Game Discussions Star Citizen Discussion Thread v12

Xink

Xink
You heard it from His Bearness' own words.

2021 was CIG's best year ever. New accounts are up, retention is up, click rate is up, existing clients are taking advantage of the brilliant savings they get on their purchases with the frequent sales CIG has on offer, revenue is up, profits are up.

Development? That is clearly not relevant.

Why change what works.
 

Mole HD

Mole HD
Thanks to @Intrepid3D for this one...posted in the org Discord channel :D

ieX4hWG.jpg
 
Last edited:

kilvenny

kilvenny
I am starting to wonder if I misunderstood what ICache was, that it was in fact misspelt and should really be spelt how its spoken, so ICash.

The faithful ICash in and the refunders ICash out. The faithful are happy because net ICash is positive and growing and this is now the true measure of current progress by CIG.
 

WotGTheAgent

WotGTheAgent
McGlashan said:
Your response to every criticism lately has been "but the funding!" It's almost as if there's no evidence of meaningful progress being made on the game itself.
Click to expand...
It's why getting into gameplay discussions ultimately always leads towards financial discussions (much to Mole's chagrin). The two are so entwined (and sometimes enshrined) by the fanbase that a lot of criticism -- and not just here, mind you -- is met with funding tracker statistics, growth of player count, average spend increases, metrics on user engagement, and so on and so on and so on.

And then when you do discuss the terrible, awful, downright idiotic, obtuse and frankly shady business practices that CIG continues to commit on a near quarterly basis, you're met with "Jeez, guy, just play the game. Can't we discuss the game mechanics?" and the wheel turns once again, landing you back to trying to have an honest conversation about half finished game mechanics and designs, pre-sold assets that sold for a thousand US bux with attached gameplay that are now half a decade or more late and have barely entered the first design state (if that), the numerous time wasting and god awful bugs and wait, no, now they want to talk about funding again. Weird. So freakin' weird.

Just an aside, my 26 year old brother plays Star Citizen. He bought in during the Kickstarter when he was still a teenager. He couldn't even drive a car. He downloaded it and tried it again the other week and has fun playing with his org mates. Hearing this, I asked him what he thought of Derek Smart, Something Awful, the drama, broken promises, etc etc etc...he didn't know about a single thing. Not even about me! Made me realize that most players have absolutely no clue about the history of this game, the developers, and how ultimately this will end up being a 20 year journey with a "Thanks for playing Star Citizen!" ending.
 
Last edited:

Agony_Aunt

Agony_Aunt
VR Golgot said:
Some great comments under Obsidian's latest...

lOkqZrl.png
Click to expand...

"but i'm impressed by the scale and the ambition they are going for even in this unfinished state"

And that right there is the disconnect.

Anyone can promise huge scale and ambition: Star Atlas, Shroud of the Avatar, Earth 2, etc.

Implementation is hard though. And then its doubly funny when faithful say "You don't understand game development" and "Game dev is hard", because to me it seems they don't understand game development because they remain convinced while accepting 10 years for <10% of the product is fine, they don't seem to understand that it means decades more to deliver the "scale and ambition" promised. Always they remain convinced that "once the tools and pipelines are done" or "once (magical tech) is done" that things will magically speed up and the game will soon be in a releasable state.
 

Agony_Aunt

Agony_Aunt
WotGTheAgent said:
It's why getting into gameplay discussions ultimately always leads towards financial discussions (much to Mole's chagrin). The two are so entwined (and sometimes enshrined) by the fanbase that a lot of criticism -- and not just here, mind you -- is met with funding tracker statistics, growth of player count, average spend increases, metrics on user engagement, and so on and so on and so on.

And then when you do discuss the terrible, awful, downright idiotic, obtuse and frankly shady business practices that CIG continues to commit on a near quarterly basis, you're met with "Jeez, guy, just play the game. Can't we discuss the game mechanics?" and the wheel turns once again, landing you back to trying to have an honest conversation about half finished game mechanics and designs, pre-sold assets that sold for a thousand US bux with attached gameplay that are now half a decade or more late and have barely entered the first design state (if that), the numerous time wasting and god awful bugs and wait, no, now they want to talk about funding again. Weird. So freakin' weird.

Just an aside, my 26 year old brother plays Star Citizen. He bought in during the Kickstarter when he was still a teenager. He couldn't even drive a car. He downloaded it and tried it again the other week and has fun playing with his org mates. Hearing this, I asked him what he thought of Derek Smart, Something Awful, the drama, broken promises, etc etc etc...he didn't know about a single thing. Not even about me! Made me realize that most players have absolutely no clue about the history of this game, the developers, and how ultimately this will end up being a 20 year journey with a "Thanks for playing Star Citizen!" ending.
Click to expand...

Yeah, that's one of the funny things, so many people are not aware of the history.

I suppose those players after a few years then diverge into either becoming skeptics or fans - when they start saying "ok, its not bad for an alpha, but when will the game be in a releasable state?" at which point, they go asking on the forums and are either met with hostility or excuses. They either then accept the excuses or start doing research and begin to understand what has been happening over the last 10 years.

Which is probably why the faithful really hate the skeptics. Because we run a narrative counter to their excuses.
 

LittleAnt

L
McGlashan said:
Your response to every criticism lately has been "but the funding!" It's almost as if there's no evidence of meaningful progress being made on the game itself.
Click to expand...
They are evidence but they are completly dismissed here. At least the funding explosion is something written on the wall. But even this is challenged here...
 

Navigare Necesse Est

Navigare Necesse Est
Agony_Aunt said:
"but i'm impressed by the scale and the ambition they are going for even in this unfinished state"

And that right there is the disconnect.

Anyone can promise huge scale and ambition: Star Atlas, Shroud of the Avatar, Earth 2, etc.

Implementation is hard though. And then its doubly funny when faithful say "You don't understand game development" and "Game dev is hard", because to me it seems they don't understand game development because they remain convinced while accepting 10 years for <10% of the product is fine, they don't seem to understand that it means decades more to deliver the "scale and ambition" promised. Always they remain convinced that "once the tools and pipelines are done" or "once (magical tech) is done" that things will magically speed up and the game will soon be in a releasable state.
Click to expand...
Easy to impress and gullible. Only takes an eloquent, charismatic leader and the sheep becomes a raging lunatic going hurrah against the neighbours.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom