Game Discussions Star Citizen Discussion Thread v12

VR Golgot

VR Golgot
sovapid said:
Well, thrown in the trash along time ago.
Click to expand...

Yeah bit late now :/

Kinda ironic it having the white knight billing now, riding in to save the funding streams, when it’s been living on the Javelin teat so long.

(Guess we’ll see whether the crazy 2020 funding actually tipped the balance back from the -7m, -10m pattern of the last 2 years. But given they managed to open at least one more dev house with Turbulent, wouldn’t be surprised if they’re still burning cash. If there’s one thing Chris knows how to do, it’s spend all the money...)
 
Last edited:

metatheurgist

metatheurgist
Viajero said:
Far as I remember, and I may be wrong, unique names was simply never up for discussion, from the get go names could be repeated by any commander in any ships and changeable at will. The main discussion point (there may have been others) was about ship naming being a paying feature or not. It was feared that even the in HUD displayed name when scanning a new ship was going to require real money payment. As it turned out only the ship exterior paint ended up being a paid cosmetic, whereas the in HUD one was free for all commanders.

News - Ship naming and Name Plates – how it will work

Hi everyone, There’s been a number of questions from Commanders regarding ship naming and how ship name plates will work so we wanted to give you a little more information about how these features will work when they’re released. In-game ship naming When you have named your ship in-game...
forums.frontier.co.uk forums.frontier.co.uk

Source: https://youtu.be/aCZqxZZBQJQ
Click to expand...
Yep, my recollection was unique names was never a go. Understandable given how often names get repeated. The number of Nostromo FCs I've seen....
 

Agony_Aunt

Agony_Aunt
Pug said:
Are you moderating the Moderators?

@Viajero
Does politely "as a moderator should" re-ask questions that he has submitted before to Devs to hopefully incite a positive response to a very valid question or questions.

This is different to a responsible Moderator openly joining a negative debate with open comments regarding a competitive product.
Pug
Click to expand...

Haha, no. But i used to be one here, so i know the rules.

Also... competing product? That's a funny one.

But ok, let's follow that line of thought. Then surely he shouldn't be allowed to be openly critical about any of FD's products either?
 

Agony_Aunt

Agony_Aunt
sovapid said:
You won't be able to use the ships people "pledge" for in Squadron 42. All of the fund raising is on the back of Star Citizen.
Click to expand...

It is also now 7 years later than initially announced and regardless of whether you can use your pledged for ships, its those ship pledges that have gone towards funding it.
 

Viajero

Volunteer Moderator
Viajero
sovapid said:
You won't be able to use the ships people "pledge" for in Squadron 42. All of the fund raising is on the back of Star Citizen.
Click to expand...

I probably did not understand what you meant but the second sentence seems to be incorrect.

All the fund raising from funding day 1 in 2012 to 14th feb 2016 was for both the PU and SQ42 together. The fund raising then was split into two types of packages, PU related ones and SQ42, and presumably SQ42 has continued generating funds for CIG given all the SQ42 trailers, vertical slices, Answer the Call 2016, Answer the Call 2017 and Beta 2020 hype contributing to alleged record funding in 2020.

Backers have indeed pre paid since day 1 for SQ42, which can not be played, or tested, at all yet.

Edit: Ah I see you meant that some of the funds received for the PU may be going into SQ42 development. Yes, that is probably true aswell.
 
Last edited:

VR jefranklin18

VR jefranklin18
Viajero said:
Hold on, fee as in real money or in game money? I mean if it was in game money it wouldnt be that bad no?
Click to expand...
Don't know. The exact text is:

We are currently reviewing various options to limit the ability to change ship names infinitely, such as a cooldown and/or a small fee (similar to how handle changes work currently), as naming your ship is intended to be a meaningful and lasting decision.
Click to expand...

The fact that it has to be done on the RSI website rather than in game, makes the entire thing a convoluted mess IMO. Source: https://support.robertsspaceindustries.com/hc/en-us/articles/360019839074
 

Viajero

Volunteer Moderator
Viajero
jefranklin18 said:
"We are currently reviewing various options to limit the ability to change ship names infinitely, such as a cooldown and/or a small fee (similar to how handle changes work currently), as naming your ship is intended to be a meaningful and lasting decision."
Click to expand...

You can not make this stuff up. Hope I am missing something but if this is how handle changes work currently, then... :

robertsspaceindustries.com

Extras - Handle Change Pass - Roberts Space Industries | Follow the development of Star Citizen and Squadron 42

Roberts Space Industries is the official go-to website for all news about Star Citizen and Squadron 42. It also hosts the online store for game items and merch, as well as all the community tools used by our fans.
robertsspaceindustries.com

:ROFLMAO:
 
Last edited:

Viajero

Volunteer Moderator
Viajero
Surefoot said:
Who cares, paying for cosmetic additions is fair play IMHO. Also cosmetic additions to an unfinished alpha, is maybe premature ?
Click to expand...

Dont disagree, but given how the ship naming discussion went over here at the time, having to pay real money just to change the name of a ship would have probably melt down the forums though 😋
 
Last edited:

varonica

varonica
jefranklin18 said:
Do you remember the utter tantrums chucked over the ED ship naming proposals, which cost all of a couple of quid for unlimited renaming?

Edit: ninjad by Viajero ☺️
Click to expand...

I don't remember, I just thought, cool. and gave them money.

It's bizarre we have people on the forums complaining because apparently FDEV won't take their money, and when they do set it up so you can pay money it's all complaints!

I've played ED for years, my initial investment in a combined original/horizons package, my pre-purchase of Odyssey, plus my name tags came to around the same as I payed for a single expansion of LOTRO late last year, and I can't remember how many expansions of LOTRO I have paid for. I consider the money I have spent on ED to be one of the best gaming investments I have ever made!
 

Surefoot

S
Viajero said:
Dont disagree, but given how the ship naming discussion went over here at the time, having to pay real money just to change the name of a ship would have probably melt down the forums though 😋
Click to expand...
There are so many griefs to be had against FDEV and their handling of several aspects of ED, that this cosmetic thing is silly in comparison... It's a model that works well for Path of Exile, and a model I actually tend to like as long it's not p2w and purely cosmetic. I would support CiG transitioning to that kind of model, instead of their current very much pay 2 win model, and it's "pay ludicrous amounts of monies for virtual non-existing ships that would win you nothing in a non-existing gameplay" but you get my point...
 

[VR] DDM_Reaper20

[VR] DDM_Reaper20
Pug said:
Exactly my point thank you, and I might add.

All our opinions matter.
Pug
Click to expand...
By that reasoning, however, games companies could get away with, pretty much, everything. Quality control? Broken promises? Yeah, NAH.

Fortunately, consumer rights are being protected against that kind of stuff.

I really would like to see a well-polished alternative to ED (at least as long as it is VR-compatible), and I really liked the WC games, so I would not mind one bit getting SQ42... but I have given up hope of ever seeing it, at least while I am spry enough to play it. Delay gets heaped on delay, in 2016 they said it was basically done... and now... see for yourself. Zip. That does NOT inspire confidence.
 

Firkrayt

Firkrayt
varonica said:
I've played ED for years, my initial investment in a combined original/horizons package, my pre-purchase of Odyssey, plus my name tags came to around the same as I payed for a single expansion of LOTRO late last year, and I can't remember how many expansions of LOTRO I have paid for. I consider the money I have spent on ED to be one of the best gaming investments I have ever made!
Click to expand...
What I never understood is how someone milking you heavily justifies others that milk you lightly.
"This bully takes all my money, he is bad. That other bully takes only part of my money, he is good". what??? Aren't cosmetics part of the game? Yes they are. So why I have to pay for a part of the game if I already paid for the game?
Devs are improving the game? Great, the better it is, the more people will buy it, income. But why people have to pay again and again? If your game is a service, charge service fee, it's called subscription. If people aren't willing to buy enough subscriptions to keep your honest business of improving the game afloat, maybe your game isn't good enough?
Micropayments are more profitable than subscriptions for the same game? True, but that's because shady business is always more profitable than the honest one. And making additional profits on people who already bought your game still is milking.

Now, where is SC in that scheme? He is the bad bully, of course.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom