Game Discussions Star Citizen Discussion Thread v12

Firkrayt

Firkrayt
Agony_Aunt said:
I think by this point most people are sure that once Server Meshing is done, it won't live up to all its promises, it will get labelled Tier 0, and CIG will come up with some other magical jesus tech that will be required before server meshing really starts to work.

Its not like we haven't heard this all before.
Click to expand...
What FUDstery is this? SC will be great as soon as CI-G establishes the Spanish Inquisition!

Dementropy said:
EDIT: I initially cited The Pledge, which was about treating backers with the same respect as a publisher, complete with communication about major decisions. Ooops.
Click to expand...
You mean embezzling their money on Chris own side projects, like he did to Microsoft with Wing Commander movie? Well, that promise Crobber did fulfill for sure.
 

Agony_Aunt

Agony_Aunt
NoMadGuy said:
personally I have no interest in tow, as far as I understand it is a separate game that was going to use a free to play model, but I could be wrong, there are people who say it was the replacement for star marine which would also have logic (and very few people use star marine nowadays) but while there are some people excited about this, many of us just don't, in life not everyone wants the same things, that's not bad, you will never find people aligned with an idea, If you want to find people dissatisfied with something, sure you will, it will be easy whatever it is; The problem I see here is how we tend to generalize, it is a bias that leads us to take the wrong image about something.
Click to expand...

So, you absolve CIG of making ToW? :D

The "all" you bolded perhaps shows you misinterpreted the statement. All in that context can be just a few people or many. ;)
 

fzfq3m

F
Dementropy said:
The way for CIG to spin this would be to say something like ToW would reach a wider audience, generate additional funds so they could deliver SQ42 and SC "sooner rather than later" (as per the infamous polls, and yes I'm keeping a straight face while typing this), and capture a portion of the console audience to show them the wonders of PC gaming
Click to expand...
That would be hilarious… on epic proportions
The game that was born as a rebellion to show investors the PC Gaming was not dead… will now rely on Console sales….

Brilliant
 

VR Golgot

VR Golgot
NoMadGuy said:
...but while there are some people excited about this, many of us just don't, in life not everyone wants the same things, that's not bad, you will never find people aligned with an idea, If you want to find people dissatisfied with something, sure you will...
Click to expand...

So you'd be fine if CIG's first release was a Battlefield clone rather than SC or SQ42?

Or to get more conjectural: If it was a Battlefield clone made for console, rather than the two planned PC titles? Or a failure at launch, meaning it contributed no meaningful funds to SC & SQ42 development? (While also tarnishing the SC brand in the process).

You see, this isn't a question of personal taste, as you're trying to make out. It's a question of whether CIG are using backer funds to provide what backers purchased. A more interesting question ;)
 

Navigare Necesse Est

Navigare Necesse Est
fzfq3m said:
That would be hilarious… on epic proportions
The game that was born as a rebellion to show investors the PC Gaming was not dead… will now rely on Console sales….

Brilliant
Click to expand...
It would require to be actually a seller and a good game in the first place. So far we've seen some shooter jank noone wants to play. I wouldn't hold my breath that console players rush to the rescue for crappy shooter gameplay.
 

Agony_Aunt

Agony_Aunt
NoMadGuy said:
nah, that's not true at all, again a biassed opinion, check the previous video i posted, pure gameplay, here
Click to expand...

So, you're saying SC lends itself more to being a releasable product (which it doesn't, since it can't be released at the moment) than a machinima maker (which it does very well)?

Or are you saying that SC doesn't lend itself at all to being a machinima maker (which would conflict with your post with the machinima video).

And you're saying my opinion is biased?! :ROFLMAO:

But if you want to suggest SC is a releasable product, awesome, we can review it like one! You want to go down that road? I'm totally up for that!
 

thistle

T
NoMadGuy said:
take the thread from that answer, where are the lies about tow? nah, maybe lack of communication and some misinformation from some people, just that, and as I said before, I personally have no interest in tow
Click to expand...
That's fine, you not having any interest in tow, but the point is you are ignoring the history of it's development. It was never to be a standalone game, it was a mode within SC which they claimed was for testing and honing the combined arms gameplay loops, before they were to be included in SC proper.

Even it's initial reveal was weird, thrown out to a baying crowd at a citcon (2019?) with claims it was going to be out and playable to backers very soon.

Here is Boredgamer's video from November 2019. Sounds exciting!

Star Citizen has a New Gamemode Theatres of War, it plays like Battlefield 5 Rush Objective Based but at the Scale of Star Citizen with 20 v 20 combined arms combat, including ships, vehicles, classes, destruction of structures and space stations.
Click to expand...

 

thistle

T
What was the plan for TOW? From citcon 2019:

bored.jpg
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom