Gameplay footage of work-in-progress Elite: Dangerous multiplayer, posted to Youtube on Nov 2012:
[video=youtube;P5JYRyhxYhI]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P5JYRyhxYhI[/video]
As will I haha, and very true
The Star Citizen Thread v 3.0
- Thread starter Jenner
- Start date
- Status
[video=youtube;P5JYRyhxYhI]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P5JYRyhxYhI[/video]
I remember that video. It appeared after there was quite some feedback in the gaming media about how Elite's pitch had nothing visual to give prospective backers of what it was they were backing.
What's in that video seems very basic and probably wouldn't take much time to knock together at all.
We should really get back on topic
Beaten to it!!
Last edited:
It's the oldest whine on the internet. "I've articulated my opinions in a rude and abusive fashion. You've moderated me. Ergo, you've moderated me because of my opinions - not because I've been rude and abusive. Freedom of speech, fascists, conspiracy, blah blah blah".
Yep, that was during the kickstarter. If you remember that, FDEV had a very difficult time getting ED funded, since they had almost nothing to show for the pitch. Some examples..
Elite Returns With Massive Kickstarter Goal
Elite 4 Comes Dangerously Close To Showing Something (that title..XD)
Look! It’s A Real Bigfoot! No, Wait, Elite IV Footage (x2)
As FDEV have told us afterwards, all the work (from multiplayer to assets to anything else) present in the game now has been done during and after the actual KS campaign. Before that there was some skunkwork prototyping, like CR did for the original SC pitch too, for a couple of years (if I remember correctly).
A fun fact though. ED was going to be started on KS some months earlier than SC was, but KS delaying their British branch opening delayed EDs KS pitch for some months.
In other news, this is also from that time (actually, one month earlier)..you can compare the end result both approaches had on crowdfunding, as well as the progress that each team made for their original pitch.
[video=youtube;RlIWJlz6-Eg]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RlIWJlz6-Eg[/video]
What I am trying to say is that you are comparing different things on different attributes. For example, the Cobra engine was not made for Elite4, it was made and used in all FDEV games, none of which were space sims and needed the tools and features that it has now. These tools and features were developed for ED mainly after the project was green lit, and the engine keeps getting more as we move forward. SC bought Cryengine3 from Crytek, and started changing and augmenting it to fit a space sim. The engine that SC has now (a heavily customized build of CRYENGINE) is getting tools and features specifically for SC, and it will keep getting more as we move forward.
What I am trying to say is that arguments from parts of both games fanbases that try to correlate and compare development processes, speed or difficulty are usually moot, and many times the product of misinformation or bias. Simply because we are talking about two different games, with vastly different development processes, manpower, budget and goals. Every time that someone says that ED was much easier to develop because XX, or that SC hasn't done anything promising or noteworthy since its inception because XXX, as a backer and supporter of both games, I die a little inside.
Only a little though, we are talking about imaginary spaceships here..
Hope that helps, cheers. C:
Last edited:
- Me: posting a design suggestion about finetuning thrusters and shield frequency
--> reaction: Too clunky, NOT FUN!
- CIG: wants to introduce a physics based damage system where you can finetune your weapons ( projectile heat, energy, velocity etc.)
--> reaction: CIG IS AWESOME!111!!!
--> reaction: Too clunky, NOT FUN!
- CIG: wants to introduce a physics based damage system where you can finetune your weapons ( projectile heat, energy, velocity etc.)
--> reaction: CIG IS AWESOME!111!!!
If all the things that CIG did weren't enough to prove cash grabbing objectives, leading people to the mistake of always buying things based on imagination instead waiting for things ready to make offers (and reasonable offers instead hundreds or thousands of dollars for in-game items after 4 times of overbudget), meaning not a two-way street road, but they do whatever they want, regardless what they said in a previous sales offer and promised, regardless customer satisfactoin.... the most recent thing that I learned is absolutely ridiculous and an absolute proof of they acting in bad faith on deals.
Well... To explain that... they basically created a TOS where they stated that wouldn't give refunds blablabla, as well as stating that would show information about how they spent the money in case of failing to deliver... and by failing to deliver that was implied not delivering later, after Nov/2014 + 12 months, originally:
http://web.archive.org/web/20130813122132/https://robertsspaceindustries.com/tos
IV. Charges & Billing
RSI agrees to use its good faith business efforts to deliver to you the pledge items and the Game on or before the estimated delivery date. However, you acknowledge and agree that delivery as of such date is not a promise by RSI since unforeseen events may extend the development and/or production time. Accordingly, you agree that any unearned portion of the deposit shall not be refundable until and unless RSI has failed to deliver the pledge items and/or the Game to you within 12 months after the estimated delivery date.
For the avoidance of doubt, in consideration of RSI’s good faith efforts to develop, produce, and deliver the Game with the funds raised, you agree that any deposit amounts applied against the Pledge Item Cost and the Game Cost as described above shall be non-refundable regardless of whether or not RSI is able to complete and deliver the Game and/or the pledge items. In the unlikely event that RSI is not able to deliver the Game and/or the pledge items, RSI agrees to post an audited cost accounting on its website to fully explain the use of the deposits for the Game Cost and the Pledge Item Cost. In consideration of the promises by RSI hereunder, you agree to irrevocably waive any claim for refund of any deposit amount that has been used for the Game Cost and Pledge Item Cost in accordance with the above.
As you can see, and checking the original kickstarter page, etc., Nov/2014 was the estimated delivery date, meaning that by Nov/2015 they should deliver everything that promised in their advertising... in the worst case.
But then, what they did was truly ridiculous. They simply changed the TOS... and the current version now says:
https://robertsspaceindustries.com/tos
"Accordingly, you agree that any unearned portion of your Pledge shall not be refundable until and unless RSI has failed to deliver the relevant pledge items and/or the Game to you within eighteen (18) months after the estimated delivery date."
They couldn't be more shady, unethical and prove more bad faith (which already did many times by breaking promises in sales offers and advertising, for the sake to get money - not due development needs) than simply doing what they did here.
This TOS becomes soooo invalid, as a matter of defense for CIG in a court of law, just because their own attitude of they changing such clause (and worst if you add to that their falls into the deceptive marketing).
Kind of "Ok. I am going to make a campaign, say whatever, do not deliver anything or just 5% of the promises, and just change my TOS adding more 6 months as more I approach to the target that I need to share how I spent the money and give refunds... Oh... and better if I keep this as hidden as possible, not sending emails to inform the change, but just putting a checkbox that people clicks without barely looking into it".
This is totally... a joke. And to prove that this is a joke, here's what Federal Trade Comission have to say about that:
"Disclaimers and disclosures must be clear and conspicuous. That is, consumers must be able to notice, read or hear, and understand the information. Still, a disclaimer or disclosure alone usually is not enough to remedy a false or deceptive claim."
Obviously they used that to delude their customer about their rights, trying to convince them that they have no right to refund (when they actually have, not just because already announced that won't achieve nov/2015, but also because felt in many situations of deceptive marketing, which is their LEGAL responsibility NOT TO DO, and that, by itself, is enough to make their unique matter of defense - their TOS - basically invalid and all the people entitled to a refund since a long time ago). But this move just show themselves even more shady, making eve more clear as acting in bad faith, in a pathetic try to delude customers.
Just wait then to they updating near of that current target from estimate + 18 months to estimate + 24 months and so on...
LOL
So, I wish luck to them, because the first customer with access to the United States court of law and willing to receive a good indemnity that goes beyond a simple refund (for example, moral damage caused by the entire focus and passion that people put "into the cause"), CIG simply made sure to throw his unique matter of defense (which was already very weak by the deceptive marketing situation) into the garbage. They are currently and totally easy-cake for any interested lawyer willing to make some money, regardless interest of backers in lawsuits, by the way.
And while people should ask both to CIG respect customer rights and be customer oriented, caring with customer satisfaction instead doing whatever for money, and visibly trying to dumb down the public about their rights, as well as be responsible enough to protect the company, by not doing repetitive deceptive marketing or THIS (ridiculous change clearly implying bad faith) - meaning protecting the money given by all backers to pay the cost of the game, instead having to pay indemnities in lawsuits due their own irresponsibility - those fans go there and applaud them, and keep trying to dumb down all other people claiming that "oh, you have no right to a refund, because, look to this TOS"... when the TOS is simply and totally: meh! And they made sure to make it even weaker.
It's a sad attitude and all that the crowd-funding business does not need are devs acting in this irresponsible way, because things that lead to false claims/advertising and changes like that, will never make this business model more reliable, and definitely will never grow/expand this way. If the total disrespect with their own estimates, like if it was an empty word were you thrown whatever date out to the window, near enough just to keep people tied and looking to your website and buying ships, wasn't enough already.
I recommend backers to demand CIG more respect from their part, more responsibility... Otherwise... there is no way that they will ever learn to follow a right and fair path with their customers (ALL THEM! Not just fans). And due this attitude, right now, CIG is easy-cake for lawyers. I can bet that they will just wait to CIG receive even more pledges to make their move... because this way their slice will be bigger.
Well... To explain that... they basically created a TOS where they stated that wouldn't give refunds blablabla, as well as stating that would show information about how they spent the money in case of failing to deliver... and by failing to deliver that was implied not delivering later, after Nov/2014 + 12 months, originally:
http://web.archive.org/web/20130813122132/https://robertsspaceindustries.com/tos
IV. Charges & Billing
RSI agrees to use its good faith business efforts to deliver to you the pledge items and the Game on or before the estimated delivery date. However, you acknowledge and agree that delivery as of such date is not a promise by RSI since unforeseen events may extend the development and/or production time. Accordingly, you agree that any unearned portion of the deposit shall not be refundable until and unless RSI has failed to deliver the pledge items and/or the Game to you within 12 months after the estimated delivery date.
For the avoidance of doubt, in consideration of RSI’s good faith efforts to develop, produce, and deliver the Game with the funds raised, you agree that any deposit amounts applied against the Pledge Item Cost and the Game Cost as described above shall be non-refundable regardless of whether or not RSI is able to complete and deliver the Game and/or the pledge items. In the unlikely event that RSI is not able to deliver the Game and/or the pledge items, RSI agrees to post an audited cost accounting on its website to fully explain the use of the deposits for the Game Cost and the Pledge Item Cost. In consideration of the promises by RSI hereunder, you agree to irrevocably waive any claim for refund of any deposit amount that has been used for the Game Cost and Pledge Item Cost in accordance with the above.
As you can see, and checking the original kickstarter page, etc., Nov/2014 was the estimated delivery date, meaning that by Nov/2015 they should deliver everything that promised in their advertising... in the worst case.
But then, what they did was truly ridiculous. They simply changed the TOS... and the current version now says:
https://robertsspaceindustries.com/tos
"Accordingly, you agree that any unearned portion of your Pledge shall not be refundable until and unless RSI has failed to deliver the relevant pledge items and/or the Game to you within eighteen (18) months after the estimated delivery date."
They couldn't be more shady, unethical and prove more bad faith (which already did many times by breaking promises in sales offers and advertising, for the sake to get money - not due development needs) than simply doing what they did here.
This TOS becomes soooo invalid, as a matter of defense for CIG in a court of law, just because their own attitude of they changing such clause (and worst if you add to that their falls into the deceptive marketing).
Kind of "Ok. I am going to make a campaign, say whatever, do not deliver anything or just 5% of the promises, and just change my TOS adding more 6 months as more I approach to the target that I need to share how I spent the money and give refunds... Oh... and better if I keep this as hidden as possible, not sending emails to inform the change, but just putting a checkbox that people clicks without barely looking into it".
This is totally... a joke. And to prove that this is a joke, here's what Federal Trade Comission have to say about that:
"Disclaimers and disclosures must be clear and conspicuous. That is, consumers must be able to notice, read or hear, and understand the information. Still, a disclaimer or disclosure alone usually is not enough to remedy a false or deceptive claim."
Obviously they used that to delude their customer about their rights, trying to convince them that they have no right to refund (when they actually have, not just because already announced that won't achieve nov/2015, but also because felt in many situations of deceptive marketing, which is their LEGAL responsibility NOT TO DO, and that, by itself, is enough to make their unique matter of defense - their TOS - basically invalid and all the people entitled to a refund since a long time ago). But this move just show themselves even more shady, making eve more clear as acting in bad faith, in a pathetic try to delude customers.
Just wait then to they updating near of that current target from estimate + 18 months to estimate + 24 months and so on...
LOL
So, I wish luck to them, because the first customer with access to the United States court of law and willing to receive a good indemnity that goes beyond a simple refund (for example, moral damage caused by the entire focus and passion that people put "into the cause"), CIG simply made sure to throw his unique matter of defense (which was already very weak by the deceptive marketing situation) into the garbage. They are currently and totally easy-cake for any interested lawyer willing to make some money, regardless interest of backers in lawsuits, by the way.
And while people should ask both to CIG respect customer rights and be customer oriented, caring with customer satisfaction instead doing whatever for money, and visibly trying to dumb down the public about their rights, as well as be responsible enough to protect the company, by not doing repetitive deceptive marketing or THIS (ridiculous change clearly implying bad faith) - meaning protecting the money given by all backers to pay the cost of the game, instead having to pay indemnities in lawsuits due their own irresponsibility - those fans go there and applaud them, and keep trying to dumb down all other people claiming that "oh, you have no right to a refund, because, look to this TOS"... when the TOS is simply and totally: meh! And they made sure to make it even weaker.
It's a sad attitude and all that the crowd-funding business does not need are devs acting in this irresponsible way, because things that lead to false claims/advertising and changes like that, will never make this business model more reliable, and definitely will never grow/expand this way. If the total disrespect with their own estimates, like if it was an empty word were you thrown whatever date out to the window, near enough just to keep people tied and looking to your website and buying ships, wasn't enough already.
I recommend backers to demand CIG more respect from their part, more responsibility... Otherwise... there is no way that they will ever learn to follow a right and fair path with their customers (ALL THEM! Not just fans). And due this attitude, right now, CIG is easy-cake for lawyers. I can bet that they will just wait to CIG receive even more pledges to make their move... because this way their slice will be bigger.
Last edited:
One thing about SC being delayed further... One of the major things going for CIG in terms of marketing is fidelity, about how the game will push limits in the graphics department. But if they keep on delaying the game, won't they also miss the opportunity of looking much better than the competition?
Have you guys seen videos and pics of SW Battlefront 3? Some say it is not gameplay, but people who saw the gameplay demo behind doors say it looks like 90% as good. It looks gorgeous and to me ahead of Star Citizen, but I'll wait for real gameplay to judge.
Have you guys seen videos and pics of SW Battlefront 3? Some say it is not gameplay, but people who saw the gameplay demo behind doors say it looks like 90% as good. It looks gorgeous and to me ahead of Star Citizen, but I'll wait for real gameplay to judge.
Last edited:
No, because they don't care.
Their scheme is redoing... ship sale... redoing... ship sale... redoing... ship sale... redoing... ship sale... and so on, while the fans continue to give them the money possible to make an entire new single player campaign from 3 to 3 months, or enough to make 6 or 7 full indie and creative games (but still, they will charge everyone for new single-player campaigns, tsc tsc).
Do you really think that they care with how they will sound or with critics or with nobody else but those fans buying whatever they sell, or care with ruining both their image, the image of the crowd-funding and of the space sim genre as a whole? Nope! That's pretty clear... actions speak louder than speech... Their actions indicate that the producers of this game basically love those "unexpected problems" and love redoing and keeping themselves more and more far of the "release" target... More money in their pockets.
"It needs to pass of the level of quality of CR" ... right!
LoL
Their scheme is redoing... ship sale... redoing... ship sale... redoing... ship sale... redoing... ship sale... and so on, while the fans continue to give them the money possible to make an entire new single player campaign from 3 to 3 months, or enough to make 6 or 7 full indie and creative games (but still, they will charge everyone for new single-player campaigns, tsc tsc).
Do you really think that they care with how they will sound or with critics or with nobody else but those fans buying whatever they sell, or care with ruining both their image, the image of the crowd-funding and of the space sim genre as a whole? Nope! That's pretty clear... actions speak louder than speech... Their actions indicate that the producers of this game basically love those "unexpected problems" and love redoing and keeping themselves more and more far of the "release" target... More money in their pockets.
"It needs to pass of the level of quality of CR" ... right!
LoL
Here's the full interview with CIG's animation director Steven Bender(Ex-Crytek) about MoCap shootings...
https://www.facebook.com/RobertsSpaceIndustries/videos/861465330562157/
https://www.facebook.com/RobertsSpaceIndustries/videos/861465330562157/
One thing is clear,CIG will delay every new module of the game as much as they can.They learn a lesson with AC,before of the very first release overall opinion&hype was record High,soon after first critics arrived and some ppl. start to realize that is just as it best an average game play and then many more start to doubt in all previous promises and tales from CR&CIG.Now I guess they will give us FPS module after ppl. start to make more pressure on CIG,but the fear is there in the air because if the FPS fail the SC house of cards will fall down badly....
Gameplay footage of work-in-progress Elite: Dangerous multiplayer, posted to Youtube on Nov 2012:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P5JYRyhxYhI
As will I haha, and very true
Yeah, FDev started their development right during KS, they had skunk works prototyping the game before hand like Chris Roberts had worked on Star Citizen for a year before they pitched it in 2012. The difference between FD development and CIG development speed is that FD started right off the bad with 80-100 people on the project while CIG on the other hand just started to look for employees to work on their game now that they were funded. Many forget that CIG was only a 10 man team during the KS in 2012. Takes a lot of time and effort to ramp up the staff. But now they are about 300 people working on the game.
At the end of the day, graphics mean nothing if the gameplay is shallow as a puddle. Right now all CIG has going for the game is the graphics, the gameplay fun and complexity let alone skill is not there. They got a long ways to go before they actually make it a fun and skill based game instead of fps in space. But they have 1.5 years before launch of the PU so they can potentially make it.
Time will tell to be honest, they will probably have $100 million donated to them and all eyes are on them to see what kind of game they will deliver. Because let's be real here, no other developer in the history of gaming has promised as much as CIG has with Star Citizen and they are a new studio working on their first game. So yeah, it will be interesting to watch what they are capable of delivering in the end.
https://robertsspaceindustries.com/comm-link/engineering/14677-Design-Cargo-Interaction
Star Citizen the coin flip simulator I bet two face will like this game too.
Star Citizen the coin flip simulator
I bet two face will like this game too.
Last edited:
who does not like a transforming ship
[video]https://media.robertsspaceindustries.com/d9sq9btd67gca/source.mp4[/video]
[video]https://media.robertsspaceindustries.com/d9sq9btd67gca/source.mp4[/video]
Last edited:
https://robertsspaceindustries.com/comm-link/engineering/14677-Design-Cargo-Interaction
Star Citizen the coin flip simulator
Excellent.
Flight/targeting model is still broken, but they incorporated Minecraft now.
Btw. new ship sales (Hull Series) on Facebook has some interesting comments.
Yeah, the grabby hand thing is similar to Minecraft. I guess the cargo will have to be voxel based to get 153,600 units of cargo for the Hull E without killing performance.
That make the buyable 150k looking like nothing... as i said... We will have the same high amount of cash like in elite.
Last edited:
- Status