Positively Spicerian!
You're not going to be able to edit history and retract half a decade of Chris Roberts' lies. You're not going to manage to pretend he wasn't sitting next to Palmer Luckey gushing about VR. You're not going to manage to edit out all the Kickstarter promises, sorry.
This ridiculous VR support/VR game thing doesn't exist anywhere except in your head. Stop wasting people's time with that nonsense or pretending it matters to anyone except someone desperately trying to clean up Chris' messes. It's absolutely preposterous! Obviously nobody expected Star Citizen to be a VR-only game. We just believed that mumbling mushmouth when he claimed it would work with the Rift.
Maybe if Chris didn't lie for years about it I wouldn't have wasted my money on this pathetic farce. A shame nobody bothered to tell him it wasn't going to be a VR game back in 2012. I do hope he takes up this weak line of defense, it would be amusing to see him pull that along with the usual hand gestures.
I gotta agree, when I heard about Star Citizen years ago I wasnt like "oh better only believe half of the stuff this guy tells me and then be extremely tolerant regarding the rest because thats how stuff works". No CRoberts told me things and went to extreme lengths verbal and physical (epic handwaving) in order to support his claims and make himself believable. I believed into the project and I had no doubt that what CRoberts told me was to be expected. Over the years I got experience with him and learned that whatever he says is to be taken with a grain of salt...or rocks of em. If he doesnt backpaddle on past statements he proves that he has no clue what hes talking about the rest of the time and the course of development only shows that he is well over his head, cannot deliver on even the pre-scopecreep stretch goals (you realize the 2014 break was because the game was intended to become
BIGGER but all of a sudden we are missing half the stretch goals and others are talked to be impossible...strange how making a project "larger" works).
Theres really no excuse here. Some people say that its the backers who got it all wrong, had the wrong expectations, are delusional...in short....its the backers fault. But thats not how it works. Because we are not talking about individuals here. Its a lot of people (the majority I d say) who got these insane ideas about whatever CRoberts told was to be expected. Thats why the system reduction to a mere handful is such a shock in the community. At best its individuals that try to justify this course of development and that alone tells you enough already. And the best excuse these people can come up with is painting an extremely incompetent picture of CRoberts which doesnt help him at all.
If whatever CRoberts says openly, in interviews or on ATVs has to be taken skeptically (btw...thats what we do on this forum but we get attacked for it.....hmmm) because chances are "we" are not getting it right,
WHY on earth should we listen in the first place? Its at best confusing and has no single meaning but always is vague and needs to be interpreted because despite his so-called experience and competence CRoberts is unable to deliver clearcut information and provide timetables that are reliable. His mumbling, stumbling and handwaving instead evoke the impression that hes hiding something, tries to avoid certain topics and generally just buys time to avoid getting cornered.
If the CEO would be able to formulate crystal clear expectations and promise only whats possible NOW we wouldnt have this mess in the first place. Its CRoberts fault, its that simple. He is not the victim here, the backers are.
As far as I can see I'm not "spinning" anything. There's plenty of sources of what was mentioned.
CR said that Star Citizen would support VR, supporting it means making it work.
Star Citizen is currently in active development, VR support will come when they decide it's time to support VR.
Again, a moot point.
Well you are promoting evidence while ignoring the rest. In that regard you consciously decide to believe snippets of evidence disregarding the parts that dont suit you. Its called "mindbending". Its the same with SC fans trying to "explain" the length of development to 3.5 or 4 years because "6th year of development" is obviously emberassing or something. And depending on who you listen to there are supported claims of when development really started. A shame that this is a piece of fact that really doesnt need a discussion because we know when it started. The implementation of VR is worrysome regarding Star Citizen because so many people with experience outline the difficulties in slapping it on as an afterthought in an environment that current cannot run VR without making the user sick. Sure, the future might bring many changes but this is the situation NOW and thats exactly what we are discussing. Your defense is the future. The problem is that the future doesnt really look all that great with CRoberts at the helm regarding his past track record you know.
Of course its a moot point, all we can do is wait and see anyway. Still you decided to stand up and make a defense.
I too remember VR being listed in the stretch goals. Your "evidence" about being first mentioned 2013 simply doesnt check out. Also I dont know why you try to mount a defense in the first place. I would like to hear excuses and explanations from the CEO himself but instead we have backers who know as much as the rest of us trying to do the explaining. Sorry....not buying it.
Oh, can you post a vid of 8 vs 8 please?
+1, I d love to see this fun with my own eyes.
Captain
Helm
Gunner
Navigator
4 combat marines
2 engineers
14 red shirts
What about
Mop man
Cook
Garbage guy
Barista
Cleaning lady (female avatars ftw, dont hit me Brittney, I m kidding)
"We will have 100 systems, but that is great because they will be handcrafted unlike ED's boring procgen!"
"We will have five systems, but that is great because they will mostly be procgen!"
[haha]
I ROFLed, thank you for that man, its nice to start the morning with a laugh
After all, the community are expecting sandworm demo levels of fidelity and awesomeness
Thanks for the clarification. Because too many arguments bog down to meaningless details shrouding the
real objective.
When I think about Star Citizen I am not thinking Sandworms but the feeling that particular video transported. Apart from the sandworm we had large locations of incredible detail, flora, gameloops. The sandworm was simply an asset. It wasnt important in the large picture, just a bonus. I couldnt care less if the sandworm is coming or not. But I want Star Citizen to be like that video and its anything but at the moment. All those promo videos demonstrating ship flight as smooth as butter rewarding tactical and skillful play. I expect an MMO because they advertised MMO-style gameplay and the term MMO and its expectations are well established. If they are not going with what the rest of the world understands under that term they need to come up with a new word, not use a known one and give it a new meaning. Terms like "carrot-on-a-stick" and "cashgrabs" hold true enough when it comes to Star Citizen and CiG.
Right now we have an arcade flight model which benefits mouse users (balance). Ships dont feel like they have mass and are not modelled correctly as promised. We do have a gameloop but its incredbly barebone and basic. The immersion promised is only possible for people who are able to come up with their own fun. If you jump into the game expecting to be entertained you ll be disappointed. The 2012 kickstarter trailer hit a nerve inside me. I was gripping my chair and holding my breath rooting for the guy back then because he triggered my longings perfectly.
Star Citizen currently is
nothing like that 2012 trailer and talking about it only exposes all the ugly problems and lies surrounding the project. By now its very much (for me) a matter of trust. And I simply dont trust CiG to keep their word or come through on promises. And they dont have to either. Who can force em? They got the money right? They just want more and thats where "working the gullies" comes in. Its just sad to see that so many private people pick up that choir as if CRoberts cannot be expected to do his work himself so others talk for him...bravo.
A good rule of thumb is just look at the milestones and judge what was delivered (not der promises). Sometimes you just gotta write off an investment. Sunk cost fallacy is a strong influence.
Yeah thats a good rule but you cant apply that in this case because it makes Star Citizen look like a scam................
