of unquestioning approach will have. It's not very persuasive.

And more broadly, I see that you believe in some highly optimistic takes on CIG. The tripartite that I mention. And you're displaying them again below, so I'll address them there

I think these are fair questions. Some community members have put it forward as well. Planetside has gotten more focus than anything in the last two years. Yea, there are many issues the funding model causes that hurt the game. CI makes money on big ships but releases them way later.

Releases them, but still minus their unique functionality, in the case of the fancier ones. Yep. It is, pretty clearly, an ongoing issue. With pretty significant repercussion the longer it continues.

This part I don't understand. Actually sharing news, gameplay and progress about the game is spreading good word? So what is one supposed to do when good things happen? Not talk? It's kind of odd to expect a narrative.

You talk both the good and bad. Not just the bad. I always mention things I don't like about SC. But I also talk about the stuff I appreciate.

It's not normal nature gamedev at all. Because it's not a normal game to develop. It's exactly why EVE has no ship interiors, Elite no space legs, X4 no FPS. Nobody tried to do all at once. Because it's insanely difficult. SC still hasn't achieved a quarter of it but the fact that it marches on. Ambitious and with increased funding even though the methods be controversial is a crazy story of its own.

Sure, talk about the good and the bad. That's all cool. What's intriguing about your output though is that the bad doesn't really penetrate your broader perspective. IE you generally espouse the 3 related beliefs I mentioned:

• The 'good' CIG: That CIG are an aspirational company. That they are doing the difficult and the new. That this is their essence.
• The promised land: That CIG will get to this difficult place they're heading for. Because they are still going, doing difficult things.
• This is how game dev works: That because of the above exceptionalism, any delays, any missteps, are all totally understandable, and perfectly normal relative to the scale of the project.

These aspects are predominant in all of your takes. You acknowledge aspects of sceptical counter-points, because they're kind of unavoidable, but not to the extent that really impinges on any of the above:

With some key sceptical counters being:

• The 'bad' marketing: They seemingly cannot fulfil on their high end content at the rate that they're selling it. But they keep selling it. This behaviour, at this stage, is surely being done knowingly. This is, to be blunt, not good.
• Pre-sold content will not be fulfilled: This is becoming a given. 100+ systems at launch, etc etc. The question becomes more about what will make the cut, and in what state.
• That the project has been based on poor dev decisions from the off: From the ever-extending wishlist of stretch goals, with their seemingly conflicting agendas of fidelity + scale in all aspects, to the choice of engine to achieve all these things, to Chris's personal foibles (perpetual scope creep, poor with deadlines, intent on micro-managing - all of which seemingly played out badly during his tenure at his prior large title).

Well, on and on. We could argue the details on the last point for ever and a day.

But I suspect none of it would have an impact. You would still return to the tripartite. It's a self fulfilling prophecy

And kinda hermetically sealed from any inquiry or facts which challenge its individual sections.

 

[Tippis]

Right? Hilarious. People enjoy Star Citizen

…which, of course, has nothing to do with what I said. Why do you do this? Why are you so wholly reliant on misdirections, misrepresentations, strawmen, red herrings, and even outright lies to try to cobble together something that might be confused with an argument?

Potential is the reason why the game has the funding it has.

Unlikely. It is much more readily explained by sunk cost, the afore-mentioned choice-supportive bias, and good old gold farming due to a naively unregulated secondary market going after the first two categories. We know well enough where the money is coming from to say that if it was a matter of potential, and more about something akin to addictive behaviour.

Eve burned the space legs and proc gen potential a while ago

Again, potential is not reality. If you're going to grant it to one you must grant it to the other.
So no. Potential cannot be “burned” — it still has the same potential it always had. Same goes for all the other games.

SC is taking all the risks and it's sweet time. But it is actively working towards these goals and sharing progress on them.

There's very little to show for any kind of actual progress towards the “potential” it has. There is a lot of fancy (but also easily reproducible) tech demos and a very long list of things that should happen but consistently fail to do so on time (or at all). Equally consistently, the things they're progressing on have no clear utility for the “potential” they're supposedly striving for. It's all a bunch of low-hanging fruit where already existing solutions… well… already exist, but where they have to take their sweet time accomplishing those things for no good reason.

Oh, SC is taking no risks whatsoever. Remember, CI¬G is under no obligation to actually deliver anything for all the money given to them (hence: do not give these people your money) and Chris has absolved himself from not living up to his own promises.

Proc Gen of planets that you can't land on? Ships that have no interiors?

You're moving the goalposts again…


e: Oh my. 2018 “best year ever”… and still operating at a massive loss.

 

[Viajero]

I didn't get what I wanted. Should I cry over all the internet forums like baby? I raise these concerns through the proper channels to CI and wait to see what they do.

To be fair, your expectations there have happened to be basically a total write off. It is actually quite spectacular:

The thing is, this is not the first time this happens. Not particularly aimed at you, mate, it is just a generalized occurrence all throughout the project. The only consistent element here is CIG failure to meet not only expectations but also roadmap after roadmap after roadmap.

A normal bystander would most likely not hesitate to emit a harshly critical judgement here, especially when told that the developer is still asking for crowdfund money. Defying all logic, you just seem to brush off all those persistent failures as if they had nothing at all to do with the developer.

 

[Dementropy]

Agree game needs more core gameplay focus. It will be interesting how the prisons will add to the law gameplay. SQ42's roadmap updates don't look good at all. You can check the current situation here: https://robertsspaceindustries.com/roadmap/board/2-Squadron-42

--

Ah more news! Financials for 2018 dropped.

Source: https://cloudimperiumgames.com/blog/corporate/cloud-imperium-financials-for-2018

That's a brief financial statement, akin to something found in a whitepaper. Those aren't detailed financials, so they can be chalked up to marketing or bolstering continued "pledges."

 

[[VR] Merkir]

Agree game needs more core gameplay focus. It will be interesting how the prisons will add to the law gameplay. SQ42's roadmap updates don't look good at all. You can check the current situation here: https://robertsspaceindustries.com/roadmap/board/2-Squadron-42

--

Ah more news! Financials for 2018 dropped.

Source: https://cloudimperiumgames.com/blog/corporate/cloud-imperium-financials-for-2018

It shows they needed that $46M cash investment, as the year-on-year trend was towards insolvency otherwise.

 

[Tippis]

It shows they needed that $46M cash investment, as the year-on-year trend was towards insolvency otherwise.

“90 days tops” is real.
(At the costs they were pulling, 90 days would have been $14M – twice their net position before the investment.)

 

[StuartGT]

I think it's probably best not to provide apparent conclusions that known-uber-troll Derek Smart was right. The poor guy wouldn't survive from the the self-fellation

 

[Mr.Nowak]

The summary of the financials is visualised in this one. Wow they still had 7 mil left at the end of 2018 without investments. That is really solid. If they maintain expenditure the 2019 income could cover nearly all expenses. I was expecting a worse situation. This is more than stable. Pretty much secured until 2021 at least imo.

But I suspect none of it would have an impact. You would still return to the tripartite. It's a self fulfilling prophecy

And kinda hermetically sealed from any inquiry or facts which challenge its individual sections.

It's hard to escape the truth. That the project has it's issues, that it has a huge backing, that it is working towards better and bigger and that it is delivering but slowly. These are pretty undeniable facts. It is not a prophecy. It's the reality. The situation the game finds itself is in is unique.

But critical minds like yours must ask. Why isn't there anything else out there? Why this? If it's failing consistently in your opinions. Why isn't something else out there that can do better and more than SC?

CI is still the most valued space game company in the entire industry. Is this just mere luck?

The actual impact is outside of here. Hence why most SC followers even in the ED don't venture much to this spot. It has been the same topic since 2015 and acknowledged even by the Lave Radio host and good old bud of mine AllenStroud when we did the podcast together. The idea back then was to calm everyone down and combine the communities of Elite and SC. So both games learn from each other and the discussions are level-headed.

Critiques are certainly fine but I do think that a lot of people are detached from the game. I played every patch since the hangar consistently. The game has come a long way each year. It's hard to admit for those passionate to dislike everything about SC but it did.

To be fair, your expectations there have happened to be basically a total write off. It is actually quite spectacular:

The thing is, this is not the first time this happens. Not particularly aimed at you, mate, it is just a generalized occurrence all throughout the project. The only consistent element here is CIG failure to meet not only expectations but also roadmap after roadmap after roadmap.

A normal bystander would most likely not hesitate to emit a harshly critical judgement here, especially when told that the developer is still asking for crowdfund money. Defying all logic, you just seem to brush off all those persistent failures as if they had nothing at all to do with the developer.

I don't like to personally mention past posts of people. It serves little purpose A dozen people here all denied that a large world map, OCS, planetside or a city planet was possible to pull off. Yet here we are and it doesn't matter what people said. The development marches on.

If a game like SC was easy to make then someone else would have snatched the 250mil and released it. No one has done it still.

The argument is not if delays are happening. The SC community is much more aware about the development than people here. Every development studio has it's set of issues. CI has more of them because of the complicated product they are building. They are full of developers that worked on many established studios. People who have spent their lives developing games are in their team. Saying that they are the problem is just wrong imo.

And I am generally slightly more biased because as a game developer I think the people making games happen are often overlooked.

 

[Dementropy]

If a game like SC was easy to make then someone else would have snatched the 250mil and released it. No one has done it still.

Or perhaps someone else knows it's cost-prohibitve witht he limitations that come with the choice of engine and gamed out the cost of keeping the project alive after release with server upkeep and the expenses associated with that.

Good thing you only need a starter pack to play.

 

[StuartGT]

Sorry for tearing apart your comment but it appears needing doing

CI is still the most valued space game company in the entire industry. Is this just mere luck?

You need to provide proof backing up this statement.

The actual impact is outside of here. Hence why most SC followers even in the ED don't venture much to this spot. It has been the same topic since 2015 and acknowledged even by the Lave Radio host and good old bud of mine AllenStroud when we did the podcast together. The idea back then was to calm everyone down and combine the communities of Elite and SC. So both games learn from each other and the discussions are level-headed.

I don't even know what you're going on about here. And I've spoken to Allen over the past few years including him doing an AMA on the Elite Reddit.

I don't like to personally mention past posts of people.

I disagree, do it! I could do with the laughs

It serves little purpose A dozen people here all denied that a large world map, OCS, planetside or a city planet was possible to pull off. Yet here we are and it doesn't matter what people said. The development marches on.

A dozen people here annoyed you so much? Really? I recommend improving your social life.

If a game like SC was easy to make then someone else would have snatched the 250mil and released it. No one has done it still.

Very true. Elite & NMS have been created by their devs as stepping stones towards the dreams, but haven't sold themselves on the promises.

The argument is not if delays are happening. The SC community is much more aware about the development than people here.

I have to disagree. Personally I've had to correct you on facts on multiple occasions; other misinformed backers also are happy to be educated.

And I am generally slightly more biased because as a game developer I think the people making games happen are often overlooked.

Congrats on not getting fired I guess

 

[Mr.Nowak]

Or perhaps someone else knows it's cost-prohibitve witht he limitations that come with the choice of engine and gamed out the cost of keeping the project alive after release with server upkeep and the expenses associated with that.

Good thing you only need a starter pack to play.

Yea and isn't it perfectly fine that someone is being ambitious, gathers the funds, the team and tries to make it happen still?

 

[Tippis]

But critical minds like yours must ask. Why isn't there anything else out there? Why this? If it's failing consistently in your opinions. Why isn't something else out there that can do better and more than SC?

There are things out there doing better and more than SC.
Almost all the games it is commonly compared against, for instance. Remember, potential is not reality.

They're doing more and better because they have competent leads who know how to properly scope a project. Who know how to manage a large team. Who know how to prioritise and progress. Who know, in short, how to deliver.

CI is still the most valued space game company in the entire industry.

[citation needed]
And remember, company value is not a simple function of “cost of ownership stake ÷ size of stake”.

A dozen people here all denied that a large world map, OCS, planetside or a city planet was possible to pull off.

[citation needed]

If a game like SC was easy to make then someone else would have snatched the 250mil and released it.

You're confusing the process of developing a game for the process of separating marks and the cash in their wallets. One of them is hard, the other is not — just unethical. The two require very different things from the people pulling them off.

The SC community is much more aware about the development than people here.

Doubtful seeing as how the SC community actively and viciously clamps down on anything that paints the development in any kind of troubling perspective.

 

[Asp Explorer]

And I am generally slightly more biased because as a game developer I think the people making games happen are often overlooked.

Ahhh my dear Mr. Nowak - that's a claim you've made quite a few times now. Would you care to elaborate a bit more, perhaps mention some games you've developed? I might even buy a few and you'd might see a bit of cash

I haven't developed a game since the ZX Spectrum days, and at a bit of a stretch (actually a great big walloping one) the Amiga years.

However, I did ROV, engine telemetry and some other 90's goodies that are (as far as I can tell) still live out there in the field. These days though, I'm just a poor mainframe hardware engineer eeking a living out of RoKS.

 

[Dementropy]

Yea and isn't it perfectly fine that someone is being ambitious, gathers the funds, the team and tries to make it happen still?

Not at the expense of crowdfunders by offering expensive concept art and racking up more time and necessary funding to deliver on promises it isn't. Cateat Emptor and all that, but constantly changing the scope of the project for those who initially supported the initial pitch isn't ambitious, it's bait and switch.

This is like Mad Mike Hughes accepting crowdfunding to prove the Earth is flat (overtly) when in reality he just wants to build a homemade rocket, so "Yeah sure, those dreams are totally unrelated to mine, but if you're going to throw money at my project, we've found a common ground, no matter how unattainable either half of the equation is." At least people are giving Mike (and Chris) a pass because of the illusions they've projected onto their respective projects.

To be fair, Star Citizen is not a scam, nor is it a Ponzo scheme, in the traditional sense.

Star Citizen is not what people initially back. To sideline original backers tells me exactly what Chris means when he says "We'll treat you just like a publisher!" (I'm paraphrasing.) The shibboleth of the community vote for expanded scope is a lie (oft dispelled with official missives from Cloud Imperium and community poll tallies), so maybe I was wrong on the "scam" thing.

And it's not a Ponzi Scheme, unless you count dangling new shops and as-of-yet-thought-out gameplay to raise funding in order to pay for the development of yesteryear's promises as a Ponzi scheme.

 

[Mr.Nowak]

You need to provide proof backing up this statement.

Crowdfunded developer Cloud Imperium Games is raising $46 million from a private investment that now values the company behind the massive, in-development title “Star Citizen” at $496 million

‘Star Citizen’ Developer Valuation Nearly Half Billion Following $46 Million Private Investment

Crowdfunded developer Cloud Imperium Games is raising $46 million from a private investment that now values the company behind the massive, in-development title “Star Citizen” at $496 million, the company tells Variety.

variety.com

Frontier: https://www.gamesindustry.biz/articles/2017-07-28-tencent-buys-9-percent-of-frontier-developments

CCP: https://venturebeat.com/2018/09/06/...s-eve-online-maker-ccp-games-for-425-million/

I don't even know what you're going on about here. And I've spoken to Allen over the past few years including him doing an AMA on the Elite Reddit.

It's the same old trend back in 2015. Just repeating and we had a podcast episode and a very similar exchange about it. Back then he also said that the thread was a bit too tempered. I just reminisced.

A dozen people here annoyed you so much? Really? I recommend improving your social life.

I didn't say annoyed. My social life is very solid thanks for the tips nonetheless. However spending some extra time here maybe is not the most sensible choice when the Witcher series is awaiting me!

Very true. Elite & NMS have been created by their devs as stepping stones towards the dreams, but haven't sold themselves on the promises.

NMS did sell on a lot of dreams and it's launch backlash reflected that they were not delivered. Elite also made several claims on features and hopes that weren't delivered. While Elite didn't market the dreams Sean Murray did.

Atmo planets when btw?

I have to disagree. Personally I've had to correct you on facts on multiple occasions; other misinformed backers also are happy to be educated.

I much like you can't be correct on everything. Also please remind me what you corrected me on? Glad you dedicated yourself to be an educator.

Congrats on not getting fired I guess

Thanks but I don't understand what you meant?

Ahhh my dear Mr. Nowak - that's a claim you've made quite a few times now. Would you care to elaborate a bit more, perhaps mention some games you've developed? I might even buy a few and you'd might see a bit of cash

Well if you like grand strategy games and some of the more niche military first person shooters then you might already have assisted the companies I worked for!

To add. CI is the last company I would want to work for. Personally my independence is worth more than anything. Joining them would mean that I am just a cog in the machine of CR. That's not what I want even though I respect the product and what they are trying to do.

 

[Tippis]

Crowdfunded developer Cloud Imperium Games is raising $46 million from a private investment that now values the company behind the massive, in-development title “Star Citizen” at $496 million

Again, it's not just a matter of cost of ownership stake ÷ size of stake, especially not since we don't know the terms of the investment, and since CI¬G aren't explaining what their (non-independent) valuation is based on. it would be more interesting to hear from the Calders, since their valuation and demands is what set the price for saving the company from insolvency…

For comparison, FDev's market cap alone sits in the $490M region and (more importantly) is independently and publicly determined.

However spending some extra time here maybe is not the most sensible choice

Actually, the sensible choice is to not make unfounded claims that you then refuse to back up.