Didn't DS "predict", before CitCon, that we weren't gonna get 2.0 before the end of the year? Sounds like CIG is never out of excuses. This reminds me of the "the guy that makes the <xxx> is on paternity leave."
The Star Citizen Thread v 3.0
- Thread starter Jenner
- Start date
- Status
There is no delay since there is no date. It's also pretty bad that you call that an explanation. Things like this happen and if you react like this more and more projects will be behind closed doors. CIG is open enough to share things. To top this off they pulled resources to make sure this doesn't effect them.
So stop spreading bad translations. Including claims like ''Downgraded''.
Yea it's so sad to see people like that around.
Last edited:
Yaffle
Volunteer Moderator
I don't understand the tweet.
Foundry 42 had (as at 31 December 2014) about £800,000 cash in the bank, and was owed a further £1M by persons unnamed.
It also owed £1.1 million to persons unknown.
It was therefore solvent at that date, and while it owed money to creditors pretty much every company does. Those creditors could be employees wages, a loan from within the group, or the window cleaner. We can't tell.
As this was nearly a year ago now I would suggest it's so vague and old as to be irrelevant.
Here's the post I was answering as you can see it's a request for opinions.
I gave my opinion that 2.0 will be delayed beyond the new year.
Yes we are all aware that having missed all past release dates CIG now refuse to give them.
In my opinion (again it's what Jezzah asked for) 2.0 will be downgraded from whats been advertised.
Also in my opinion SC will either never be released or will be released in a downgraded late form possibly titled "freelancer 2" by another company. This will happen after they go bust and crowdfunding will get heavily regulated as a side effect.
The RSI forum is the place to go if you feel traumatized by opposing views.
I gave my opinion that 2.0 will be delayed beyond the new year.
Yes we are all aware that having missed all past release dates CIG now refuse to give them.
In my opinion (again it's what Jezzah asked for) 2.0 will be downgraded from whats been advertised.
Also in my opinion SC will either never be released or will be released in a downgraded late form possibly titled "freelancer 2" by another company. This will happen after they go bust and crowdfunding will get heavily regulated as a side effect.
The RSI forum is the place to go if you feel traumatized by opposing views.
Me neither, that's why I'm asking.
may be ''the flame'' is over but Derek Smart is trying to warm up his hands because ''winter is coming''
Last edited:
How is giving your opinion, including the official link from which you formed your opinion, misinformation ?
- - - Updated - - -
People who share a different opinion than yourself?
In your hastiness to defend your holy grail you must have misunderstood his post or simply jumped to a wrong conclusion.
Last edited:
This is the only thing that CIG is actually capable of doing it and with re-doing it ship models again and again they want to justify all lost time&money.....
Mu77ley
Volunteer Moderator
Really?! All those hundreds of staff and they can't get stuff done because one guy hurts his wrist?! If that's even remotely true it points to massive incompetence on the part of management.
Another question it raises is the moral aspect of publicizing an employee's (possibly private) medical information in a newsletter. If I was used to publicly explain a delay by my employer following an injury I wouldn't be happy and would worry about the "achieving deadlines" aspect of my next review given that they clearly think it's slowing them down. I hope they got his permission before going public with it.
I hope he's OK and suffers no lasting injury, as a cyclist with more than my fair share of close calls with badly driven cars I have nothing but sympathy for him.
Agreed. It also isn't surprising, given CIG's track record for giving excuses rather than content. There is nothing they have available as yet which isn't a buggy mess (sales page notwithstanding).
I'm sure putting it in their weekly address was a form of punishment
....for being reckless during an important time in development
Last edited:
In that link you posted, CIG themselves acknowledge the risk of delays...
"It was a tough decision to make in putting our efforts behind this one huge release because it always had the potential for added risk for delays in production..."
So I think that word is available for use!
Ships get remade because new tech has been made so the game is better looking and more efficient. Star Citizen is not a rush job most things they do is to make sure the game is future proof. Also 2.0 is on content lock the feature set won't be downgraded stop spreading misinformation please. Lead devs are significant but CIG is a team of nearly 300. So they can easily pull resources. They add stuff like that to keep the community in the loop not so that people panic over.
More and more I feel the users in this forum are not ready for open development and favour a closed doors approach. Where things are hidden and never see daylight and that way people think they never happened. Things get reworked many many times in game development you just see the last version. Things also fail many times too you just see the fixed version. 2.0 will hit PTU when it is ready. Then you can add a month or two on it for a public release.
CIG has no rush hence no release date.
More and more I feel the users in this forum are not ready for open development and favour a closed doors approach. Where things are hidden and never see daylight and that way people think they never happened. Things get reworked many many times in game development you just see the last version. Things also fail many times too you just see the fixed version. 2.0 will hit PTU when it is ready. Then you can add a month or two on it for a public release.
CIG has no rush hence no release date.
That's certainly true but some of it was also down to bad planning. The Cutlass cell height as an example.
This is also true but misguided. People simply don't like seeing "their" money wasted. They feel that with a bit more thought and critical design process a lot of these redos could be avoided to some degree, and that's a perfectly fair viewpoint providing they concede that not everything can be accounted for.
Patently false, it wouldn't be a critical time with all hands on deck otherwise.
Last edited:
I wish you the very best of luck with your continued enthusiastic support of the Star Citizen project.
- Status