Star Citizen Discussions v7

If CIG continues to develop SC as they do now, I doubt it will see light of the day as complete game. They don't have much money anymore, their base is maxed out and they still have long way to go. That's the major takeaway from this and this haven't changed in any form.

That's why I personally just don't buy 'when SC comes out'. First of all, SC has to come out, what we have seen in Citizencon 2017 or Gamescom 2016 is not SC, they are demos to show off features not implemented yet. Fact that we are five year in and there's not even consistent gameplay around ships is just nonsense.

For ED vs SC comparison to work, SC has to be actually released.
 
If CIG continues to develop SC as they do now, I doubt it will see light of the day as complete game. They don't have much money anymore, their base is maxed out and they still have long way to go. That's the major takeaway from this and this haven't changed in any form.

That's why I personally just don't buy 'when SC comes out'. First of all, SC has to come out, what we have seen in Citizencon 2017 or Gamescom 2016 is not SC, they are demos to show off features not implemented yet. Fact that we are five year in and there's not even consistent gameplay around ships is just nonsense.

For ED vs SC comparison to work, SC has to be actually released.
Agree.

But my point is that it's not even fair to compare a future version of SC to the current version of ED. To compare, either we compare the current alpha version of SC with current version of ED, or future version of both to each other, which would land us only in wishful thinking. My dream version of ED is much better than the future SC, because it's my dream version that has everything that I want. At the same time, the dream version of SC is better than the future ED because that also contains everything I dream about having.
 
What a farce. As mentioned, a lot of those buildings are clearly repeated as it was panned over. How carefully they flew with one player instance so the framerate didn't start jerking again. Another in-engine script demo. A lot of those buildings look pulled from Blade Runner design. I bet if they went down to the floor, it would look blocky and apparent it was all for show. Hilarious that FSX had autogen of buildings and land textures over 10 years ago in comparison.


ED vs. SC demos. The cryengine rendering has better reflections and daylight texturing. Once ED gets to better lighting in 3.0 , it'll be apparent SC has been defunct and dead all along.
 
Last edited:
Agree.

But my point is that it's not even fair to compare a future version of SC to the current version of ED. To compare, either we compare the current alpha version of SC with current version of ED, or future version of both to each other, which would land us only in wishful thinking. My dream version of ED is much better than the future SC, because it's my dream version that has everything that I want. At the same time, the dream version of SC is better than the future ED because that also contains everything I dream about having.

A hidden issue is the 'the devil is in the details' issue with games. When you make a list of common complaints about ED, many are on a level noone discusses with SC. ED has imho by far the best AI I know in a space sim, and SC has pretty much nothing yet. How will things be balanced, how will a 'grind' be prevented? There are quite literally hundreds of things about the actual game design that need to work, and we're not even at the point we're beginning to discuss them.

What a farce. As mentioned, a lot of those buildings are clearly repeated as it was panned over. How carefully they flew with one player instance so the framerate didn't start jerking again. Another in-engine script demo. A lot of those buildings look pulled from Blade Runner design. I bet if they went down to the floor, it would look blocky and apparent it was all for show. Hilarious that FSX had autogen of buildings and land textures over 10 years ago in comparison.


ED vs. SC demos. The cryengine rendering has better reflections and daylight texturing. Once ED gets to better lighting in 3.0 , it'll be apparent SC has been defunct and dead all along.

Thats ten years old?! :eek:
 
A hidden issue is the 'the devil is in the details' issue with games. When you make a list of common complaints about ED, many are on a level noone discusses with SC. ED has imho by far the best AI I know in a space sim, and SC has pretty much nothing yet. How will things be balanced, how will a 'grind' be prevented? There are quite literally hundreds of things about the actual game design that need to work, and we're not even at the point we're beginning to discuss them.
Agree.

Just see how much work FDev have to do to balance rewards, missions, NPCs, and so much more, and they're not even close to finished. SC will have years of balancing issues to fix. This is a common problem with games like these. Every MMO with some "economy", missions, rewards, RNGs, and such, have constant problems with balancing it. CiG can't even address it yet without players actually playing it.
 
Agree.

Just see how much work FDev have to do to balance rewards, missions, NPCs, and so much more, and they're not even close to finished. SC will have years of balancing issues to fix. This is a common problem with games like these. Every MMO with some "economy", missions, rewards, RNGs, and such, have constant problems with balancing it. CiG can't even address it yet without players actually playing it.

You are saying that SC might have same 'grind' problem as ED has? :eek:
 
I need help, my nephew has succumbed to the super-high-fidelity-hype. I tried an intervention with letting him play ED, but he just said no... I have failed as an uncle. [where is it]

Oh, and if a movie is ever considered about SC it will be in 256k none of this 4k or 8k visual nonsense, and the crowd funding campaign will start shortly followed by "The game is progressing but we have to rebuild the entire foundations to support the movie."

Keep at it. There are lots of great games out there that work. All you need to do is fine one that he can enjoy. Once he gets into playing a playable game, he will understand the difference between hype and reality.
 
I'm sad to see so much negativity towards Star Citizen here. I had hoped to see sci fans happy to see another space game with a huge scope being worked on, no matter if it takes a long time to release. 3.0 is almost in our hands, and you still find reasons to criticize, with points that were already cleared in the ATV's, that showed the complex mission system, how they plan to fill the worlds with NPC's and playable content, and so on.

Even in the current presentation, which was so cool, you find such silly reasons to criticize. Instead of being amazed by the fact you can fly in a futuristic city, anywhere you want on the planet, or go seamlessly into space, and travel to another planet, you criticize the fact the buildings repeat and are like in Blade Runner? Come on, seriously... They even showed in the presentation that they have a simple system in place to generate those buildings and it was clear there that those you can't visit will be similar to each other. They made tools to make generating large scale content easier, and its obviously very complex. The fact that it works will speed up production.

Be more positive, a lot of people are working on this, not only CR, and they deserve respect and admiration for their achievements, which are obvious for anyone watching the ATV's, even before the release of 3.0.
 
I'm sad to see so much negativity towards Star Citizen here. I had hoped to see sci fans happy to see another space game with a huge scope being worked on, no matter if it takes a long time to release. 3.0 is almost in our hands, and you still find reasons to criticize, with points that were already cleared in the ATV's, that showed the complex mission system, how they plan to fill the worlds with NPC's and playable content, and so on.

Even in the current presentation, which was so cool, you find such silly reasons to criticize. Instead of being amazed by the fact you can fly in a futuristic city, anywhere you want on the planet, or go seamlessly into space, and travel to another planet, you criticize the fact the buildings repeat and are like in Blade Runner? Come on, seriously... They even showed in the presentation that they have a simple system in place to generate those buildings and it was clear there that those you can't visit will be similar to each other. They made tools to make generating large scale content easier, and its obviously very complex. The fact that it works will speed up production.

Be more positive, a lot of people are working on this, not only CR, and they deserve respect and admiration for their achievements, which are obvious for anyone watching the ATV's, even before the release of 3.0.

1) People dont mind waiting, people mind being lied to.
2) We cant fly in amazing futuristic cities. They showed us flying in futuristic cities in 2014 as well, and claimed we would be able to do the same 'soon'. Years from now they'll show a new amazing video to new people who dont know this is how it works. By then you'll know better, and the new folks wont believe you. :)
3) All the stuff you think you heard now and sounds promising, is stuff we've been hearing for half a decade now. Every year the same stories, same excuses, same promises, and no show of the actual content. They have been saying they 'have the mechanics/pipelines/tech/whatever firmly in place and can now crank up production speed literally every presentation since 2014. It may sound promising to you, but we know better.

3.0 wont have the whole stanton system, or even half of it. It wont have the new netcode. It wont have the promised gameplay loops, or the complex mission system or any of that. It wont have the cities you saw at the presentation. None of the stuff they showed at these presentations has ever arrived on our HD. Not the sandworm, not the 2014 cities, not the 2017 cities, nothing. If they actually deliver what they promise none here would complain. Noone cares about waiting. We're just tired of the non-stop nonsense.

You saw a cool presentation. It looks very impressive. Everyone here agrees CIG is very good at that. But if you want to carry the 'just be patient' torch for a few years, be our guest. :)
 
Last edited:
I'm sad to see so much negativity towards Star Citizen here. I had hoped to see sci fans happy to see another space game with a huge scope being worked on, no matter if it takes a long time to release. 3.0 is almost in our hands, and you still find reasons to criticize, with points that were already cleared in the ATV's, that showed the complex mission system, how they plan to fill the worlds with NPC's and playable content, and so on.

Even in the current presentation, which was so cool, you find such silly reasons to criticize. Instead of being amazed by the fact you can fly in a futuristic city, anywhere you want on the planet, or go seamlessly into space, and travel to another planet, you criticize the fact the buildings repeat and are like in Blade Runner? Come on, seriously... They even showed in the presentation that they have a simple system in place to generate those buildings and it was clear there that those you can't visit will be similar to each other. They made tools to make generating large scale content easier, and its obviously very complex. The fact that it works will speed up production.

Be more positive, a lot of people are working on this, not only CR, and they deserve respect and admiration for their achievements, which are obvious for anyone watching the ATV's, even before the release of 3.0.

Username checks out :D
 
I'm sad to see so much negativity towards Star Citizen here. I had hoped to see sci fans happy to see another space game with a huge scope being worked on, no matter if it takes a long time to release. 3.0 is almost in our hands, and you still find reasons to criticize, with points that were already cleared in the ATV's, that showed the complex mission system, how they plan to fill the worlds with NPC's and playable content, and so on.

Even in the current presentation, which was so cool, you find such silly reasons to criticize. Instead of being amazed by the fact you can fly in a futuristic city, anywhere you want on the planet, or go seamlessly into space, and travel to another planet, you criticize the fact the buildings repeat and are like in Blade Runner?

You can't do any of that, that's the issue. Perhaps you will be able to do that in the future, but just because it's in a tech demo doesn't mean it will be in the game, case in point: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RvAwB7ogkik (warning, quite loud after ten seconds).
 
I'm sad to see so much negativity towards Star Citizen here. I had hoped to see sci fans happy to see another space game with a huge scope being worked on, no matter if it takes a long time to release.
Of course most of us are happy such a game is being worked on. We're just being realistic; the scope far outreaches the time, budget and technical capability that CIG have.

3.0 is almost in our hands, and you still find reasons to criticize, with points that were already cleared in the ATV's, that showed the complex mission system, how they plan to fill the worlds with NPC's and playable content, and so on.
Yes, they do a very good job of telling us what's coming in future. They do a less stellar job of actually delivering it. Remember, a year ago they told us that 3.0 was merely weeks away. 52 weeks later and it still hasn't been delivered (and no amount of crowing about how the scope has changed can excuse that).

Even in the current presentation, which was so cool, you find such silly reasons to criticize. Instead of being amazed by the fact you can fly in a futuristic city, anywhere you want on the planet, or go seamlessly into space, and travel to another planet, you criticize the fact the buildings repeat and are like in Blade Runner? Come on, seriously... They even showed in the presentation that they have a simple system in place to generate those buildings and it was clear there that those you can't visit will be similar to each other. They made tools to make generating large scale content easier, and its obviously very complex. The fact that it works will speed up production.
Most people will have been impressed by the cityscape and the visuals. If this was a single-player game, I would be incredibly excited about it. However, it's not a single-player game; it's an MMO game world and I am doubtful that they can make this work in a multiplayer context. There's so much more to making a game out of it than just generating lots of buildings. The AI has to be there, the networking has to be there, the *game loop* has to be there, and all of that is conspicuously absent from these demos.

Be more positive, a lot of people are working on this, not only CR, and they deserve respect and admiration for their achievements, which are obvious for anyone watching the ATV's, even before the release of 3.0.
They've made an incredibly pretty series of tech demos. They've also made a somewhat poor FPS game with spaceships, and have a shedload of technical debt to service. Judge them on what they deliver to the backers, not what they show in their marketing output.
 
I really enjoyed the video with the city & planet generation etc. Patience and the game will come.. I think there are trolls all around and folks these days complain for the sake of complaining... Looking forward to SC and to keep playing elite... it's good to mix things up a bit!!!
 
You are saying that SC might have same 'grind' problem as ED has? :eek:
Oh, no, not at all, since SC is a dream project that only fits into my fantasy. :D

Honestly though, I do think SC will be a much worse grind fest than ED ever was. Between trying to finishing a mission, you have to eat, drink, and go to the bathroom in the game, every 10 minutes because of some "immersion" requirement. And then your character gets tired every hour and has to sleep for 20 minutes. And that's for a mission that won't pay a fraction of the insurance on the ship that just got blown to pieces. That's what I fear will happen.
 
I'm sad to see so much negativity towards Star Citizen here.

I guess it's not actually directed at me because I haven't really joined the discussion in here.
But the reason I dislike SC is because of Chris Roberts.
From that very first kickstarter video I saw of him boosting about how he was going to single-handedly save pc-gaming with his bdsse.
And it hasn't helped that when ever I followed Elite news, there was some SC fan who had to come and tell how much better SC was going to be.

And it's not that I dislike other space games. It's really only SC I dislike.
 
Last edited:
I'm sad to see so much negativity towards Star Citizen here. I had hoped to see sci fans happy to see another space game with a huge scope being worked on, no matter if it takes a long time to release. 3.0 is almost in our hands, and you still find reasons to criticize, with points that were already cleared in the ATV's, that showed the complex mission system, how they plan to fill the worlds with NPC's and playable content, and so on.

I still look forward to playing some diluted form of Star Citizen in the far, far future, but so much has happened that I do not trust the SC business anymore. It stinks.
 
I'm sad to see so much negativity towards Star Citizen here. I had hoped to see sci fans happy to see another space game with a huge scope being worked on, no matter if it takes a long time to release. 3.0 is almost in our hands, and you still find reasons to criticize, with points that were already cleared in the ATV's, that showed the complex mission system, how they plan to fill the worlds with NPC's and playable content, and so on.

Even in the current presentation, which was so cool, you find such silly reasons to criticize. Instead of being amazed by the fact you can fly in a futuristic city, anywhere you want on the planet, or go seamlessly into space, and travel to another planet, you criticize the fact the buildings repeat and are like in Blade Runner? Come on, seriously... They even showed in the presentation that they have a simple system in place to generate those buildings and it was clear there that those you can't visit will be similar to each other. They made tools to make generating large scale content easier, and its obviously very complex. The fact that it works will speed up production.

Be more positive, a lot of people are working on this, not only CR, and they deserve respect and admiration for their achievements, which are obvious for anyone watching the ATV's, even before the release of 3.0.

hmm I think people have as much right to be negative about this subject as any other subject on this forum.

I started finding it extremely difficult to "be more positive" about Star Citizen about three years ago when it was obvious they were more interested in raising funds than producing a game. I read many other people's comments criticising this project, the missed dead-lines, lack of direction, lack of game-play development, continued ship sales and considerable questions surrounding critical path stuff like network technology and scalability. I used to laugh at people that pursued refunds having understood the risks of backing a crowd funded project.

I think it was about last year when they produced yet another smoke and mirrors demonstration that had nothing to do with the build they are targeting at your hard drive (something else Chris Roberts specifically said he wouldn't do at the start) another "proof of concept" demo (a questionable piece of FPS game-play that apparently had no real context in terms of what the player would be doing and lead up to a random sandworm) while the actual "game", the thing you can download, the thing they update, is obviously weighed down in technical debt that I dreaded downloading updates and couldn't see myself ever enjoying playing the thing. They simply have no idea how these tech demos will work around any game logic and they still don't have the critical underlining network tech figured out - absolutely vital early on in an MMO proposal like this which would have an eventual bearing on their capability of delivering everything they propose in trade show demonstrations.

One year ago Chris Roberts went on stage and announced 3.0 to be released around Christmas 2016 then went through bullet points concerning 4.0 and subsequent updates (to be delivered throughout 2017) and I thought "this is your very last chance, if you don't show real progress in 2017 I'm done with you". Months later they moved the goal posts again talking about how they had discovered project planning, patting themselves on the back and announcing the "3.0" plan they subsequently forgot about once they couldn't carry it out. The inconvenient truth that Star Citizen fans can't seem to answer for me is this; if the stuff they are showing in these demonstrations is done then why aren't they able to put it on your hard drive? When will you be playing it? Why are they demonstrating it if they don't know? They are producing these demonstrations purely to raise more cash, to keep everyone paid a bit longer, in a vicious circle where they seem to focus mainly on these demos and concept sales when the fundamental game logic should be in the hands of the people that wanted a game. MMO's need a huge amount of refinement in the hands of people actually playing them.

I'm done with Star Citizen, done with CIG and yeah I got my refund. I'm a fan of Space Games but not perpetual crowd funding, I'm a fan of work produced by competent developers able to create something that stands up on it's own merits available in a box, made to be played. Star Citizen is something else entirely, it's a funding drive riffing off nostalgia and the "Chris Roberts" brand, While I'm sure they still think they are making a "game" I think the collection of funds is their primary concern now and CitizenCon just further confirms this, sorry if it's difficult to be positive about yet another tech demo of flying about that you won't be playing on your PC next year or the year after. Sorry if that's sad, but Chris Roberts made it sad. He jumped on the work started by the likes of DayZ and others which have sadly turned PC gaming into an experimental market of poorly supported, un-fun, unfinished concept work with endless days of self congratulatory "making of" videos. It offends me as a former games developer, it offends me as a current software project manager.

I'm sorry if you're offended for the people that work on this but if they are that hurt by internet comments then the forum section of another game product in the same genre is somewhere I'd avoid if I was that sensitive. I like the space tech demos they have created but I'm not aware that they were taking the public's cash to create a company that made space game concept demoware. Visuals aren't everything to me anyway, I'm old school and prefer game-play which I found it difficult to extract as a proposal over the years. I have no flippin' idea what people will be doing in Star Citizen and reading the average backers comments on various forums I can safely say after half a a decade, that neither does anybody else.

Flying over PG cities pulling faces into their web-cams I guess.

Even if they somehow pull a game out at some stage I'll find it difficult to be very positive about the process in which this game was made.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom