Game Discussions Star Citizen Discussion Thread v12

LittleAnt

L
thistle said:
I've no interest in walking around a 155m Anaconda, personally.
Click to expand...
Good for you but we are a lot to be interested. If ED had real ship interior, SC would have collapsed x years ago.
thistle said:
But it's irrelevant to the point. Is paying $135 for a red spaceship a bargain or a scam?
Click to expand...
Paying 135$ to fund a company that will give you a real immersive ship's pilot experience in a space game is a bargain for a lot of people.
 

Northpin

Northpin
LittleAnt said:
Paying 135$ to fund a company that will give you a real immersive ship's pilot experience in a space game is a bargain for a lot of people.
Click to expand...

You're paying for a promise.
A promise made by a company that consistently breaks promises

Which can only mean you are funding a scam (gimme $50, you'll get a nice game in 2-3 years. well, gimme some $$ more, we're making progress but we're not quite there yet... more $$ please... more... more... and this is happening year after year for how long? 11 years already?)
 

amigacooke

amigacooke
LittleAnt said:
Paying 135$ to fund a company that will give you a real immersive ship's pilot experience in a space game is a bargain for a lot of people.
Click to expand...
Who is this company of which you speak? :)

I kind of think my ship interior (and base building) itch will be scratched by Starfield.

I‘ve pledged, and this time it’s a pledge not to fund what developers say is/might be coming. It’s working well.
 

Ed02349

E
amigacooke {macOS} said:
Who is this company of which you speak? :)

I kind of think my ship interior (and base building) itch will be scratched by Starfield.

I‘ve pledged, and this time it’s a pledge not to fund what developers say is/might be coming. It’s working well.
Click to expand...
Is there an edition of the game at $135?
So much buzz about this game. I wonder if it'll become a dying game before Star Citizen gets another system.
Actually I can see CIG adding another system to SC anytime, by deleting the current one because it's outdated or LORE.
 

LittleAnt

L
Northpin said:
You're paying for a promise.
A promise made by a company that consistently breaks promises

Which can only mean you are funding a scam (gimme $50, you'll get a nice game in 2-3 years. well, gimme some $$ more, we're making progress but we're not quite there yet... more $$ please... more... more... and this is happening year after year for how long? 11 years already?)
Click to expand...
The nice game is now if you can stand bugs from time to time. The vast majority of new players since 2 years just play for what's ingame. You should test the game because I guess you don't know how many promises have been already released. What you call a scam is the main game for a lot of player (and ED refugees) that play hundred of hours in it.
 

VR Golgot

VR Golgot
A fine super-combo post here:

A game dev, OG concierge+ backer, with some critiques about the game...

TheIronGiants said:
Tbh your post deserves a longer reply to address everything, but let me just say this. You are absolutely 100% correct. CIG's design team is proving just how lazy they are and how little they care about basic level design principles. We are 10 years into this project and they still don't know how to add a proper entrance to a spaceship, balance a PVP engagement (which is not new, every FPS game has figured it out), or make trading interesting.

Getting a bit tired of the blind optimism over this game when CIG is proving time and time again they can't even make barebones features that are designed logically, and people actually believe we are going to end up with insanely deep and interesting mechanics. Tell that to salvage which is just mining code rebranded, and mining is pretty barebones too, heck we don't even have large asteroid mining but Elite has had it since day one.

Now before anyone says I'm just a hater, I am arguably one of the highest spending backers, spending many thousands per year since kickstarter days. I'm not going to enter this sunken cost fallacy that so many have fallen into. If they are doing a bad job, it needs to be called out.

They need new designers. It's getting ridiculous how much new content is lacking basic game design principles. Most game designers I've worked with in my career seem far more competent than what CIG designers are creating. Isn't money going to getting the best talent? Or at least good talent...

(source)
Click to expand...

(Dear reader, they got out).
 

amigacooke

amigacooke
LittleAnt said:
Wait to discover you can't pilot your ship in atmosphere, that you can only autoland and that flying in space will be as good and complex as flying in space in NMS.
Click to expand...
You know, despite that, people will be having fun! :)

I’m sure that SC is fun for those who play it. However, it’s not what was advertised when I made the pledge so it’s not the game I thought I’d be playing.
 

TiberiusDuval

T
LittleAnt said:
You are correct, refueling will be limited in Stanton. The gameplay is tailored for systems like Pyro. So no exodus before Pyro.
But when Pyro will be out, prepare indeed for a mass exodus, and not only for fuel rats if FDEV had not improved a lot EDO.
Click to expand...
I have to say there number of things why I personally would not choose SC:
1. I don't play pay to win games.
2. SC does not have those mechanics and careers in place I like in ED. Particularly since my main activity is explorer there is basically nothing for me. Other things I like to do, is trading stuff, ED has mostly working market simulation, especially one that is influenced by local faction politics, and which on other influences local politics.
3. Interiors: Well yes they would be fine addition, but for me they are not the deciding factor. Much more important to me is things like flight model, performance and so on.
4. Major downfactor for SC to me is forced PVP. I simply do not like PVP games, and certain PVP game styles. Big nope.
 

StuartGT

StuartGT
Agony_Aunt said:
robertsspaceindustries.com

Hull C is a perfect illustration of what Star Citizen is - Star Citizen Spectrum

Hull C actually perfectly illustrates the essence of SC and CIG's approach to game development. Unnecessarily over complicated design (the spindle took 3 years to implement), and because of that...
robertsspaceindustries.com robertsspaceindustries.com

White knights out in force. Sounds like they are basically willing to wait forever for CIG to make the game how they want. I wonder how old they are.
Click to expand...
254rR9m.png
 

LittleAnt

L
TiberiusDuval said:
I have to say there number of things why I personally would not choose SC:
1. I don't play pay to win games.
2. SC does not have those mechanics and careers in place I like in ED. Particularly since my main activity is explorer there is basically nothing for me. Other things I like to do, is trading stuff, ED has mostly working market simulation, especially one that is influenced by local faction politics, and which on other influences local politics.
3. Interiors: Well yes they would be fine addition, but for me they are not the deciding factor. Much more important to me is things like flight model, performance and so on.
4. Major downfactor for SC to me is forced PVP. I simply do not like PVP games, and certain PVP game styles. Big nope.
Click to expand...
SC will never be for you, even finished and released.
(sidenote, SC is not pay to win, you can get the best fighter ship in less than one week)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom