Star Citizen Thread v6

[spacebum]

So, REAL development from 2014 to today is basically 3 years and the end of 2012 was kickstarter while 2013 was more company building to handle it all.

Realistic release date? 2018 for SQ42 would not be unreasonable IF they get 4.0 out in that time.

C'mon son. This is pure nonsense.

In their own words, development began in 2011.

But by your scenario they spent 3 years "building a company". Was no work done at all in that time? Was it 3 years to conduct interviews and stock the stationery cupboards? What about the developers they employed early on, did they just come in every day and twiddle their thumbs waiting until 2014 when work could begin? At the very least, was there no planning done in this time? Perhaps not, because they do not appear to have any clear design goals.

The fact is they've been working on this in some form since 2011. Whether or not they've chucked out a lot of what was done in the early years (which seems likely) it doesn't change that fact, and only hammers home just how badly this entire thing has been handled. It's a fiasco. The only positive is it might form the basis of a case study on how not to manage game development.

Also re Illfonic let's not forget that this was a problem entirely of CIG's own making. They commissioned Illfonic to do some work but failed to specify or manage it correctly, then when it all fell apart Chris Roberts - gaming's own Donald Trump - laid the blame at Illfonic's door.

 

[Snarfbuckle]

I would imagine the blockers to be internal strategic decisions rather than particular technical ones. Out of the two games which is more likely to succeed? Or rather, which one requires the least resources. I thnk most would assumed this to be SQ42. Which game go people think is what CR wants to be released more than anything else? For me it would be his cinematic SC MMO.

SQ42 will likely never be released until SC gets out of the way to allow for development to continue, hopefully to completion.

Except SC is not the cinematic game, that is SQ42.

Also, getting SQ42 released would dampen the pressure on everyone working and have people playing SQ42 while waiting for SC MMO to be fleshed out.

Also, SC requires far more resources than a "on rail" cinematic campaign since they can limit mission areas and make a step-by-step controlled campaign instead of a gazillion missions, random encounters and other things.

 

[knowles2]

Are we too harsh on CIG? https://www.reddit.com/r/starcitizen/comments/6wpxxd/star_citizen_development_are_we_too_harsh/

If anything us and media are to soft for them.

 

[Barking_Mad]

Given there's 15 Engineering positions open at CIG, of which 7 are senior ones, even if they had detailed features set, implementation may still be far from anything else than pre-pre-alpha
Senior Tools Programmer
Senior Game/Animation Programmer
Senior Engine Programmer
Senior Game/AI Programmer
Senior Game Programmer
Physics Programmer
Gameplay Engineer, Service & Backend
UI Programmer
Gameplay Programmer
Animation Programmer
Senior Graphics Programmer
Tools Programmer
Network Programmer
Senior Audio Programmer
Junior Audio Programmer

Funny: nothing's needed for Marketing and Narrative depts

That's a silly amount of senior positions to have open 5+ years into a project. They've been open for some time too. It says much about CIG and its reputation that they can't attract the necessary skill set.

 

[Memnoch]

Except SC is not the cinematic game, that is SQ42.

I see. So what were we being shown during the presentation at the end, SC or SQ42? CR was directing that thing like it was a movie. Ordinarily I would agree with you, for any other game, but it is not being sold how you are describing it.

Also, getting SQ42 released would dampen the pressure on everyone working and have people playing SQ42 while waiting for SC MMO to be fleshed out.

And? I can't speak for the pressure the developers are under but why do you think the public playing a released game would in any way slow down development of SC? If this is them working under pressure I would hate to see what they would do during a lazy week!

Also, SC requires far more resources than a "on rail" cinematic campaign since they can limit mission areas and make a step-by-step controlled campaign instead of a gazillion missions, random encounters and other things.

So you agree with me then? SC does require more resources, therefore it is more likely SQ42 would be able to be finished first.

 

[Snarfbuckle]

C'mon son. This is pure nonsense.

In their own words, development began in 2011.

But by your scenario they spent 3 years "building a company". Was no work done at all in that time? Was it 3 years to conduct interviews and stock the stationery cupboards? What about the developers they employed early on, did they just come in every day and twiddle their thumbs waiting until 2014 when work could begin? At the very least, was there no planning done in this time? Perhaps not, because they do not appear to have any clear design goals.

The fact is they've been working on this in some form since 2011. Whether or not they've chucked out a lot of what was done in the early years (which seems likely) it doesn't change that fact, and only hammers home just how badly this entire thing has been handled. It's a fiasco. The only positive is it might form the basis of a case study on how not to manage game development.

Development in that case is not creating a game, it's prototyping and at most rough storyline. And who the heck would conduct interviews and try to start up a studio a YEAR before the kickstarter to even see if they have the MONEY, or if there is even an INTEREST.

We have the numbers for the amount of employees per year and they had 7-8 people in 2012. What, they had a stealth company working behind the scenes and not getting paid during 2011-2012?

Also, "began" in 2011 could also mean they started pitching the idea and fiddling on storyline and concepts in december 2011.

As i said, the production did not really got into gear until 2013 when they had proper studios.

If they did 10% of a yearly production in 2011 and 30% 2012 and then managed 100% in 2013 it still means they did not get into full production until 2013.

 

[spacebum]

If anything us and media are to soft for them.

The media are waiting for it to collapse so they can do post-mortems and some where-did-it-go-wrong hand-wringing. Nobody wants to be too harsh on CIG right now for several reasons - they saw what happened to the Escapist, ing off devs and publishers by slating an unreleased game is a risky endeavour that can make it more difficult to do your job in the future, and it would need sources to go on record which is a big ask in the games industry.

 

[Agony_Aunt]

Again, this is not how the real life works. You reserve this attitude for a childish dream of yours, yourself or maybe next of kin (children most likely, people tend to be less forgiving with their partners).

Did you misquote? Or were you really aiming that at me?

 

[Snarfbuckle]

I see. So what were we being shown during the presentation at the end, SC or SQ42? CR was directing that thing like it was a movie. Ordinarily I would agree with you, for any other game, but it is not being sold how you are describing it.

A demo reel for emergent gameplay of SC multiplayer, nothing more.

And? I can't speak for the pressure the developers are under but why do you think the public playing a released game would in any way slow down development of SC? If this is them working under pressure I would hate to see what they would do during a lazy week!

It would release public pressure from backers and critics if they actually released a full game.

So you agree with me then? SC does require more resources, therefore it is more likely SQ42 would be able to be finished first.

Definitely.

SC MMO is supposed to be 100 fleshed out systems when DONE, with NPC's, missions and now also planetary landings and FPS combat.

SQ42 is a cinematic campaign with branching mission system which is a more controlled environment.

The only question is how much tech is shared between the two games so that SQ42 might need everything SC MMO needs.

 

[spacebum]

Development in that case is not creating a game, it's prototyping and at most rough storyline. And who the heck would conduct interviews and try to start up a studio a YEAR before the kickstarter to even see if they have the MONEY, or if there is even an INTEREST.

We have the numbers for the amount of employees per year and they had 7-8 people in 2012. What, they had a stealth company working behind the scenes and not getting paid during 2011-2012?

Also, "began" in 2011 could also mean they started pitching the idea and fiddling on storyline and concepts in december 2011.

As i said, the production did not really got into gear until 2013 when they had proper studios.

If they did 10% of a yearly production in 2011 and 30% 2012 and then managed 100% in 2013 it still means they did not get into full production until 2013.

Crobberts said himself they started work in 2011. That is when development started in their own words. If they failed to do anything productive in that time that's their own stupid fault. It's yet another example of very badly managed this entire joke of a game has been.

lol at your parroting of the "real development" timeline story. Picturing them doing nothing for several years is good for a laugh though so cheers for that.

 

[Memnoch]

As i said, the production did not really got into gear until 2013 when they had proper studios.

If they did 10% of a yearly production in 2011 and 30% 2012 and then managed 100% in 2013 it still means they did not get into full production until 2013.

So which future year do you think this excuse will no longer be valid? At what point do we stop looking back, drawing a circle round 2013, nodding sagely accepting our lot in life? In which year will it be acceptable to suggest that they have had plenty enough time to release something that actually works as intended?

I feel a line in the sand should be drawn and stop giving them a free pass for failure time and time again.

The only question is how much tech is shared between the two games so that SQ42 might need everything SC MMO needs.

And that would be my concern. SC is the blocker for SQ42's release, as far as I see it. Perhaps the other way around for all I know but I doubt it.

 

[Ian Skippy]

C'mon son. This is pure nonsense.

Not only did they say they started in 2011, they kept showing updates in the following years of the real development they were doing. For the real game that would really launch in 2014 with the real money people really paid. Snarfbuckle knows it. He is intentionally revising history to make the development seems less troubled. There is a better word than 'nonsense' when people intentionally say stuff that isn't true, btw. Note how the 'realistic release date' is always 'conditionally next year'. The release date for Sq42 has been 'next year' for years now, its pathetic. Mark my words, if it doesnt release in 2018 Snarfie will come here telling us we'd all knew 2019 would be the realistic year all along.

 

[spacebum]

SQ42 definitely out in 2018. For sure this time. Even though they couldn't show a single second of it at gamescom 2017 and the devs have admitted there's lot of work to be done. Still, definitely 2018.

Also it's for sure going to be a high quality game that will silence the naysayers and haters until the release of crobbers magnum opus. It will definitely not be a glitchy buggy pile of garbage like everything they've done so far, with the same high standard of writing as the awful, awful wing commander movie.

 

[Agony_Aunt]

The only question is how much tech is shared between the two games so that SQ42 might need everything SC MMO needs.

Good point! Can anyone rustle up some links to what CIG have promised in relation to SQ42?

How many ships, systems, mechanics, features, etc?

 

[WindWpn]

I have been following SC for a few years now and a backer since 2015. I believe in reality what SC is is a "proof of concept" test bed for gaming tech which is at least 10+ years out. We will never see a release candidate of Star Citizen but rather perpetual alpha software. This can be ok, as it paves the way for future gaming tech such as FOIP, and much of the other aspects of SC (AI subsumption, etc...) which are literally 10 years+ out in gaming future.

All in all, SC is simply a development/testing platform for future gaming technology. Nothing is this buggy unless it is literally "cutting edge/proof of concept" software. We will never see SC out of alpha which is frankly, OK. What we will see, and indeed do see right now are the seeds of future gaming technology being conceived by CIG. From that perspective, good for them to push the envelope and drive gaming tech into the future. By 2030+ we will see some of this technology in games as well as likely everyday applications. Granted I will be an old man by then, but hey... see what happens...

 

[spacebum]

I have been following SC for a few years now and a backer since 2015. I believe in reality what SC is is a "proof of concept" test bed for gaming tech which is at least 10+ years out. We will never see a release candidate of Star Citizen but rather perpetual alpha software. This can be ok, as it paves the way for future gaming tech such as FOIP, and much of the other aspects of SC (AI subsumption, etc...) which are literally 10 years+ out in gaming future.

All in all, SC is simply a development/testing platform for future gaming technology. Nothing is this buggy unless it is literally "cutting edge/proof of concept" software. We will never see SC out of alpha which is frankly, OK. What we will see, and indeed do see right now are the seeds of future gaming technology being conceived by CIG. From that perspective, good for them to push the envelope and drive gaming tech into the future. By 2030+ we will see some of this technology in games as well as likely everyday applications. Granted I will be an old man by then, but hey... see what happens...

Haha wow.

Some of those who handed that $156m over may disagree that this is "OK". And unless they're planning on refunding all that money after trying and failing to deliver what they've promised, consumer law will have something to say about it too.

 

[Snarfbuckle]

Crobberts said himself they started work in 2011. That is when development started in their own words. If they failed to do anything productive in that time that's their own stupid fault. It's yet another example of very badly managed this entire joke of a game has been.

lol at your parroting of the "real development" timeline story. Picturing them doing nothing for several years is good for a laugh though so cheers for that.

3-5 people making a proof of concept build for investors and later for a kickstarter is not "in production".

Thats like saying you are employed from the day you see a work ad for a future interview.

 

[Yaffle]

All

Step away from the handbags, and cut out the sniping and insults.

 

[1500]

Development in that case is not creating a game, it's prototyping and at most rough storyline. And who the heck would conduct interviews and try to start up a studio a YEAR before the kickstarter to even see if they have the MONEY, or if there is even an INTEREST.

We have the numbers for the amount of employees per year and they had 7-8 people in 2012. What, they had a stealth company working behind the scenes and not getting paid during 2011-2012?

Also, "began" in 2011 could also mean they started pitching the idea and fiddling on storyline and concepts in december 2011.

As i said, the production did not really got into gear until 2013 when they had proper studios.

If they did 10% of a yearly production in 2011 and 30% 2012 and then managed 100% in 2013 it still means they did not get into full production until 2013.

Funny, CR said they spend a million in the year before the kickstarter. Also you seem to forget that they had a working demo that they showed up during its kickstarter. Then you have CR's own words saying that they were a year into development at the start of kickstarter.

 

[spacebum]

3-5 people making a proof of concept build for investors and later for a kickstarter is not "in production".

Thats like saying you are employed from the day you see a work ad for a future interview so stop being childish.

No it's not like at all actually. It's like seeing the person in charge of a game saying that development began in 2011, then saying that it began in 2011, when they said it did.

We’re already one year in - another two years puts us at 3 total which is ideal. Any more and things would begin to get stale."

- Chris Roberts in 2012