So, the SC funding spreadsheet calculates totals for a month in a peculiar way (I think the sum of funding per day and per month is calculated starting from a different hour, so the values are a bit off) so there might be some discrepancies, but here are funding figures in August of each year:
Aug 2013: $2,201,742
Aug 2014: $3,699,901
Aug 2015: $2,781,241
Aug 2016: $4,494,327
Aug 2017: $2,726,184
Edit: What's funny is that funding from January to August is almost identical between 2016 and 2017.
Star Citizen plays a role in this as it is drawing money (worth multiple AA+ productions) out of this niche market. The genre could have been highly profitable even with a small audience, but most space nerds decided to go all-in on Roberts, so there was nothing left for actually released games.
Hmm, i don't think that SC is drawing money from the space sim market. It's a whale business model, where few people spend the most, just like in all these mobile f2p games. Normal space sim fans don't back SC for unreasonable amounts of money. But what also happened is that CR started to expand to the FPS military pathos market, or claimed to do so. This attracted a lot of publicity, since COD style game are very mainstream. Well, in the end there is nothing.
...
Mainly, I just don't want people to be able pin this failed game (if/when it fails) on space games in general. The failings seem to be general mismanagement and not related to space games.
...
Hard to say for sure, but I think that 'space games' are probably easier to mismanage than most, simply because the genre is so open-ended. It is simply too easy to get suckered into scope creep, one, 'good idea' at a time. An experienced developer willing to leave the 'good ideas' for later, and work on getting the core right, may make a go of it, but it needs firm control. Something entirely lacking as far as CIG are concerned...
An experienced developer willing to leave the 'good ideas' for later, and work on getting the core right, may make a go of it, but it needs firm control. Something entirely lacking as far as CIG are concerned...
You can't cage creativity. You can't control genius. You have to grab the day, one jpeg ship commercial at a time, and pursue the One true Vision whilst coders straight out of college lay a firm technological foundation for you in HTML.
You might not realize it, but the genre is already dead, featuring multiple high-profile failures with the latest one being Mass Effect: Andromeda.
Star Citizen plays a role in this as it is drawing money (worth multiple AA+ productions) out of this niche market. The genre could have been highly profitable even with a small audience, but most space nerds decided to go all-in on Roberts, so there was nothing left for actually released games.
Hard to say for sure, but I think that 'space games' are probably easier to mismanage than most, simply because the genre is so open-ended. It is simply too easy to get suckered into scope creep, one, 'good idea' at a time. An experienced developer willing to leave the 'good ideas' for later, and work on getting the core right, may make a go of it, but it needs firm control. Something entirely lacking as far as CIG are concerned...
What's happening is probably more simply about good or bad management. CIG: Star Citizen is definitely an example both bad money management and lack of game feature creep management.
With the likely failure of CS, I'm hoping the majority will see it for what it is and not blame space game scene for what is general mismanagement.
The 600i is a supremely expensive ship for its size and role, especially against the larger Carrack and cheaper Constellation. Why is this? What benefits are worth the increased expense?
We are building a universe, and part of that means we can consider aspects that a standard game does not, such as value and desirability. When we look at vehicles in the real world, its apparent that more functionality does not always mean something is more expensive, and vice versa. In the Star Citizen universe, a sleek, luxury ship created by Origin will bring certain connotations with it, in the same way most people would find a sports coupé more desirable than a family sedan, despite the fact it has less seats and cup-holders.
It's not about CR being perfectionist, if the animations require more work they require more work, basic game development stuff. The main thing is that we know they are actively being worked on and looking great.
I didnt see any proof of their planetary tech to be honest. It was just 2 barren moons which by all means could ve been completely handcrafted. You dont need PG tech for 3 moons, sorry.
Star Citizen is building it's universe by handcrafting planets and moons with the assistance of procedural tools. Since Star Citizen isn't going for a galaxy with billions and billions of singular planets it doesn't need to rely so heavily on PG to make it happen.
From Sean Tracy: "OE: Reborn asks Will there be full and dense forests on planets?ST: Yes, there will be. This is still something we are working pretty hard on. Right now the focus is on the next major release, i don’t think is beyond saying we don’t have any dense forests stuff in the next release per se. We are absolutely working on it. At Citizencon we showed off some of the vegetation assets and we are seeing how dense we can make them. We are just finalising development on this. I like the term ‘procedurally assisted’ because a lot of people talk about procedural generations where they assume it is just a program that comes up with stuff and the the pure other side which is all art driven, we are somewhere in the middle where it is procedural assistance through tools. We have a procedural assisted placement of all the outposts or forests and we are getting that finalised and in a state that the performance is in a good place. Will we have forests? Absolutely! Have dense will they be? They will be as dense as we can make them and still run well."
Not really, for now what gear you wear only gives you the ability to breath in space, there is no information for now of any suit that help you endure tempteratures (btw... endure certain temperature where? even in 3.0 that will not be active, there will be no big changes in temperature or nothing of that even active.
That's just your/their dreams for now, nothing tangible in the alpha, not even in 3.0 so for now it continues to be not relevant, atleast not more of what we currently have in 2.6, I'm sure the code behind it is important and maybe the start of something that may be someday relevant, but for now there is no big change in that between 2.6 - 3.0). If someday the temperature in the planet, or station makes you need a specific suit then that day your words will be right, but for now it changes almost nothing of the actual game and much less the gameplay.Being able to shot or pilot a ship is not different if you do it in you pink uniform or in you blue one.
and I said "The only survival feature was the oxigen, there was little else...", It affects the gameplay... yeah but is only the oxigen for now. There is no more survival featgures, and the oxigen is great but... not enough.
Is not relevant to the project and I don't care if it was featured since the beggining, we have a game with no gameplay loops, no core mechanics and no idea of how the professions and many mechanics will work. With that on the table the facetrack is the last thing they should be working on. So I maintain what I said, is useless and doesn't help the game in any way.
Not really, you already have (it's in 2.6.3 already) benefits from using heavy armor as it allows you to carry more heavy weapons with it, grenades and so on. Yela Moon is a freezing cold atmosphere, you will need to dress in accordance to "survive" over there.
You have advantages of using some armor over other already in the form of visibility. In the future movement and heat/energy signal and so on. It will influente your ability to stealth play or "tank" play.
There's plenty of gameplay loop's and core mechanics already working seamless toguether, ignoring them is disingenuous .
Is a ship, John is just a dam ship, it can be big but is a ship, nothing more and nothing less. Is not a great progress that will make 3.0 better o that gives us any idea of how the game will be. And even then the battle was a laggfest.
In fact, it concerns me that they only got the Idris to fight right now... when SQ42 should already be released. Is not a great sign.
But I'm going to say one thing that I liked about the Idris fight, the damage states of the exterior were nice, I liked that, I really thought that was a nice detail.
We already saw ships landing on ships, and again nothing that we the players will make use of for quite a long time... and seeing how the ursa and the Idris behave together we will have to wait for quite some time.
Not really John, and believe me, I really want to see progress.
No Rolan, it's not "just a ship" it's a player playable and interact able moving level as detailed as the best sci-fi maps you can get in AAA games. With engine rooms, player facilities, hangars, medi-bays etc. It's the main HUB for the player in the single player campaign where you live and make contact with several characters and develop your char and evolve your story.
Flyable Idris vs Idris shows not only that capital ship battle is technically possible but also seing it landing showcases the biggest land able ship in action. Also taking off and landing on Capital Ship's is a core mechanic not only for Star Citizen but Squadron 42.
All around Gamescom Demo showcased some of the progress they have achieved in the last months, and quite remarkable progress.
Ports, Landing zones
Item 2.0
Mission givers, branches and subsumption
Mobiglass enhancement
Cargo implementation
Kiosk and market implementation
New Vehicles , Weapons , Amour
Full Persistence etc
This progress can also be seen in detail just by reading their detailed monthly reports:
Obviously there are enough people who have lost their minds either and buy into it. [wacky]
On a more sarcastic note I think the right people are being milked here...
I have an outrageous collection of green pixels. I can even turn them all blue
jpegs are so common though - real connoisseurs like them BMPy
Still - it's only a couple of months til Citizencon - and then we'll see what CIG have really been working on all this time. It's going to be sublime. All the doubters will be silenced, all the detractors will hang their heads in shame, and everyone who likes SPAEC GAEMS will buy an Idris because what they will show will be just so, so, amazing that to not fund the project at this stage would be a stab in the back to all the urm, backers.
It's not about CR being perfectionist, if the animations require more work they require more work, basic game development stuff. The main thing is that we know they are actively being worked on and looking great.
Star Citizen is building it's universe by handcrafting planets and moons with the assistance of procedural tools. Since Star Citizen isn't going for a galaxy with billions and billions of singular planets it doesn't need to rely so heavily on PG to make it happen.
From Sean Tracy: "OE: Reborn asks Will there be full and dense forests on planets?ST: Yes, there will be. This is still something we are working pretty hard on. Right now the focus is on the next major release, i don’t think is beyond saying we don’t have any dense forests stuff in the next release per se. We are absolutely working on it. At Citizencon we showed off some of the vegetation assets and we are seeing how dense we can make them. We are just finalising development on this. I like the term ‘procedurally assisted’ because a lot of people talk about procedural generations where they assume it is just a program that comes up with stuff and the the pure other side which is all art driven, we are somewhere in the middle where it is procedural assistance through tools. We have a procedural assisted placement of all the outposts or forests and we are getting that finalised and in a state that the performance is in a good place. Will we have forests? Absolutely! Have dense will they be? They will be as dense as we can make them and still run well."
Yes we all know what they have pitched and promised. Tell me, are you sure their teams are competent enough to implement said forest and have AI and players running around without the slide show effect that SC currently has even on desolate areas?
Yes we all know what they have pitched and promised. Tell me, are you sure their teams are competent enough to implement said forest and have AI and players running around without the slide show effect that SC currently has even on desolate areas?
Ofc they are, the ones saying it's possible are the ones that made cryengine 15 years ago and have been working and improving it ever since. If there are guys who know what the engine can or cannot do it's these ones. They have explained in several ATV's what and how they are doing it.
At 12 minute watch the testimony of the Senior Technical Director who's in charge of the planetary tech for Star Citizen. (he's also the guy that wrote the first ever draft of what went on to be the Cryengine)
Obviously there are enough people who have lost their minds either and buy into it. [wacky]
On a more sarcastic note I think the right people are being milked here...
Some of them for sure but we also heard about people who are pledging their life away and risk losing marriage and house because of their mental condition CRoberts takes advantage of. So for some its really sad tho inevitable. If it wouldnt be Star Citizen it would be another scam ruining them. Really I feel kinda bad for all the devoted people who keep their trust without getting aggressive in the face of doubt and skepticism and hope for the best. On the other hand, I wanted to address all the whales on a personal note and enforce their belief and thank them for their continual support. This has been the best entertainment I had in a decade easily. Following this project also has educated me in a great many fields so I cant really complain. Regardless of how this projects ends....I will be one of the "winners".
My dear John - how much of that is on your hard drive just now, and how much of that do you really expect to see on your hard drive in the next 12-24 months?
I'm reminded of King Lear at this point.
Oh - and Mr Fritz is absolutely correct in that Star Citizen has certainly risen interest in all sorts of facets of many things and delivered heaps of entertainment. It's been very educational for many people - gotten some people interested in programming themselves, and inspired at least a couple of people I know to take studies in computing / development.
My dear John - how much of that is on your hard drive just now, and how much of that do you really expect to see on your hard drive in the next 12-24 months?
I remember people asking the same thing when we talked about Star Marine. Can't we just be happy that it's being developed? It will come when it's ready, simple as that. Wouldn't you be happy if Frontier showcased some info about the development of atmospheric worlds? Or space legs for that matter?
Only in this thread I see people frowning and scowling other's just for being excited by seing the work behind the scenes, the direction the development is heading and even theory-crafting about possible game-play scenarios. Kinda odd imo.
The 600i is a supremely expensive ship for its size and role, especially against the larger Carrack and cheaper Constellation. Why is this? What benefits are worth the increased expense?
We are building a universe, and part of that means we can consider aspects that a standard game does not, such as value and desirability. When we look at vehicles in the real world, its apparent that more functionality does not always mean something is more expensive, and vice versa. In the Star Citizen universe, a sleek, luxury ship created by Origin will bring certain connotations with it, in the same way most people would find a sports coupé more desirable than a family sedan, despite the fact it has less seats and cup-holders.
This is objectively wrong. Luxury sports coupés are expensive, because they are expensive to make. They are made in low volumes (economies of scale), because people actually don't desire them more than a family sedan. They buy them additionally to their main car. The per-unit revenue of luxury cars is higher, however more practical mass market products sold in millions easily beats them in total revenue.
So the whole thing is about "connotations" and fleecing whales. There is no objective reason why a JPEG is expensive to make and economies of scale don't apply either.
Only in this thread I see people frowning and scowling other's just for being excited by seing the work behind the scenes, the direction the development is heading and even theory-crafting about possible game-play scenarios. Kinda odd imo.
No John, what you see in this thread are people who want to see others excited by Star Citizens development. We want to see the game released, become a great success, and be a fun and enjoyable game to play and participate in.
The disconnect is where the theorycrafting cannot match up with the direction development is heading, where development cannot match the direction the visionary wants to take it, and where the visionary himself has absolutely no clue on what he wants.
If you've followed Star Citizen development from the very beginning of it's public announcement - you'll be able to see and count for yourself how many times it's gone round in circles. We're no further on than we were in 2014 - and that raises a few eyebrows.
No John, what you see in this thread are people who want to see others excited by Star Citizens development. We want to see the game released, become a great success, and be a fun and enjoyable game to play and participate in.
The disconnect is where the theorycrafting cannot match up with the direction development is heading, where development cannot match the direction the visionary wants to take it, and where the visionary himself has absolutely no clue on what he wants.
If you've followed Star Citizen development from the very beginning of it's public announcement - you'll be able to see and count for yourself how many times it's gone round in circles. We're no further on than we were in 2014 - and that raises a few eyebrows.
Well it's not about what you or me want. It's about making 2 huge ambitious space themed games. One a Single-Player campaign other a MMORPG. Possible one of the most ambitious video-games ever attempted. This all with crowdfunding and a brand new studio. And if you think it's going around in circles or that it's no further than it was in 2014 it's possible that you haven't been following it closely enough and in the right places for that matter.
.
Would I be happy, yes, but not if they just showed it, talked about it, but don't deliver it. In that case I would rather wait and as FD has done all along when they tell us about something it does go into the game. Sorry but for SC that is not always the case.
.
Star Marine is a great example all talk and (non truths) as in it was days away, then weeks, then months. Suddenly announced Star Marine is in the game by Croberts himself, only many months later to release Star Marine. WHAT? HUH? He said it was in the game. Oh we knew it wasn't but there was a poster long ago when this was all new news, a person saying how Chris was right it is in the game there was 1st person action. Of course it wasn't what was shown and promised, still Croberts said it, so it was to that person. (No I will not go find it, was thousands or more posts ago), yet they released it and there was some kind of a sataball or some such missing in action and unless I am mistaken still is, not that anyone talks about it anymore. It just vanished. So no I don't want FD to blue sky or show what is not in game and my not be. They have done it, the Orey Map comes mind as the one I remember most. I liked it, want it, but hasn't happened and no idea if it will. Still it was shown as concept art, not promised but said they would like to do it. Croberts says it will be in game, a difference. We would like it is miles different then it will be.
.
In any event till it is in game, I won't believe it will ever be in the game anything promised or mentioned by Croberts.
.
Calebe
I remember people asking the same thing when we talked about Star Marine. Can't we just be happy that it's being developed? It will come when it's ready, simple as that. Wouldn't you be happy if Frontier showcased some info about the development of atmospheric worlds? Or space legs for that matter?
Only in this thread I see people frowning and scowling other's just for being excited by seing the work behind the scenes, the direction the development is heading and even theory-crafting about possible game-play scenarios. Kinda odd imo.
I'm still waiting for the moment when the hangar module connects to the PU as promised in 2013! guess what, I don't even see CIG hyping that feature for 3.0, for all that we saw on various presentations and articles, on 3.0 players will still start on random magical bed.
well in fact, back then hangar - PU connection was supposed to be one of the main features that on the top list of features that were coming soon, 4 years later, virtually nothing like it is even mentioned; that is one proof from many on how serious the project management issues there at CIG.
