Game Discussions Star Citizen Discussion Thread v12

sovapid

sovapid
Surefoot said:
What i was saying is currently SC is balanced towards "zero realism" with atmo having the only effect of dampening thrusters and max speed. There's zero aero effect
Click to expand...

There are100% areo effects in atmo that are more than affecting max speed. Maybe you don't do anything that would make you notice, maybe you dont actually play at all, hard to say.

It is most noticeable when dog fighting in atmo and the only way to do that until very recently was to fight other players.
 

gorankar

gorankar
I picked up a pledge over Christmas just because. It's not as bad when it's not during a free play period, but it's bad. Lots of instantaneous death where you have no idea how it happened just walking down some stairs, or stepping off a tram and falling to the center of the planet. Ship blows with no clue how except some other player lulzing about shooting you from outside an armistice/no fire zone. And pad rammers and people that fire into amistice/no fire zones actually have defenders. Lots of names I remember from ED pretending to be pirates and blowing you up or at least attempting to commit extortion while blowing you up, and crying about players logging out or self destructing on them. Pad ramming seems to be a favorite past time. That game is going to end up with segregated servers like ED has. No way around it really. The gank orgs are just murder all the time right now. But it is beautiful, and if you can get away from where players, and thus gankers, are in any numbers, and learn to server flip if you see a lot of members of the various gank orgs on there, it can be fun.
The flight model is not as bad as it sometimes looks. Moving the 3rd person camera is not really very smooth with kb/m and it can look like the ship is doing weird things and being jumpy. From the cockpit with a stick it feels OK. Not as good as ED, but at least OK. 3rd person camera needed to land sometimes, especially the large ships since SC lacks a landing display like ED has. They could have added downward facing landing cameras but whatever.
Networking is pretty bad at times, but still not as bad as ED's P2P networking has always been for me. Cheating, despite easy anti cheat, perhaps because of easy anti cheat lol, is fairly rampant.
I don't think they will finish the game. I do enjoy much of the game that exists right now. I'll get my $10 of fun out of it.
 

Intrepid3D

Intrepid3D
I have spent the last the last 4 weeks playing Icarus, about 150 hours in those 4 weeks, now i'm bored stupid by it.

I'm tired of getting no more than a few weeks entertainment out of games, i'm tired of the industry copying eachother, ARK, Rust, Scum, Icarus they are all the same game with different themes and i never lasted for more than a few weeks in any of them.

The gaming industry is out of ideas and very risk averse, its the grey gruel of mediocrity that perpetually leaves you dissatisfied.

I'm going to say it and hate on me all you like, Star Citizen is the only thing that makes me feel the way i did about games 30 years ago.
 

Agony_Aunt

Agony_Aunt
Intrepid3D said:
People can be overly sensitive, they are not "Hit Pieces" they are just lazy and / or bad journalism.

One thing i will say about the Ray's Guide video is; it was a bad idea to propose people name something better, that is extremely subjective.

Having said that we have seen enough new comers to the game be utterly blown away by it to understand it actually does have something that for some just isn't available in anything else.
Click to expand...

For sure, plenty of people like what SC offers, although have a care with "just isn't available in anything else", you can say that about a lot of games. ED also offers something that isn't available in anything else, and people are blown away by that. And then we get into the whole "ah, but no other games has X and Y and Z" and we end up going down the road of no other game is like SC because SC is the only game like SC, which again, applies to many games. Basically it ends up being circular, that SC is the best SC on the market. :p

You're spot on about the "name something better" part. Very subjective.
 

Agony_Aunt

Agony_Aunt
Intrepid3D said:
I'm going to say it and hate on me all you like, Star Citizen is the only thing that makes me feel the way i did about games 30 years ago.
Click to expand...

Hah, you do you. Its when people cross the line and start evangelizing it, telling others that it is the best game in 30 years is when you are going to start getting questioned whether you actually played another game during those 30 years. :p

Personally while i still remember old games fondly, i try to remember them without the rose tinted glasses. Say what you like about some companies that pump out "safe" games year after year, but there are always devs that do something different or put a new twist on things and make games that are fun and bring back those feelings of something new.

Its another fallacy of the faithful, where they harp on about companies like EA or whoever, but fail to acknowledge all the devs out there who create good games.

Some of them fail, some of them succeed. Take Lemnis Gate for example. A risky game to try and develop, especially for a small studio. It depended on getting a decent following, and if done by EA or Ubisoft it might have gained enough traction to become popular (AAA publishers have their benefits!) but it didn't, and as i understand it, its pretty much dead already.

So there are companies out there taking risks. The main differentiator between those companies and CIG is on whose money it is being developed, what they were promised for their money, and what was delivered.

If backers were investors, CR would have been kicked off the project years ago due to his incompetence and failure to deliver on his promises.

The only thing that keeps him there is the continued faith of the backers and their failure to hold him accountable. If either of those changes....
 

Dementropy

Dementropy
The multi-installment Kotaku UK series from 2015 (I think? It's been a while) was good. They even went so far as to interview people and not mess up the quotes.

The problem is people will seek out news that confirms their own biases, and those sites have twigged to that, and continue to pump out content accordingly.

If you want to read articles that are slightly skeptical to very biased against SC, go read Eurogamer, MassivelyOP, Forbes (though the one article they published that made its way to physical copies was more about business finance than game dev), or others. If you want pro-SC articles, you can read Polygon, GameStar, or Twinfinite (which has some of the most myopic articles, and will only give updates on how much money CIG made and new features, while never mentioning things that get delayed, removed, or any screw-ups whatsoever).

With all of that said, it's important to look outside of your own biases, as well as the biases of the content creators/reporters/etc. to understand why the audiences of those sites feel the way they do about Star Citizen. Much like with politics, the ongoing articles about how great/bad SC is don't change people's minds. Their opinions lean one side or another before clicking the links. And once opinion becomes belief, then it's even more difficult for a person to change their minds (and I don't absolve myself of this).

The writers aren't trying to convince anyone. They are communicating past you, the reader, and directing things at a larger audience whose opinions align with what they are publishing - it's just that on a personal level, we get caught up in the process. Perhaps the biggest overlap of pro and anti-SC folks would be those clicking on "Well, EA has found a new way to monetize their games and gatekeep content from players." You're going to go in ready to roll your eyes, while getting that small infusion of dopamine because you have something to grouse about on Reddit or whatever virtual water cooler you prefer to hang out at when discussing things with like-minded people or venturing into darker spaces to finally "own" the naysayers.
 
Last edited:

Intrepid3D

Intrepid3D
Agony_Aunt said:
Hah, you do you. Its when people cross the line and start evangelizing it, telling others that it is the best game in 30 years is when you are going to start getting questioned whether you actually played another game during those 30 years. :p

Personally while i still remember old games fondly, i try to remember them without the rose tinted glasses. Say what you like about some companies that pump out "safe" games year after year, but there are always devs that do something different or put a new twist on things and make games that are fun and bring back those feelings of something new.

Its another fallacy of the faithful, where they harp on about companies like EA or whoever, but fail to acknowledge all the devs out there who create good games.

Some of them fail, some of them succeed. Take Lemnis Gate for example. A risky game to try and develop, especially for a small studio. It depended on getting a decent following, and if done by EA or Ubisoft it might have gained enough traction to become popular (AAA publishers have their benefits!) but it didn't, and as i understand it, its pretty much dead already.

So there are companies out there taking risks. The main differentiator between those companies and CIG is on whose money it is being developed, what they were promised for their money, and what was delivered.

If backers were investors, CR would have been kicked off the project years ago due to his incompetence and failure to deliver on his promises.

The only thing that keeps him there is the continued faith of the backers and their failure to hold him accountable. If either of those changes....
Click to expand...

You're trying to tell me i couldn't possibly enjoy the game because you wouldn't, think about that.
 

Ebob

E
Intrepid3D said:
Yes, its a cynic's ramblings about the joy of others, like the incel in the dark corner of the room.
Click to expand...
Have I told you Star Citizen is a SCAM? Have I told you that it's not even released?! Have I told you that the faithful continue to support Chris Roberts even after 400 MILLION has not done the job?!?!?! By clicking that "Play" button, you indirectly contribute to the conman's money laundering scheme! Shame! Shame! Shame!!! Come to the path of the Refunds, praise be to Derek the Smart....
 

StuartGT

StuartGT
Intrepid3D said:
I have spent the last the last 4 weeks playing Icarus, about 150 hours in those 4 weeks, now i'm bored stupid by it.

I'm tired of getting no more than a few weeks entertainment out of games, i'm tired of the industry copying eachother, ARK, Rust, Scum, Icarus they are all the same game with different themes and i never lasted for more than a few weeks in any of them.
Click to expand...
In a surprising turn of events, Intrepid discovered that games in the same genre (survival) were very similar.

Intrepid3D said:
The gaming industry is out of ideas and very risk averse, its the grey gruel of mediocrity that perpetually leaves you dissatisfied.
Click to expand...
I disagree completely. You clearly don't play many games.
 

Agony_Aunt

Agony_Aunt
Dementropy said:
The multi-installment Kotaku UK series from 2015 (I think? It's been a while) was good. They even went so far as to interview people and not mess up the quotes.

The problem is people will seek out news that confirms their own biases, and those sites have twigged to that, and continue to pump out content accordingly.

If you want to read articles that are slightly skeptical to very biased against SC, go read Eurogamer, MassivelyOP, Forbes (though the one article they published that made its way to physical copies was more about business finance than game dev), or others. If you want pro-SC articles, you can read Polygon, GameStar, or Twinfinite (which has some of the most myopic articles, and will only give updates on how much money CIG made and new features, while never mentioning things that get delayed, removed, or any screw-ups whatsoever).

With all of that said, it's important to look outside of your own biases, as well as the biases of the content creators/reporters/etc. to understand why the audiences of those sites feel the way they do about Star Citizen. Much like with politics, the ongoing articles about how great/bad SC is don't change people's minds. Their opinions lean one side or another before clicking the links. And once opinion becomes belief, then it's even more difficult for a person to change their minds (and I don't absolve myself of this).

The writers aren't trying to convince anyone. They are communicating past you, the reader, and directing things at a larger audience whose opinions align with what they are publishing - it's just that on a personal level, we get caught up in the process. Perhaps the biggest overlap of pro and anti-SC folks would be those clicking on "Well, EA has found a new way to monetize their games and gatekeep content from players." You're going to go in ready to roll your eyes, while getting that small infusion of dopamine because you have something to grouse about on Reddit or whatever virtual water cooler you prefer to hang out at when discussing things with like-minded people or venturing into darker spaces to finally "own" the naysayers.
Click to expand...

Very true. But you missed Gamestar.de, shills for CIG :D
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom