Star Citizen Discussion Thread v11

Status
Thread Closed: Not open for further replies.

govny

govny
Mad Mike said:
ED was the same we had the spinning sidewinder of doom, killer teleporting space stations, hell after release we had NPC's with deadly beam plasma weapons.
I hate playing buggy alpha games. There is no upside to me, you get to see behind the curtain which is no good thing, added frustration of things not working and to top it off potential burnout before the game even launches.
Click to expand...

with one difference. Frontier took some months to go from a buggy alfa to a released game, SC after 7 yeras is still there.
 

Mole HD

Mole HD
MTBFritz said:
wow you are toxic :eek::eek::eek:

It doesnt matter if you were joking or being sarcastic or even that somebody else told him whats what. For him and his lil echo chamber elitist buddies you are now officially a "hater". Welcome buddy and your transformation (you might refuse to accept it) is on par with most people in this thread too. A couple more years and you ll be hard pressed to see, find or even write anything positive about SC. The way of the newbies ^^
Click to expand...
I can't be a hater...I'm already part of the club 🧐
 

Frank

Frank
Tippis said:
I would. If you've spent three years on a project and you're already late because of some inane attention to irrelevant details… perhaps hire a copy editor?


No. It was well-known that the trend would continue, barring a global calamity that ruined the entire computer industry overnight. When the project started, the 486 had recently been released and was selling like crazy, especially in the nascent gaming community. The Pentium was a known thing on the horizon that would — without any doubt — yield further power-per-price improvements.

Everything was pointing up. Everything had been pointing up for years. Every prediction was pointing up. It would have been a risky assumption to suggest, against all evidence, that it would suddenly turn completely around. Betting that it would continue was easy and safe. So the funny thing is that, as written, it's actually accurate: it would have been insanely risky to assume that the ratio would decrease, and if it did it would have been insanely stupid to make the game he was trying to make. But my guess is that Chris was trying to ignorantly paint himself as a risk-taker rather than knowingly paint himself as deliberately stupid. The problem is that Chris has never had a good grasp of the computer and gaming industry, and just assumed — like he has a habit of doing — that he's on some kind of brave and fantastical endeavour.

The only risk he was taking — and I very much doubt that Chris was in any way aware of it because of that blindness to his surroundings — was that everything would move so fast around him that his game would be passé by the time it came out. Not because of Moore's Law or because of PC purchasing behaviour, but because the PC gaming industry was so rapidly iterating that his old ideas would be… well… old. And indeed, on the point of trying to make the most realistic flight simulator and actually making use of modern hardware, he was soundly beaten before that famous CES demo was ever show — two years before the game even came out — and ultimately, SC failed to achieve anything of the kind. History repeats itself.
Click to expand...
Okay. Point taken. But I still think those two failings are nothing compared to the near-messianic belief that he was the only one working on shaded solid graphics
 

VR Golgot

VR Golgot
Mad Mike said:
I know this won't go down very well in this thread as it is not slating the game but... Imo the point is...... When it worked you thought it was great right? Everything else that happened after your crash sucks....but the rest IS down to it not being finished and it is a playable alpha.
Click to expand...

The game now puts noobs in a situation where they have to buy credits with more real cash (on top of their initial AAA-price purchase) if they want to play through the bugs & instability. That's what I thought was the most interesting take-away from that post.

And that distinguishes it from the other paid alpha you mention.

(I mean a load of other stuff distinguishes SC's endless pre-alpha, shine-before-substance, untrammelled pre-selling approach from the majority of other alphas. But I'm trying not to belabour them ;))
 

StuartGT

StuartGT
Golgot said:
The game now puts noobs in a situation where they have to buy credits with more real cash (on top of their initial AAA-price purchase) if they want to play through the bugs & instability. That's what I thought was the most interesting take-away from that post.

And that distinguishes it from the other paid alpha you mention.

(I mean a load of other stuff distinguishes SC's endless pre-alpha, shine-before-substance, untrammelled pre-selling approach from the majority of other alphas. But I'm trying not to belabour them ;))
Click to expand...
Agreed. The AUEC policy change is strategy-switch to CIG targeting basic-pledge backers for extra funding/revenue, as opposed to targeting whales with expensive concept/flyable jpeg/ship sales.
 

shreddog

shreddog
Just to clear up a bit. I was a bit wrong in my post :whistle::rolleyes:
It turned out I didn't actually have to pay any credits to get the ship reclaimed, as long as I waited the 10 minutes.
I initially thought I both had to wait AND pay. But the payment is only to get the ship immediately.
 

VR Golgot

VR Golgot
shreddog said:
Just to clear up a bit. I was a bit wrong in my post :whistle::rolleyes:
It turned out I didn't actually have to pay any credits to get the ship reclaimed, as long as I waited the 10 minutes.
I initially thought I both had to wait AND pay. But the payment is only to get the ship immediately.
Click to expand...

Ah yeah I did wonder about that. Expediting costs but thought the delayed delivery was free.

You're still likely to lose more than you make as a noob initially, due to instability / cargo loss etc, going by other tales. But keep the trip reports coming if you persevere ;)
 

Mole HD

Mole HD
Agony_Aunt said:
Its a worrying point. Some of the more deluded Backers love to talk about big bad publishers, but CIG are paving the way to make the big bad publishers behave even worse.

Of course they will say they would never throw money at EA like this. But they don't need to know. Just wheel out an aging rockstar dev from retirement, help them set up a flashy demo and kickstarter, and let the whales throw money at it. Meanwhile, through various shell companies, the money flows into EAs coffers.
Click to expand...

FTFY ;)
 

VR Golgot

VR Golgot
StuartGT said:
Agreed. The AUEC policy change is strategy-switch to CIG targeting basic-pledge backers for extra funding/revenue, as opposed to targeting whales with expensive concept/flyable jpeg/ship sales.
Click to expand...


I'm still kinda suspicious that it's actually whale-ferreting. Trying to discern those with whale tendencies amongst new sign ups via a paywall, so they can focus them. It's a fairly common practice in the F2P world. (If not the only way - but SC doesn't have the luxury of laying down a red carpet of content right now, to act as luxury fly paper ;))

As number cruising like yours here suggests, whales are still the primary revenue stream. (And you were ultimately low-balling there, given Turbulent's past statements about only 50% of registered accounts having purchased the game, back in the day). That to me suggests they don't actually care about getting pure numbers in at this point. They care about attracting new whales ;)
 

[VR] Mad Mike

[VR] Mad Mike
Golgot said:
The game now puts noobs in a situation where they have to buy credits with more real cash (on top of their initial AAA-price purchase) if they want to play through the bugs & instability. That's what I thought was the most interesting take-away from that post.

And that distinguishes it from the other paid alpha you mention.

(I mean a load of other stuff distinguishes SC's endless pre-alpha, shine-before-substance, untrammelled pre-selling approach from the majority of other alphas. But I'm trying not to belabour them ;))
Click to expand...
Have to buy credits?. Sorry if I am not getting you. If what you are saying is what I think it is that sucks...... But are you saying if I log in with my base $60 pledge I can't play without paying cash? If so that really does suck.
 

VR Golgot

VR Golgot
Mad Mike said:
Have to buy credits?. Sorry if I am not getting you. If what you are saying is what I think it is that sucks...... But are you saying if I log in with my base $60 pledge I can't play without paying cash? If so that really does suck.
Click to expand...


Yeah they've changed the system. You no longer get the UEC creds attached to your game purchase account. You start with 0 UEC.

That's why shreddog's post was interesting to me. It was an early example of a noob running up against that. (Although there have been plenty more on reddit etc)

Strictly speaking you don't have to buy credits, you could earn some. But given the bugs + instability, and the flimsy nature of the starter ships, it seems that losing money is just as likely an outcome as making some early doors.
 

Mole HD

Mole HD
Golgot said:
Yeah they've changed the system. You no longer get the UEC creds attached to your game purchase account. You start with 0 UEC if you have a basic account.

That's why shreddog's post was interesting to me. It was an early example of a noob running up against that. (Although there have been plenty more on reddit etc)

Strictly speaking you don't have to buy credits, you could earn some. But given the bugs + instability, and the flimsy nature of the starter ships, it seems that losing money is just as likely an outcome as making some early doors.
Click to expand...
I can only assume it's on new backer accounts since I started with my usual amount with 3.8 as did the majority of folks I asked. I was assuming it was a bug with some backer accounts starting with 3.8 since every game package starts with in game UEC attached. I noticed that I can't purchase more UEC to add to my acccount and have it immediately available in game any longer...I tried topping up some with store credit after being robbed by server errors to no avail. There was also strange and random starting aUEC amounts during PTU which didn't reflect what anyone actually had tied to their accounts...sometimes even half of what was tied to the account...which makes me think it's a bug rather than policy.

If it is indeed a new policy from Ci¬G...it'll come back and bite them. Dumping new players into the PU with zero credits even when they have a basic 5,000 UEC tied to their pledges isn't a great idea.

I see a lot of long term backers handing out aUEC to new guys, the same as I do...lending ships capable of doing box deliveries if the newbies bought in with a Mustang etc..but taking away a basic amount of starting aUEC leaves new folks without the basic ability to buy even some armour to start off, pay for fuel or fines or pay for expediting fees after a game crash loses their ship.

Anyway, it's a pretty poor decision from whoever made it... if it is a conscious decision rather than a bug or account error.
 
Last edited:
Status
Thread Closed: Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom