I wish I could even aspire to being an SC pleb
All I have is a Freelancer. That's not even a bit of dried up snot trodden onto the heel of a proper backer's spats.
Star Citizen Discussion Thread v11
- Thread starter Sir.Tj
- Start date
-
- Tags
- star citizen
- Status
I wish I could even aspire to being an SC pleb
All I have is a Freelancer. That's not even a bit of dried up snot trodden onto the heel of a proper backer's spats.
Whatever happened to Star Citizen's vaunted subsumption? Do you remember how they used to go on and on about it and how it was going to make NPCs in other games look basic. Instead they have been stuck getting a single static bartender barely functioning.
NPCs that would get up and go to work on time, leave at the end of their shift and then go shopping or hit the bar etc, NPCs that would take the place of crew members, NPCs that would have different reactions based on whether you had showered or pooped recently and so on.
What happened there?
NPCs that would get up and go to work on time, leave at the end of their shift and then go shopping or hit the bar etc, NPCs that would take the place of crew members, NPCs that would have different reactions based on whether you had showered or pooped recently and so on.
What happened there?
Its all tied up in Bartender AI Tier 0 at the moment. When the bartender achieves self-awareness, then it will spread to all the other NPCs and the game will really come alive!
Funny thing is, this is just another pointer showing that SQ42 and SC being almost ready in 2014 was just a massive pile of lines. They didn't even have their AI done and they still don't, 6 years later.
The sandwurm ate it.
Yeah I was reading it was meant to be coming in 2015, then people were saying 3.0 was being delayed because of subsumption AI and now we are in 2020 and the AI is still totally emotionless, bland, non-responsive and just sucks in general.
I cannot believe they put all that work in for this to be the result, so I can only assume they scrapped it and went back to the drawing board.
LOL. Is that Star Citizen's version of the dog eating the homework?
While it might ve been "clear as day" for others this was something I didnt recognize when I read about the queue system. Coming from DS frequent twitter feed...
I mean yeah...in hindsight its obvious but I was reading about the queue hassle and my immediate thought was "wow....demand must be through the roof" which gives a different outlook on the funding stream.
But maybe its not high demand....maybe supply is shrinking so whoever they already had is going to rub ellbows and compete for online time? And if thats true....how does that correlate to the proposed "increased" funding? More money would mean more servers especially in this case, where CIG promoted and planned an event, even combining it with free fly and try-outs.....suggesting they "couldnt see it coming" is extremely naive and not something I would believe for a second.
Continuous observation will answer this question in due time. Once the even is over and things go back to normal we can say it was a fluke or oversight or whatever else floats your boat. But if this queue system persists even when the influx of people goes down....well do I need to say more?
Star Citizen is still going to show us all that it can be what CIG promises...when the company finally makes some progress that is recognizable by the world at large....not just by a few hardcore followers who see anything Chris and CIG do as the best thing since sliced bread. Even if SC finally reveals to be a failure or bad game...that isnt a crime. Lots of bad games out there or games that serve a small niche of players rather then everybody. But I read about somebody who claims to have invested FOURHUNDRED AND FIFTY dollars into this game and is "glad" he can enjoy it by flying around and watching the sunset......thats a monstrosity and that people acknowledge and accept it as "given" is something I dont understand. I would accept this blasé attitude with F2P games but usually people demand a return value for their money. Nobody simply gives away money he had to earn in the first place. This is "I decide what I do with my money" territory but again....this statements says more about YOU then it does about the game and when people claim that SC is "worth" an investment of thousands of dollars and can only provide the meager results that actually is Star Citizen.....it doesnt bode well for the speakers credibility.
Which brings us back to individual view/opinion and how much you value the few qualities Star Citizen actually provides.
Only that this doesnt put the discussion to end but prolongs it because people refuse to be honest and admit how "shallow" they actually are when they are willing to pay through the nose for nice screenshots while at the same time ripping other games apart and giving brutal criticism to other released games that do only some of the things that SC does (delays, overcharging, underdelivering, P2W, disappointing results....take your pick).
Is "its an alpha" really such a powerful sedative that it can make people gloss over all the obvious shortcomings and suggested problems plaguing the project? I pride myself in being pretty acceptant in my age....compared to my younger self. Theres a lot of things I dont like but I cant do a damn about them so I learn to live with em or stay away in a way that keeps em off my radar. First impressions matter but I m willing to listen to arguments and look at evidence that might change my view.
When peoples first impressions during this event is "what a crap show...." what is it that you can reply to them that might change their view? Its an alpha? You dont understand game development? We all know the drill. Some select view will actually stay clear of snide remarks, toxic replies and provide reasons for why THEY do it....but that usually doesnt help the one who objects because the acceptant people have already demonstrated through the years that they are either saints or so thick-skinned that actual abuse doesnt trigger them anymore.
Nice screenshots. I see tons of games that provide those. More refined, higher resolutions, better framerates, maintained during gameplay. If thats your focus then there is a long list of heavy competition out there....already available and a lot cheaper.
Ships? SCs ships are unique and nice-looking but they are not special in any way.
SCs interactivity is small scale because the game world is pretty small. There are games that allow the same level of interactivity on a bigger scale....maybe with a loading screen but "seamless" (and we could still argue if SC really is seamless or just fakes it) isnt something that is truly important I think. Not when you have to wait 30 minutes for your game to load and you constantly run into buffer and server issues because of it. Isnt gameplay, content and complexity more important?
And I know....CIG promises to provide ALL OF THAT but cmon....we are closing in on year 9 of development and most of the things in SC are still in flow and not nailed down. Isnt that worrying? Isnt that testament that CIG is the wrong company to tackle this behemoth?
The "solution" is not to wait longer or become more patient or "go away" (all actual advice given to people who have issues with the project) but to actually push CIG to get things done or man up and admit they cant do it. People who claim to "be okay with the return value" they get for their hundreds or even thousands of dollars paid who at the same time criticize other games for tiny things are lying to themselves....trying to look past the collosal waste of time and money they themselves provided. And I dont talk about the ones who actually feel that way because....due to the TOS and the nature of the project getting your money back is nearly impossible by now so if you manage to be "okay" with it then you can actually continue without ripping your hair out.
Its the people who make that claim then turn around to bash other games and maintain a demand of quality that not even SC can provide.
And we come back to "its an alpha" or any of the other excuses provided to keep the milk cow at the trough.
I was expecting to watch CIG collapse under its own weight over time. When time advances with the company being unable to provide what they promised. Players really aint as forgiving as the SC hardcore make it look like. Or better....companies failing to provide what they promised are not rewarded for the behavior and people are known to hold grudges so most companies try to plan long-term and keep the abuse to a minimum or avoid it alltogether.
But when you dont think long-term, when you dont actually plan to come through then your primary objective is to clear the pockets of your faithful as much as you can before your ploy reveals......if you are somebody who doesnt care about honesty, integrity and keeping a promise of course.....then its a simple cash-grab and nothing more. Chris Roberts doesnt strike me as a man who values any of these qualities. He reminds me of a weasel or a con-artist for those who dont get the comparison. Whatever he says should be taken with a huge dose of suspicion and whatever result is provided should be examined rigorously in order to make sure CIG and thus SC is on the right track.....to avoid letting the project slip on the cash-grab track that it IMO already drove on for the last 4 or 5 years...enabled by people who refuse to accept reality.
If you see things that make you think they are going off the rails or they follow a course that endangers the expected result........waiting and keeping still is actually the worst thing you can do. And I get the "who needs all the hassle" retorts because I share them only I would ve walked away a long time ago because I simply cannot ignore and look past all the things that irk me. And I dont need other players who have no better idea or understanding then myself to correct me, force their version onto me or tell me its "my fault" somehow. If things really were "normal" for such a project then I would expect actual examples for that to be the case.
But SC stands out as "special" in any way possible. The funding. The rate of progress to use of resources. The acceptance of its playerbase. The development time. Underdelivering. Hype.
Nothing about Star Citizens development is transparent. Whoever states that or claims thats the case either is blind to the obvious or drives a narrative so hard to the level of self-delusion. Critical changes in its development is discovered after the fact or even denied. Provided numbers are completely company-controlled giving no chance to actually verify them. And when you point out an ugly fact you are met with excuses, attacks or denial.
I used #itsnotacult a lot over the years and we had our period where this has been discussed and has been the focus of discussion but as time goes on this becomes more and more obvious and presents a sorry state of things. When players willingly or unknowingly are lured into a cult-like system that abuses them for monetary reasons. We could argue if its CIG or some delusional hardcore fanboys who are responsible for this and keep driving it but there is no doubt that CIG is the sole benefactor of the toxcicity and extreme conditions which are the norm in SCs development. And "blaming the victim" is a strategy used for addiction and cults and can be easily observed in this projects history as well. When the initial source was misleading or designed to create an illusion, its not the fault of people who fell for it...never was.
Cults dont need to be quenched. A lot of cults in the world continue to exist because some people actually crave the hollow promises that they all are based on. I would argue that cults dont do anything good and for the most part are used to unjustly enrich individuals who are exploiting a "legal way" to cheat people but heres where free will comes into play. A friend of mine is religious and has due to recent loss fallen to bigotry which made us clash just a few days ago. I usually dont bother with such people but this was a friend I value and see as a victim so we talked.....for hours. And I was able to deconstruct his version of reality and whats actually happening bit by bit. The more I pushed the more extreme his denial became, often accompanied by pure agression but again....its a friend so I endured the verbal abuse and kept going, steering around any attempt of sidestepping, obvious fallacies and straw arguments. Simply dropping the issue wasnt really possible because he claimed it was ME being wrong and he had the solution. Only he didnt. All he had was the drug clouding his view and judgement. At some point I realized that it was impossible for me to break through or rather...I could but by doing so I would destroy something intangible. Something he obviously needed to survive. What he needed was a lie and I knew it and I think he did too....but he willingly accepted it for the comfort it brought him. And he was unable to admit that loud.
So I dropped it because I didnt want to crush him. maybe I should ve but the picture of him suffering because I denied him his drug wasnt something I wanted to take on my shoulders. We are back to "not speaking about it" because we both know where it leads but our relationship has already changed as did my view on him at large. Its a loss and I have no doubt he will seek out echo chambers to enforce his belief that allows him to keep going....even if it means he is being abused for money and power.
But I would like to put the "cult" stamp on a cult so that innocent people dont have to go through the hassle or waste of time to avoid them. If Star Citizen is pay to win I dont need to discuss the term or point to other games which are p2w. If its not "pure" p2w but has heavy tendancies towards it then that can be included (and beating a premium ship with a stock ship is not evidence against it....). If the projects development is chaotic and very unreliable then those should be the terms used to give people taking a look an actual and honest answer they can base their decisions on because again....if people WANT to be in a cult then thats their decision. I just see too many cults luring in unwilling people into their grasp, breaking their spirits over time and committing mental and physical crimes that need to be opposed....and that counts for Star Citizen as well.
Star Citizen continous to claim qualities that it cannot provide. Its followers keep bashing other games and criticizing business practices without admitting that Star Citizen is prone to the same things other games are bashed for and that CIG is on a level of exploitative business practices that make EA or Ubisoft look like saints. Pay to win aspects are categorically denied even when obvious in their existence. Any and all kind of criticism or suggestion is perceived as a threat, at best ignored but usually attacked...often in a childish and personal manner. The "dream" is used continously to ignore or dismiss any signs of decay or rot. And the danger of "hell" is the projects collapse...to be avoided by all means. So at some point getting to nirvana isnt important anymore. Only avoiding hell is and like in religious cults people waste large amounts of their available time and resources to avoid a danger that isnt actually there.
CIG collapsing is not a problem. If Star Citizen fails it doesnt mean that the world has missed out on something special. Because if any of these things happen it only means that CIG was unfit to do the job in the first place and would there ve been more control, more honesty and more transperancy then we all might be playing Star Citizen today or follow a company that actually has a chance to pull it off. One of the most drastic things Star Citizens development has actually provided evidence for is that the publisher or "control tool" is an absolute necessity to ensure (partial) success. Without any form of oversight or veto rights things go pear shaped quickly and promise degenerates into abuse
"Wait and see" is not something that is helpful in this scenario. Patience is required because most things actually "take time" but time passed and resources used need to be explained and justified and in Star Citizens case I either see nice graphics or delusion on a cult-like level. At this point "wait and see" is at best a mantra that allows the user to remain passive and docile...and it empowers a potential scam. If you really care you speak up, even if it means what you have to say isnt all praise and glory. Truth and facts matter. Anywhere where its more then just peoples opinion.
So Star Citizen IS a cult and its ongoing existence is based on that foundation by now. In real life people often remain silent when they observe crimes or atrocities...mostly because they fear for their own safety in speaking up. Mistrels in distress, supressive regimes, crimes....its not so "simple" to stand up and point and speak your mind when you dont have the equipment to allow you to do what you do. People die because they dared to speak up against observed injustice.
But criticism of Star Citizen cannot be bashed down. The internet allows all kinds of toxcicity because users feel invulnerable but at the same time it makes heroic efforts easier. Standing up and and speaking your mind is something you can do without losing your life (well...at least in the country I live in) and because the driving factors realize this efforts have changed to manipulation rather then open conflict. And because lies are called out and explained that manipulation is directed against the existing fanbase....to "harden" their perception and keep them paying. Like in pay to win schemes not every user has to pay....as long as a certain percentage does and carry the whole operation.
Yeah another tirade/wall of text. Blame it on my encounter with my friend which left me shaken. Things often are not as easy as I thought they are.
I mean yeah...in hindsight its obvious but I was reading about the queue hassle and my immediate thought was "wow....demand must be through the roof" which gives a different outlook on the funding stream.
But maybe its not high demand....maybe supply is shrinking so whoever they already had is going to rub ellbows and compete for online time? And if thats true....how does that correlate to the proposed "increased" funding? More money would mean more servers especially in this case, where CIG promoted and planned an event, even combining it with free fly and try-outs.....suggesting they "couldnt see it coming" is extremely naive and not something I would believe for a second.
Continuous observation will answer this question in due time. Once the even is over and things go back to normal we can say it was a fluke or oversight or whatever else floats your boat. But if this queue system persists even when the influx of people goes down....well do I need to say more?
Star Citizen is still going to show us all that it can be what CIG promises...when the company finally makes some progress that is recognizable by the world at large....not just by a few hardcore followers who see anything Chris and CIG do as the best thing since sliced bread. Even if SC finally reveals to be a failure or bad game...that isnt a crime. Lots of bad games out there or games that serve a small niche of players rather then everybody. But I read about somebody who claims to have invested FOURHUNDRED AND FIFTY dollars into this game and is "glad" he can enjoy it by flying around and watching the sunset......thats a monstrosity and that people acknowledge and accept it as "given" is something I dont understand. I would accept this blasé attitude with F2P games but usually people demand a return value for their money. Nobody simply gives away money he had to earn in the first place. This is "I decide what I do with my money" territory but again....this statements says more about YOU then it does about the game and when people claim that SC is "worth" an investment of thousands of dollars and can only provide the meager results that actually is Star Citizen.....it doesnt bode well for the speakers credibility.
Which brings us back to individual view/opinion and how much you value the few qualities Star Citizen actually provides.
Only that this doesnt put the discussion to end but prolongs it because people refuse to be honest and admit how "shallow" they actually are when they are willing to pay through the nose for nice screenshots while at the same time ripping other games apart and giving brutal criticism to other released games that do only some of the things that SC does (delays, overcharging, underdelivering, P2W, disappointing results....take your pick).
Is "its an alpha" really such a powerful sedative that it can make people gloss over all the obvious shortcomings and suggested problems plaguing the project? I pride myself in being pretty acceptant in my age....compared to my younger self. Theres a lot of things I dont like but I cant do a damn about them so I learn to live with em or stay away in a way that keeps em off my radar. First impressions matter but I m willing to listen to arguments and look at evidence that might change my view.
When peoples first impressions during this event is "what a crap show...." what is it that you can reply to them that might change their view? Its an alpha? You dont understand game development? We all know the drill. Some select view will actually stay clear of snide remarks, toxic replies and provide reasons for why THEY do it....but that usually doesnt help the one who objects because the acceptant people have already demonstrated through the years that they are either saints or so thick-skinned that actual abuse doesnt trigger them anymore.
Nice screenshots. I see tons of games that provide those. More refined, higher resolutions, better framerates, maintained during gameplay. If thats your focus then there is a long list of heavy competition out there....already available and a lot cheaper.
Ships? SCs ships are unique and nice-looking but they are not special in any way.
SCs interactivity is small scale because the game world is pretty small. There are games that allow the same level of interactivity on a bigger scale....maybe with a loading screen but "seamless" (and we could still argue if SC really is seamless or just fakes it) isnt something that is truly important I think. Not when you have to wait 30 minutes for your game to load and you constantly run into buffer and server issues because of it. Isnt gameplay, content and complexity more important?
And I know....CIG promises to provide ALL OF THAT but cmon....we are closing in on year 9 of development and most of the things in SC are still in flow and not nailed down. Isnt that worrying? Isnt that testament that CIG is the wrong company to tackle this behemoth?
The "solution" is not to wait longer or become more patient or "go away" (all actual advice given to people who have issues with the project) but to actually push CIG to get things done or man up and admit they cant do it. People who claim to "be okay with the return value" they get for their hundreds or even thousands of dollars paid who at the same time criticize other games for tiny things are lying to themselves....trying to look past the collosal waste of time and money they themselves provided. And I dont talk about the ones who actually feel that way because....due to the TOS and the nature of the project getting your money back is nearly impossible by now so if you manage to be "okay" with it then you can actually continue without ripping your hair out.
Its the people who make that claim then turn around to bash other games and maintain a demand of quality that not even SC can provide.
And we come back to "its an alpha" or any of the other excuses provided to keep the milk cow at the trough.
I was expecting to watch CIG collapse under its own weight over time. When time advances with the company being unable to provide what they promised. Players really aint as forgiving as the SC hardcore make it look like. Or better....companies failing to provide what they promised are not rewarded for the behavior and people are known to hold grudges so most companies try to plan long-term and keep the abuse to a minimum or avoid it alltogether.
But when you dont think long-term, when you dont actually plan to come through then your primary objective is to clear the pockets of your faithful as much as you can before your ploy reveals......if you are somebody who doesnt care about honesty, integrity and keeping a promise of course.....then its a simple cash-grab and nothing more. Chris Roberts doesnt strike me as a man who values any of these qualities. He reminds me of a weasel or a con-artist for those who dont get the comparison. Whatever he says should be taken with a huge dose of suspicion and whatever result is provided should be examined rigorously in order to make sure CIG and thus SC is on the right track.....to avoid letting the project slip on the cash-grab track that it IMO already drove on for the last 4 or 5 years...enabled by people who refuse to accept reality.
If you see things that make you think they are going off the rails or they follow a course that endangers the expected result........waiting and keeping still is actually the worst thing you can do. And I get the "who needs all the hassle" retorts because I share them only I would ve walked away a long time ago because I simply cannot ignore and look past all the things that irk me. And I dont need other players who have no better idea or understanding then myself to correct me, force their version onto me or tell me its "my fault" somehow. If things really were "normal" for such a project then I would expect actual examples for that to be the case.
But SC stands out as "special" in any way possible. The funding. The rate of progress to use of resources. The acceptance of its playerbase. The development time. Underdelivering. Hype.
Nothing about Star Citizens development is transparent. Whoever states that or claims thats the case either is blind to the obvious or drives a narrative so hard to the level of self-delusion. Critical changes in its development is discovered after the fact or even denied. Provided numbers are completely company-controlled giving no chance to actually verify them. And when you point out an ugly fact you are met with excuses, attacks or denial.
I used #itsnotacult a lot over the years and we had our period where this has been discussed and has been the focus of discussion but as time goes on this becomes more and more obvious and presents a sorry state of things. When players willingly or unknowingly are lured into a cult-like system that abuses them for monetary reasons. We could argue if its CIG or some delusional hardcore fanboys who are responsible for this and keep driving it but there is no doubt that CIG is the sole benefactor of the toxcicity and extreme conditions which are the norm in SCs development. And "blaming the victim" is a strategy used for addiction and cults and can be easily observed in this projects history as well. When the initial source was misleading or designed to create an illusion, its not the fault of people who fell for it...never was.
Cults dont need to be quenched. A lot of cults in the world continue to exist because some people actually crave the hollow promises that they all are based on. I would argue that cults dont do anything good and for the most part are used to unjustly enrich individuals who are exploiting a "legal way" to cheat people but heres where free will comes into play. A friend of mine is religious and has due to recent loss fallen to bigotry which made us clash just a few days ago. I usually dont bother with such people but this was a friend I value and see as a victim so we talked.....for hours. And I was able to deconstruct his version of reality and whats actually happening bit by bit. The more I pushed the more extreme his denial became, often accompanied by pure agression but again....its a friend so I endured the verbal abuse and kept going, steering around any attempt of sidestepping, obvious fallacies and straw arguments. Simply dropping the issue wasnt really possible because he claimed it was ME being wrong and he had the solution. Only he didnt. All he had was the drug clouding his view and judgement. At some point I realized that it was impossible for me to break through or rather...I could but by doing so I would destroy something intangible. Something he obviously needed to survive. What he needed was a lie and I knew it and I think he did too....but he willingly accepted it for the comfort it brought him. And he was unable to admit that loud.
So I dropped it because I didnt want to crush him. maybe I should ve but the picture of him suffering because I denied him his drug wasnt something I wanted to take on my shoulders. We are back to "not speaking about it" because we both know where it leads but our relationship has already changed as did my view on him at large. Its a loss and I have no doubt he will seek out echo chambers to enforce his belief that allows him to keep going....even if it means he is being abused for money and power.
But I would like to put the "cult" stamp on a cult so that innocent people dont have to go through the hassle or waste of time to avoid them. If Star Citizen is pay to win I dont need to discuss the term or point to other games which are p2w. If its not "pure" p2w but has heavy tendancies towards it then that can be included (and beating a premium ship with a stock ship is not evidence against it....). If the projects development is chaotic and very unreliable then those should be the terms used to give people taking a look an actual and honest answer they can base their decisions on because again....if people WANT to be in a cult then thats their decision. I just see too many cults luring in unwilling people into their grasp, breaking their spirits over time and committing mental and physical crimes that need to be opposed....and that counts for Star Citizen as well.
Star Citizen continous to claim qualities that it cannot provide. Its followers keep bashing other games and criticizing business practices without admitting that Star Citizen is prone to the same things other games are bashed for and that CIG is on a level of exploitative business practices that make EA or Ubisoft look like saints. Pay to win aspects are categorically denied even when obvious in their existence. Any and all kind of criticism or suggestion is perceived as a threat, at best ignored but usually attacked...often in a childish and personal manner. The "dream" is used continously to ignore or dismiss any signs of decay or rot. And the danger of "hell" is the projects collapse...to be avoided by all means. So at some point getting to nirvana isnt important anymore. Only avoiding hell is and like in religious cults people waste large amounts of their available time and resources to avoid a danger that isnt actually there.
CIG collapsing is not a problem. If Star Citizen fails it doesnt mean that the world has missed out on something special. Because if any of these things happen it only means that CIG was unfit to do the job in the first place and would there ve been more control, more honesty and more transperancy then we all might be playing Star Citizen today or follow a company that actually has a chance to pull it off. One of the most drastic things Star Citizens development has actually provided evidence for is that the publisher or "control tool" is an absolute necessity to ensure (partial) success. Without any form of oversight or veto rights things go pear shaped quickly and promise degenerates into abuse
"Wait and see" is not something that is helpful in this scenario. Patience is required because most things actually "take time" but time passed and resources used need to be explained and justified and in Star Citizens case I either see nice graphics or delusion on a cult-like level. At this point "wait and see" is at best a mantra that allows the user to remain passive and docile...and it empowers a potential scam. If you really care you speak up, even if it means what you have to say isnt all praise and glory. Truth and facts matter. Anywhere where its more then just peoples opinion.
So Star Citizen IS a cult and its ongoing existence is based on that foundation by now. In real life people often remain silent when they observe crimes or atrocities...mostly because they fear for their own safety in speaking up. Mistrels in distress, supressive regimes, crimes....its not so "simple" to stand up and point and speak your mind when you dont have the equipment to allow you to do what you do. People die because they dared to speak up against observed injustice.
But criticism of Star Citizen cannot be bashed down. The internet allows all kinds of toxcicity because users feel invulnerable but at the same time it makes heroic efforts easier. Standing up and and speaking your mind is something you can do without losing your life (well...at least in the country I live in) and because the driving factors realize this efforts have changed to manipulation rather then open conflict. And because lies are called out and explained that manipulation is directed against the existing fanbase....to "harden" their perception and keep them paying. Like in pay to win schemes not every user has to pay....as long as a certain percentage does and carry the whole operation.
Yeah another tirade/wall of text. Blame it on my encounter with my friend which left me shaken. Things often are not as easy as I thought they are.
It been done before by Gothic already. Or was it Little Computer People? Anyway, it needs to be better, never donner and more reinvented. That takes time and eventually marketting will have invented new dribble and tech Gebabbel from all the miillion of dollas that they can pretend it's already in and the acolytes will go and spread the word.
I wish I had a good advice what to do in such situations with your friend. I think usually their surrounding just transforms as well. Friends get replaced by new ones. People rather stick to views they agree on. Recently I had a taxi driver going on the virus was a test of the higher being. Whichj is a load of tosh, but since the outset: "We've been abusing the environment. Abusing our fellow humans. etc." wasn't really arguable I just let that slip.
And it made me think, if the initial outset can be agreed on - does it really matter that much which conclusions they draw? I think it's easier appealing to have undogmatic applications for real life than to tackle the fundamental pillars of a belief system. It doesn't matter if someone is a shill for SC when you can both agree that it's a good idea to collect water before setting out into the desert.
My guess with the queuing system is that it is there to reduce the the issues they seem to have spawning pilots and their ships into the verse correctly. The queuing system effectively slows the throughput. My guess is there are too many requests on the pilot/ship/config db and it is not able to perform the requests so you get time outs. New accounts probably put more stress on as it has to initialize the character as well. The way you structure the db could also be a huge factor. I don't think its any surprise that this queuing system appeared immediately prior to a free fly!
Sounds good. I wonder if this ties into their recent switch to the Long Term Persistence database and then the problems they were having which resulted in the removal of items from said database. It seems too coincidental for all of this to occur together.
You know, I can't help but compare Star Citizen to another game I backed on Kickstater waaay back at the end of 2012.
Stonehearth, a voxel based village construction and management simulator.
The game was supposed to be released in 2014, but remained in Alpha until it was officially released in late 2018. The game was always fun to play, with the Hearthlings (the AI villagers) able to follow their routines right off the bat. The Hearthlings began to show personalities in 2016, hold "wingding" style conversations in 2017, and have more complex emotions in early 2018. I actually watched one Hearthling run off in tears after another Hearthling who had insensitively reminded her of her pet rabbit, who had died in a goblin raid early in the game!
Unfortunately, the development team wasn't able to continue development after 2018, unable to meet its last, and most ambitious, stretch goal: a "dungeon master." Naturally, they got some hate because of that, but IMO it's still a good game. The Development team had to redo two of their core features (how Hearthlings build the structures you design, and path finding) because player designed buildings were way more elaborate than the development team had anticipated. Personally, I think they made the right choice.
A very small team on a limited budget could get their AIs to interact with a dynamically changing environment, and give them personalities and emotions along the way. What the heck is wrong with CIG, given the problems that their AIs have, even after all this time?
Servers are back up but they were down for a while 
Source: https://clips.twitch.tv/FlirtyUnusualBarracudaBibleThump
Finally installed it this morning.
Giving it a whirl after I finish watching Cape Fear.
Giving it a whirl after I finish watching Cape Fear.
It also worth watching their promo videos, for example, the great gatsby/5th element rip off one they did which showed the bartender being highly animated and interacting with people and doing a cocktail or something. That's what they sell to people. What they deliver is t-posing NPCs.
Other good comparisons are Shroud of the Avatar and Chronicles of Elaria. Both massively oversold what they thought they could produce, both had lengthy devleopment times with backers throwing money at it while vigorously defending the state of it, SotA had a "rockstar" developer behind it (and IIRC, the CoE guy has been around a while), and ultimately, both failed to deliver.
Ah, getting in the right mindset!
Complete with questionable cash shops, funding drives and P2W.
The other one that is taking a real long time is Camelot Unchained (Mark Jacobs) but at least their cash shop is more palatable and they will refund backers if they want out.
- Status