Star Citizen Discussion Thread v11

Status
Thread Closed: Not open for further replies.
You mean always online? Thought that's not an issue, but maybe you mean something else?

Let's not forget that valve let's asset flippers and non-devs flood the store with trash, store bought game engine demos, and trading-card schemes with no repercussion to drown any decent games making them hard to find due to a complete lack of quality control. They also allowed the abuse of the greenlight system with one moderator of it threatening ME for reporting greenlight abuse because my comment on the project was repeatedly deleted so I would repost it. This was "Spam" even though I only ever had one comment on the project at any time, and they indicated my account could be banned for reporting the project.

Epic isn't great, but they are trying to do some things right including a better cut for devs and more quality control. I can't argue with either of those.
 
A few pages back, but stake is a very interesting word to use when describing a game pre-order or crowd-fund. Ditto invest which is sometimes used.

Both imply some sort of ownership of the project as a whole - which backers most certainly don't receive.

OK, so maybe I'm a bit of a language nerd sometimes but this does get a bit of a Roger Moore-esque eyebrow lift from me!

I feel disgust when I have to use the word 'pledge', makes it seem/feel like a "charitable donation" to some creepy, grinning, millionaire, television evangelist/preacher. So I used 'stake' as technically Crobblers gave the impression that the public were to be viewed by himself and the company as their publishers, and publishers often weild powers that give the impression of ownership of a product. At the time, it sure as heck felt or was marketed like I was buying a part of the company, I laugh and joke about it all now though. :)
 
I feel disgust when I have to use the word 'pledge', makes it seem/feel like a "charitable donation" to some creepy, grinning, millionaire, television evangelist/preacher. So I used 'stake' as technically Crobblers gave the impression that the public were to be viewed by himself and the company as their publishers, and publishers often weild powers that give the impression of ownership of a product. At the time, it sure as heck felt or was marketed like I was buying a part of the company, I laugh and joke about it all now though. :)
"Stake" is all right to use. It is figuratively the stake through any project's heart to install bad management and then flood it with cheap money with no oversight and controlling.
 
Let's not forget that valve let's asset flippers and non-devs flood the store with trash, store bought game engine demos, and trading-card schemes with no repercussion to drown any decent games making them hard to find due to a complete lack of quality control. They also allowed the abuse of the greenlight system with one moderator of it threatening ME for reporting greenlight abuse because my comment on the project was repeatedly deleted so I would repost it. This was "Spam" even though I only ever had one comment on the project at any time, and they indicated my account could be banned for reporting the project.

Epic isn't great, but they are trying to do some things right including a better cut for devs and more quality control. I can't argue with either of those.
Any evidence for asset flipping and trading card money laundry games drowning good games so that they actually underperform?

And the issues you mentioned are nothing compared to actual artificial exclusivity employed by epic... There's no evidence about bigger money cuts for the developers actually resulted in tangible positive effect for the developers.

As for quality control, what do you even mean about here? Who decide about that quality control? Because it's a rather subjective matter whether a game have enough quality to be sold or not.
Or how about this... EA, that Electronic Arts that has long being synonymous with the evil gaming corporation, even they never did what Epic did... They had all the motivation and resources to do so years before Epic, but now even EA is selling a new game on steam and planned on bringing more.
 
...And the issues you mentioned are nothing compared to actual artificial exclusivity employed by epic ...
...Or how about this... EA, that Electronic Arts that has long being synonymous with the evil gaming corporation, even they never did what Epic ...

Since this is bordering on extremely off topic by this point, continuing this in the SC thread is ill advised so I'll just say this...

Numerous devs have complained about visibility on steam and the flood of asset flips/trading card games/etc.. you can find it on youtube, or a quick google search. feel free to do it as I am not flooding this thread with off topic leaks.

The thing that bothers me more, however, is these segments of your post I have quoted.

