Game Discussions Star Citizen Discussion Thread v12

Do we think SQ42 is not going to happen at all or is all the furore about its delay?

I think SQ42 will happen eventually... although CR moving to the UK to get it finished is a potential disaster. God help us all if he sees too many green pixels!

But its not really just a delay is it?

It was (according to direct quotes from Chris, Sandi, and Erin) almost ready in 2014 and again in 2015. It was again getting close in 2016. That was 5 years ago. Then somewhere around then Tyler said he'd played through the whole game. Then we hear circa 2019 they were redoing all the missions. And we've seen "roadmaps" over the last couple of years showing the progress on the missions. And of course, the latest news is that CR is moving to the UK in 2022 to help get SQ42 done... meaning 2022 is not likely the release year either.

The single player game, that CR said he would put up against any AAA game out there in 2013/2014(?) will have taken perhaps 10 years to develop by the time it is released.

Its already 6 years past the first suggested release date.

Again, its a bit more than just a delay. Its years of CIG misleading and outright lying to backers.
 
I think SQ42 will happen eventually... although CR moving to the UK to get it finished is a potential disaster. God help us all if he sees too many green pixels!

But its not really just a delay is it?

It was (according to direct quotes from Chris, Sandi, and Erin) almost ready in 2014 and again in 2015. It was again getting close in 2016. That was 5 years ago. Then somewhere around then Tyler said he'd played through the whole game. Then we hear circa 2019 they were redoing all the missions. And we've seen "roadmaps" over the last couple of years showing the progress on the missions. And of course, the latest news is that CR is moving to the UK in 2022 to help get SQ42 done... meaning 2022 is not likely the release year either.

The single player game, that CR said he would put up against any AAA game out there in 2013/2014(?) will have taken perhaps 10 years to develop by the time it is released.

Its already 6 years past the first suggested release date.

Again, its a bit more than just a delay. Its years of CIG misleading and outright lying to backers.
Does the UK hand delinquent UK-citizens to US authorities?
 
SQ42 is not the only game that's a many years project, most of them don't make it into the public concious until they at most actually 2 years off complete.

But SC/SQ42 are not the only games that are talked about from early in their dev cycle. There are many games on kickstarter, some of them good and were released. (some not so good as well, and some outright scams). And strangely enough, some of those good ones didn't miss their expected release dates by 6+ years.
 
Promises made by executives who didn't fully understand what they were talking about is not unique in game development, it does happen and for that to be a reason to write off the thing of contention entirely would be hypocrisy on this forum.

And they also rightly get panned for it, so no reason CR should be excused either.
 
It certainly makes one think its probably best investing only in games when they are completely finished, and not investing in dreams and wishful thinking.

Publishers are not going to fund games with this much intended scope and detail, because they know costs can quickly spiral out of control.

With Star Citizen you are not buying a completed game that has its costs locked in to it and now you're trying to recover those costs and hopefully make a profit.
Yes, you are asking people to invest in your idea, not something gamers normally do. but it happens in other walks of life every day.

I'll give you an example of something that we as gamers have some knowledge of.

Due to a car crash of events AMD (Advanced Micro Devices) was on the brink of going bust around 2015, their share price at under $2 reflected that.

Long story short they pulled themselves out of it by creating some excellent products that sold is huge numbers, now they make the best X86 Processors, they make all the hardware for all the consoles, Samsung are using their chips in their phones and tablets, they are about to buy another tech company for $35 Billion.
These days they are trading at $85 to $95 a share.

Had you bought $20,000 of shares in 2015 you would now be $980,000 better off, the risk was you bought $20,000 of shares and they go bust, you lose your $20,000.

Backers, with varying degrees of pocket depth are risking whatever they think is worth it to get the game no one else will make at the end of it, or nothing, that's the risk.

kBbuULj.png
 
Read again. Only haters can make a big deal of SC players switching or not their priorities in which game they want to see released first.

Only haters can make a big deal of CIG switching priorities?

You mean like how the narrative shifted year on year depending on which was preferable for backers to believe?

Only haters could make a big deal of that?

I would have thought that backers themselves would make a big deal of that, as well as a lot of other things CIG have said and done over the years. But apparently not, most backers seem to enjoy being taken for a ride.
 
Only haters can make a big deal of CIG switching priorities?

You mean like how the narrative shifted year on year depending on which was preferable for backers to believe?

Only haters could make a big deal of that?

I would have thought that backers themselves would make a big deal of that, as well as a lot of other things CIG have said and done over the years. But apparently not, most backers seem to enjoy being taken for a ride.
Again "Only haters can make a big deal of players switching priorities?" nobody was talking about CIG here except you.
 
Publishers are not going to fund games with this much intended scope and detail, because they know costs can quickly spiral out of control.

Certainly if you don't have good planning, budget, and control of scope.

Yet there are multi billion projects out there in the real world which are infinitely more complex than computer games, that somehow get delivered.

CIG could have controlled the budget and scope, they could have had good planning. They could have built up the game stepwise, modularly, delivering on their promises, and then expanding the game. Many games these days do this. They have a budget, they ship the core game, then they expand through DLCs.

CIG got greedy and also failed to properly cost what they were offering. Once again, go look at the stretch goals. It is clear CIG had no idea how much each stretch goal would cost, they just threw random numbers at random features and backers pledged.

The game as initially advertised was estimated at 5.5 million. We still don't have that game, nothing even close to it. The game they advertised for 65 million is even further away and will cost nowhere near that.

This is well beyond things spiraling out of control. There never was any control. CIG act like time and funds are infinite. The scary thing is, they might be more or less right. Backers seem happy to keep giving CIG money and excusing the time its taking with "game dev is hard yo!"

However, if CIG had tried to do it that way, i suspect they would have failed hard and fast early on. Because they couldn't have presold lots of dreams they had no idea whether they could deliver on. That promised 5.5 million game would have run out of money long before completion, and that would have been the end of it.

Could a publisher do it? Probably, but i guess it wouldn't be profitable. Too much of a niche gaming area. To get the base game out that might sell decently well would perhaps take a hundred or two hundred million, and that would only be on a par with the game CR said would cost 5.5 million. The DLCs would cost a boatload more money for all the extra things. I doubt they could make a profit out of it.
 
Again "Only haters can make a big deal of players switching priorities?" nobody was talking about CIG here except you.

Huh, when did players switch priorities for CIG? Players don't control CIG.

And from what i've seen, players have been pretty consistent in saying what they wanted from CIG. Some wanted SQ42 more, although most seem more interested in SC.

This all side discussion started from your response to @Skizomeuh's post.

You'll see soon that only the true believers knew SQ42 never was the priority.

This isn't about the players switching priorities. He's talking about "true believers" claiming they knew all along what the priorities were.
 
Certainly if you don't have good planning, budget, and control of scope.

Yet there are multi billion projects out there in the real world which are infinitely more complex than computer games, that somehow get delivered.

CIG could have controlled the budget and scope, they could have had good planning. They could have built up the game stepwise, modularly, delivering on their promises, and then expanding the game. Many games these days do this. They have a budget, they ship the core game, then they expand through DLCs.

CIG got greedy and also failed to properly cost what they were offering. Once again, go look at the stretch goals. It is clear CIG had no idea how much each stretch goal would cost, they just threw random numbers at random features and backers pledged.

The game as initially advertised was estimated at 5.5 million. We still don't have that game, nothing even close to it. The game they advertised for 65 million is even further away and will cost nowhere near that.

This is well beyond things spiraling out of control. There never was any control. CIG act like time and funds are infinite. The scary thing is, they might be more or less right. Backers seem happy to keep giving CIG money and excusing the time its taking with "game dev is hard yo!"

However, if CIG had tried to do it that way, i suspect they would have failed hard and fast early on. Because they couldn't have presold lots of dreams they had no idea whether they could deliver on. That promised 5.5 million game would have run out of money long before completion, and that would have been the end of it.

Could a publisher do it? Probably, but i guess it wouldn't be profitable. Too much of a niche gaming area. To get the base game out that might sell decently well would perhaps take a hundred or two hundred million, and that would only be on a par with the game CR said would cost 5.5 million. The DLCs would cost a boatload more money for all the extra things. I doubt they could make a profit out of it.

I think SC, no matter who was in charge would have ended up in the dustbin of unrealised projects due to budget constraints.

But you might be right, how would you or i even know? Listen to the SlatEMike video i put up, he's talking to two ex-CIG dev's about backseat game developers.

What i do know, for me personally, is that this project is worth sticking with, if it comes to nothing, well i'm an adult and i knew that was always going to be a possibility. Risk vs reward, i'm 45, not 12, i understand what that is.
 
Last edited:
I think SC, no matter who was in charge would have ended up in the dustbin of unrealised projects due to budget constraints.

But you might be right, how would you or i even know? Listen to the SlatEMike video i put up, he's talking to two ex-CIG dev's about backseat game developers.

What i do know, for me personally, is that this project is worth sticking with, if it comes to nothing, well i'm an adult and i knew that was always going to be a possibility. Risk vs reward, i'm 45, not 12, i understand what that is.
One ex Ci¬G dev...Jerry, who was on one of the design teams. The other, ASN, who's a regular caller for Mikey's weekly ATC is an indie developer who started off developing the Indie shooter, Squad and now has his own game development studio.

I watch ATC regularly...good show.

As an aside, we used to have our own tame Ci¬G dev who occasionally posted on here...Ben Parry (sorry Ben) who also worked for FDev before moving to Ci¬G. He's since moved on to greener pastures last I heard.

It's rumoured that if you say "64 bit positioning" 3 times, he'll re-appear ;)
 
Last edited:
One ex Ci¬G dev...Jerry, who was on one of the design teams. The other, ASN, who's a regular caller for Mikey's weekly ATC is an indie developer who started off developing the Indie shooter, Squad and now has his own game devlopment studio.

I watch ATC regularly...good show.

It is, yesterday i subbed to his Youtube Channel.
 
Back
Top Bottom