Is this satire?
The Star Citizen Thread V10
- Thread starter Sir.Tj
- Start date
- Status
Is this satire?
I mean, if your going to play a tech demo... play it in style... and... pay? And now pay more???
Initially I though the cosmetics list was kind of ok, although somewhat amusing seeing CIG scrape after $1 here and $1 there on top of their $500 spaceships but the $24 weapons for the 300i is not cool.
Wait, so they do the cosmetics cheap then hit people for a almost half the cost of a AAA game for weapons?
Descendent studios.... doesn't sound at all like CR's Ascendant pictures.
Initial small scale remake of a classic increasing scope due to extra funding.
Failure to deliver.
And apparently SC backers are saying its all the publishers fault, when they had a deal with Steam but went chasing the extra money with a publisher.
Of course this is all the fault of the big bad publisher.
![[VR] Merkir](https://forums-cdn.zaonce.net/data/avatars/m/141/141091.jpg?1553527154){kind=avatar}
You're being kind... you used the plural.
People are handwaving this away because you'll be able to earn it in game but it always ignores the fact that those who pay money get a serious leg up over those who don't.
If Johnny-no-Cash is flying around in his pauper's Aurora and Willy-wallet-warrior comes along in his 300i souped up with cash bought modules, weapons and ammo then it makes no difference to Johnny whether you can earn it in game or not.
CIG justified selling everything under the sun by claiming MMOs are unbalanced as long term players have advantages over new players but that imbalance is exactly what's happening here, except its about who can pay instead of who can play.
If Johnny-no-Cash is flying around in his pauper's Aurora and Willy-wallet-warrior comes along in his 300i souped up with cash bought modules, weapons and ammo then it makes no difference to Johnny whether you can earn it in game or not.
CIG justified selling everything under the sun by claiming MMOs are unbalanced as long term players have advantages over new players but that imbalance is exactly what's happening here, except its about who can pay instead of who can play.
I don't think it is a big deal. MMO's are unbalanced unless you get in on day one and no life it to the end game. I started playing Elite years after it released. So I was out in my Sidewinder while people were flying around in Corvettes. So what?
And it isn't like the souped up 300i is really that much better than a stock one. Weapons, disregarding current metas, aren't really "better" then each other. They are just different, but hypothetically are balanced against each other.
In fact, paying money for the modifications looks pretty dumb. Its like paying $30 for a grade A power plant and FSD in Elite.
As SC stands now, it would not take long to just earn them in game. And the trend in SC has been to make things easier to get in game. When I first started playing SC (maybe 2 years now) the highest paying mission paid 500 credits. Now the highest paying mission pays 10,000 (and they are quick to do bounty hunting missions).
The biggest issue to upgrading your ship in game is that if the ship blows up, server crashes, etc. All the upgrades are gone when you claim the ship. According to CIG's post today, that will no longer true. If you upgrade your ship through in game means, the upgrades will persist through a claim.
Q&A: Ship Customization - Roberts Space Industries | Follow the development of Star Citizen and Squadron 42
Roberts Space Industries is the official go-to website for all news about Star Citizen and Squadron 42. It also hosts the online store for game items and merch, as well as all the community tools used by our fans.
robertsspaceindustries.com
Kinda like paying real money for one of these is dumb:
Ships - Roberts Space Industries | Follow the development of Star Citizen and Squadron 42
Roberts Space Industries is the official go-to website for all news about Star Citizen and Squadron 42. It also hosts the online store for game items and merch, as well as all the community tools used by our fans.
robertsspaceindustries.com
Its $55 cash. Or you can buy it in game for 50,000 credits. 5 missions and you've earned it through game play.
If someone wants to pay 55 bucks to get one instead of doing the missions, it is fine with me.
The issue will be if CIG finds new and improved ways to make it much more of a grind. But like I said, they have been moving in the opposite direction.
Last edited:
That's kind of the point though isn't it. A player joining a game years after release can have no expectation of things being equal. A player starting the game on the same day as everyone else does expect some form of equality.
I don't know what the specs of those weapons are but selling items like that in cash shops is and always has been a faux pas. Chris famously claimed Star Citizen would not be P2W and yet here we are. Next we'll be seeing gold ammo or some crap.
Absolutely and it's pretty insulting towards the backers when they've already begged $230 million from them. Where does the begging stop?
The income certainly sounds better but to get something like a Hammerhead you're going to need to do 2300 runs of the bounty mission. 575 hours at 4 missions per hour or just over 6 months at 3 hours per night.
The biggest issue to upgrading your ship in game is that if the ship blows up, server crashes, etc. All the upgrades are gone when you claim the ship. According to CIG's post today, that will no longer true. If you upgrade your ship through in game means, the upgrades will persist through a claim.
