I don't care for ED anymore. And I don't understand why you're so obsessed with it. In a thread about Fail Citizen.
Game Discussions Star Citizen Discussion Thread v12
- Thread starter Yaffle
- Start date
-
- Tags
- star citizen
Because EDO has an effect on SC and vice versa.
Source: https://www.reddit.com/r/starcitizen/comments/ocw86j/what_happened_with_ed_to_cause_so_many_refugees/
An effect that is mostly in the heads of those who want to see it. It is like Spectrum outrages having "effect" on funding. I mean, almost zero effect.
You don't want to get into the system counting fight
More like 'when SC has more content it will be hard on the ED community'
To which we say 'get on with it then' - something besides Hello Games to motivate fdev to get their act together would be great
No, it's because you're trolling. Next week you pull another lame thing out tje hat.
The day SC gets its second system will be the day the game will be missing its 98 systems, as opposed to 99. Yet another triumphant 1%.
I really dont understand Ants confidence. Why would CiG suddenly change the habit of a lifetime by delivering what was promised all those years ago. I would like to see the game released as promised and I am very glad that Mr Roberts hasnt had a penny from me.
Which, after almost a decade, should be what everyone's focused on, instead of a second system (which thus far isn't being implemented at a faster rate than their first).
Edit: It's kind of sad that after all this time and money, even ardent supporters have had to lower their lofty expectations from "SC will be the BDSSE with robust quarterly patches, just you wait and see!" to a very resigned "Just you wait until they... release a second system. In the future. Sometime. To be determined."
Last edited:
There is no confidence. Ant just regurgitates the most ridiculous crap to provoke reactions here. In a way that's why we are kinda here. I find genuine stuff more funny tho.
Yeah it does kinda show man
CIG have been saying 'X is coming' for a longgggg time. Frequently roadmapping said things and then not delivering them, often for multiple years in succession. As a fairly heightened example, let's look at the infamous 3.0 Roadmap, targeted for delivery over the 2017+ period:
^^ EDIT: Now with orange 'feature incomplete' tier added ^^
Nearly 5 years later, and huge sweeps of that content and tech are nowhere to be seen. And everything which has been added, with the notable exception of mining, is in a 'Tier 0' introductory form. IE nowhere near the level of functionality or complexity that CIG say they aspire to. Both in terms of the ship functionality and the player professions.
You could have dropped in on CIG land in any of the intervening years and heard that loads of it was coming 'this year +1'. Salvaging for the ($400) Reclaimer, to make it more than just a shell. Multiple star systems to explore in all of those shiny exploration ships. Etcetera etcetera.
This is the downside to CIG's apparent transparency. They talk a damn good game, but there's currently a fairly absurd lag on them actually delivering it
So, I'm afraid, lol at the very idea of SC having 'Full VR support' in 'a few years', for example
And it's also worth noting on the capital ship videos that they don't actually exist as a playable vehicles in SC currently.
If you wanna assess whether SC is for you, (and indeed, whether it has executed a game mechanic in a better way than other titles), you need to first discern the difference between their marketing bling, and their actual delivered things
Last edited:
LOL, you keep doing it.
We've seen how much you've dumped on Odyssey and the more you do that, the worse it makes SC look if that is your only yardstick.
Imagine if the Porche marketing department decided to use the slogan "Better than a Lada".
Actually worse than that, because you're talking only about a DLC vs a full game. Perhaps its even like them saying "Better than a car tyre"
I mean, if you want to big up Star Citizen, you're going to have to make a more positive statement than saying its better than eating poo.
The problem for the ED community lies with ED.
The problem with SC lies with the SC community.
The former is a question for the rest of the forum, the latter is a question for this thread.
If people switch to playing SC because Odyssey is pants, that's their choice. But hopefully they are doing it fully informed of everything about SC and are not being mislead about the state of the game or the history of CIG. I also hope they are doing it because they like SC, not because they don't like Odyssey (as in, not swtiching from a bug ridden poor performance DLC lacking certain features to a bug ridden poor performance game lacking certain features).
LOL. Again, ED is ED and a second system is nothing. The day SC adds a second system to SC will indeed be a major milestone for the game. A 100% increase in the number of systems. Maybe in another 5 years they will add a third!
Because the only way they can make SC look good is by comparing it to poo.
109 IIRC. Go count them on the stretch goals.
<snipped only for brevity>...If you wanna assess whether SC is for you, (and indeed, whether it has executed a game mechanic in a better way than other titles), you need to first discern the difference between their marketing bling, and their actual delivered things
The best piece of advice ever...and normally my start and end point when offering advice on SC to anyone buying into the advertising and marketing crap Ci¬G persistently throw out of the door.
The gameplay actually there in the PU on a daily basis can be very playable and enjoyable...I rarely see anyone seriously disputing that one fact. The caveats though are many...the main one is whether you're able to look past the business practises and monetisation of the project by Ci¬G. Some like me, can and do look past it and can separate the business side from what I play. I'm highly critical of Ci¬G but enjoy playing Star Citizen and I don't see any conflict between the two.
I'm the same with EA, Ubisoft...anybody who develops and publishes a great many of the game titles I play. To make a righteous stand against any of those main culprits would be like cutting my nose off to spite my face. EA Play pro, Ubisoft connect+, Microsoft gamepass ultimate...I have them all and have been a subscriber to all of those games services since they were introduced, in some cases like EA Play pro... what used to be Origin Access premier on PC... for many years. Making a similarly righteous stand against Ci¬G simply for their business practises... for me... would be a bit hypocritical
Last edited:
Haha, both of those are on my poo list as well. Don't give either company money.
However, when my daughter wanted The Sims and both wanted some AC games, of course i paid. I've got my principles, but i'm not forcing my kids to follow them.
However, if one of them came to me saying "Daddy! That Star Citizen game looks good, can i have it?" I might wonder what i've done wrong in life
Tanks were a big promise at one point. Are there tanks?
There are indeed...not so much ordinary 'tanks'...but proper 'tonks'
A loving father sometimes need to punish out of necessity?Haha, both of those are on my poo list as well. Don't give either company money.
However, when my daughter wanted The Sims and both wanted some AC games, of course i paid. I've got my principles, but i'm not forcing my kids to follow them.
However, if one of them came to me saying "Daddy! That Star Citizen game looks good, can i have it?" I might wonder what i've done wrong in life