Game Discussions Star Citizen Discussion Thread v12
- Thread starter Yaffle
- Start date
-
- Tags
- star citizen
Even from HDD. I keep all my games on HDD as I don't have more than one pretty constrained SSD, and its reserved for OS.
your summary is probably much more accurate and succint than mine
Basically anyone saying negative things about the game on forums and reddit etc is not valid opinion, only the CEO has a valid opinion eg: it's actually a good game because Chris says it's as good as other games
Its backers fault again for putting too much cash in meaning they wanted more features (scope)
They don't understand that all these features take too much time to fix (Chris has probably been fixing bugs since 2019 hence we haven't heard from him)
If everyone would just say nice things and check out the latest ship sales that would mean they understand AGILE
If I were still a backer, my response would be "hey Chris, you wanted the budget that exceeds a AAA game studio, why don't you start acting like one and understand terms like budget, scope and quality and how they are linked? Then maybe you would be able to release a quality product within a scope and budget you know like the pros do with less cash"
I know it for SC because I see it myself on the performance tab in real time. If you want to see it too, just test the freefly yourself.
No. Compare the starting ship Aurora inside+outside to the starting ship Sidewinder. Visually in game you see the Aurora have much more details than the Sidewinder. Just test it in the freefly to see it by yourself.
You can see those sort of element outside ships in the alpha.
And it just come from a weapon, not even the ship.
About rendering of ship, there is a cool tool to see all ships (note : the inside of ships lack a lot of elements).
You can move the green bar to see the inside.
I know it for SC because I see it myself on the performance tab in real time. If you want to see it too, just test the freefly yourself.
No. Compare the starting ship Aurora inside+outside to the starting ship Sidewinder. Visually in game you see the Aurora have much more details than the Sidewinder. Just test it in the freefly to see it by yourself.
You can see those sort of element outside ships in the alpha.
View attachment 187830
And it just come from a weapon, not even the ship.
About rendering of ship, there is a cool tool to see all ships (note : the inside of ships lack a lot of elements).
You can move the green bar to see the inside.
INSANE
…you should provide the exact same evidence that you demand from others. Otherwise, we can safely say that you're just making things up. Kind of like with the PS5 comparison you made that has yet to be supported with even a shred of evidence.
You understand that this is not a good thing, right?
Anyway…
That would make sense for a groundbreaking or innovative game. It doesn't quite explain why CI¬G can't seem to figure out their own scheduling of standard implementations of known solution to long-solved problems. Nine flipping years of data fed into even the most rudimentary evidence-based scheduler would iron out that issue, but again, that's a known solution to a long-solved problem so no wonder CI¬G is being crushed by it.Chris Roberts said:
Stop trying and start doing, otherwise you should probably not use such an unfamiliar methodology as agile (it's not an acronym, btw) since it's kind of a core part of the process.Chris Roberts said:
Maybe after nine years, it's time for you to decide to stop working on end-of-development and past-release features and instead invest more time into the foundations that you will need to build your game on? Stuff like networking, storage, db architecture, and all the other myriad of things that lets you figure out your asset and performance budget? You know, before you do something hideously stupid like starting to produce janky animations, pointless-polished art, and imprecise physics…Chris Roberts said:
So the retention rate has actually decreased over the years. This is fine.Chris Roberts said:
Also, just like the “citizen count” used to contain every Tom, [Richard], and Harry who ever created an account, irrespective of whether they actually bought anything or played the game, what are the odds that this player count also includes free-flyers who get into the and instantly become flee-flyers, never to look back again? Makes me wonder why this odd odd stat was casually dropped right in there — might it perhaps be a metric demanded by the investors for the cash to keep flowing? And what happens if this goal isn't reached…?
Last edited:
Another Chris post
Spectrum - v7.53.0
RSI’s Spectrum is our integrated community and player interaction service, including chat, forums, game integration, and Player Organization facilities. Player Organizations (“Org”...robertsspaceindustries.com
I wouldn't normally do this but I know you've invested a lot of time into Star Citizen, including on the testing and community content creation so I'm going to take your reply to as a sign of frustration and try to add a little more context to help you see a bigger picture.What were you hoping to get from your Original Post? I was assuming it was - I was wondering where we are almost 4 years later, tested a few things and made a video.I shared information on where we are, and why you don't see something you thought you should. Part of my motivation for answering is that I commonly see people assume things that aren't true like the room system not being in the game because one aspect of the system doesn't have the behavior that they think it should. I wanted to give you extra context and information so you (and others in this thread) had a better understanding of what is in, what isn't and why it isn't and what is left to do.If you want to encourage me or other developers to answer questions then it helps to not turn around and question people's professionalism or make sweeping statements. If someone did that to you in your job I am sure it would be irritating. I have a thicker skin than most of the developers at CIG, and realize that not everyone is speaking in their first language or realizes how they phrased things may not have been the best, but in general it is best to approach things with constructive criticism, leaving the ad hominems out. You wouldn't be putting this much time into something if you didn't care, so why put energy into posting something that a developer will dismiss because it feels like an attack? I can tell you that being considerate of someone and treating them with respect will get you much further than than being dismissive. The development team reads these forums and other places like reddit, and the community's feedback really helps, but the feedback that gets actioned on, that gets passed around internally and is discussed is the constructive type, not the overly negative type. Just saying something sucks isn't helpful. Explaining why it sucks for that user, and their ideas to potentially rectify it is helpful.My biggest disappointment with modern internet discourse is that there's a significant amount of cynicism, especially in forum or reddit debates, and a portion of people assume the worst. If a feature is missing, late or buggy it's because the company or the developer lied and or / is incompetent as opposed to the fact that it just took longer and had more problems than the team thought it would when they originally set out to build it. Developers by their very nature are optimistic. You have to be to build things that haven't ever been built before. Otherwise the sheer weight of what is needed to be done can crush you. But being optimistic or not foreseeing issues isn't the same as lying or deliberately misleading people. Everyone at CIG is incredibly passionate about making Star Citizen the most immersive massively multiplayer first person universe sandbox, and everyone works very hard to deliver that. If we could deliver harder, faster, better we would. We get just as frustrated with the time things take. We practice bottom up task estimation where the team implementing the feature breaks it down and gives their estimates of how long it will take them. Management doesn't dictate timelines, we just set priorities for the teams as there are always a lot more things to do at any one time than we have people to do them. We are constantly reviewing and trying to improve our AGILE development process and how we estimate sprints. As the code, feature and content base grows there is more maintenance and support needed for the existing features and content, which can eat into the time a team has for new feature development, meaning you always have the push and pull of current quality of life in a release versus delivering new features and content. The same push and pull exists in the community as there is a strong desire for polished bug free gameplay now but also new features and content, often from the very same people.Things like Salvage haven't been pushed back on a whim, but because in terms of priority we felt that it would premature to work on Salvage before the iCache and physical damage system is implemented in the game as this fundamentally changes how we manage state, handle damage and debris. So when presented with a priority call to make on resource allocation we deprioritized Salvage in order to build the infrastructure to really make it sing, as opposed to working on a system we will have to refactor when the iCache and new damage system came on line.We have also decided we wanted to invest more time into the quality of life, performance and stability in Star Citizen as it is actively played every day by tens of thousands of people; on normal days we have an average of over 30,000 different people playing and at the peak during events this year we've hit 100,000 unique accounts playing in one day which is pretty impressive for a game in an early Alpha state. We are on track to have over one million unique players this year. Star Citizen already has the main gameloops of a space sim; cargo hauling, commodity trading, mercenary, pirate, bounty hunting and mining. Just spending time refining and finishing out these would make Star Citizen with all it's detail and fidelity more engrossing than any "finished" space sim you can play today.We've shown a preview of the new roadmap format ( https://robertsspaceindustries.com/...17727-Star-Citizen-Squadron-42-Roadmap-Update ) that we are working on. Part of the motivation for changing how we share the tasks we are working on and their progress is so the community can get better visibility into the hard choices that we face everyday on the project and see what exactly every team is working on as opposed to just the few tasks we feel comfortable sharing because we think have a high probability to make that quarter. When we make a priority call and move up or add a task there is always something that needs to be pushed back. The new format which tracks our 58 feature and content teams that work on Star Citizen and Squadron 42, will be able to show what each team is working on and if a new initiative like improving the cargo hauling experience gets added you'll see the tasks that get pushed back on the teams that will work on this new initiative. As a point of data these teams can be anywhere from 4 people to over 20 people and of the 58 teams only 11 are exclusively dedicated to Squadron 42 and 12 for Star Citizen and the rest are shared (things like graphics, engine, actor, vehicle, AI, VFX, sound and so on), although a lot of the priorities for things like actor, vehicle and AI are driven by what Squadron needs.Switching the roadmap format was something that I made a priority for us at the start of the year when it was clear that the current roadmap format wasn't helping, especially as the teams really didn't want to commit until absolutely definitely their feature would make it, which you'll normally only know about six weeks before release, due to the vitriol they would see when a task was pushed back, despite our best efforts to get everyone that looks at the current Road Map to read and acknowledge the caveats ( https://robertsspaceindustries.com/roadmap/board/1-Star-Citizen/info ) which explicitly say some of the tasks are likely to slip. Getting tired of this I felt it would be best for the community to see the same view I and the rest of the senior development management see on Star Citizen and Squadron 42. This won't stop people from disagreeing with our priority calls or how long something takes, but at least it will share the overall picture and people can see exactly what everyone is working on at any moment and how long it is projected to take. They will be able to see it change when it does for us and hopefully appreciate how many people are working really hard to make Star Citizen a game like no other. One of the reasons the new Road Map is taking time because we're building a system that visualizes all this as a top level directly from our JIRA database. We plan to use a more verbose version of the public roadmap for our internal sprint scheduling, so the data you see will be a sanitized version of what we see (we won't share individual developer names and assignments publically for obvious reasons but internally we will see this).I sense from your reply to me that it's the time taken and priorities that you're frustrated with, as you feel like we're focusing on the wrong things. I can see that point of view, but you're looking at it from the outside without the full knowledge of exactly what it will take, and the order it needs to be done in to deliver the gameplay that will set Star Citizen above everything else. This is the game I've dreamed of my whole life. Now I am in a position to realize it, I am not willing to compromise it's potential because it is taking longer than I originally envisioned. What I will commit to, and what is an internal priority is to improve the current gameplay and quality of life as we go, as Star Citizen is already fun in many ways, even if more buggy and not as stable as I would like, and just finishing off and polishing the basics will make it play as well or better than most other games.I can promise you the gameplay I described is not a pipe dream, nor will it take 10 to 20 years to deliver. I described systems we either have working, or are working on; we've even shown early versions of some of this like fire on Inside Star Citizen. I can't promise you exactly what quarter it will come together but once the new Road Map web work is done you'll be able to see the teams progress to achieving what I describe in real time.Thank you for your support and passion over the years. I hope this extra insight was helpful.
I was kinda joking before about the FDev dig having nettled him. But he's really doubling down
I don't know how anyone can doubt this is Chris. It's an Escapist-tier screed. Typed feverishly at an odd hour, seemingly. (Assuming he's in LA, not the Seychelles or something).
Last edited:
Maybe the Calders also read FDev's financials report and are asking Chris some tough questions?I was kinda joking before about the FDev dig having nettled him. But he's really doubling down
I don't know how anyone can doubt this is Chris. It's an Escapist-tier screed. Typed feverishly at an odd hour, seemingly. (Assuming he's in LA, not the Seychelles or something).
He must be under a lot of stress to think making impassioned posts on Spectrum at 2am (California-time), two nights in a row, after not posting there for over a year, is the sensible thing to do.
Ha. He has truly lost it, it's glorious.I was kinda joking before about the FDev dig having nettled him. But he's really doubling down
I don't know how anyone can doubt this is Chris. It's an Escapist-tier screed. Typed feverishly at an odd hour, seemingly. (Assuming he's in LA, not the Seychelles or something).
What Tippis said.
Forza Horizon streams assets constantly, launch and see for yourself, dear sir, don't ask for videos.
CI-G needs time "to have to be to build" (what ever that means) the development process before they start building the game. Actually, I believe they are already working on an alpha of roadmap to that.
Every time I've posted that on Spectrum I get banned...must be nice living in a dictatorial world where you pay others to keep you deaf and blind to any critiscism.
