The Star Citizen Thread v5
- Thread starter Brett C
- Start date
- Status
the link you gave also lead to more apt definition on what this fear uncertainty doubt thing is https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vaporware#Early_announcement
Why are the moderators in CIG forum using vaporware software terms to describe their forum users?
Also why is that early announcement term so apt for star citizen?
Now heres the article about developing games instead of software.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Video_game_development#Milestones
"end product" is not a term fitting the nature of development of Star Citizen as it was never meant to be final on release, development will continue for years to add content and features (e.g. strech goals not slated for initial release).
No he's saying that they won't be able to finish star citizens "promised" feature list as of its initial release. The plan was always to have continued development after its initial release, afterall it's supposed to be a MMO, so you would expect that they won't just close shop once it's released and stop further development.
Say theres sudden panic tomorrow everyone stops funding star citizen.
will there ever going to be product CIG promises to deliver if funding stopped tomorrow?
I don't see a reason why there wouldn't be a product, neither do i think financials are an issue at this point. If they manage to release SQ42 at the end of the year or early 2017, there will be a revenue stream which should secure further development even if funding stopped and a lot of people would demand refunds because they spent too much money on a product instead of the development of said product.
Actually, one of the stretch goals reached was that they would release SC 'complete' and before end of 2014. They said that if the goal wasn't reached they would have to release a 'viable 1.0' version and add from there, and start with S42 rather than releasing both. He got the money, then didnt release it earlier but delayed it by a minimum of three years without the promised inclusion of all stretch goals. Its literally taking money from the backers and then doing the exact opposite from what was promised. That he even got people like you willing to believe 'it was the plan all along' is absurd: you can just check these facts for yourself.
Correct, the initial plan was also to end the funding campaign (if my memory is correct there was a grace period after), plans changed, it was decided to continue funding to get a "better" game. Would you think it's reasonable to say that money doesn't buy you time and building a "better" game takes more time? From the point the funding was continued the estimated release date was obsolete.
Remember that the early adopters have already bought and paid for SQ42. With CoD due Nov 4 I have real difficulty in seeing where a solid revenue stream from "space FPSers" who aren't already on the train will come from - the FPS component of a bigger product from a studio with no previous releases is a tough sell against an AAA FPS from a series that defines FPS for many people.
SQ42 is not a competitor to CoD, not sure why people think it is. Also, i think no gamer in the world limits their gaming experience to a single game.
Plans changed? You dont get to 'change plans' after making a promise to people and taking their money. If he had released the core version as promised and then added the other goals with no deadline at all, fine. But this is simply unethical and borderline criminal. If I order a burger at some joint that is supposed to come in five minutes, I dont want to hear its actually going to be five days 'because some other dudes said that was okay if the burger would be bigger'. I am sure they did, but thats not my problem.
Luckily for CIG they are nowhere close to matching that release date.
They do tend to limit them to released ones though
Can't argue with that.
Because the new CoD is a story-driven mixture between FPS and flying space-ships, basically aiming to deliver what Chris promised a few centuries ago, but now with actual polish and a real release date.
Well, if the burger has to be developed first in order to give it to you, you might have to wait a little longer as development is not a linear process.
- - - - - Additional Content Posted / Auto Merge - - - - -
No, CoD is first and foremost a multiplayer arcade FPS, which happens to have a 6 hour single player experience added to it.
FPS in space. You might not think it's a competitor but, well....
Not everyone has huge amounts to spend on games. Someone careful with their $60 may go for the known option over the unknown (Star Citizen is virtually unknown to the vast majority of gamers). Brand recognition plays a massive part - why do you think that there are so many sequels in entertainment genres? Because the known quantity sells, and brands tend to osmose into other areas of culture*. Also, multi-platform availability massively increases available market.
* For the last 15+ years advertising has moved more towards brand recognition than necessarily trying to sell individual products, and how brands can be linked to lifestyle. Battlefield vs CoD, Xbox vs PS, Coke vs Pepsi, the list goes on. "Call of Duty" immediately bring certain gaming qualities to mind. "Squadron 42", nope. CIG have to fight this.... as by simply developing a FPS (with AAA aspirations) it places itself in the same marketplace as the giants. EDIT: I have spent 21 years doing IT work for one of the biggest global players in the advertising & media industry. Selling "The Brand" is everything for big business now.
Last edited:
Thing is there is a different target audience, games like Battlefield/CoD encourage casual players to pick it up. SQ42 will never play in the same ballpark as CoD, it will not be able to sell as many copies as CoD, and i don't think that's something they're aiming for. Reaching a broader audience means dumping things down, making it accessible to casual players.
Fine, whatever. If you aren't even willing to acknowledge that intentionally breaking a promise you could easily have kept is morally dubious we're not really going to go anywhere. As for CoD: you can pretend SQ42 is going to be a unique and awesome thing but the general public is going to see two shooters in space with flying ships, with a 'be part of the military' as background. One of them will have first-class FPS mechanics, the other is after four years and licensing the CryEngine still trying to figure out how to make players open a door without regularly launching them into space.
See this trailer: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EeF3UTkCoxY
Description: Call of Duty®: Infinite Warfare returns to the roots of the franchise where large-scale war and cinematic, immersive military storytelling take center stage. Prepare for a gripping war story in which players fight against the Settlement Defense Front to defend our very way of life.
If this trailer was the S42 trailer you'd be running naked through the streets screaming how Chris had proved all the haters wrong. But this is the CoD trailer, and Chris has nothing to show yet. So lets hear why this is all actually wrong, S42 is super awesome, wildly different and unique, and will bring CIG loads of money they can use to make the game. For real, this time.
Insignificant_The_Galaxy_Cat
Banned
Oh I dunno, didn't Squadron 42 intially promise multiplayer co-op play too? And didn't CIG mention that this would be done by them better than CoD.... Only for CIG to then later on drop co-op gameplay from Squadron 42, whilst still touting it as being right up there with Call Of Duty in terms of gameplay?
The very fact that CIG got straight up hustled by CoD: Infinite Warfare at E3 when Infinity Ward showed a game that was basically doing what SQ42 was saying it would do, with no sign of SQ42 anywhere on the horizon apart from Tweets from CIG showing Mark Hamill et al on their mo-cap re-shoots and absolutely no gameplay videos... That was very embarrassing for Chris Roberts and co, and now they are on serious crunch time just to get out SOMETHING before the end of the year (which won't happen).
So no, what you said was kinda very silly and not very true at all.
*Edit* Sleutelbos brings up a very good point regarding comparisons between Infinite Warfare and Squadron 42 and it's something I've brought up before myself in the past... All we know about Squadron 42 are based off a terrible proof of concept, set piece walkthrough, with dodgy character models, glitches and poorly refined mo-cap and an equally poor script. On top of that the Morrow Tour was dreadfully dull and boring. No battles, no tense dramatic acting and line delivery. And most tellingly of all, not a hint of actual gameplay either.
Apart from this and a couple of SQ42 trailers with Mark Hamill front and centre, that's ALL we have to go on regarding that game...
Meanwhile Infinity Ward's gameplay trailer of Infinite Warfare is the direct antithesis of this. It throws you straight into the action, drama and terror as the enemy makes their surprise attack, laying waste to the city you are currently based at. Then it progresses to show how the game will play, what the FPS elements are like, how the different weapons work, how the cover system operates and some of the foes you will face on the ground.
After that, the action moves to space, with the transition of the character moving from the ground into the spacecraft proving to look far more straightforward and "immersive" than anything CIG have attempted in Star Citizen so far. The actual space battles themselves *looks* spectacular, frenetic and action-packed and considering this was one of the main things CIG have been hanging their hat on for Squadron 42, it does look like they have a LOT to live up to when Infinite Warfare is released in November.
Now, imagine if what I just described above was reversed and it was CIG showing off a gameplay reel like Infinity Ward had? You, along with several others of your support crew here, would be raving about how incredible Squadron 42 is and this game would be a blast upon release... and you'd have good reason to do so.
But this isn't an alternative universe unfortunately, and unless CIG somehow pull off a miracle between now and CoD: IW's release, then I'm not seeing how that game will be able to compete even remotely with it.
Last edited:
The trailer is awesome, most of the trailers of the CoD and Battlefield series are awesome.
As said before, CoD is a different game, it's not SQ42 and will not be what most people expect from SQ42.
I think the female model is about to be added but my question is that why is the UEE a strictly Aryan nation? I don't think shades of brown are that difficult to implement, right?
Avoiding the whole casual this and that...
IMO, COD:IW is going to be one of the most accessible games with space flight in it (i'm betting there will be more ground battles than space dogfighting or space FPS).
SQ42 is taking the flight part quite a bit more seriously. Various systems to manage, flight impacting damage models, highly customizable loadouts and upgrades, and probably less survivable that a ship in COD:IW. Actually, I'd liken SQ42 more to Freelancer, which is what I hope it is going to be.
Still waiting, though...everything is subject to change and removal. I just wish CIG could articulate the gameplay experience of SQ42 instead of always just listing a bunch of cool things.
I'll probably get COD:IW a few years down the road when it is on silly sale or in a humble bundle.
Last edited:
- Status