As I said, "good" is highly subjective. It might look good, but so far I have seen very little engaging gameplay, or something that would even resemble satisfying gameplay. And as I have written before, problem is, if you don't have that at prototype level, chances to get it right after production are not great. Everything feels to be in there for sake of it. Ohhh, you have muted sounds in space...errr...you should have ZERO sound in space. It just doesn't click or work that way. Players can hover over open areas? How that's gonna be addressed? How it's gonna work?
The Star Citizen Thread v5
- Thread starter Brett C
- Start date
- Status
As I said, "good" is highly subjective. It might look good, but so far I have seen very little engaging gameplay, or something that would even resemble satisfying gameplay. And as I have written before, problem is, if you don't have that at prototype level, chances to get it right after production are not great. Everything feels to be in there for sake of it. Ohhh, you have muted sounds in space...errr...you should have ZERO sound in space. It just doesn't click or work that way. Players can hover over open areas? How that's gonna be addressed? How it's gonna work?
There are many good ideas they have in SC, a lot they have talked about. The proof will be in the implementation though. Can they bring it all together and make it work?
ED also had a lot of good ideas on paper, both the stuff they talked about in the dev diaries and stuff from the DDF.
Some of what has been implemented so far in ED though is lacking, and while everything is potentially up for reworking at some point, it means we have to wait for those things to be done.
Having said that, its ok with ED, we know that large parts of the game are still needing work.
SC has an issue with this, as they are going for a "full" game on release. Of course, they can continue to add things and work on existing stuff after release, but that's not how its being marketed. 1.0 has to bring a fully engaging and quality set of integrated mechanics, otherwise they will get flack from the wider community and the media.
Last edited:
I would call that FPS gameplay boring if I wanted to praise it.
It's severely lacking compared to anything FPS-related released in the last 10 years.
HOW are people excited with something like this?
Then again it's still alpha so everything can miraculously turn from frog-status to prince-status by just applying a few patches.
It's severely lacking compared to anything FPS-related released in the last 10 years.
HOW are people excited with something like this?
Then again it's still alpha so everything can miraculously turn from frog-status to prince-status by just applying a few patches.
ED moves slowly, and sometimes it is a bit frustrating without knowing internals. FD decided to share less about ongoing work some time ago - due of various factors - and we know only about stuff they are ready to release. Said that, at least we have clear information where ED is going. SC still lacks this sense of direction.
As for "full game" - SC 1.0 won't have that and I think everyone, including media, understands that it is stupid to push for that. CIG has to do regular releases - call them any way you want - to keep engaging with backers and not to lose support they have.
After reading the passenger transport career design, I wasn't able to take the full picture of a "fully engaging and quality set of integrated mechanics" Star Citizen seriously anymore.
Is this official design document from CIG? LOL whut?
This still jumps out at me as one of the most innovative and finest gameplay experiences of all time:
Alongside micromanaging the on-board movie database it seems like a thrill a minute.
![[VR] DDM_Reaper20](https://forums-cdn.zaonce.net/data/avatars/m/44/44021.jpg?1588332101){kind=avatar}
I laughed my head off upon reaching the part where they were talking about "concept sales of ships."
In other words, open your wallets, people. CIG wants YOU(r money).
Issue is that some people can find it very interesting and engaging while majority of them will complain about complicated mechanics and will throw tantrums.
The drink mixing stuff? Yeah that's never going to get old, ever. And fixing the in-flight movie system always was my dream job. It should be noted that this stuff was published back when they were "almost done" with the trading system, and using a board game to "validate the design". We haven't heard anything from that since, and the people involved with the trading stuff have left CIG a long time ago. So, thankfully, the chances of drink mixing actually making it into the game are slim.
Same who think manual cargo un/loading is great and assume other people would love to make this kind of mundane activities their career to help them traders. Same who think SC will provide them an experience centered around their little person at any time. Same who probably have a smegton of money poured into SC and will consider themselves more citizens than the others.
LOL, someone watched ST too much...
[video=youtube;naXLxNX4UZc]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=naXLxNX4UZc[/video]
You gotta modulate the phase variance on a high-band sub-space frequency - the answer to all science/engineering issues in Star Trek TNG
If you head over to the delta quadrant, chronotons are inexplicably more important.You gotta modulate the phase variance on a high-band sub-space frequency - the answer to all science/engineering issues in Star Trek TNG
That post just shows how gamers view game features - they see them as real life functions just mapped into game - and they of course ignore everything else. In result it sounds awesome on paper, but most likely will be close to terrible in game for multiple reasons alone. That said, such obsession with "everything", while having no believable core mechanism for it is just feature creep which doesn't sound good investment of money when developing game. Because if there's no core, everything will feel disconnected.
Anyway, would like to see some new SM footage.
Anyway, would like to see some new SM footage.
Last edited:
I don't expect designing such features and "mini-games" is in any way easy. As with all things, it's only trying them out that can give a true litmus test of how much "fun" they are. I would expect for every 25 ideas touted, one may turn out to be good enough (and practically possible) to put into the game.
And that's the crux of all this. It is same criticism raised at ED. And it barks back at point I have made earlier - there's huge gulf between SC "game" and SC "second space life simulator". As SC hasn't made clear choice who it wants to be, it will also won't help to understand how feature creep might work in context of final product.
Just in time for the upcoming holiday sale, the chairman sent out another newsletter (this is the anniversary sale one) ahead of the upcoming holiday sale. It's not live on RSI yet, but start laughing. He actually wrote this:
"For those keeping track, we got Alpha 2.6 made the release window forecast from the Production Schedule Report"
Remember when I said they pushed 2.6 out on 11-30 in order to claim that it was "released"?
"For those keeping track, we got Alpha 2.6 made the release window forecast from the Production Schedule Report"
Remember when I said they pushed 2.6 out on 11-30 in order to claim that it was "released"?
Yeah, this is part where they lose me. I understand reason for Evocati and alpha testing bug fixing, etc. but this manipulation is where I am just off.
edit: also isn't it 2.6 pre-alpha-alpha?
Last edited:
- Status