Another Chris post
Spectrum - v7.53.0
RSI’s Spectrum is our integrated community and player interaction service, including chat, forums, game integration, and Player Organization facilities. Player Organizations (“Org”...I wouldn't normally do this but I know you've invested a lot of time into Star Citizen, including on the testing and community content creation so I'm going to take your reply to as a sign of frustration and try to add a little more context to help you see a bigger picture.What were you hoping to get from your Original Post? I was assuming it was - I was wondering where we are almost 4 years later, tested a few things and made a video.I shared information on where we are, and why you don't see something you thought you should. Part of my motivation for answering is that I commonly see people assume things that aren't true like the room system not being in the game because one aspect of the system doesn't have the behavior that they think it should. I wanted to give you extra context and information so you (and others in this thread) had a better understanding of what is in, what isn't and why it isn't and what is left to do.If you want to encourage me or other developers to answer questions then it helps to not turn around and question people's professionalism or make sweeping statements. If someone did that to you in your job I am sure it would be irritating. I have a thicker skin than most of the developers at CIG, and realize that not everyone is speaking in their first language or realizes how they phrased things may not have been the best, but in general it is best to approach things with constructive criticism, leaving the ad hominems out. You wouldn't be putting this much time into something if you didn't care, so why put energy into posting something that a developer will dismiss because it feels like an attack? I can tell you that being considerate of someone and treating them with respect will get you much further than than being dismissive. The development team reads these forums and other places like reddit, and the community's feedback really helps, but the feedback that gets actioned on, that gets passed around internally and is discussed is the constructive type, not the overly negative type. Just saying something sucks isn't helpful. Explaining why it sucks for that user, and their ideas to potentially rectify it is helpful.My biggest disappointment with modern internet discourse is that there's a significant amount of cynicism, especially in forum or reddit debates, and a portion of people assume the worst. If a feature is missing, late or buggy it's because the company or the developer lied and or / is incompetent as opposed to the fact that it just took longer and had more problems than the team thought it would when they originally set out to build it. Developers by their very nature are optimistic. You have to be to build things that haven't ever been built before. Otherwise the sheer weight of what is needed to be done can crush you. But being optimistic or not foreseeing issues isn't the same as lying or deliberately misleading people. Everyone at CIG is incredibly passionate about making Star Citizen the most immersive massively multiplayer first person universe sandbox, and everyone works very hard to deliver that. If we could deliver harder, faster, better we would. We get just as frustrated with the time things take. We practice bottom up task estimation where the team implementing the feature breaks it down and gives their estimates of how long it will take them. Management doesn't dictate timelines, we just set priorities for the teams as there are always a lot more things to do at any one time than we have people to do them. We are constantly reviewing and trying to improve our AGILE development process and how we estimate sprints. As the code, feature and content base grows there is more maintenance and support needed for the existing features and content, which can eat into the time a team has for new feature development, meaning you always have the push and pull of current quality of life in a release versus delivering new features and content. The same push and pull exists in the community as there is a strong desire for polished bug free gameplay now but also new features and content, often from the very same people.Things like Salvage haven't been pushed back on a whim, but because in terms of priority we felt that it would premature to work on Salvage before the iCache and physical damage system is implemented in the game as this fundamentally changes how we manage state, handle damage and debris. So when presented with a priority call to make on resource allocation we deprioritized Salvage in order to build the infrastructure to really make it sing, as opposed to working on a system we will have to refactor when the iCache and new damage system came on line.We have also decided we wanted to invest more time into the quality of life, performance and stability in Star Citizen as it is actively played every day by tens of thousands of people; on normal days we have an average of over 30,000 different people playing and at the peak during events this year we've hit 100,000 unique accounts playing in one day which is pretty impressive for a game in an early Alpha state. We are on track to have over one million unique players this year. Star Citizen already has the main gameloops of a space sim; cargo hauling, commodity trading, mercenary, pirate, bounty hunting and mining. Just spending time refining and finishing out these would make Star Citizen with all it's detail and fidelity more engrossing than any "finished" space sim you can play today.We've shown a preview of the new roadmap format ( https://robertsspaceindustries.com/...17727-Star-Citizen-Squadron-42-Roadmap-Update ) that we are working on. Part of the motivation for changing how we share the tasks we are working on and their progress is so the community can get better visibility into the hard choices that we face everyday on the project and see what exactly every team is working on as opposed to just the few tasks we feel comfortable sharing because we think have a high probability to make that quarter. When we make a priority call and move up or add a task there is always something that needs to be pushed back. The new format which tracks our 58 feature and content teams that work on Star Citizen and Squadron 42, will be able to show what each team is working on and if a new initiative like improving the cargo hauling experience gets added you'll see the tasks that get pushed back on the teams that will work on this new initiative. As a point of data these teams can be anywhere from 4 people to over 20 people and of the 58 teams only 11 are exclusively dedicated to Squadron 42 and 12 for Star Citizen and the rest are shared (things like graphics, engine, actor, vehicle, AI, VFX, sound and so on), although a lot of the priorities for things like actor, vehicle and AI are driven by what Squadron needs.Switching the roadmap format was something that I made a priority for us at the start of the year when it was clear that the current roadmap format wasn't helping, especially as the teams really didn't want to commit until absolutely definitely their feature would make it, which you'll normally only know about six weeks before release, due to the vitriol they would see when a task was pushed back, despite our best efforts to get everyone that looks at the current Road Map to read and acknowledge the caveats ( https://robertsspaceindustries.com/roadmap/board/1-Star-Citizen/info ) which explicitly say some of the tasks are likely to slip. Getting tired of this I felt it would be best for the community to see the same view I and the rest of the senior development management see on Star Citizen and Squadron 42. This won't stop people from disagreeing with our priority calls or how long something takes, but at least it will share the overall picture and people can see exactly what everyone is working on at any moment and how long it is projected to take. They will be able to see it change when it does for us and hopefully appreciate how many people are working really hard to make Star Citizen a game like no other. One of the reasons the new Road Map is taking time because we're building a system that visualizes all this as a top level directly from our JIRA database. We plan to use a more verbose version of the public roadmap for our internal sprint scheduling, so the data you see will be a sanitized version of what we see (we won't share individual developer names and assignments publically for obvious reasons but internally we will see this).I sense from your reply to me that it's the time taken and priorities that you're frustrated with, as you feel like we're focusing on the wrong things. I can see that point of view, but you're looking at it from the outside without the full knowledge of exactly what it will take, and the order it needs to be done in to deliver the gameplay that will set Star Citizen above everything else. This is the game I've dreamed of my whole life. Now I am in a position to realize it, I am not willing to compromise it's potential because it is taking longer than I originally envisioned. What I will commit to, and what is an internal priority is to improve the current gameplay and quality of life as we go, as Star Citizen is already fun in many ways, even if more buggy and not as stable as I would like, and just finishing off and polishing the basics will make it play as well or better than most other games.I can promise you the gameplay I described is not a pipe dream, nor will it take 10 to 20 years to deliver. I described systems we either have working, or are working on; we've even shown early versions of some of this like fire on Inside Star Citizen. I can't promise you exactly what quarter it will come together but once the new Road Map web work is done you'll be able to see the teams progress to achieving what I describe in real time.Thank you for your support and passion over the years. I hope this extra insight was helpful.
Haha! What a post to circle the wagons and cement the ground for the final stand. I feel like he wrote a stack of these before disappearing into this mist. Its the recorded sick message from Ferris Bueller's Day Off.
Edit: Maybe he just gave his forum login to Blobbers before he went to be a millionaire.
Last edited:
"And lo, Jesus will rise from the dead, and once he reaches his requested floor, there shall be a DING heard throughout the lift!"
Yes, that's because most games in early alpha state don't have marketing masquerading them as finished games, whilst having paid access to said alpha. The reason for that not being common practice is because then you have to invest more time into the quality of life, performance and stability of the game, which is not something it is sensible to need to constantly do at this stage of development.Chris Roberts said:
Why are you even thinking about refining and finishing out features in an alpha before you have the underlying tech in place to know what your constraints are for those features?!Chris Roberts said:
Hold up. Fifty-eight teams?! What does the management structure atop that even look like? That sounds like a recipe for a complete lack of coordination and coherent direction, but we've seen absolutely no evidence of- oh.Chris Roberts said:
This reads like it could have undertones of "we're running out of runway and we want the smouldering remains to look as good as possible."Chris Roberts said:
Again, though, why would you be considering finishing off and polishing features before the tech is in place that informs the limitations and constraints of those features...
He definitely does have a point about the sort of extreme backlash they get, and as you noted there are plenty of people in this thread who that applies to. I generally try to stick to playing the ball not the person, as it were, which IMO is a good start. I'm more than happy to grill CIG's decisions, but personal attacks tend to muddy the waters (although that doesn't mean that CR gets to absolve himself of all his interesting choices as the chairman, of course).
Given they haven't even released the roadmap yet with less than three weeks left in the quarter, I'd say that's a pretty safe bet.
Brah, quit your moaning yo. It's only been like, 8-9 years. Quit hassling me bout your money brah, can't you see I'm busy being agile? What's that? It doesn't mean what I think it means?
You're just a hater brah, good thing I have thick skin tho, not like anything triggers me to post epic rants on how thick my skin is and how my pre-alpha project I started with your money is still in its early days 8 years later.
You're just a hater brah, good thing I have thick skin tho, not like anything triggers me to post epic rants on how thick my skin is and how my pre-alpha project I started with your money is still in its early days 8 years later.
9 months later, still no new roadmap.
This is considered a priority? God help anything that isn't!
It certainly fits the template of the 3.0 release: at first it was “out by December”, and then, by February or March — 6-7 months after the first statement — it had changed to “we sat down in January to decide which features would go into it”. Because that had apparently not been decided when that December release date was first announced.
Come on guys, give him a break. After all, he's attempting to create a kind of roadmap that's never been done before.
The outcries about "extreme negativity" and overal negativity directed at the developers got me chuckling.
I would like to take a closer look at the term "extreme negativity" and put it into context. Because I have the feeling somebody is using the word incorrectly. "Extreme" for me is something so outside the norm, so over the top by levels of magnitude that it disallows normal interaction or just leaves people in shock. To use it on this thread it would mean zero moderation and everything goes with people attacking each others families and making all kinds of suggestive remarks towards sexuality, political or religious allegation etc. We are talking "frothing at the mouth" screaming with the occasional threats to others wellbeing or even death threats. Or the open disregard of facts and reality and also open display of bias or double standard that it makes interaction next to impossible....come to think of that I think we DO have a few people of this caliber in this thread ^^
Describing this thread as "extremely negative" is equal to saying "I dont like what you are saying" but even the one saying it realizes how lame that really is so lets put it into a more drastic expression to shift the perception or provoke a reaction?
The majority of this thread simply doesnt believe any verbal statements coming from CIG or any of its many defenders anymore. This is a stance based on experience and the companies own track record over the years. We are not talking about malicious jokes for the most part (recently we got a few more trolls then usual) but people who got burned so often that they require hard evidence because they are done with second chances. If anything is extreme about this its the willingness of a select few to overlook all mistakes, broken promises and lies in CIGs past and only look forward the past be damned.
Now on to what the supposed Chris Roberts (doesnt really sound like him....) said. All the unfair criticism and harsh words directed at the developers hurting them on the inside. Not him of course because hes got such a hard skin but anybody else. Seriously....he just speaks up for all the people who cannot defend themselves....so noble.
Its a fact that a lot of strong language is used when it comes to critizising Star Citizen and CIG but if you take a closer look you ll realize that this has developed over time due to several factors, many of which have been under direct control of CIG.
- silence
I remember a lot of constructive criticism voiced politely early on and throughout SCs development, even showing levels of understanding or expertise which would have deserved some kind or more of a response all going ignored
- biased moderation and interaction
because silence and ignoring only works against people who expect results or hold CIG to their own words/promises. Brown-nosers and enablers are being confirmed, coddled and even supported in direct confrontations on forums. And even tho there are behavioral rules on their own forums there are a lot of examples where SC defenders have a lot more ellbow space or acceptance when it comes to whats deemed a bannable offense and whats not
- letting others speak for yourself
in the void of a direct response/reaction the yes-men and shills picked up the banner and made it their "job" to defend this project against all criticism even tho they dont really know what they are talking about. Worse, any "good" criticism is being sweeped under the rug all the same because facts and reality dont matter, only defending the project does so this directly leads to delusion, distortion of facts and intentional deception which all waters down the interaction over time
All of these but the last point in particular leads to criticism becoming harsher, more rude and less polite over time because you could stay civil and polite in the face of unwarrant agression and ridicule but thats not a winning strategy when we talk years of interaction. Disicpline will slip, crack and eventually go out the window and people being attacked will hand out as good as they receive.
Criticism against CIG is not an all-out war effort, this thread especially takes a lot of potshots but there hardly is any real hard words against the devs and the company. Its all very comical for the most part with a few select serious posts going under in the sea of back and forth. There are of course serious questions and accusations being backed up by results and reality but of course, there are no answers to those because apart from some white knights and people who are not allowed to speak freely nobody able to defend SC is coming here. And I guess due to the fact that the "truth stings" this thread has had a lot of influx recently from a number of faithful trying to "even the score" or make an effort to defend the project once more..trying to paint the existing community as vengeful, hateful or extreme.
Not to say that there arent any extreme haters out there. But they certainly are an exception and only last for a short while before they give up and walk away or blow a nut.
Criticism against CIG has become more widespread and ridicule is everywhere, even coming from other video game studios. Star Citizen has turned into an industry joke officially by now but how did that come to be? All thanks to the fanatics IMO. Not only have they made it personal for a lot of private people and even websites over the years, their focused efforts resulting in comment and review bombing have lead to anger, retaliation and hurt feelings because THEY started to be extreme. I m not saying that being extreme in response is "okay" but it makes it understandable and deserves recognition not these lame attempts to paint critics as the bad boys in all this. In fact...especially in this thread...CIG gets what they deserve but overall the environment still is pretty mature and polite (no thanks to the posters, all hard work by the moderation team).
Its CIGs lack of action in this regard that makes them directly responsible for the deterioration of their own forums and overall negativity directed at the project everywhere. Scams turn sour at some point. You can only go so far exploiting the patience and goodwill of people who give you more then the chance but support you with their own ard-earned money.
I get that some people try to paint themselves and the project as the victim here but this really doesnt fly when you know the history and how it all started. I dont need to use strong language, be offensive or agressive but these attempts to invoke pity or a feeling of "unfairness" wont work on me because I have the context, the background information and remember how it all started.
Star Citizen is at its current state and exposed to overall negativity as a direct result of their own (in-)action and track record. They had the money, they had all the options and by god....they had more then enough time to come true on their own promises. They didnt so far and trying to blame others for that or thinking up new reasons for that (whaaa, its the extreme haters fault) wont work because nobody ever had any kind of influence on this project except for Chris Robert and his family. But Star Citizen the project and Chris Robert the man provide a string of example of what NOT to do and what to avoid at all cost because all of them lead to bad results. From CRs video of playing his own game to his reaction to that critical article years ago and of course the continuous lack of results or blunders of the project itself.
Star Citizen is like watching a movie. You can have the audience stand and walk away, being distractive or raging up the cinema but none of that is responsible for that movie being bad or underdelivering which results in the audience behavior in the first place. Its like saying its the audiences fault that Wing Commander the movie sucked....really?
This is more "extreme" then the ridiculous use of the term earlier in this thread. The extreme willingness to forgive everything, the extreme readiness to accept everything positive, regardless how far-fetched, the extreme display of sudden expertise in all kinds project and game development related combined within a single person. I mean at least even the distractors, shills and trolls remain civil and polite for the most part. There have been a few exceptions lately but I dont expect them to stay for long.
I would like to take a closer look at the term "extreme negativity" and put it into context. Because I have the feeling somebody is using the word incorrectly. "Extreme" for me is something so outside the norm, so over the top by levels of magnitude that it disallows normal interaction or just leaves people in shock. To use it on this thread it would mean zero moderation and everything goes with people attacking each others families and making all kinds of suggestive remarks towards sexuality, political or religious allegation etc. We are talking "frothing at the mouth" screaming with the occasional threats to others wellbeing or even death threats. Or the open disregard of facts and reality and also open display of bias or double standard that it makes interaction next to impossible....come to think of that I think we DO have a few people of this caliber in this thread ^^
Describing this thread as "extremely negative" is equal to saying "I dont like what you are saying" but even the one saying it realizes how lame that really is so lets put it into a more drastic expression to shift the perception or provoke a reaction?
The majority of this thread simply doesnt believe any verbal statements coming from CIG or any of its many defenders anymore. This is a stance based on experience and the companies own track record over the years. We are not talking about malicious jokes for the most part (recently we got a few more trolls then usual) but people who got burned so often that they require hard evidence because they are done with second chances. If anything is extreme about this its the willingness of a select few to overlook all mistakes, broken promises and lies in CIGs past and only look forward the past be damned.
Now on to what the supposed Chris Roberts (doesnt really sound like him....) said. All the unfair criticism and harsh words directed at the developers hurting them on the inside. Not him of course because hes got such a hard skin but anybody else. Seriously....he just speaks up for all the people who cannot defend themselves....so noble.
Its a fact that a lot of strong language is used when it comes to critizising Star Citizen and CIG but if you take a closer look you ll realize that this has developed over time due to several factors, many of which have been under direct control of CIG.
- silence
I remember a lot of constructive criticism voiced politely early on and throughout SCs development, even showing levels of understanding or expertise which would have deserved some kind or more of a response all going ignored
- biased moderation and interaction
because silence and ignoring only works against people who expect results or hold CIG to their own words/promises. Brown-nosers and enablers are being confirmed, coddled and even supported in direct confrontations on forums. And even tho there are behavioral rules on their own forums there are a lot of examples where SC defenders have a lot more ellbow space or acceptance when it comes to whats deemed a bannable offense and whats not
- letting others speak for yourself
in the void of a direct response/reaction the yes-men and shills picked up the banner and made it their "job" to defend this project against all criticism even tho they dont really know what they are talking about. Worse, any "good" criticism is being sweeped under the rug all the same because facts and reality dont matter, only defending the project does so this directly leads to delusion, distortion of facts and intentional deception which all waters down the interaction over time
All of these but the last point in particular leads to criticism becoming harsher, more rude and less polite over time because you could stay civil and polite in the face of unwarrant agression and ridicule but thats not a winning strategy when we talk years of interaction. Disicpline will slip, crack and eventually go out the window and people being attacked will hand out as good as they receive.
Criticism against CIG is not an all-out war effort, this thread especially takes a lot of potshots but there hardly is any real hard words against the devs and the company. Its all very comical for the most part with a few select serious posts going under in the sea of back and forth. There are of course serious questions and accusations being backed up by results and reality but of course, there are no answers to those because apart from some white knights and people who are not allowed to speak freely nobody able to defend SC is coming here. And I guess due to the fact that the "truth stings" this thread has had a lot of influx recently from a number of faithful trying to "even the score" or make an effort to defend the project once more..trying to paint the existing community as vengeful, hateful or extreme.
Not to say that there arent any extreme haters out there. But they certainly are an exception and only last for a short while before they give up and walk away or blow a nut.
Criticism against CIG has become more widespread and ridicule is everywhere, even coming from other video game studios. Star Citizen has turned into an industry joke officially by now but how did that come to be? All thanks to the fanatics IMO. Not only have they made it personal for a lot of private people and even websites over the years, their focused efforts resulting in comment and review bombing have lead to anger, retaliation and hurt feelings because THEY started to be extreme. I m not saying that being extreme in response is "okay" but it makes it understandable and deserves recognition not these lame attempts to paint critics as the bad boys in all this. In fact...especially in this thread...CIG gets what they deserve but overall the environment still is pretty mature and polite (no thanks to the posters, all hard work by the moderation team).
Its CIGs lack of action in this regard that makes them directly responsible for the deterioration of their own forums and overall negativity directed at the project everywhere. Scams turn sour at some point. You can only go so far exploiting the patience and goodwill of people who give you more then the chance but support you with their own ard-earned money.
I get that some people try to paint themselves and the project as the victim here but this really doesnt fly when you know the history and how it all started. I dont need to use strong language, be offensive or agressive but these attempts to invoke pity or a feeling of "unfairness" wont work on me because I have the context, the background information and remember how it all started.
Star Citizen is at its current state and exposed to overall negativity as a direct result of their own (in-)action and track record. They had the money, they had all the options and by god....they had more then enough time to come true on their own promises. They didnt so far and trying to blame others for that or thinking up new reasons for that (whaaa, its the extreme haters fault) wont work because nobody ever had any kind of influence on this project except for Chris Robert and his family. But Star Citizen the project and Chris Robert the man provide a string of example of what NOT to do and what to avoid at all cost because all of them lead to bad results. From CRs video of playing his own game to his reaction to that critical article years ago and of course the continuous lack of results or blunders of the project itself.
Star Citizen is like watching a movie. You can have the audience stand and walk away, being distractive or raging up the cinema but none of that is responsible for that movie being bad or underdelivering which results in the audience behavior in the first place. Its like saying its the audiences fault that Wing Commander the movie sucked....really?
This is more "extreme" then the ridiculous use of the term earlier in this thread. The extreme willingness to forgive everything, the extreme readiness to accept everything positive, regardless how far-fetched, the extreme display of sudden expertise in all kinds project and game development related combined within a single person. I mean at least even the distractors, shills and trolls remain civil and polite for the most part. There have been a few exceptions lately but I dont expect them to stay for long.