Game Discussions Star Citizen Discussion Thread v12
- Thread starter Yaffle
- Start date
-
- Tags
- star citizen
Many devs died to bring us this patch.
Interesting video, and quite possibly this has happened or can happen in other games with PvP
If I get the story right, a PvPer killed a guy, and the target kept coming back and got killed over and over again, and then reported the PvPer for griefing, and CIG banned them(?), despite there being video evidence of the target coming back time and again.
If I get the story right, a PvPer killed a guy, and the target kept coming back and got killed over and over again, and then reported the PvPer for griefing, and CIG banned them(?), despite there being video evidence of the target coming back time and again.
Highly unlikely the PvP'er got banned for this one reported incident, just doesn't happen. I like Mongrel Squad...they're decent RP pirates and don't usually descend into griefing... but there's more to this story than is being told I reckon
Player reporting has been consistently abused since it became a thing. I've personally had several instances of being falsely reported on Xbox live (and on PC) for 'cheating' playing the battlefield series back in the day...some folk just don't like being removed from the top of the leader board or having their KD ratio tarnished...it happens frequently in every online game, regardless of genre, where competitive PvP is involved and with an entire generation of online gamers for whom player toxicity has become the norm rather than the exception.
It's the reason I gave up the competitive PvP nonsense and generally prefer single player or coop PvE games for my entertainment these days...just can't be arsed dealing with entire armies of potty mouthed spotted yoofs with the singular intent of ruining my game time. It wasn't a matter of gitting gud, I was gud, very gud in some of the games I've played...I just got heartily bored with the toxic behaviors that pervade online PvP of any kind
Last edited:
Yes I'm wrong, since 2004...
GTA 6 development started back in 2012 (before GTA 5 released) but didn't hit the production line until 2015.
Viajero
Volunteer Moderator
Yes I'm wrong, since 2004...
GTA 6 development started back in 2012 (before GTA 5 released) but didn't hit the production line until 2015.
LittleAnt, it is precisely this kind of ridiculous and disingenuous posts that make you lose any amount of credibility in the thread.
"Bethesda started committing manpower to Starfield in after wrapping up production on Fallout 4, but it was a twinkle in the company’s eye since at least 2004."
So development start, i.e. people actually working on it, in 2015 (release of FO4). Not 2004.
I mean, if we apply your very particular logic, and since Chris Roberts is on record saying that SC is the game he has always wanted Freelancer to be (it has been a twinkle in his eye at least since then), we could also count SC development start in 2000 (release of Freelancer). So according to you SC would have been in development for over 23 years and counting.
Last edited:
Unlike star citizen however...even granting the generous assertion that your misappropriation of dates and development schedules are even slightly correct... Starfield will release this year...and with zero $ of private backers' funding being misappropriated throughout the entire development process.Yes I'm wrong, since 2004...
GTA 6 development started back in 2012 (before GTA 5 released) but didn't hit the production line until 2015.
I wonder how many top selling game titles from universally recognised AAA game studios will be designed, developed and released before the Empire of Roberts manages to ship any working, fully realised and released game before those of you still believing in the cult of Roberts cease with the utterly pointless and frankly ridiculous comparisons?
Doesn't the simple but inescapable fact that the majority of those universally recognised AAA game development studios being abused for comparison have each designed, developed and released not one, but several top selling games during the 11+ years the Empire of Roberts have spent frittering away over $500m on the eternal alphas of Sqn 404 and star citizen ever register?
Last edited:
It's the reason I gave up the competitive PvP nonsense and generally prefer single player or coop PvE games for my entertainment these days...just can't be arsed dealing with entire armies of potty mouthed spotted yoofs with the singular intent of ruining my game time. It wasn't a matter of gitting gud, I was gud, very gud in some of the games I've played...I just got heartily bored with the toxic behaviors that pervade online PvP of any kind
I was never bothered with being gud. I was far more of a git.
I could not possibly even suggest that there is a number of routing tables I've left as recursive smoking wrecks over the years
Still, it's more of a positive integer than CI-G have released games.
Credibility on which subject ?
You missed the point of my post.
Game A in alpha since 10 years.
Game B in alpha since 9 years.
Game C in alpha since 8 years.
Game D in alpha since 7 years.
