They really can't do that. Backers already paid for 110 systems by 2013.
Game Discussions Star Citizen Discussion Thread v12
- Thread starter Yaffle
- Start date
-
- Tags
- star citizen
They really can't do that. Backers already paid for 110 systems by 2013.
Charming bingo thing that allow you to dismiss some simple facts and realities about SCA real vote with huge consequences, what a strange thing, for sure it's of no value...
Yes, backers voted for it. They voted twice in fact. First time on a form long ago, the other time with a constant flow of money (and this vote continue).
If you're counting continued throwing of money at CIG as a "vote" then its 3 votes.
But pay attention to what people are saying, and more important, the things your lord and savior said during those votes. More money = more scope but no delays!
What backers voted for wasn't what CIG delivered. Even if it was clear for a brain dead monkey that CR was talking out of his derrier.
The reason people joke about Bingo is because its one of those excuses that has been debunked time and again but are still used by faithful backers to defend the project.
Its not the Bingo that dismisses the facts, its the facts that dismisses the "facts" that some backers have in their heads.
I know you don't want to hear it, but its there in black and white, CR's own statements/quotes.
The Gladius is the hero fighter in SQ42, its always the first to get new tech lavished on it.There are dual issues here though.
A) Some of that existing fat is high-end sirloin stuff. It's had AAA assets lavished on it. More than a normal prototype would during standard gaming R&D. It's gonna be both a wrench to get rid of, and in some cases, an outright pain perhaps. (Do you need to remodel your ship again to remove those interactive module bays? What happens to the fancy mobile turret you just sold on your pseudo-X-wing if it proves untenable?)
Source: https://www.reddit.com/r/starcitizen/comments/mi9evo/all_new_access_on_gladius_ptu_313/
Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZgXkx2OT3PA
B) They're still layering on stuff that looks very much like future fat to be cut. Chris's gas system that needs to be piped into all of the ships, able to be struck by a stray bullet from space. That's if the bullet (and the networking?) can handle the bizarre plan to add material properties to the existing ship materials at this stage, altering centre mass and damage properties etc, but constrained by the visual designs created to date.
They're still slapping on the excess merrily.
But I do agree on the future need for a prune being inevitable. And they should probably stop tracking argon now
I'd be interested to hear any thoughts you have on how other teams may be impacted by the wait for server meshing. Like we see an obvious fallout in their missed deadlines on getting a 2nd system into the game. But presumably design and engineering in other departments will also be fairly roadblocked in what they can do until the networking architecture is in a firmer place?
It opening up like a Swiss Army Knife is for component access, all ships have it to varying degrees, depending on its age, for example the MSR has full component access while the Connie has some and some of it is wrong, ships with interiors its all internal, small fighter like the Gladius have component access on the outside, so there are panel's that open up on the outside, all over the ship like you see there, the Gladius is the first but eventually yes every ship without an interior will be covered with panels that open up with components inside.
The idea is when a component gets worn-out or damaged you physically remove it and replace it, during combat in larger multicrew ships its your egeneers job to maintain those components, so he will be running round putting out fires and replacing components.
I know a lot of backers get their panties wet over this sort of stuff, but to me it sounds like a) utter nightmare and potential tedium and b) hell for solo players and single seater ships where there is simply no option to do that. Oh, ill throw in a c) to make the running around repairing during combat, it means TTK has to be high... tediously high.
Isn't that the way tho?
You're always better off in the Carrier then you are in its aircraft.
Sure, I get the intention. I’m just suggesting it’s the type of thing that’s fits @Winterdyne ’s criteria IE: "does a ship really need to have 40 odd individually updating and gimballed thrusters and attachments?"
And the type of thing that may be a pain to strip out of the whole ship complement if they ever roll it out, and then find they have to cull the feature for performance reasons etc.
Once again LA, hundreds of quotes from CIG and others, including many statements from Holy Roberts, all in an easily digestible meme format.
Source: https://imgur.com/a/P9PZSNw
I'm pretty sure there are at least 2 there relating to the votes CIG did and what CR actually said.
Source: https://imgur.com/a/P9PZSNw
I'm pretty sure there are at least 2 there relating to the votes CIG did and what CR actually said.
If you want localised damage mechanics then yes, it is.
The question is do you want that?
the last I heard they were going broke spending for than they take in
I don't know, i haven't given CIG hundreds of dollars to experience flying a carrier nor do i usually play with other people, so even if i were to play SC, it would be a rare occurrence for me to actually have others on my ship. And i say my ship, because in a space game, i want to fly a spaceship, not play second fiddle or stand around waiting for something to happen or for someone else to give me orders. I'm not the sort of person who wants to spend my play time depending on other people or have others depending on me. Real life just isn't conductive to that and its a bit boring for me.
But look at it, seriously. Components failing due to wear and tear? How is that not going to be annoying and tedious?
And is a high TTK really desirable? I've watched PvP battles in ED where the participants are packed to the gills with shield boosters and hull reinforcements and its just deadly boring. They just go round and round and round for ages. Might as well watch paint dry. And i can only imagine how tiring it is to be in a battle like that.
Its not about whether its better to be in a carrier or a small fighter. Its about whether such mechanics are fun. For many SC backers they seem to think its going to be fun. I don't.
I’d say W’s question is a more interesting one: Can the game support it? (In concert with all the other spangly features).
My question relates more to: Is it smart to model these things with end-game fidelity if they’re still essentially prototypes, and open to both functional change as they interact with other changing systems, and to ultimately ending up on the cutting room floor?
To which I reckon the answer is: No
Developing your game, in a live environment, with AAA assets all the way down the line, is super-clearly a daft way to produce a game. It does sell a lot of spaceships to fund the daftness though
Last edited:
Speculation only, just like some people think CIG have enough money in the bank for years to come.
What we do know is CIG were almost out of money in 2018 and required a private investment to keep things going. After that they've had some good years for funding that have probably kept them safe, but its hard to know their actual burn rate vs income, since the only financials that they are obliged to produce are for the UK entity and anything they produce for their other companies are not independently audited. Furthermore, CIG's dozen shell companies makes it hard to know where the money is going. For example, they have 1 company which holds the rights to the IP which the other companies presumably pay for those rights, typical Hollywood accounting, which CR and Ortwin used during their filmmaking days.
But, based on their previously released financials and estimating off the size of the company, they are probably burning more than they get in a slow pledge month, and therefore it might explain the crazy number of sales they have had this year, because they need the income to keep outstripping the expenses.
oh I heard that on elite week that it cant be a scam cuz they spend more than they took
Well, you shouldn't be able to take out a large ship with a small fighter. and you can't, during the Xeno Threat event a dozen small fighters had almost no impact on the Idris Shields, we needed a Retaliator with its size 9 torps to bust open those shields, but it also needed protecting from enemy fighters.
Also people have different ideas on what they want from a game, a lot of people like this level of gameplay detail and SC aims to be the most detailed game ever made.
LOL. I've heard some funny reasons as to why SC is/isn't a scam, but that one is very funny.
At the end of the day, scams can grow out of good intentions or companies even running at a loss. Example: Fyre Festival. Billy made (and spent) lots of money out of the festival, but it was still a scam and the company he set up to make it happen ended up broke. Also see Theranos.
They were in a way. (They had a burn rate of -$7m a year, and $7m on the books). But some angel investors chucked a bunch of cash in to save the day.
The historic backer cash to date is very much gone. But thankfully the investors will probably demand a game now
And that's another thing i don't like, although I guess sovapid might disagree with your statement here.
A good pilot in a small ship should be able to take out a poor pilot in a big ship. A big ship should not be an "I win" button and if so, it just means SC is more pay to win than ever.
If you read my comments you will see that I acknowledge that others feel differently. But keep in mind "most detailed ever" comes at a cost, potentially the cost of non-delivery. More detail isn't always a good thing. Sometimes a bit of abstraction is also good for gameplay and removes tedium. A good game designer knows when to say "no". Unfortunately, i don't think CR knows this.
Well if you think you can sink one of these.
With one of these.
Go for it, i'll watch
and a group of ten small ships should rip it to bits just like a aircraft carrier