Game Discussions Star Citizen Discussion Thread v12

varonica

varonica
Intrepid3D said:
The more i see arguments about whether or not Star Citizen is a game the more stupid that seems to me.

Its like the meaning of game has become a cult and if you're deemed unworthy you're not allowed in, please stop.
Click to expand...

Certainly if we denied a lot of other games the status of "game" because "reasons" you would have a fair argument. The problem is definition, throwing coins at a wall and seeing who gets closer is a game, and that argument has been used earlier in this thread to support the claim that SC is a "game" because it has some very basic game loops, but it does ignore a huge detail, and that is we aren't throwing coins at a wall, we are comparing immensely complex virtual worlds where such simplistic comparisons are useless. We can only compare like to like, that is SC to other similar games, NMS, EVE Online, Elite Dangerous and understand that the word "game" has a specific meaning in that comparison, and SC in my opinion doesn't stand up to that standard.
 

VR Golgot

VR Golgot
Frank said:
Back in the auld days computer games got away with these... erm... homages, seeing as they were just peanuts compared to the large companies. That's why we got Thargoids, Mostly Harmless, Trumbles, Blue Danube hub stations

I was thinking about this "homage" thing while Obsidian Ant's video showed the Tyrell Building. I guess the big difference these days is that the other games companies are more careful with their homages, whereas Chris Roberts is still doing it. I remember a few years back he was caught removing the watermark from one of his homages
Click to expand...

To be fair the watermark issue was down to a lone blagger (Ryan Archer), so not really an organisational thing.

But Chris's tendency to glom onto the zeitgeist and persist on a diet of sci-fi tropes is pretty overt on the creative side. And potentially problematic for the project under the hood:

VR Golgot said:
Today's blast from the past:

Chris decries devs having their heads turned by other games (2015)

'But I saw this other game doing this, maybe we should have that feature?' And that's the sort of noise that hurts, I think, a game. So being true to yourself is really really important.
Click to expand...

Also Chris (Via Kotaku, 2016)

Once, a source says, Chris came to work after playing The Order: 1886. Impressed by the highly detailed art, he asked CIG’s character artists to match that standard. The team, my sources told me, saw this as impossible. “That's fine for a single-player game where you're able to control stuff and stream things in a certain way,” one source explained. “You do not expect that for any kind of MMO or open world. But that's common knowledge for anyone that's worked in games.”

The second example I was given was from a time when Roberts came back from seeing another in-development CryEngine game, Kingdom Come: Deliverance. He had been deeply impressed by the character inventory and outfits system, which involved multiple layers of clothing where each item has different properties, from its material to its weight and shape, that affect how it animates. Chris wanted it for Star Citizen.
Click to expand...

Also Chris (Via long-suffering colleagues, 2018) ;)

Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XxZLwy8JyKA#t=2190s
Click to expand...
 

Agony_Aunt

Agony_Aunt
Frank said:
Back in the auld days computer games got away with these... erm... homages, seeing as they were just peanuts compared to the large companies. That's why we got Thargoids, Mostly Harmless, Trumbles, Blue Danube hub stations

I was thinking about this "homage" thing while Obsidian Ant's video showed the Tyrell Building. I guess the big difference these days is that the other games companies are more careful with their homages, whereas Chris Roberts is still doing it. I remember a few years back he was caught removing the watermark from one of his homages
Click to expand...

Its probably also largely due to the legal situation becoming stickier and companies jumping on each other to protect their IP/trademarks/etc.
 

Agony_Aunt

Agony_Aunt

Intrepid3D

Intrepid3D
varonica said:
Certainly if we denied a lot of other games the status of "game" because "reasons" you would have a fair argument. The problem is definition, throwing coins at a wall and seeing who gets closer is a game, and that argument has been used earlier in this thread to support the claim that SC is a "game" because it has some very basic game loops, but it does ignore a huge detail, and that is we aren't throwing coins at a wall, we are comparing immensely complex virtual worlds where such simplistic comparisons are useless. We can only compare like to like, that is SC to other similar games, NMS, EVE Online, Elite Dangerous and understand that the word "game" has a specific meaning in that comparison, and SC in my opinion doesn't stand up to that standard.
Click to expand...

Star Citizen is the only game where people demand a definition of what constitutes a game to classify it as either or not, its ridiculous, the only people who seem to care so much are those arguing its not a game, its why they need an agreed classification where what is or is not is entirely subjective, its the church mentality of brow beating someone for their subjectivity, like a five year old cries "its not a game poo poo head" because the other kid likes something they don't.
 

metatheurgist

metatheurgist
The game software industry has clear definitions on what is a game or not. An alpha is not a game, a beta is not a game. It's a product in development that may one day be a game. That is why industry rags don't review alphas and betas (unless it's some sort of preview). And that is why SC defenders keep using it as a talisman against criticism because they know the conventions too. And why it's hypocrisy to say it's a game on one hand while hiding behind the "It's Alpha" cry on the other. Sure, as has been pointed out a kid rolling a hoop is a game, but, context matters.
 

VR Golgot

VR Golgot
Intrepid3D said:
Star Citizen is the only game where people demand a definition of what constitutes a game to classify it as either or not, its ridiculous, the only people who seem to care so much are those arguing its not a game, its why they need an agreed classification where what is or is not is entirely subjective, its the church mentality of brow beating someone for their subjectivity, like a five year old cries "its not a game poo poo head" because the other kid likes something they don't.
Click to expand...

I think it’s pretty obvious which angle varonica is coming from. It’s this one:

VR Golgot said:
  • SC is very clearly not equivalent to a classically launched computer game. It is a buggy pre-alpha early access title. As it itself claims.
Click to expand...

And all games are held to these standards, not just SC. That’s why those terms exist.

Throwing poo and religion around because such definitions exist seems excessive.
 

Intrepid3D

Intrepid3D
metatheurgist said:
The game software industry has clear definitions on what is a game or not. An alpha is not a game, a beta is not a game. It's a product in development that may one day be a game. That is why industry rags don't review alphas and betas (unless it's some sort of preview). And that is why SC defenders keep using it as a talisman against criticism because they know the conventions too. And why it's hypocrisy to say it's a game on one hand while hiding behind the "It's Alpha" cry on the other. Sure, as has been pointed out a kid rolling a hoop is a game, but, context matters.
Click to expand...
It does? what like some sort of council of game definitions? Can you link me to those definitions?
 

gorankar

gorankar
I am sure this has been said before, but for the proponents of the game, Star Citizen is a game when something works right or is cool/awesome, and an Alpha when it's not working.

The alpha/game is a mess. When it's working, it's essentially ex Eve players, former ED gank squads, and other nuisance players ganking their way around the one available system. I had around 100 hours of fun and 100 or so of frustration before more or less just giving up on it. So I guess I got something out of it. I do log in and try do a box or bunker mission from time to time just to see how long it takes to get pad rammed/sniped. Yesterday it was less than 30 minutes. No one around, delivered box, came out to ship being shot at on pad by new arrival. Logged out. Maybe I still have a ship when I log back in, in a few days/weeks or I maybe I don't. It's not like it matters since progression is temporary.
 

LittleAnt

L
Intrepid3D said:
The more i see arguments about whether or not Star Citizen is a game the more stupid that seems to me.

Its like the meaning of game has become a cult and if you're deemed unworthy you're not allowed in, please stop.
Click to expand...
Because calling SC a game here is like blasphemy 😋 You can't go against the dogma 🤪
 

metatheurgist

metatheurgist
Intrepid3D said:
It does? what like some sort of council of game definitions? Can you link me to those definitions?
Click to expand...
Spurious argument.

There is no council of car makers that says when a car is finished. It's finished when it's in the showroom and you can buy it. Until then it's a prototype.
There is no council of film makers that says when a film is finished. It's finished when it's in the theaters and you can buy a ticket to see it. Until then it's in production.
The standard for a game is when it has gone gold and is being manufactured and can be purchased. That is when game sites review it and criticize it and accept that it is a released product. Until then it is vaporware.
 

Darkfyre99

Darkfyre99
Xink said:
Your friendly reminder that buying into SC is buying into a scam.
Click to expand...
Nah... it's not a scam.

It's just:
  • a primarily crowd funded project that includes a Hollywood Accounting Scheme of dozens of shell companies, designed to funnel tens of millions of dollars into the coffers of the principle creative behind this project, his brother and (once kept secret) wife, and his close personal friend and longtime business partner;
  • a primarily crowd funded project that has allowed the principle creative to one again indulge in his desire to be a big-time Hollywood Director, complete with casting famous movie stars to not only do voice acting, but also perform completely unnecessary, and as it turns out also completely premature, motion capture;
  • a primarily crowd funded project that has allowed the principle creative to live out his fantasies of being a Rockstar Game Developer, complete with lavishly appointed offices and expensive conventions;
  • a primarily crowd funded excuse to employ hundreds of artists who constantly refactor their excessively detailed work at the whim of the principle creative, without considering factors like available graphics processing in typical machines, available networking bandwidth and latency, and even such niggling details like game design and engine development;
  • a primarily crowd funded project that is in its 12th year of development, which has raised over $500 million USD to date, of which over $450 million USD was via crowd funding, which has utterly failed to meet any of its release dates or developmental milestones since 2014, and seems no closer to release today than it was at the time of the 2012 Kickstarter;
  • a primarily crowd funded project of a sci-fi MMO, which despite most funding being towards the development of the MMO, has as it's primary focus on releasing the original introductory campaign of the MMO as a stand alone single-player game
  • a primarily crowd funded project that defines itself as a fun game to play in its marketing, while simultaneously claiming to be an alpha test when it faces well deserved criticism
But at least there is something resembling an early access game there, one that features AAA game graphics even this "early" in development, though most early access games manage to be far more stable, have far more developed game loops, and are more than willing to let players and the media review themselves.

See... it's totally not a scam.
 

Zieman

Zieman
VR Golgot said:
  • SC is categorically still a tech demo. (No proof of networking which supports their planned scope, etc etc).
  • SC has enough game elements to be considered a game. (As you would hope, after nearly half a billion spent and 9 years+ of production).
  • SC is very clearly not equivalent to a classically launched computer game. It is a buggy pre-alpha early access title. As it itself claims.
Semantic attempts to put it into any one of those boxes alone are daft. So...

BfWFJ9v.png


;)

SC is its own mad thing.
Click to expand...
cr_faces.jpg
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom