TheAgent on SA, and it was apparently also mentioned on Eurogamer around the same time.
Game Discussions Star Citizen Discussion Thread v12
- Thread starter Yaffle
- Start date
-
- Tags
- star citizen
To me back then, there was no other group except the WhoHow can you know Ready Steady Go but not The Kinks?
Stellar Surveyor. Right, we scanned the one star already? Job done!I haven't stopped laughing yet...is it me or are the marketing snakes really just taking the pith now?
They really should use the term 'tem instead of 'verse because they only have half a system.
I haven't stopped laughing yet...is it me or are the marketing snakes really just taking the pith now?
Explore the cosmos?
Very pithy.
To me back then, there was no other group except the Who
That's enough talking about my generation.
Still can't find any reference to it though...since you made me go look. Urban myth
How can you know Ready Steady Go but not The Kinks?
I know back in the day on SA there was some hypothesizing about possible limits on the amount of time audio and mocap could be in use, as per the actors' contracts, but I don't believe there was any reported legal action.
Now if you want to go back to Kevin Costner, that's a different story.
I'll keep looking, but I feel like I'm spinning my wheels on this one.
Now if you want to go back to Kevin Costner, that's a different story.
I'll keep looking, but I feel like I'm spinning my wheels on this one.
Is this now the rocking music thread?
Are you saying booo or booourns?
Here is one Nirvana borrrowed off:
I do like the Nirvana version more.
Something worse than SC?
Its not that SC is a clear scam like this. But CIG/SC paved the way for scams like this. It informed the corrupt and the liars and cheaters there is a market out there where people will literally pay you to tell them dreams and you can string people on for years without delivering a product.
Last edited:
I quickly skipped the intro and thought it was about SC for the first part, or at least some sort of satire of SC, are we sure it's not a SC satire?
A Skeptic's First Steps into Star Citizen
Part Six: Conclusions, Part One
(Part One)
(Part Two)
(Part Three)
(Part Four)
(Part Five)
The free fly event is over, much to my disappointment, I'm somewhat surprised to say. Despite the issues experienced, I wasn't quite willing to let my adventures in the ironically named 'Verse end. I'd barely scratched the surface by the time it had ended. Thankfully, I'm not at all willing to allow a wastrel like Chris Roberts benefit financially off of me either, so I'm not about to buy back in. Especially when I consider how utterly unethical his abuse of the crowd-funding model is. But if I was unaware of this project's history and said abuse? I could definitely see myself naively buying in to this project after what I experienced in the game. There were flaws and frustrations, sure, but much of that frustration stemmed from my knowledge of how Star Citizen was originally pitched. The game as originally pitched wasn't supposed to be like this.
My primary motivation for participating in this free fly was to test the capabilities of my new computer. When I bought it, I knew I'd want to test it against Star Citizen, a game which is rather notorious for eating powerful machines for breakfast. It can handle Elite Dangerous Odyssey in VR, even in settlements. But SC? It typically got less than 30 fps. IMO, this is a playable rate for the things I typically enjoy, since I'm definitely not into the pew-pew. Perhaps, now that I'd gotten past the "admire all the hard work the artists did" stage of the new game experience, I'll be able to dive deeper into the meat of this game. Because I'm definitely going to try out the next free fly event as well.
My secondary motivation was to see for myself where all the money had gone besides into the coffers of the Roberts' clan, because what I'd seen in live streams certainly didn't look like a $400 million+ game, and it didn't seem to play like a $400 million+ game. But I've learned over the years that a good live streamer can make a game look more entertaining than it actually is, and watching someone else play a game can be a very different experience than actually playing it yourself.
And I was right. My innately curious nature had me poking my nose into areas not normally seen on streams, and there were a lot of lavishly detailed areas that had no in-game function what-so-ever. Conversely, there were a lot of areas that seemed half-finished, or barely started, and were later abandoned. And this was just a fraction of one area in the game. I could've easily spent the entirety of the free fly event soaking in the exquisite details of the area I started in, as well as those of the free ships themselves, without ever having delved into the actual game play.
Which makes me wonder... given my knowledge of CIG's senior leadership, was this perhaps on purpose? Were the starting areas designed to waste players time, to distract them long enough that they get a false impression of what the game is really like? I'm not normally one to assume malice when there are simpler answers... but given CIG's history, perhaps malice is the simpler answer.
In just about every game I've ever played, the starting areas are designed to cater to the newbie gamer. Shops with the starting equipment they need are easy to find, the exits are conveniently close. New Babbage was a labyrinthine sprawl of confusing passages, dead ends, wasted space, and shops that were worthless to a newbie player. The primary exception to this trend are procedurally generated open worlds, and even some of them still managed this feat.
I've frequently compared this game to a white-washed tomb, a fair exterior that disguises the rot contained within. There has been a lot of time and money spent on unnecessary artwork for a game that's at the Alpha stage of its development, used to convince the unwary that this project is legit. It's also possible I'm just being cynical, which is especially easy to be after following development of this game, and New Babbage was yet another example of Roberts being Roberts.
Ultimately, it doesn't matter either way for me, because there's no way I'd buy into this game until it's released and on sale. But if the game's free? I think it's worth a second dive.
edit: It just occurred to me that I've actually got more to say, so consider this part one. Part two will hopefully be finished as I work on it during breaks at work.
Part Six: Conclusions, Part One
(Part One)
(Part Two)
(Part Three)
(Part Four)
(Part Five)
The free fly event is over, much to my disappointment, I'm somewhat surprised to say. Despite the issues experienced, I wasn't quite willing to let my adventures in the ironically named 'Verse end. I'd barely scratched the surface by the time it had ended. Thankfully, I'm not at all willing to allow a wastrel like Chris Roberts benefit financially off of me either, so I'm not about to buy back in. Especially when I consider how utterly unethical his abuse of the crowd-funding model is. But if I was unaware of this project's history and said abuse? I could definitely see myself naively buying in to this project after what I experienced in the game. There were flaws and frustrations, sure, but much of that frustration stemmed from my knowledge of how Star Citizen was originally pitched. The game as originally pitched wasn't supposed to be like this.
My primary motivation for participating in this free fly was to test the capabilities of my new computer. When I bought it, I knew I'd want to test it against Star Citizen, a game which is rather notorious for eating powerful machines for breakfast. It can handle Elite Dangerous Odyssey in VR, even in settlements. But SC? It typically got less than 30 fps. IMO, this is a playable rate for the things I typically enjoy, since I'm definitely not into the pew-pew. Perhaps, now that I'd gotten past the "admire all the hard work the artists did" stage of the new game experience, I'll be able to dive deeper into the meat of this game. Because I'm definitely going to try out the next free fly event as well.
My secondary motivation was to see for myself where all the money had gone besides into the coffers of the Roberts' clan, because what I'd seen in live streams certainly didn't look like a $400 million+ game, and it didn't seem to play like a $400 million+ game. But I've learned over the years that a good live streamer can make a game look more entertaining than it actually is, and watching someone else play a game can be a very different experience than actually playing it yourself.
And I was right. My innately curious nature had me poking my nose into areas not normally seen on streams, and there were a lot of lavishly detailed areas that had no in-game function what-so-ever. Conversely, there were a lot of areas that seemed half-finished, or barely started, and were later abandoned. And this was just a fraction of one area in the game. I could've easily spent the entirety of the free fly event soaking in the exquisite details of the area I started in, as well as those of the free ships themselves, without ever having delved into the actual game play.
Which makes me wonder... given my knowledge of CIG's senior leadership, was this perhaps on purpose? Were the starting areas designed to waste players time, to distract them long enough that they get a false impression of what the game is really like? I'm not normally one to assume malice when there are simpler answers... but given CIG's history, perhaps malice is the simpler answer.
In just about every game I've ever played, the starting areas are designed to cater to the newbie gamer. Shops with the starting equipment they need are easy to find, the exits are conveniently close. New Babbage was a labyrinthine sprawl of confusing passages, dead ends, wasted space, and shops that were worthless to a newbie player. The primary exception to this trend are procedurally generated open worlds, and even some of them still managed this feat.
I've frequently compared this game to a white-washed tomb, a fair exterior that disguises the rot contained within. There has been a lot of time and money spent on unnecessary artwork for a game that's at the Alpha stage of its development, used to convince the unwary that this project is legit. It's also possible I'm just being cynical, which is especially easy to be after following development of this game, and New Babbage was yet another example of Roberts being Roberts.
Ultimately, it doesn't matter either way for me, because there's no way I'd buy into this game until it's released and on sale. But if the game's free? I think it's worth a second dive.
edit: It just occurred to me that I've actually got more to say, so consider this part one. Part two will hopefully be finished as I work on it during breaks at work.
Last edited: