The Star Citizen Thread v5

[thorn-]

Who's money it is is very relevant.

I believe you've missed Snarf's point.

Let us say that each of use is building a widget. You have $1000 and a team of 2 to build yours, I have $1,000,000 and a team of 20.

Each of us has decided that we have sufficient funds to build our respective widget. We both give a date on which the widgets will be released. The date comes and goes; at present, neither widget has been released. There may be perfectly good reasons for both of us being late, of course. Problems pop up that we didn't expect.

But the fact that you only had $1000 and 2 people to build your widget doesn't make it any less late. It would also be a bit ironic for you to discuss how bad I am at building widgets, while citing your expertise in building them.

Personally I don't do pay2win, or broken tech demo's.

The cool thing about SC, or any game, is that you don't have to. Many people enjoy such games, but it's ok that you don't.

 

[LeSabre]

So no, there will not be content over night but it's far easier having tools to simply "drop" things into a good editor than having to have everything hardcoded.
But once their tools are up and running adding content will be a lot quicker and allow them to expand the game a lot easier.

Lmao, six years and they still don't have their toolsets developed?

They are never going to be any quicker, they've been parotting "once the pipelines are refactored" and "once we have developed tools" etc for years. It's patheticly laughable how you guys keep falling for it.

 

[Stigbob]

No, but adding content ONLY to show people the "hey, look, we are actually working on visible stuff you can do things with" and instead work on a proper infrastructure and toolsets is far better than pandering to people who want to see stuff.

There are good reasons why most game companies wait until there is actual content before showing anything.

So no, there will not be content over night but it's far easier having tools to simply "drop" things into a good editor than having to have everything hardcoded.
But once their tools are up and running adding content will be a lot quicker and allow them to expand the game a lot easier.

And of course added content adds bugs to an alpha, hell, everything you add to a game has a chance to cause conflicts with other assets and code, even more so early on, ESPECIALLY when merging different parts together. That surprises you? That a game in development has BUGS? Hell, RELEASED games have bugs for crying out loud and many companies takes YEARS before stomping them out.

People have been banging on about how development will accelerate once various pipelines are finished for years. It's all rubbish, in real news the planetary tech team walked out and started their own business.

It's doomed.

 

[lysan]

Funny how whenever CIG screws up publicly, some people turn up in this thread to try to turn it into the Derek Smart/LOD/"Elite is actually bad" thread out of nowhere...

I still scratch my head to understand how this is supposed to make CIG look any better or turn their broken tech demo into something other than a joke.

Well, compared to SC, LOD and ED are not begging people for money for 7 years, SC It's like having your uncle coming over for a few days and he moves in permanently.

 

[Tippis]

As far as I know he has tried to sell his game in greenlight / early access on different platforms, so it´s not only "his money".
And to return to Star Citizen, how relevant and trustworthy would you think are posts from a developer regarding SC if this developer doesn´t behaves himself according to the standards he is demanding of CIG?

…and…?

You kind of forgot to return to Star Citizen there, you know — you just stayed on the same (off-)topic.

 

[Insignificant_The_Galaxy_Cat]

No, but adding content ONLY to show people the "hey, look, we are actually working on visible stuff you can do things with" and instead work on a proper infrastructure and toolsets is far better than pandering to people who want to see stuff.

There are good reasons why most game companies wait until there is actual content before showing anything.

So no, there will not be content over night but it's far easier having tools to simply "drop" things into a good editor than having to have everything hardcoded.
But once their tools are up and running adding content will be a lot quicker and allow them to expand the game a lot easier.

And of course added content adds bugs to an alpha, hell, everything you add to a game has a chance to cause conflicts with other assets and code, even more so early on, ESPECIALLY when merging different parts together. That surprises you? That a game in development has BUGS? Hell, RELEASED games have bugs for crying out loud and many companies takes YEARS before stomping them out.

I never said anything about other games not having bugs, in fact I've experienced my fair share of bugs that have affected the games that I have purchased many times in the past.

What I was alluding to is CIG's singular inability to do anything worthwhile to combat them. Also, the fact that you have brought up the point how some released titles take years to get some bugs dealt with, just makes it even more funny how CIG are going to handle things if they ever get to a released date with just how broken their not-Alpha is currently, and has been for a couple of years now.

As for the whole infrastructure part, I think what people are trying to get their heads around is how CIG don't seem to HAVE had any plan from the beginning, and are only NOW starting to try and put one together... after 6 years of releasing barely functional tech demos, which they have touted as a full on experience to people during all that time. And also showing off totally not in-game demoreels and bull shots that show little or no relation to what the game is like to actually play. (I mean, why *didn't* the faithful backers have any access to what Chris Roberts and co "played" live on stage during GamesCon and CitizenCon? If that stuff was "playable" for the developers, then surely the backers would be more than happy to test said new content and give their feedback.)

 

[dsmart]

As far as I know he has tried to sell his game in greenlight / early access on different platforms, so it´s not only "his money".

That's FALSE.

- I am a self-funded indie dev; sole owner of my studio, and with no investors or partners. I have been thus for over three decades because it allows me to make the games that I want to make, for an audience that buys them

- I am an approved Steam publisher since 2006 (my first game was there in 2009); and never had to go through Greenlight. I use Steam's backend services which gives me access to their EA (started here) and CBT (here now) services.

You guys don't even know what you're talking about most of the time, but you engage as if you do.

And to return to Star Citizen, how relevant and trustworthy would you think are posts from a developer regarding SC if this developer doesn´t behaves himself according to the standards he is demanding of CIG?

That's FALSE. I never asked for anything like that. And my "behavior" (<--- LOL!!) bears no relevance to the success or failure of Star Citizen. My opinions are my own.

 

[dsmart]

Since the end of the kickstarter? Citation needed. The whole DS thing only blew up nearly 3 years after that (about 6 months after the original release date), and he is usually the one cited as claiming its impending doom.

But the question is, do you think they would still be going if they hadn't made any more money (through false representation and corresponding jpeg sales) since those claims were made? If not, the claims were probably accurate based on the state of the project at the time. If some people subsequently continued to throw money at Roberts hand-over-fist in order in order to desperately prop up the development, that's an unexpected result of the predictions, not a contradiction of them. And remember, Roberts himself has backtracked from "if funding suddenly ended we could finish the games" to "we have to make money on the Squadron 42 release to be able to finish Star Citizen".

Yeah, they have the revisionist history thing down pat. My first blog appeared on July 6th, 2015. Long before that, even amid the hype onslaught, articles like this "Fans Have Dropped $77M on This Guy’s Buggy, Half-Built Game - Wired, March 2015" were the norm.

 

[dsmart]

But in respect to the said above it should be allowed to ask, why you accuse Chris Roberts to be a lier and a fraudster for still collecting backer money and not delivering the promised game (correct?), while you are selling (or have sold) yourself a game (LOD, not interested in your wording games, be it greenlight, early access or what ever) that is not finished, is delayed since 2012 (correct?) and has no delivery date. Why is this behaviour for you and certainly many other developers ok, but not for CR?

Are you serious? Like right now?

- - - Updated - - -

Originally Posted by dsmart View Post (Source)
That's FALSE.

- I am a self-funded indie dev; sole owner of my studio, and with no investors or partners. I have been thus for over three decades because it allows me to make the games that I want to make, for an audience that buys them

- I am an approved Steam publisher since 2006 (my first game was there in 2009); and never had to go through Greenlight. I use Steam's backend services which gives me access to their EA (started here) and CBT (here now) services.

No one denies the fact that you are self funded and an indie developer but you HAVE sold game packages while under Steam Greenlight did you not? After all, gamers HAVE bought game packages for LOD?

Which part of "never had to go through Greenlight" was unclear to you?

 

[Tuub t Tute]

Woo hoo! https://robertsspaceindustries.com/schedule-report

BMM due for completion May 1st 2018, oh mama, it is going to be great to finally find out which end the cockpit is in that thing

 

[Stigbob]

I'm worried about Yaffle, should we check his bookshelf ?.

 

[Tuub t Tute]

So Quantum Drive was scheduled for completion yesterday. We won't see it for 2 months and 10 days until 3.0 lands.

Anyone know if CiG is updating the schedule with big green ticks to say "Yup, we kept to schedule and completed that bit!"

- - - Updated - - -

I'm worried about Yaffle, should we check his bookshelf ?.

Maybe Bagpuss went to sleep? :/

 

[VidarSnipes]

So Quantum Drive was scheduled for completion yesterday. We won't see it for 2 months and 10 days until 3.0 lands.

Anyone know if CiG is updating the schedule with big green ticks to say "Yup, we kept to schedule and completed that bit!"

If I remember correctly, schedules for 2.6.x were updated each week, I hope the same is going to happen here and we will be able to verify CIG's progress without waiting for the purported ("not a promise", yadda yadda yadda) release date.

 

[dsmart]

My bad, is it better to simply say that you had your product on STEAM and customers purchased packages for said product?

Ergo, you received money from customers and in return are at that point at least expected to deliver a product (release date may vary due to needed delays or unforeseen consequences).

Steam Early Access (via CBT, hence no store page) is the only way to obtain the game. No promises were made. Aside from the fact that I've shipped many products over the years - and never bailed - I could take 20 years, or cease development tomorrow, and go fishing if I wanted to. Star Citizen isn't that. Go back and read up on the difference.

What is Early Access?

Get immediate access to games that are being developed with the community's involvement. These are games that evolve as you play them, as you give feedback, and as the developers update and add content.
We like to think of games and game development as services that grow and evolve with the involvement of customers and the community. There have been a number of prominent titles that have embraced this model of development recently and found a lot of value in the process. We like to support and encourage developers who want to ship early, involve customers, and build lasting relationships that help everyone make better games.

This is the way games should be made.

Is this the same as pre-purchasing a game?

No. Early Access is a full purchase of a playable game. By purchasing, you gain immediate access to download and play the game in its current form and as it evolves. You keep access to the game, even if the game later moves from Early Access into fully released.

When will these games release?

Its up to the developer to determine when they are ready to 'release'. Some developers have a concrete deadline in mind, while others will get a better sense as the development of the game progresses. You should be aware that some teams will be unable to 'finish' their game. So you should only buy an Early Access game if you are excited about playing it in its current state.

 

[dsmart]

Well, you are trying to deflect instead of answering (my post), you have cited a statement of me and answered with "That´s FALSE" and are now weasel wording with the following bullet points (which had no relevance to my statement). So for myself it´s clear what your posts are worth. I´m out...

Nice try. Go back and read what you're writing. That's specifically what I'm responding to. You, on the other hand, keep deflecting and ignoring what's being written. Which is pretty much what you guys do. Deflection just wastes everyone's time.

 

[dsmart]

Nor would it change the fact that Derek is hypocritical about having received money from customers in exchange for goods and failed to meet a delivery date.

That's all.

Are CIG deserving of critique, sure, but grand standing about delays when one does not manage any better is not a good way to do it.

LOL!! I just have to laugh; because truly, this is pristine lolz. It's amazing to me that you guys can make these false equivalent comparisons with a straight face.

ps: whether I am a hypocrite (your flawed opinion) or not, it simply will not change the fact that i) Star Citizen is a full-on scam ii) Star Citizen lied to its backers iii) Star Citizen isn't, and never will be, a "game"

 

[dsmart]

Yes, im well aware that you could take twenty years and you could go fishing. Im not disputing that at all.

But having set an initial release date and then delaying the game (for whatever reason) while having sold a product to a customer and then bashing another developer does not make you LOOK good.

Im pretty sure that's not what you intended but the problem is that regardless of the validity of your critique it DOES get tainted by your own delays - hence the hypocritical aspect.

And while the SC kickstarter indeed had an initial release date there is neither a guarantee there either.

FALSE

Also, once we switched engines back in 2011, the game had no release date. Prior to Sept 2014, when the game appeared on Steam Early Access (the only way we could use Steam backend services without building our own), that was the first time it was ever for "sale". And even then, it's under Steam's EA rules. Which is why it's not for sale anywhere else; we're neither promoting, nor marketing it. We're developing it. And whoever wants to play it during that period, is welcome to join in and pay for the privilege. Just like every EA game on the planet.

What has any of this to do with Star Citizen?

 

[LeSabre]

Woo hoo! https://robertsspaceindustries.com/schedule-report

BMM due for completion May 1st 2018, oh mama, it is going to be great to finally find out which end the cockpit is in that thing

Awesome only two weeks + 1 year away

Which in CIG time means the "limited" (Once they are gone from the shelves they are gone, until we sell more) BMM LTI (cargo bay sold seperately as the BMM is now a small snub fighter) sale will begin on May 1st, but the ship will not make an appearance for another year or so after that, depending on when they need another sale.

(The cockpit is in the middle btw, on the left lower side, near the whatsit and just above the doodad)

 

[dsmart]

Im not disbelieving you but you are the one claiming to have facts so please, present the facts.

And do present facts, not rumors, blogs, hearsay and vague opinions.

Facts, solid proof.

You're switching and deflecting again.

ps: I never made no such claims. Go ahead and show me one single instance where I proclaimed to have facts - about anything. Thanks.

 

[dsmart]

I'm not discrediting anyone, merely pointing out a fact.

What "fact" would that be exactly?