Yes, EA has done bad stuff, and I would say that you are extremely over-inflating the severity of "artificial exclusivity" to say that EA, who kill off dev studios and slaughter IPs are worse than Epic giving a guaranteed return on investment to a dev studio in exchange for timed exclusivity. This is, of course, on top of the fact that EA DID have exclusives on EA origin. This is, of course, a matter of opinion. You won't change mine and I won't change yours. I just find it odd when folks refuse to support a trusted dev because they can't give valve money and have to give some to epic instead.
 
Since this is bordering on extremely off topic by this point, continuing this in the SC thread is ill advised so I'll just say this...

Numerous devs have complained about visibility on steam and the flood of asset flips/trading card games/etc.. you can find it on youtube, or a quick google search. feel free to do it as I am not flooding this thread with off topic leaks.

The thing that bothers me more, however, is these segments of your post I have quoted.

Yes, EA has done bad stuff, and I would say that you are extremely over-inflating the severity of "artificial exclusivity" to say that EA, who kill off dev studios and slaughter IPs are worse than Epic giving a guaranteed return on investment to a dev studio in exchange for timed exclusivity. This is, of course, on top of the fact that EA DID have exclusives on EA origin. This is, of course, a matter of opinion. You won't change mine and I won't change yours. I just find it odd when folks refuse to support a trusted dev because they can't give valve money and have to give some to epic instead.
Valve just has the better market place. It's like supermarkets. One is rancid, in shambles and has bad service. The other offers proper shopping services. Where do you go? Do you really need the two items only the rancid one has on the shelves?
 
I feel disgust when I have to use the word 'pledge', makes it seem/feel like a "charitable donation" to some creepy, grinning, millionaire, television evangelist/preacher. So I used 'stake' as technically Crobblers gave the impression that the public were to be viewed by himself and the company as their publishers, and publishers often weild powers that give the impression of ownership of a product. At the time, it sure as heck felt or was marketed like I was buying a part of the company, I laugh and joke about it all now though. :)

Oh yes, 100% agree with you there. Pledge can be... problematic if you think about it the wrong way!
 
*SC Community - can we trust the road map this time?

*CIG publicly -
Future work estimates are just that: estimates.
All estimates are based on our knowledge and experience but there are many aspects of game development that are impossible to predict because they literally cover uncharted territory. You will see the same estimates we use in our internal planning, but it is important to understand that in many cases (especially with groundbreaking engineering tasks) these estimates are often subject to change due to unforeseen complexity in implementing features.

*whats really happening -

 
Last edited:
I would hardly consider Epic "Rancid", I'd say it's more like Steam is my local Wegmans and Epic is Shopright. The selection is worse, sure, and the store isn't as fancy but it still does the job. If game of the year nominated Control is for sale at Shopright and not Wegmans, I guess I'm going to Shopright to get Control. Yes, even if Shopright paid Remedy to keep Control out of Wegmans for a year.

Onto Star Citizen, yeah that roadmap is a catastrophe. All the gameplay just gutted from the future patches. It's almost as if they simply don't know how to make their game work and be playable outside of the default stuff (movement, guns firing) that most game engines let you do. It takes them years and years and years to implement even the most basic form of anything outside of that (see, mining).
 
Easy: Most of my games collection runs on Linux thanks to Steam. If i reboot to windows that's once in a quarter to test SC.. Where is Epic Store for linux ? Some of the games they removed from Steam were actually running on Linux, so how can i get them now ?
Side note, my testing of latest 3.8.x patch (is it 3.8.1 ?) is overdue, but motivation is kinda low for that one...
 
Valve just has the better market place. It's like supermarkets. One is rancid, in shambles and has bad service. The other offers proper shopping services. Where do you go? Do you really need the two items only the rancid one has on the shelves?
I dunno, I prefer the days when there were no "supermarkets" tying strings to devs and imposing brand exclusivity. Gimme the days of the Mom and Pop store where I could walk into any shop and buy any game pls.
 
Status
Thread Closed: Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom