"I will not be putting anymore money into this until..."
Quite a ridiculous thing to need to qualify for a title that it still in development really. This is what "gaming" has come to
The Star Citizen Thread V10
- Thread starter Sir.Tj
- Start date
- Status
"I will not be putting anymore money into this until..."
Quite a ridiculous thing to need to qualify for a title that it still in development really. This is what "gaming" has come to
Interesting person that one, went a bit quiet in the huge threads that spawned after news of the 46mill investment news from what I observed. Had to change the script a bit in regards to that I guess, and is back with full vigor spamming memes and picardfacepalm on half the thread OPs.
"Star citizen seems to break even the strongest of dreaming men. One women stands tall though."
https://robertsspaceindustries.com/...pparent-progress-on-300s-now-taking-b/1973413
The GPU comment is gold.
In 2012 or early 2013 I read about a Geforce GTX 880 being the perfect GPU for Star Citizen 1.0 and had a good laugh. This was of course a made up designation and GTX 880 ended up being a mobile GPU.
Now we entered RTX and SC still isn't done...
Star Citizen operates in the Holywood model of Actual Representation being a blanket
ED is much more schematic and trusts that your imagination will do a good job of filling the blanks and getting on with letting an actual playable story come together.
the nature of cliques is that they go on as if their idionsyncrasies cannot be observed
online gaming is arch in that very regard
who is going to warn you when the catastrophe arrives?
ED is much more schematic and trusts that your imagination will do a good job of filling the blanks and getting on with letting an actual playable story come together.
the nature of cliques is that they go on as if their idionsyncrasies cannot be observed
online gaming is arch in that very regard
who is going to warn you when the catastrophe arrives?
I use SC as an example of how not to do it, in my PM classes.
Heh, one day you might get one of the faithful in your class. That will be interesting.
Well it’s internal in the company so don’t think so, unless they change profession.
However, when I was very passionate about the project I was also very angry, but now I don’t care and can talk about it in an objective POW, still I always get the same follow up questions, “why do they keep making the same mistake?” and my answer is always, I don’t know, and I still can’t answer this question, why keep making the same mistake repeatedly!?
Because apparently it still makes money.
Yes that one is obviously on top of the list, however they could make even more if they didn’t make these mistakes.
Viajero
Volunteer Moderator
Because they don’t need to face any consequences. Or at least because they can constantly postpone those consequences into the future. Saving face is a very important factor in all this. Only when the consequence Horizon is clear can there be some kind of catharsis or resolution. I.e Either no change but at least you get closure and the corresponding consequences applied. Or the team changes, learns and deliver in time before the consequence horizon.
I don’t think they are making significant money, at least not in amounts that would warrant a decent return. They probably have enough to get by though.
Last edited:
And that my friend is closer to the truth, the stakeholders are not accountable, they shuffle the minions around at the lower levels, but the top stays intact. Still that do not answer the core of the question, why do they make the same mistake over and over, even if the top is utterly incompetent, they must at some point realize this is wrong and change their ways? Unless they simply are not mentally able to comprehend their actions are wrong?
Viajero
Volunteer Moderator
Well, the team may not have access to the means and/or competence required to change. Even if they are aware of what’s required. Maintaining status quo and postponing consequences may be much more efficient resource-wise than changing. And especially when changing probably means to scratch the current financing model based on selling hype.
Last edited:
Yes, and in projects postponing something is very often used to gain time, however it’s not the right way and you 9 out 10 times end up in a much worse situation than from where you started.
It’s like peeing in your pants because you’re cold, first it’s nice and warm, then ....... well we all know where that leads to.
Viajero
Volunteer Moderator
Indeed. But most projects can only afford to delay for so long before consequences are applied anyways. SC has had no such limitations so far. At least until the entrance of 46 mill from private investors. That may change the game and force some kind of consequence horizon.
Last edited:
Of course SC had such limitations, they were only shoved aside with "This is good for Star Citizen" awkward laughter. There's a reason why they work primarily on ship models, while actual game development suffers - it's exactly because they are delaying it and need more money and making gameplay won't bring in money - it would actually decrease the income, as people would have less dreams to craft and less ships to buy.
Its funny how conclusions and remarks mirror the exact same posts from 3 years ago only back then they were fought tooth and nail and were tried to be fended off.....today...most of them go unopposed. I guess the day when "Star Citizen will finally show all those haters and naysayers" is a day NOBODY will see coming, not even the pro-fans
Its funny how conclusions and remarks mirror the exact same posts from 3 years ago only back then they were fought tooth and nail and were tried to be fended off.....today...most of them go unopposed. I guess the day when "Star Citizen will finally show all those haters and naysayers" is a day NOBODY will see coming, not even the pro-fans
Ah, was it just a few short years ago backers were still insisting there would be 100 systems soon, once those pipelines were in place, things would come a lot faster. And ships! It was ok that they kept making concept sales, because, you know, once those pipelines were in place....
Goose4291
Banned
Its funny how conclusions and remarks mirror the exact same posts from 3 years ago only back then they were fought tooth and nail and were tried to be fended off.....today...most of them go unopposed. I guess the day when "Star Citizen will finally show all those haters and naysayers" is a day NOBODY will see coming, not even the pro-fans
Perhaps they just realised that its pointless engaging with the sort of people who write massive treatises in what is the tenth thread of its nature about why it'll fail, and have no intention of listening to any point of view beyond that?
Last edited:
I'm listening. I'm happy to hear an opposing point of view to my own - which, to be clear, is that the Star Citizen project has failed, development has been wrapping up, and backers will never receive the game that was sold - for technical and organisational reasons that I'm happy to describe.
A possible theory but based on the past behavior that was visible in this thread I doubt very much that most are able to react in such a mature fashion. Of course with all the dissent everywhere else rising up I guess its hard to stay on top of the "hate waves" here in particular.
- Status