Game Discussions Star Citizen Discussion Thread v12
- Thread starter Yaffle
- Start date
-
- Tags
- star citizen
the funny thing is that CDPR will be releasing their next game around the time SQ42 is supposedly slated to come out (Q4 2024)
absolutely bonkers
just lol: The multiplayer expansion for CP2077 will have released, as well as their third and final DLC pack in mid-to-late 2022. By the time SQ42 is ready to come out, CP2077 will be almost half a decade old.
absolutely bonkers
just lol: The multiplayer expansion for CP2077 will have released, as well as their third and final DLC pack in mid-to-late 2022. By the time SQ42 is ready to come out, CP2077 will be almost half a decade old.
Last edited:
And who knows. At the rate Star Citizen is going maybe we ll discover new physics and scientific facts that will force Holy Koolaid Roberts to redesign everything, to much praising and spite pledging in the name of fidelity no doubt ^^
Oh - my dear Fritz - if CI-G have to restart everything yet again to reach the new fidelity norm, and the more enthusiastic backers plunge deep into their pockets and shower Genuine Roberts with hundreds more millions - it'll be fantastic! Fund yet more development from their pocket, it won't cost me a penny, and I'll still be owed two games.
There still won't be any games though.
SQ42 will never come out as published game.
Last edited:
I just realized why I tend to roll my eyes at proclamations that “Star Citizen is an alpha... it’s supposed to be buggy!”
In every other “playable alpha” I’ve played, the developers always put the emphasis on the playable half of that phrase. They were alphas only in the sense that they were not complete, feature wise. Each added feature was tested, the bugs fixed, and then the game was in a stable state before they moved on to add the next feature.
Star Citizen is the only so called “playable alpha” I’ve seen where the developers don’t care about the playable half of that phrase, but shields themselves from critics with the alpha half.
In every other “playable alpha” I’ve played, the developers always put the emphasis on the playable half of that phrase. They were alphas only in the sense that they were not complete, feature wise. Each added feature was tested, the bugs fixed, and then the game was in a stable state before they moved on to add the next feature.
Star Citizen is the only so called “playable alpha” I’ve seen where the developers don’t care about the playable half of that phrase, but shields themselves from critics with the alpha half.
It's because after a decade of development, the foundation is still not laid. Hell, the foundation is still not fully conceptualised. They don't care about the playable half because they can't care — they have nothing solid and secure to build that gameplay on. It's all shifting sand and half-baked ideas. and even the pointless ephemera they do focus on changes from one day to the next and is constantly undone by new whims.
It's not just that every last facet is bugged — they're perpetually half-built, and the underpinnings that should be supporting everything are not even that. At this stage, there are parts of the game that should have almost no bugs in it, and in a way they don't… because there can be no bugs in something that doesn't even exist.
Last edited:
Ah but is it the devs or is it the fans doing that? The devs parrot the "early days" and "quality takes time" fluff but I think it was the fanaticals who came up with the "SC is an alpha = bugs are normal" and it goes against anything alpha because they truly have no idea about game development. Its powerful stuff too when you consider that the gospel is picked up and taken over even by people who should know better. The power of teh lemming ^^
So if every alpha is in stable state, why the hot mess with the gold version of CP77 just 2 days before it's public release (long after it's alpha and beta stage) ?
CDPR don't know how to manage alpha ?
As usual, you transform what I said. Never said "it was just as bad as SC".
It was better than SC but in really bad state for a gold version when the press tested it before the public and without the day one patch.
I am happy to see some NPC T pose, vehicle sinking on ground, crash to desktop, NPC floating, etc on a released game when a lot of you here were claiming for a long time that those same bugs were not normal to see in an alpha and only due to the incompetency of CIG.
Now, either you say that CDPR is as incompetent as CIG, or you admit that those bugs are not easy ones to correct and can be seen in alpha, even after several years.
As far as I know, the bugs found in CP77 didn't just magically appear last month, they've been there for several years and were present in alpha + beta.
oh I don’t doubt that
All of these issues previously bandied around by the gaming media were fixed in the patched before release version of CP '77 though... and since Steam recorded the record highest number of concurrent players in one evening...over 1,000,000 all playing CP '77 (and that's only on Steam) I suspect t'interweb would have been on fire by now if it had been a buggy mess...
I'm only 20 or so hours in and I've found nothing of note bug wise so far...perhaps the release word is what Ci¬G are waiting for to get them started
Last edited:
Whoa there, FUDster! Hear the Holy Roberts:
"Playable" game, don't you see?
Everything in SC alpha is totally bug-free and polished!!
But you know it's going to be so awesome!
Unfortunately, it's all some sort of scam.
Buy an Idris.
I had never seen that article before ... I cannot believe they ask you to turn off UAC and overwrite the native folder/file permissions and owners!!
I do similar actions in my Sandbox VMs (Where I detonate malware) .....
Except it is not actually a hot mess, comparatively speaking. As usual, you transform what someone else says into a suggesting that SC is as bad as [whatever] when what was actually said was specifically that what sets others apart from CI¬G's incompetence. But you just skipped right over that because you must at all costs ignore all such explanations and maintain that CI¬G is normal.
False dilemma. We'll add that to your pile of fallacies.
There's also a third option: the bugs are easy to correct and the reason we see them in an alpha even after several years is that CI¬G is incompetently focusing on the wrong thing (and failing to fix that too), making these bugs vastly more prevalent for vastly longer.
If you wanted to turn this into an informed argument, you should have gone down the path of, not competence (because CI¬G has amply demonstrated that any argument involving that will be to their detriment) but prioritisation. The bugs don't get fixed because they're not important at the moment. That way, you could have compared to how and why bugs persist through a long development process. You'd still have problem explaining what on earth they prioritised instead since nothing else gets fixed either, though…