I get the feeling a lot of the middling to hard core fans are properly holding their breath this time round. This is the one that makes or breaks it for CIG. After last year and the road to.... fiasco. So will the cavalry come riding over the hill chopping up the naysayers ... or some old donkey with CR on its back and a bucket of mouldy oats fetching it along for another few yards.
Star Citizen Thread v6
- Thread starter Brett C
- Start date
- Status
Why have you become so cryptic in these last few posts?
Spills out some beans please, what did you really want to post?
Or a planetary map loaded in CryEngine where you can drive around for five minutes before the next guy gets a chance.
Was watching a documentary on light. Apparently Edison never invented a long lasting light bulb until years after he made the announcement; he did it early to discourage competitors from trying. He would arrange interviews with journalists and rush them through the interview in 5 mins before the bulb died then switch in a new one for the next journo all the while saying the bulb would last forever. Sounds familiar. History repeats and once again SC is doing something that's already been done. At least Edison wasn't fleecing people continually.
Amazing how DS magically needs 'sources' to work out what everyone who as an interest in SC...from any viewpoint... can deduce from reading between the lines and making stuff up all by themselves.
What's more amazing the line of people still funding the project despite the obvious.
It's not an excuse, it's basic reality. Nitpicking on a 4+ year old statement without acknowledging the context at the time, when the project plan and scope was way smaller it's extremely disingenuous to say the least.
Ignoring basic context like the facts that at that time CIG staff consisted of only 1 studio with ~20 dev's and had only raised $9 Million dollars and were still far from imagining that they would end getting many more millions and be able to increase the scope like they did.
CIG did the absolute righteous thing to do, they adapted their plan according to the support shown by backers and embraced the full scope and ambition of Chris Roberts vision to make something that they feel otherwise wouldn't be made.
Marketing reality and Game Development reality are different things. With the amount of funding, support and expectations that Star Citizen has generated it's been a while that It's not about addressing to specific dates but addressing to specific standards of quality and scope.
Mostly the ones that make use of the mechanics they develop concerning cargo and it's manual carrying. So Trading/Cargo Hauling and the iteration of what already exists with in the PU with the dynamic between Pirating/Criminal Status and the Bounty Hunting quest.
Maybe some more that use the mechanics they already have and aren't to complex to introduce like Ship Escort, Taxi/Passenger delivery or Racing for example.
"Basic persistence" were your own words. I was only quoting what you wrote. There are 100 systems planned to be in the game, all with their own lore and porpose. Some of It can be seen in the https://robertsspaceindustries.com/starmap.
Doesn't mean they have to be implemented all at the same time, we've been through that, CR mentioned this same incremental addition of systems back in 2015! I'm sure there will be a lot to discover in 3.0 and 4.0 and 5.0 and so on.
Just like ED it's a 10 year plan for full completion. A marathon, not a sprint if you like. We enjoy the ride the best we can by playtesting and helping out CIG with feedback and support.
Criticism and jokes apart, this is a good article to read about SC development cost.
http://gamasutra.com/blogs/MattBrad...tizen_Has_a_Huge_Development_Cost_Problem.php
PSA: Gamasutra people understand game development
Not really a great article, author is clearly not a developer or has any understanding of the industry seeing has it misses to many glaring issues with it's comparisons one could almost assume it's a satirical article.
"Gamasutra people" indeed understand game development. Unfortunately that article is not by "Gamasutra People" but just an "opinion" by a fresh account who wrote a "blog" there. Awkwardly, or not, it seems to be going for the "CIG should disclose it's finances" nonsense instead of focusing on the game's development or it's challenges.
I beg to differ. What's already playable in the PU show's integrated mechanics that are very hard to pull seamlessly together and because of that are absent in most games of the genre.
I'm talking about of full on space leg usage, so that includes seamlessly walking anywhere freely, this includes ofc inside huge ship's where you can gather with other players and play while it's moving. Having EVA mechanics, FPS mechanics besides the traditional Dogfighting is actually very difficult to pull off. That's why very few space games games allow for that in the seamless way that Star Citizen does.
CryEngine has been around for how many years? 15 now? Nothing close to Star Citizen has been produced that I've known. I think they've shown plenty and since it has been enough to generate 156$millions in funding I'd say Im not alone in that assessment.
It was never supposed to be in the current game, the current game is a different game of the one pitched in the video of the kickstarter. Same vision and main idea, just expanded quality and scope thanks to the increase in funding.
It will come exactly when CIG think it's ready for playtesting, not sooner not later.
You can be a citizen without being a backer.
Well there's a first time for everything, just like landing on the moon it requires theory, science and technology knowledge to predict and find the probably way's to make it happen.
CIG are lucky to have in their ranks some of the best programmers and engineers in the business that are more than willing to push the boundaries to fullfill Star Citizen vision to the fullest.
You can make all the humors analogy's you want that it wont make Star Citizen a scam. Actually expanding the scope and quality of a product you've pitched is the exact opposite of it and any gamer would be more than happy to see other dev's follow CIG footsteps instead of seeing so many sub-par released games. It might not be what you want of a game, but it's not your game isin't it, you just backed it early, like other hundreds of thousands gamers did.
CIG is not only Chris Roberts you know... Most of their senior staff have worked on a lot of major groundbreaking and massive successful franchises, both old-school ones to more recent ones.
25th August - Main show.
Seem you are complaining a bit by anticipation. All CIG Gamescom presentations have been nothing short of amazing, don't see why this year it would be any different. CIG has no need to rush anything, things will release when they are ready to playtest and that's it. I'm sure there will be plenty of new stuff showcased for the backers to feast.
The only thing that will break is the backers wallets as always. It seems a dejavu from when people were doubting that Star Marine was releasing after all the wait same old cynical doubting behavior and for what? Things arrive when they are ready to arrive and that it.
Star Marine was only released to counter criticism and under much protest from senior staff.
The development of it was an absolute nightmare due to demands for things like bullet trajectories calculated from the barrel of the weapon .
The engine change discussion that I mentioned a few pages back happened in a meeting during Star Marine dev and was a real option being discussed.
The criticisms of Gamescon presentations is not that they aren't "amazing" but that they are standalone r&d tech aka "fake" or unrepresentative of the project, or disingenuous.
Nothing else in JohnMice's post is worth addressing.
The development of it was an absolute nightmare due to demands for things like bullet trajectories calculated from the barrel of the weapon .
The engine change discussion that I mentioned a few pages back happened in a meeting during Star Marine dev and was a real option being discussed.
The criticisms of Gamescon presentations is not that they aren't "amazing" but that they are standalone r&d tech aka "fake" or unrepresentative of the project, or disingenuous.
Nothing else in JohnMice's post is worth addressing.
Must be strange to be so apathetic about things, I don't know how you can do it.
In CIGs case, especially so. One would think though, for a company that claims to openness and honesty in addition to "the pledge", marketing and development would be closely aligned. The greater the difference, the more backers are being misled. Its one thing to mislead people through marketing when your dev funds are coming from other sources, its another to mislead the people providing you with the funds.
So, basically not much in the way of professions then. Even trade sounds suspect if they are only putting in the mechanics for transferring cargo.... has there been any mention of an actual economy to make trading worthwhile?
So, you don't know if any of that is coming right? Its just wishful thinking.
Plans don't equal reality.
Ah, the good old "x doesn't understand software development". Its amazing how many developers, QA people, project managers, are told by SC fans they don't understand software development. I've been told i don't understand software development many times on the SC reddit.... as someone who works in a software development company and spent a few years as a project manager.
Yes, its so hard, that there is no seamless transitions in NMS and Hellion and other games..... oh, wait! More like its not done in all games because that's not what they are trying to make in those games.
Indeed, even Star Citizen hasn't been produced yet. If anything like what CR has pitched to backers over the years is ever produced, then i'll be amazed.
Indeed. Many companies are full of some of the best people in the business. My company also has some of the best programmers and engineers in the business also. Its all irrelvant if the captain of the ship keeps changing direction on a whim.
Yes, but he's the guy in charge, and when he says jump, he expects people to ask how high.
The way I see it, CiG and CR are stuck between a rock and a very hard place. They can't release what they have and another delay is out of the question.
Backers are pulling their funds in ever increasing numbers as it is...usually in the range from a few hundred dollars to concierge packages then buying back in with starter packs... if at all.
Come Gamescom on Friday and cringe-worthy viewing of an overly effusive CR babbling over the offerings of another pretty tech demo...With a definite no show for 3.0... with another predicted delay or no announcement at all on either 3.0 or Sqn 42, more backers will pull the cash they've got in the project and due to general and realistic scepticism due to last year's fiasco, very few new backers will buying in with anything more than a starter pack. There will be the usual muppets clamouring for attention buying more very expensive ship JPG's...but not near enough to make that much of a difference.
I suspect 3.0 is nowhere near ready for release judging from what I can see in the burn down ATV's. It's obvious that everything they compile into the build breaks something previously working...but if it does appear in the state I think it's in sometime in September, backers will be pulling the plug anyway once they play it.
For myself and the few hundred bucks I have in it...CR has until mid September to produce something tangible and playable that's actually on my hard drive... then I'm out. A dozen or so of my mates in for similar amounts or more have already bailed, some buying back in with basic starter packs, some just given up all together. Depending on what CR and CiG present at Gamescom...I may even be out before then.
On the announcement of yet another concept sale at Gamescom... one of the subscribers posted this vid on Spectrum...very apt...and sums up the current mood of many of the backers. It got locked down and deleted in a hurry though [yesnod]
[video=youtube_share;xEMjTtaTzB8]https://youtu.be/xEMjTtaTzB8[/video]
Backers are pulling their funds in ever increasing numbers as it is...usually in the range from a few hundred dollars to concierge packages then buying back in with starter packs... if at all.
Come Gamescom on Friday and cringe-worthy viewing of an overly effusive CR babbling over the offerings of another pretty tech demo...With a definite no show for 3.0... with another predicted delay or no announcement at all on either 3.0 or Sqn 42, more backers will pull the cash they've got in the project and due to general and realistic scepticism due to last year's fiasco, very few new backers will buying in with anything more than a starter pack. There will be the usual muppets clamouring for attention buying more very expensive ship JPG's...but not near enough to make that much of a difference.
I suspect 3.0 is nowhere near ready for release judging from what I can see in the burn down ATV's. It's obvious that everything they compile into the build breaks something previously working...but if it does appear in the state I think it's in sometime in September, backers will be pulling the plug anyway once they play it.
For myself and the few hundred bucks I have in it...CR has until mid September to produce something tangible and playable that's actually on my hard drive... then I'm out. A dozen or so of my mates in for similar amounts or more have already bailed, some buying back in with basic starter packs, some just given up all together. Depending on what CR and CiG present at Gamescom...I may even be out before then.
On the announcement of yet another concept sale at Gamescom... one of the subscribers posted this vid on Spectrum...very apt...and sums up the current mood of many of the backers. It got locked down and deleted in a hurry though [yesnod]
[video=youtube_share;xEMjTtaTzB8]https://youtu.be/xEMjTtaTzB8[/video]
Last edited:
Is it really out of the question, though? I mean technically there won't be any more delays anyway since there's not even a tentative release date any more (for a pre-alpha patch, lol), but I have faith that there's still enough mileage in the devotion of people like JohnMice to keep the top spinning for a while yet. Show a few isolated tech demos to the braying sycophants in the audience, come up with a few new buzzwords for them to parrot mindlessly, make it seem businesslike with a few slides, wave some hands, talk up some new jpegs, joke about missed deadlines. If he feels like he's in real trouble, wheel out Sandi with a tearful speech. Watch the money pour in. Tame media outlets will push the official line, the defence force will shout down everything else. Business as usual. I have no doubt that right now Roberts is cracking the whip on some very unfortunate CIG minions who are tasked with putting together a completely unplayable cinematic specifically for his presentation.
And if 3.0 is (somehow) delivered, to the same laughably low quality standard established by 2.x (or lower), or in separate modules or whatever other compromise it takes to make it happen, it will just be explained away as "alpha, never done before, revolutionary, quality, scope, you don't understand game development." And yet we're also supposed to believe that these delays happen because CIG only releases things when they're ready, and because Roberts is such a perfectionist. [rolleyes]
I bet your mates were counted twice on the "Star Citizens" total. And probably all of their separate buy-ins were added to the funding total, regardless of refunds.
I said here about a year ago that if they didn't deliver something significant at last year's Gamescom, and certainly by CitizenCon, that I would consider the project to be a lost cause. They didn't, and I do. Certainly nothing has happened since to make my rethink that. But I like to keep my pledge package (freelancer, I think? whatever the $125 one was) active, because in a sad way it amuses me to have them still owe me two games.
Last edited:
He's already pulled that stunt more than once...and more than a few 'normal' backers outside of the cult won't be so easily placated this time around. There will always be some, of course...but they're running out of excuses and buzzwords that sound convincing even to themselves.
As for keeping the pledge active, I suspect there's more than a few keeping their Freelancer and Sqn 42 addon alive 'just in case'. After all, none of us want to be wrong, do we? [squeeeee]
Last edited:
They in lies the Key
SC and SQN42 should be judged and measured on what the end consumer has access to, not what is envisioned, promsied, or dreamed of
But instead the narriative is like this, where it is a constant reference to SC as a current game where you can do all the things planned
Yes the video is of "What would SC be like if it was released today with all its planned features" and carrys the disclaimer of nothing is step in stone, but just the choice of language is always not "SC will have X Y and Z" or "Plans to have X Y & Z" or "Aims to have X Y Z" but always refers to SC as if it is a feature complete released project that does have, that already has the best and most detials charater creation ever due to its fidelityy, not that that has ever been seen on any consumers drives at home so how can such statements be made when phrased as fact vs goals or aims or ambitions
[video=youtube;o1xZTc5RF9c]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o1xZTc5RF9c[/video]
PS cool video of the cats
That's just it, they have pulled it more than once, but for each person who loses patience there will be a fanatic who's going to double-down to keep up the pretense. It will blow up eventually, of course, I just don't think it will be this weekend.
Just browsing through the stretch goals, and a few things struck me for the first time.
1) New ships apparently cost 1 million to make if the stretch goals are to be believed
2) They initially said 40 systems, then added another 10 with a stretch goal that would add 250,000 to the funding. At 60 million they got up to 100 star systems. But wait, they had individual stretch goals earlier to add single systems, all of those coming in at a cool 1 million each. So, 1 million per ship, 1 million per system..... if that is what was required, then 100 systems and how many ships? Over 50 now? That would put the development cost of just those at over 150 million! Either true, and then SC is in big trouble, or backers gave more money than was required to achieve the work, in other words, CIG were greedy, taking more than necessary... so much for greedy publishers.
3) They knew they wanted to do full planets, not just restricted landing zones in April 2014.... so all those comments from fans about the expanded scope of 3.0 due to proc gen planets and how CIG initially planned fixed landing zones are 100% horse manure.
On a side note. The funding chart is in a bit of a slump at the moment, although guess some people are still paying subscriptions and buying ships. I guess a lot of people are waiting for 3.0 before deciding whether to invest more.
1) New ships apparently cost 1 million to make if the stretch goals are to be believed
2) They initially said 40 systems, then added another 10 with a stretch goal that would add 250,000 to the funding. At 60 million they got up to 100 star systems. But wait, they had individual stretch goals earlier to add single systems, all of those coming in at a cool 1 million each. So, 1 million per ship, 1 million per system..... if that is what was required, then 100 systems and how many ships? Over 50 now? That would put the development cost of just those at over 150 million! Either true, and then SC is in big trouble, or backers gave more money than was required to achieve the work, in other words, CIG were greedy, taking more than necessary... so much for greedy publishers.
3) They knew they wanted to do full planets, not just restricted landing zones in April 2014.... so all those comments from fans about the expanded scope of 3.0 due to proc gen planets and how CIG initially planned fixed landing zones are 100% horse manure.
On a side note. The funding chart is in a bit of a slump at the moment, although guess some people are still paying subscriptions and buying ships. I guess a lot of people are waiting for 3.0 before deciding whether to invest more.
You know what makes me wonder how CIG is planning on making money after their project is finished. If they rope in everyone and their grandmother during the funding, who's gonna buy the game? Or are they planning it to be super inclusive to all demographics? Not if the fancyful dreams of CR are to be believed...
For me Star Citizen is banta fodda. I've wasted my money only to find out that it no longer runs on my laptop. So far ED has been great with minimal issues but again how far further down the track will it become an issue whereby a new upgrade is required? I surely would like to see what the future holds for this sim.
Last edited:
if your laptop can't run current sc then probably it can't run modern AAA games either... so you may want to buy a new one.
Me neither, not without breaking some promises. I can only imagine subscriptions to keep the servers running, more concent sales, or maybe like ED, sale of cosmetics, although no idea if that will be enough.
On the other hand, we were led to believe that release would be feature complete at one point, while at the same time saying development would continue after and.... erm... now we might be looking at an MVP. I doubt backers would be happy with paying for updates whenver they happen after all the money they have invested.
There is the possibility of some extra money coming in from sales of later episodes of SQ42, although depends on how much they can charge for those, and how many players will be interested in it.
I think they might be thinking that once the game is released they will make a lot of new sales. But considering the genre, i guess a majority of people who might be interested have alerady pledged, especially considering all the marketing that has led people to believe (time and again) that release is close, just around the corner....
IF they ever release Sqn42 and IF it's any good and IF it's not priced exorbitantly then I'll buy it.
As I'm not sure the first of my conditions will ever be met, I'm not holding out much hope
Yeah, only CR (the greatest gamedev ever that have discovered variable serialization and render to targets after six years of SC development) understand game development.
Seriously, stop insult all the other people that work in game industry, this attitude is ridiculous now.
Last edited:
Imagine if, after release, the game immediately goes free to play!
Last edited:
- Status