Q&A: Ship Customization - Roberts Space Industries | Follow the development of Star Citizen and Squadron 42
Roberts Space Industries is the official go-to website for all news about Star Citizen and Squadron 42. It also hosts the online store for game items and merch, as well as all the community tools used by our fans.robertsspaceindustries.com
Kinda like paying real money for one of these is dumb:
Ships - Roberts Space Industries | Follow the development of Star Citizen and Squadron 42
Roberts Space Industries is the official go-to website for all news about Star Citizen and Squadron 42. It also hosts the online store for game items and merch, as well as all the community tools used by our fans.robertsspaceindustries.com
Its $55 cash. Or you can buy it in game for 50,000 credits. 5 missions and you've earned it through game play.
If someone wants to pay 55 bucks to get one instead of doing the missions, it is fine with me.
The issue will be if CIG finds new and improved ways to make it much more of a grind. But like I said, they have been moving in the opposite direction.
Maybe I'm a bit old school but I feel we should be doing out best to move away from excessive monetisation in gaming.
I agree but if people are dumb enough to pay then someone will take the money. It's the entire premise of economics based society.
I get where you are coming from with this but at the same time...after a week after release that will be mostly moot as well since most people will have moved away from most starter ships as well and gained something better.
I mean, we have WoW with "pay to get to lvl 90-100 so you can "start" playing" nowadays.
(i seriously do not get that part but at the same time i understand not wanting to spend 3 months just leveling up to be able to enjoy new game content, but at the same time, you miss a lot of the original content).As long as CIG does not go down the route of EXCLUSIVE weapons, ships and ammunition that are straight out BETTER than anything that will be aqquired in game like World of Tanks with "gold ammo" and such items.
Yes, there will be things that might be close to impossible to get in game like some rare unique ships but they will not be better than everything else and have weapons that do more damage than others.
Didn't you get the memo? There will be no release of SC. Its always going to be a soft release.
So...the point is already moot then?
Viajero
Volunteer Moderator
The overall claim that because an MMO is persistent and players join it at different times makes it not P2W seems quite disingenuous to be honest.
The key element of progress in a persistent MMO (in addition to personal skill, that is) is precisely time. The more time you spend in the game the more you progress (be it levelling, gear or all of the above). That is precisely the core competitive advantage between players (in addition to skill): Time. A player who has spent more time is expected to dominate a new player by definition of a persistent and time progress based MMO.
Anything that can bypass that "time" required to grant you that progress instantaneously in exchange for money is therefore P2W.
The key element of progress in a persistent MMO (in addition to personal skill, that is) is precisely time. The more time you spend in the game the more you progress (be it levelling, gear or all of the above). That is precisely the core competitive advantage between players (in addition to skill): Time. A player who has spent more time is expected to dominate a new player by definition of a persistent and time progress based MMO.
Anything that can bypass that "time" required to grant you that progress instantaneously in exchange for money is therefore P2W.
Last edited:
OK so... P2W is not a thing because there's nothing to win, imbalance is not a problem because it's a natural thing in mmos, a release date is not a thing because what is release anyway....
So basically, while arguing the opposite few months back I assume any true citizen will have no problem with ship sales after "release", right? There's no problem with that, right?
History repeating: one argue something could happen, he's welcomed with "hater! Burn the witch!" by true believers, then later this something starts to take shape and all of a sudden it's perfectly normal.
Let's start a new thing : there'll be lootboxes, won't look like, won't be named as such, but will definitely be ones.
Star Citizen : what's bad in other games won't happen in SC, then will but it will be perfectly fine.
So basically, while arguing the opposite few months back I assume any true citizen will have no problem with ship sales after "release", right? There's no problem with that, right?
History repeating: one argue something could happen, he's welcomed with "hater! Burn the witch!" by true believers, then later this something starts to take shape and all of a sudden it's perfectly normal.
Let's start a new thing : there'll be lootboxes, won't look like, won't be named as such, but will definitely be ones.
Star Citizen : what's bad in other games won't happen in SC, then will but it will be perfectly fine.
I get where you are coming from with this but at the same time...after a week after release that will be mostly moot as well since most people will have moved away from most starter ships as well and gained something better.
I mean, we have WoW with "pay to get to lvl 90-100 so you can "start" playing" nowadays.
This is absolutely true but the character boosts were brought in almost 10 years after release. What CIG are doing is more akin to having character boosts back in 2005
That's like saying being unemployed and able to simply grind a game longer than anyone else is an automatic win.
That element will still be there. We cannot purchase in-game reputation which is the one thing that will control everything. It's the equivalent of being able to buy an Anaconda on day one for Elite but you would not get any missions that is designed with that ship in mind on day one or even day 30.
Yes, it's definitely bypassing time to grind equipment but everything else still needs to be grinded.
I honestly see no difference from backing Elite and get a Cobra mkIII compared to those who had a Sidewinder, and it was not as easy to grind money then.This is absolutely true but the character boosts were brought in almost 10 years after release. What CIG are doing is more akin to having character boosts back in 2005
That said, yes, a leg up is given in equipment but all the reputation and such will still have to be grinded to be able to fully utilize those ships.
Viajero
Volunteer Moderator
The main core competitive advantage in a persistent, time based progress MMO, i.e. time, is blind to the reasons why or how you decide to use that time. Arguing a specific reason is better or worst than others is just biased rationalization.
- Status