Game Discussions Star Citizen Discussion Thread v12

[Agony_Aunt]

The released Homescape game give me less fun than the unfinished Star Citizen (I play the 2 games). So why it's acceptable for you if I spend xxx$ on Homescape and not on SC ?

You can spend your money on whatever you want.

Whether its wise to do so is a question.

Ok, so you've had more fun in SC than a released game. In that case, it begs the question, if CIG folded today, would you be ok with the money you have spent on SC? Would you consider it money well spent?

I presume you didn't fund SC just to have to fun in an alpha to one day to have fun in a quality released product that delivered on what it promised?

I've never played Homescape, so can't comment on that, but i've spent money on games that i enjoyed and games that i didn't enjoy that much. We all make mistakes of course. However, i've never backed a pre-release game until i saw that they were going to deliver on a decent working game. Its why i held off on backing ED until it was late in beta. With hindsight i can wish i had backed earlier. With hindsight on SC i can say i'm glad i never gave CIG a penny.

 

[Mole HD]

I don't think i was implying anything about the regular backers.

Where do you draw the line between regular backers and the likes of those idiots who gleefully boast spending $50k on jpegs though?... $100 pledgers...$1k concierge...$2.5k grand admiral...?

It's the crowing on the internet by those who've chucked a deposit on a house supporting the project I find distasteful...not the amount anyone choses to spend.

 

[BirdWisdom]

No reson to release the first promised game Squadron 42

 

[TiberiusDuval]

Where do you draw the line between regular backers and the likes of those idiots who gleefully boast spending $50k on jpegs though?... $100 pledgers...$1k concierge...$2.5k grand admiral...?

It's the crowing on the internet by those who've chucked a deposit on a house supporting the project I find distasteful...not the amount anyone choses to spend.

Well I have to say, whatever anybody does with their DISPOSABLE money is theirs business, but when it is throwing away money you really should not spend recklessly thats another question. So I say it depends. For someones that 45 dollars spent for SC is not very wise, on other hand for someones 50K is small change...

 

[Agony_Aunt]

Where do you draw the line between regular backers and the likes of those idiots who gleefully boast spending $50k on jpegs though?... $100 pledgers...$1k concierge...$2.5k grand admiral...?

It's the crowing on the internet by those who've chucked a deposit on a house supporting the project I find distasteful...not the amount anyone choses to spend.

Remind me, how much have you spent? Just so i know where to draw the line

Seriously though, yes, pretty much the same as you. Those waving their wangs are the ones I'd like to see get burned.

 

[VR Golgot]

The released Homescape game give me less fun than the unfinished Star Citizen (I play the 2 games). So why it's acceptable for you if I spend xxx$ on Homescape and not on SC ?

I think your CIG apologism needs a refactor Ant. This is just woeful.

The point was, and remains, that CIG have raised these enormous sums via two means:

• Saying they're building the game of all games.
• Charging exorbitant extra amounts for dream vehicles within the game.

Both of these heavily monetised strands remain hugely shy of their delivery targets, more than a decade after initial prototyping began. And there are legitimate grounds for thinking they will never fulfil many of their fundamental sales pitches.

As I said, spend money on what you like. Enjoy what you like. That's just a red herring you've wafted into argument. But don't try and argue that your personal fun cancels out the dubious business practices above. Because it doesn't.

 

[LittleAnt]

Ok, so you've had more fun in SC than a released game. In that case, it begs the question, if CIG folded today, would you be ok with the money you have spent on SC? Would you consider it money well spent?

At least 100 hours of play for 45€ is a well spent amount of money for me. I've spent almost 80 € in the released Hill climb racing 2 for the same amount of time played. I enjoy it a lot but it gives me less fun than SC. The "released state" is not a criterion at all for me to judge a "well spent" amount of money. The main criterion is the amount of fun the game/activity give me.

I presume you didn't fund SC just to have to fun in an alpha to one day to have fun in a quality released product that delivered on what it promised?

I funded SC to have a lot of fun in a beautiful space game. I have a lot of fun in the game now in it's broken and not released state and no other released space game give me more fun than SC, so the main goal is already fulfilled for me, released or not.
What I find in the alpha now already justify for me the full amount of money I gave to SC. And patch after patch it's better and better.

The point was, and remains, that CIG have raised these enormous sums via two means:

• Saying they're building the game of all games.
• Charging exorbitant extra amounts for dream vehicles within the game.

"Saying they're building the game of all games" >>> that's what they do.
"Charging exorbitant extra amounts for dream vehicles within the game" >>> that nobody is obliged to buy. You buy them if you want to support the game. And for the "dream" part, 110 ships are not dreams anymore.

 

[VR StarLightPL]

It's the crowing on the internet by those who've chucked a deposit on a house supporting the project I find distasteful...not the amount anyone choses to spend.

But it's usually the motivation for spending those sums - being able to rub it in "normal" people's faces. It's also a syndrome of "I have lots of money and don't know what to do with it". I never understood for example buying a watch that costs more than let's say a $250. It's a waste of resources for me. I simply don't get the allure of high margin products, paying for brand etc. For me it's a form of neo-tribalism. But hey - it's their money and they're free to do with it what they want, and also brag about it on the internet.

Some people on this forum have spent hundreds of pounds in Frontier's Store - I've seen brags about amounts allowing you to buy a VR headset. For me it's simply weird, but again, it's their money.

As for SC, if it ever releases and delivers only HALF of what was promised, I can pay around $250 for it ;-) But for the foreseeable future, that $250 is really safe with me

 

[Xink]

SC has more parallels with the business model of Onlyfans content creators than any game. Both sell to predominantly but not exclusively male customers, with a small minority counting for a comparatively large proportion of income. Both sell intangible dreams and aspirations and sometimes digital content that the customers find pleasing to look at, or mere acknowledgment of their existence.

 

[Viajero]

At least CIG is trying to release a complex game. When you see players spend thousand on games like FIFA or Homescape... $1 billion in lifetime revenue for Playrix

It still amazes me how some backers still refuse to acknowledge the fundamental difference between spending money on an actual product, off the shelf, where what you see is what you get and enjoy, on the spot; and spending money on a promise of a dream that is 7 years late and may or may never come true.

I figure that anyhting that can be used as the basis for rationalizing and fooling yourself that SC is not as bad, is good.

 

[Vetinari]

Both sell to predominantly but not exclusively male customers, with a small minority counting for a comparatively large proportion of income

Not for the first time this makes it sound like a Casino model

 

[TiberiusDuval]

It still amazes me how some backers still refuse to acknowledge the the fundamental difference between spending money on an actual product, off the shelf, where what you see is what you get and enjoy, on the spot; and spending money on a promise of a dream that is 7 years leate and may or may never come true.

I figure that anyhting that can be used as the basis for rationalizing and fooling yourself that SC is not as bad, is good.

Well I put vast sum of 35 euros to EDO, without getting product immediately. But considering track record of FDEV said investment quite like will eventually deliver something playable and perhaps even enjoyable. When it comes to CIG products...nah...

 

[VR Golgot]

"Saying they're building the game of all games" >>> that's what they do.

That's what they're attempting to do. There's a difference.

There isn't one dream core tech which they've introduced that doesn't have major question marks over its viability. Just taking one for brevity's sake:

• Nested physics grids: Still kill at transitions, entail ships getting blown away by wind when the player leaves the grid, are seemingly uncrossable by NPCs etc, etc. Their latest use case, ship-to-ship docking, currently causes the player of the launchable fighter to clip out of both ships if the mother ship is in motion. And they have many more challenges to come (Moveable nested grids in the Hull series, etc etc).

But we could go through: The extremely sketchy placeholder networking and years of missed deadlines trying to advance it towards 'server meshing', the planetary surfaces and their unfortunate habit of clipping ships and players to their deaths. Hell, even the fundamentals of item persistence and respawning are still far from a reliable state.

Sounds more like a nightmare at points

Trying to build the dream doesn't entail that the dream will be built. We can see all the potential fault lines. The uphill struggles that CIG are having to reach both their down-to-earth aims, and their fantastical ones too.

And for the "dream" part, 110 ships are not dreams anymore.

Incorrect.

Most of the big ticket ships that have made it into the live build don't work as advertised. They are not the dream that was sold, fulfilled. The Starfarer wasn't just supposed to be a giant maze which can't even be used for trade. It was supposed to have refuelling mechanics. The Reclaimer wasn't supposed to be a fearsome looking brick. It was supposed to have scavenging gameplay mechanics. The Mercury Star Runner is supposed to have smuggling mechanics underpinning it. The Carrack is supposed to be an exploration ship scouring the systems of the 'verse...

Throw in regressions in existing mechanics for some of the smaller ships... (Is the interdiction snare working currently on the Mantis, for example? Not reliably, nope...). And yeah. That 110 number is the number of flyable assets in the game. Not the number of ship pledges delivered.

The number alone also doesn't communicate this aspect:

The majority of the delivered ships are the smaller ones. Most of the big ticket showstoppers, with big ticket pricing, still languish on the 'really need to do this somehow' list...

 

[Skizomeuh]

I have no doubt some would spend fortune on The Visionary's underpants scent vials.

 

[Viajero]

Well I put vast sum of 35 euros to EDO, without getting product immediately. But considering track record of FDEV said investment quite like will eventually deliver something playable and perhaps even enjoyable. When it comes to CIG products...nah...

Indeed, and the differences are still huge. In EDO the lapse of time between you paying the money and getting the product is infinitesimal compared to SC. But not only that, within that short time lapse you have, at any time, the option to get a refund if you so wish or if you decide that you prefer to buy when it releases. It is a pre-purchase to all effects, refunds no questions asked, included. SC TOS on the other hand are designed to prevent any refunds except the 14 day mostly statutory obligation.

 

[LittleAnt]

It still amazes me how some backers still refuse to acknowledge the fundamental difference between spending money on an actual product, off the shelf, where what you see is what you get and enjoy, on the spot; and spending money on a promise of a dream that is 7 years late and may or may never come true.

It still amaze me that some doesn't understand that if a non finished product gives more fun to a gamer than a finished product, the said gamer have nothing to 'acknowledge' when he plays the non finished product instead of the one on the shelf.
For instance, I try to play ED but the game doesn't give me a lot of fun. I play it from time to time waiting for EDO but, for now, it's nothing comparable to the fun I have in SC.

For what I understand, what you miss about a lot of backers is mainly that the alpha is enjoyable now for them, not in their dreams.

 

[sovapid]

Ok, so you've had more fun in SC than a released game. In that case, it begs the question, if CIG folded today, would you be ok with the money you have spent on SC? Would you consider it money well spent?

I've dumped thousands into SC. Lets say SC gets released with every thing that was "promised". In that case would you say that money was "well spent"?

I wouldnt. No matter what its bunch of money spent frivolously.

 

[TiberiusDuval]

It still amaze me that some doesn't understand that if a non finished product gives more fun to a gamer than a finished product, the said gamer have nothing to 'acknowledge' when he plays the non finished product instead of the one on the shelf.
For instance, I try to play ED but the game doesn't give me a lot of fun. I play it from time to time waiting for EDO but, for now, it's nothing comparable to the fun I have in SC.

For what I understand, what you miss about a lot of backers is mainly that the alpha is enjoyable now for them, not in their dreams.

So lets say Cyberpunk was more fun before they patched major bugs in it?

 

[BirdWisdom]

A small question: is it a bad business for SC if ED gets legs?

 

[Agony_Aunt]

At least 100 hours of play for 45€ is a well spent amount of money for me. I've spent almost 80 € in the released Hill climb racing 2 for the same amount of time played. I enjoy it a lot but it gives me less fun than SC. The "released state" is not a criterion at all for me to judge a "well spent" amount of money. The main criterion is the amount of fun the game/activity give me.


I funded SC to have a lot of fun in a beautiful space game. I have a lot of fun in the game now in it's broken and not released state and no other released space game give me more fun than SC, so the main goal is already fulfilled for me, released or not.
What I find in the alpha now already justify for me the full amount of money I gave to SC. And patch after patch it's better and better.



"Saying they're building the game of all games" >>> that's what they do.
"Charging exorbitant extra amounts for dream vehicles within the game" >>> that nobody is obliged to buy. You buy them if you want to support the game. And for the "dream" part, 110 ships are not dreams anymore.

So, in short, you would consider it money well spent if CIG collapsed.