I think their credibility as developers went out the window about 5 years ago...
Game Discussions Star Citizen Discussion Thread v12
- Thread starter Yaffle
- Start date
-
- Tags
- star citizen
Do they? A car or a battery factory is something everyone can see. When was the last time you have seen new or improved pipelines from CIG? Contrary to Tesla, we can only perceive the results. Even the headcount is not clear because the most transparent developer ever is strangely tight-lipped about their contractors.
Although it is still a mystery as to why they would be realising in, say, 2019, that they needed another hundred people to deliver more star systems in reasonable time. Who is responsible for planning there? It is not only Chris Roberts.
And if they are still doing that after 9 years, what hope is there for anyone that SC will deliver on their stretch goals within the next decade? Including the 110 systems backers paid for?
Perhaps it would be better to ask yourself whether this is the reality? It probably is the reality. So what does it really mean? Most certainly not a new system every few months.
Because the tools were not ready, as simple as that. Why hiring people if they can't work ?
But they've been continuously growing since launch. Apparently, according you, the tools were still not ready at 400 people or 500 people, and now they are at 600 people (at least going off CIGs statement).
And it seems like you are saying the tools might still not be ready.
How many people do they need before the tools are ready? 700, 800?
Or are you saying the tools are now ready, and we can be sure in yet another year we won't be listening to how the tools were not ready and they are now ready and that development only really started in 2022?
Because, once again, we've been listening to exactly the same statements for the last
Why do you think this year is any different? What have you seen that differentiates this year from previous years?
Are you saying they knew they would require these people right after The Great Change of 2016?
Last edited:
The initial pitch for Squadron 42 was in 2016.Actually, yes, development really only started in20082013
2008 probably in Chris' head.
Ok maybe I lied. https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/cig/star-citizen
List of most expensive video games to develop - Wikipedia
en.wikipedia.org
Squadron 42 - a perspective - Star Citizen Spectrum
Perhaps one of the most asked questions is currently "what the hell is going on with SQ42", and numerous memes such as "answer the call 2016". What I think is going on is exactly what I have...
robertsspaceindustries.com
It's not according to me, the tools are not finished. CIG is still working on gaz cloud tech, player's owned outpost, river of water/lava, path mesh for NPC on planet's surface, canyons...
Last edited:
Nope.The initial pitch for Squadron 42 was in 2016.
Squadron 42 - a perspective - Star Citizen Spectrum
Perhaps one of the most asked questions is currently "what the hell is going on with SQ42", and numerous memes such as "answer the call 2016". What I think is going on is exactly what I have...
SQ42 was first pitched in 2012 kickstarter along with SC for a 2014 release date. In 2014 its release was postponed when they ran out of stretch goals. In 2016 SC and SQ42 where split with SQ42 to "answer the call in 2016". Then 2017, 18 and then "when it's done". See SC wiki.
It's only 7 years delayed, as of this year. Don't worry, everything is bon.
One would make a parody of faithful, one could never be more accurate than your statements.
I was joking about the post I linked to
Let me ask this way. Tools are software and their development follows similar paths as any other software project. Given CIG's inability to deliver a game, mainly due to the constant scope creep and lack of accountability, what gives you any confidence to think that they can "finish" the tools? After all, there is always a way to introduce more scope, more features, better UI etc.
Is there anything CIG has done so far, or in CR's history in the gaming industry, indicating that the development of the tools themselves is somehow immune from falling victim to the behavioural patterns so symptomatic of his previous endeavours?
The initial pitch for Squadron 42 was in 2016.
Squadron 42 - a perspective - Star Citizen Spectrum
Perhaps one of the most asked questions is currently "what the hell is going on with SQ42", and numerous memes such as "answer the call 2016". What I think is going on is exactly what I have...
LOL, they love just retconning history don't they?
Can't they ever just say "Welp, CIG messed up. Oh well."?
So, what are you basing your hope on that the tools will be finished this year, or next year, or the year after?
When will the tools be ready to allow the content spigot to be opened so it comes flooding out?
Because, just to bring this back to the topic of CIG/Turbulent creating 110 solar systems, as recently noted, even a system a month (which is never going to happen) would take another 9+ years from the point of the relevant tools being ready. Realistically speaking, each system is going to take many months, assuming they have multiple teams working on them and making multiple systems in parallel (and assuming CR doesn't stick his thumb in the works).
Furthermore, if the tools are still being worked on, how did they manage to do Stanton in the first place? How is it that some backers seem to think CIG have Pyro or Odin tucked away somewhere just awaiting server meshing?
The tools either exist or they don't?
Sure, the stuff for gas cloud tech and player outposts and stuff might still need making, but none of that prevents all systems from being made. An arugments exists for specific worlds that need specific tech but there are plenty of systems that don't need any of that tech. They made Stanton without the need for "path mesh for NPC on planet's surface".
Is there any reason at all to believe CIG will have more than half a dozen systems in the next 5 years or so? Have CIG actually shown anything that might give confidence this will happen? And i mean, actually shown, working. Not talk. Talk is cheap.
This ties in with what i'm saying and why i'm calling LA out on his statements.
Take gas cloud tech that LA holds up as needing the tools making. They made Stanton. It has a gas giant. Sure, it can't be flown though yet, but its there. This means other systems with gas giants can be made with the same limitation. But the system itself can be there, with stations, outposts, planets and moons they do have the tech for. And once gas giant tech is done, flip the switch (metaphorically speaking) and boom, you now have a load of gas giants that can be flown though.
I mean, that's how FD have done it. A full galaxy, but only some planets landable. But when they added the tech for light atmospheres, now there are billions of new worlds opened up.
Basically none of what LA is saying stands up to even casual scrutiny.
For someone who claims to be a software developer, they don't seem to understand much about software development! (Yes! I did it! I went there! Anyone got a bingo?)
Yes... definitely the same old song and dance from CIG and its evangelists...
"Ooh I love to dance a little sidestep, now they see me now they don't-
I've come and gone and, ooh I love to sweep around the wide step,
cut a little swathe and lead the people on."
"Ooh I love to dance a little sidestep, now they see me now they don't-I've come and gone and, ooh I love to sweep around the wide step,
cut a little swathe and lead the people on."
Funny little convo over on SA