Etc
All of which are currently or soon to be released titles making legitimate sales profit for the game studios involved in their creation. There is no realistic comparison to star citizen or the Empire of Roberts' ridiculously poor effort as much as you insist on trying to re-invent one
Last edited:
And you (for what I know), despite the release of x AAA games, will play the alpha of the evil CR's game in 2023 and probably in 2024 and the other years...I wonder how many top selling game titles from universally recognised AAA game studios will be designed, developed and released before the Empire of Roberts manages to ship any working, fully realised and released game before those of you still believing in the cult of Roberts cease with the utterly pointless and frankly ridiculous comparisons?
Doesn't the simple but inescapable fact that the majority of those universally recognised AAA game development studios being abused for comparison have each designed, developed and released several top selling games during the 11+ years the Empire of Roberts have spent fittering away over $500m on the eternal alphas of Sqn 404 and star citizen ever register?
I am pretty sure Starfield has moved out of Alpha.
Of course my Dear Little Ant! How else are you, Mole, myself and many others going to compare what has been delivered to what was promised by Genuine Roberts, that we paid for in hard currency?
Even in 2024 and beyond, that wobblechinned waveyhanded chronic gesticulator owes us at least two games.
...and I've paid handsomely for the dubious privilege of doing so since December 2015. I also play most if not all of the titles on your nonsensical comparison 'list'
Last edited:
Now you're changing what you said and being disingenuous. Since you can't remember what you wrote (I feel terribly sorry for your extreme short-term memory flaws) here I'll help you:Yes I'm wrong, since 2004...
GTA 6 development started back in 2012 (before GTA 5 released) but didn't hit the production line until 2015.
Wrong. Starfield has not been in alpha since 10 years, or since 2004. Only an idiot would suggest such a silly notion, but as you're well known for your inability to do reliable research on any topic, I'll assume you're being passed incorrect information and are simply clueless about it.
Starfield is widely known to have begun pre-production in 2016, so there might have been a pre-alpha, at most, from that point onwards.
Unless you're also suggesting that Star Citizen has been in alpha ever since Chris first began discussions with dev mates back in 2010? Again, only an idiot would suggest such a silly notion, but as you're well known for your inability to do reliable research on any topic, I'll assume you're being passed incorrect information and are simply clueless about it.
Wrong. For a game to become "old" it must first release, and GTA6 hasn't yet released - to either early access or full launch.
Meanwhile, GTA5 is a 9 years old (full launch in late 2013), Elite Dangerous is 8 years old (full launch in late 2014), Star Citizen is 5 years old (Early Access in late 2017 with Alpha 3.0), and both Squadron 42 and Theatres Of War appear to be dying in the womb (aka stillbirths).
Last edited:
Yep, you've got the story correct. The piracy victim kept respawning in their medbed, repeatedly refused to negotiate with the pirates, and repeatedly attacked them forcing the pirates to kill him again and again. The victim then reported the pirates to CIG support who promptly warned one of them. In summary: the victim was the actual griefer.
It was one of the hot topics in today's Answer The Call from Mike:
And Mike's previous react video on the topic:
In conclusion: CIG are in the wrong.
Last edited:
You still don't understand my point. I really don't care when SF (or any other game) has started its development. How long a game is in alpha doesn't define solely a good or a bad alpha. I threw a bunch of intentionally skewed dates at you (after a simple one-minute search and I just picked the first few answers giving the earliest dates) and you dispute them like it matters (seriously? You really think I think SF started its development in 2004 because Howard talked about it over coffee in 2004?) If you really want to know what I think about the alpha of other games, I'll just say that CP2077 and EDO should have had an extra year of alpha and/or beta, nothing more.
If the game is complex the alpha will be long, if the game is simple the alpha will be short. If the company making the game think the game is not ready, the alpha continue if they have the money. For what CIG want to do and how CIG started, 10+ years of dev does not surprise me more than that.
We are not the same. You are comparing while me and Mole are playing. See the difference ?
Oh, I understand your point completely: it's to intentionally obfuscate about any topic whatsoever through purposefully posting incorrect information, in some vain and futile attempt to protect your fair maiden Star Citizen for whatever silly reason (Star Citizen is a game so can't love you, and neither will the company CIG).
