The Star Citizen Thread V10

Status
Thread Closed: Not open for further replies.

Jenner

I wish I was English like my hero Tj.
Jenner
Ian Skippy said:
Because, as a few of them openly admit, they are scared that the whole thing comes crashing down if they 'lose faith in the project and starve CIG of the needed resources'. Many of them know these ships wont come, either at all or as advertised. The ships function as a justification to give money to a company to make sure they dont lose all the earlier money they gave.

Its what caused all the refund-drama. Most game communities tend to be allergic to people saying "I dont like this game, cya!", but in the case of CIG it is perceived as actively hurting the company to the point it might endanger everyone else's 'investment'.
Click to expand...

"Sunk Cost" :) Yeah, makes sense.

I can't help but shake my head at the whole BDSGE notion at this point, too. Back in 2012 both SC and Elite made a splash when they arrived on the crowd funding scene since we really were in a 'space game drought' but this no longer is true. Since SC started we've had several high profile space games and more on the way, too. Heck just this month we've had Rebel Galaxy Outlaw release and announcements for Kerbal Space Program 2 and Everspace 2. Meanwhile SC is limping along with 2012 tech that's already had pieces refactored and abandoned and rebuilt and outsourced.... How can this hope to compete when and if it gets released?
 

Viajero

Volunteer Moderator
Viajero
Ian Skippy said:
Because, as a few of them openly admit, they are scared that the whole thing comes crashing down if they 'lose faith in the project and starve CIG of the needed resources'. Many of them know these ships wont come, either at all or as advertised. The ships function as a justification to give money to a company to make sure they dont lose all the earlier money they gave.

Its what caused all the refund-drama. Most game communities tend to be allergic to people saying "I dont like this game, cya!", but in the case of CIG it is perceived as actively hurting the company to the point it might endanger everyone else's 'investment'.
Click to expand...

Literally the very definition of sunk cost fallacy.

edit: ninjaed!
 
Last edited:

Ian Skippy

Ian Skippy
Jenner said:
"Sunk Cost" :) Yeah, makes sense.
Click to expand...

Viajero said:
Literally the very definition of sunk cost fallacy.
Click to expand...

Well, not necessarily. SCF is the scientific term for 'throwing good money after bad.', and what is 'bad money' isn't nearly as objective a concept as people often claim it is. The classical example is 'buying a car for $500 and then spending $600 to fix it after discovering the belt is badly worn'. But while that may be 'bad money' from a financial pov (the car wasnt worth $500 so you should accept your loss and move on), someone may have an emotional connection with it that would make it worth far more to him than would 'objectively' make sense. He is not spending that $600 because he cant accept losing the $500, he is spending it because to him the car simply is worth it.
 
Last edited:

Rubbernuke

Rubbernuke
I just wonder as CR has promised (and sold) robot suits, ships, vehicles, land, weapons, clothes.....with little actual underpinning game or these items even existing. At some point even the most committed Montoya level backer is going to wonder when its all going to come together.

But then, if they stop with the merch, they can't develop the underpinnings- a vicious circle.
 

Mole HD

Mole HD
Asp Explorer said:
Oh they can definitely add more content, they are going to keep churning out jpegs and really ramp up that waffle pipeline.

The problem is, no amount of waffle is going to patch up their backend infrastructure or redesign their CS architecture - their much lauded SSOCS is going to do absolutely sweet fat artichokes in that regard even if they ever get round to designing it, let alone successfully deploy and implement it. Whole thing needs a re-write from the beginning.
Click to expand...
I meant content like gameplay for those JPG's...we all know they won't cease the marketing blurb since that's all they have the ability to expand on. The 'game' is stagnant...since there's no gameplay to warrant it being called a game in the first place, that's never going to change since the engine CR picked for his pet project isn't capable of doing any more than it already is.

Everything I have in game is flyable but only 3 ships have gameplay associated with them to a very basic level. I farmed all my JPG's off a long time ago except for 1...but only because it has a decent loaner and it got rid of a useless 600i explorer when I farmed that off on the grey market and free swapped it for this current JPG instead.

Some folks are just overly enthralled with ships that look like a council toilet had a lovechild with a bidet... I certainly traded up for free due to that fascination for porcelain flavoured Yuppie yachts...traded up in a relative sense of course....all equally worthless at the end of the day since I now own a picture of a nice and very large cargo/support ship that's gotten no further than being drawn on a post-it note on Chris Roberts desk...
140914
....but the loaner is at least in game and flyable, possibly useful too if fuel scooping actually makes it in. I should mention I already had one of these...but melted it for something else entirely a few months ago :rolleyes:
140915
 
Last edited:

Jenner

I wish I was English like my hero Tj.
Jenner
sovapid said:
It looks amazing and is a flying level. Would be nice if it had some point or game play to go with it. But it is impressive.
Click to expand...

That sums up a lot of SC ships.

Yeah, it looks very nice. I give props to SC's ship designers. They make some beautiful stuff.
 

Ian Skippy

Ian Skippy
sovapid said:
This is one of the reasons they keep biting:

https://imgur.com/a/sL417iH
Source: https://imgur.com/a/sL417iH


It looks amazing and is a flying level. Would be nice if it had some point or game play to go with it. But it is impressive.
Click to expand...

I dont get it.

EA:"Hey guys! Here is the new mass-effect! Of course you have your own massive ship you can walk in, plus a whole game around it. Sure, the facial animations aren't the best, and the story is a bit cliche, but it has tons of gameplay for $50!

SC Fans: Ugh, EA is the worst!

CIG: Hey guys, here is a big ship you can walk in without any gameplay for only a $890!

SC Fans: OMG, this is why we love you! Amazing!
 

Navigare Necesse Est

Navigare Necesse Est
Ian Skippy said:
I dont get it.

EA:"Hey guys! Here is the new mass-effect! Of course you have your own massive ship you can walk in, plus a whole game around it. Sure, the facial animations aren't the best, and the story is a bit cliche, but it has tons of gameplay for $50!

SC Fans: Ugh, EA is the worst!

CIG: Hey guys, here is a big ship you can walk in without any gameplay for only a $890!

SC Fans: OMG, this is why we love you! Amazing!
Click to expand...
EA already got rid of the gullible. Some went to buy jpegs.
 

cheesenbiscuits

cheesenbiscuits
Mole HD said:
I meant content like gameplay for those JPG's...we all know they won't cease the marketing blurb since that's all they have the ability to expand on. The 'game' is stagnant...since there's no gameplay to warrant it being called a game in the first place, that's never going to change since the engine CR picked for his pet project isn't capable of doing any more than it already is.

Everything I have in game is flyable but only 3 ships have gameplay associated with them to a very basic level. I farmed all my JPG's off a long time ago except for 1...but only because it has a decent loaner and it got rid of a useless 600i explorer when I farmed that off on the grey market and free swapped it for this current JPG instead.

Some folks are just overly enthralled with ships that look like a council toilet had a lovechild with a bidet... I certainly traded up for free due to that fascination for porcelain flavoured Yuppie yachts...traded up in a relative sense of course....all equally worthless at the end of the day since I now have a picture of a nice and very large cargo/support ship that's gotten no further than being drawn on a post-it note on Chris Roberts desk
View attachment 140914
....but the loaner is at least in game and flyable, possibly useful too if fuel scooping actually makes it in.
Click to expand...

Mole HD said:
It also costs as much as I paid for this... which is one reason I'm not biting ;)
View attachment 140916
Click to expand...
You paid 1/2 a billion? :oops:
 
Status
Thread Closed: Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom