not quite the same. In SC you will wake up at Olisar even if you simply log off without dying
The Star Citizen Thread V10
- Thread starter Sir.Tj
- Start date
- Status
not quite the same. In SC you will wake up at Olisar even if you simply log off without dying
I paid $45 and have access to everything, seems pretty good I think.
Compare that to $500 on Path of Exile ...
No you dont have access to everything. You have access to your startership that you bought with 45$. Anything else including ship mining (bar the ships that you can grind for rent of course) is behind a paywall that you can overcome with the help of others who allow you to use one of their ships. Either way doing more then the 45$ allow you to do requires more money....to be paid by you or somebody else.
And of course if we want to get nitpicky...you paid 45 bucks for a game that you currently can access....what is it now....25% of? But it looks like the 25% prealpha provides more fun to you then other complete games so alls good
Last edited:
It's difficult to say given the sheer size and task they've set themselves.
By comparison:
GTA V took a team of 1,000 people 5 years and $125m+
Shenmue - 6 years
StarCraft II: Wings of Liberty - 7 years.
L.A. Noire - 7 years
Spore - 8 years!
Team Fortress 2 - 9 years
Prey - 11 years
Diablo III - 11 years
Duke Nukem Forever - 15 years ... but DNF was garbage so it doesn't count
SC which utterly dwarfs any of these, has a team of 1,000(+-) people, are making two games and they in early-mid Alpha at 7 years.
Development will take as long as it needs to. That said, the more money people give them, the more they can get done so the longer they can stay in development. Pull that funding and they'll need to quickly cobble something together for release and use a more sensible approach.
Wait.. Regardless of where you are? If I docked at ArcCorp.. I'd wake up in Olisar? Or if I logged out in the middle of space.. back in Olisar on login? Every single time?
For clarity I was referring to things like Star Marine (I remember in early days they were sold separately as modules) and when the game is released every ship becomes available and I can earn the UEC to buy it. So yeah, access to everything.
I paid $45 for early access, yes. I also paid it with the understanding that it wouldn't be the complete experience/product for a long while.And of course if we want to get nitpicky...you paid 45 bucks for a game that you currently can access....what is it now....25% of? But it looks like the 25% prealpha provides more fun to you then other complete games so alls good
Just because I enjoyed my time in SC doesn't mean it provides more fun than other games (Ghost Recon Breakpoint is my game of choice at the moment and it offers vastly more enjoyment that SC right now). It just means I found it really enjoyable.
Things are looking hopeful for the free-fly this year as 3.7 seems stable - last time I tried I barely got out of bed with the frame rate issues so I look forward to maybe seeing a different corridor this year
This is what I mean when I say it's looking promising.Things are looking hopeful for the free-fly this year as 3.7 seems stable - last time I tried I barely got out of bed with the frame rate issues so I look forward to maybe seeing a different corridor this year
Last time I played I couldn't even get to summon my ship, too much hanging and frame rate issues.
Now? Buttery 70fps.
I know the beginning years were the primary foundations, like .. ship control, fps, picking things up, inventory system, AI etc .. basically all the stuff that the game will be built up on. Not sure what foundations they are still doing right now.
I suspect they believe that, myself partly included, because when building a complicated system you want to get the inter-connected and primary functions out of the way and then use those functions to build up the rest.
We'll see, I'm patient and not in any rush.
There's a breaking point; where the majority will pull away and only a few diehards will remain. Hoping the game doesn't come to that.
Suggesting it now would be rather pointless and may come across as criticism; and nothing will rile up a fan more.
You get the hardcore fans in every game. Chris can do wrong and Star Citizen is the ultimate experience and there are 1,001 "perfectly valid" reasons why feature X is not complete.
I prefer to watch from the side-lines though, and make judgements using my own experience in development. It's slow going for sure.
Hard to believe it is two years since I got my refund and six years since my original pledge. To be honest it looks like the game is no closer to release than it was then.
This goes back to March last year, to give an indication of what's been going into the game. You could probably go back further, just don't know how.
Star Citizen Roadmap - RSI
The Roberts Space Industries Star Citizen and Squadron 42 roadmaps.
robertsspaceindustries.com
I'm curious, what markers do you use to determine if something is closer to release?
A fair response.
The length of the pre-alpha stage isn't the only reason for those critiques. Two other keys ones are:
- The macro-purchases that they continue to market but rarely complete.
This is the aspect that is most clearly dubious to my eyes. There's a litany of pre-purchased vehicles with unique gameplay functions that are nowhere near delivery. (Where is the Hull series with its fancy folding arrays and unique docking? The science ship with its modular form & mini-games? The enormous capital ships? The medical craft & its healing and respawn functions? The exploration gameplay... Etc etc). They represent a huge amount of dev. And the fancier ones that do get released completely lack these actual gameplay functions (with the exception of the more modest Prospector, the new Mantis etc). Where is the Reclaimer's scavenging arm and gameplay? The Caterpillar's detachable cockpit and tractor beam? The refining and refuelling gameplay for the Starfarer? Etc etc.
And yet ever-more are added to the list... Pocket carriers, tanks, mine laying ships. Huge amounts of dev. On and on it goes...
They surely know that it's absurd to try and fulfil on all these functions if they keep adding to the list. But they keep selling the new...
- The sheer absurdity of the initial scope. And the fact that it creeped far further still.
Taken in conjunction, these initial aspirations stretched credulity: 1000+ player single-shard game space, 100+ systems with unique exploration content, poly counts that are 10x the industry standard, 9:1 NPC ratios leading daily lives etc. These things have 'never been done' before in concert, because they're highly unlikely to work in concert.
The situation hasn't got any better with all additional tasks they've layered on since.
Duke Nukem Forever - 15 years ... but DNF was garbage so it doesn't count
The two aspects that make it very pertinent
It's more like 500+
This doesn't seem to be true. Prior to the investor $46m it looks like their burn rate was unsustainable. That's why they took on investors / sold off part of the company. It has bought them a few more years of dev at 500+ staffing (if player purchases stay steady). But it doesn't look like the model can be sustained like this indefinitely on player purchases alone.
Last edited:
By looking at trends. The trend is clearly for the expected release date to move forwards through time at something like two years per year. It isn't getting closer to release, it is getting further away. This is the expected result of using scope creep as a design paradigm.
Which starter pack included the 300i for $45?
No, you'll respawn in any of the big areas where you last landed (ArcCorp, Hurston, Olisar, Grim Hex).
I usually log out in space, in my ships bed. When I log back in, I'm back in space in my ship. Works like a charm the last few patches.
Things are looking hopeful for the free-fly this year as 3.7 seems stable - last time I tried I barely got out of bed with the frame rate issues so I look forward to maybe seeing a different corridor this year
Ha, I have similar issues last time I tried it, first attempt was unplayable, second attempt frame rate was good. I got out of bed, opened the bedroom door and floated off into the inky blackness of space
There was no third attempt...
Fair point and I agree it's rather iffy selling things that aren't finished.
However, having said that I can't answer to all of those, but I can give a possible scenario for the Reclaimer from a development perspective.
Bear in mind that this not necessarily the correct answer, nor is it a justification for the sale of what is essentially unfinished content.
It's merely a developers summation to a possible situation.
According to the RSI website, the Reclaimer is still in development. In development doesn't always mean it's actively being worked on, it can currently be sitting in the pipeline.
So, it's entirely possible it's on hold while other features need to be developed before the Reclaimers development can continue.
In development we call these other features enablers. Once the enablers have been developed, the Reclaimer can be finished.
We use this method quite frequently where I work as it allows us to continue working on other items instead of sitting around waiting for something to be developed that will allow us to finish off a feature.
I know the number of players per goes up as they work on the servers. Just opening up it over 1000+ players is inviting disaster. Do it groups and slowly raise the limit as networking and other core code and server infrastructure is improved.
I don't disagree though that the scope of the game jaw dropping in it's audacity.
I stand corrected.
That's what I'm saying; if player funding is pulled they'd need to quickly pull something together to keep afloat.
IMHO, they should have focused on one thing SQ42 first, and then focused on the rest.
It's difficult to say given the sheer size and task they've set themselves.
By comparison:
GTA V took a team of 1,000 people 5 years and $125m+
Shenmue - 6 years
StarCraft II: Wings of Liberty - 7 years.
L.A. Noire - 7 years
Spore - 8 years!
Team Fortress 2 - 9 years
Prey - 11 years
Diablo III - 11 years
Duke Nukem Forever - 15 years ... but DNF was garbage so it doesn't count
SC which utterly dwarfs any of these, has a team of 1,000(+-) people, are making two games and they in early-mid Alpha at 7 years.
Development will take as long as it needs to. That said, the more money people give them, the more they can get done so the longer they can stay in development. Pull that funding and they'll need to quickly cobble something together for release and use a more sensible approach.
Sure, you can compare with examples of long development time. Can we do the reverse?
No Man's Sky - 3 years to release, building an engine from scratch, and has over the subsequent years has added loads of new content, with a tiny team, and the scope of that is pretty decent.
Saying "yeah, its bad, but there are worse" is not a great defense.
Also pointing to the imagined scope is also not a great defense. CIG have promised a lot over the years. There were a whole boatload of 10FTCs where CR basically said yes to just about ever hair brained thing everyone asked for. They wrote pages about gameplay mixing drinks and selecting in-flight movies for NPC passengers.
The potential scope for SC is not only unrealistic, but implementing even most of it will potentially take decades.
Therefore its better to consider, what scope needs to be implemented before they can get a release? To get the game out of alpha and to the point where it becomes a purchase and not a pledge. The point where the average gamer who is interested will be happy to slap down $60 and feel like they have got something worth their money.
Of course, it makes sense to forget about things like Pets (one of the final stretch goals), the hundred+ systems (half a dozen might be acceptable), and of course, multiple gameplay loops that work. It also goes without saying that it should be relatively stable.
This would be but a fraction of the imagined scope, but good enough to ship it.
How many more years will it take to reach this point? Certainly not before the release of SQ42, which is currently getting most of CIG's attention apparently. Is 2022 realistic for an MVP release? Possibly?
10 years from kickstarter to get it out of alpha and into a releasable state?
How's that compare with your list?
The length of the pre-alpha stage isn't the only reason for those critiques. Two other keys ones are:
- The macro-purchases that they continue to market but rarely complete.
This is the aspect that is most clearly dubious to my eyes. There's a litany of pre-purchased vehicles with unique gameplay functions that are nowhere near delivery. (Where is the Hull series with its fancy folding arrays and unique docking? The science ship with its modular form & mini-games? The enormous capital ships? The medical craft & its healing and respawn functions? The exploration gameplay... Etc etc). They represent a huge amount of dev. And the fancier ones that do get released completely lack these actual gameplay functions (with the exception of the more modest Prospector, the new Mantis). Where is the Reclaimer's scavenging arm and gameplay? The Caterpillar's detachable cockpit and tractor beam? The refining and refuelling gameplay for the Starfarer? Etc etc.
And yet ever-more are added to the list... Pocket carriers, tanks, mine laying ships. Huge amounts of dev. On and on it goes...
They surely know that it's absurd to try and fulfil on all these functions if they keep adding to the list. But they keep selling the new...
I absolutely agree that they're trying to make a game. I think they know full well that they can't fulfil on key aspects that they've pre-sold though. And yet they continue to sell them, and add to the list...
- The sheer absurdity of the initial scope. And the fact that it creeped far further still.
Taken in conjunction, these initial aspirations stretched credulity: 1000+ player single-shard game space, 100+ systems with unique exploration content, poly counts that are 10x the industry standard, 9:1 NPC ratios leading daily lives etc. These things have 'never been done before in concert, because they're highly unlikely to work in concert.
The situation hasn't got any better with all additional tasks they've layered on since.
The two aspects that make it very pertinent
It's more like 500+
This doesn't seem to be true. Prior to the investor $46m it looks like their burn rate was unsustainable. That's why the took on investors / sold off part of the company. It has bought them a few more years of dev at 500+ staffing (if player purchases stay steady). But it doesn't look like the model can be sustained like this indefinitely on player purchases alone.
cough you missed the base building feature which they sold land claims for and the Pioneer that got them a fair few million as well.
There are quite a few foundational aspects that still aren't in, or are sub-MVP:
- Full solar system support. (Currently they're talking about removing planets to trial new ones)
- Multi solar system support. (The talk is this will be the Citcon reveal / sizzle reel, but not in currently)
- NPC Character AI. (Still shy of MVP levels at the moment. Pedestrians are eccentric, regress to stationary states etc. Combatants currently just mob players in 3.7, etc).
- Fundamental interaction items such as doors, ladders, seats and beds don't work reliably. And occasionally kill you.
- Etc
More technically minded people could probably argue about whether the 64-bit positioning is really in a solid place, whether the 1000+ shard tech should have been built into the engine foundations (not cobbled in later in stages). Etc etc.
It seems pretty clear that they're still not done on the foundational aspects though, 7 years+ after kickstarter.
Last edited:
- Status