The Star Citizen Thread v5

[Clawhammer]

It's a good idea (and very tempting) but I don't like to see people getting conned into believing something that isn't true.

Maybe it is not that, maybe people are just sick of reading all the grumpy cat stuff here Not everyone like hate and negetivity in high dose every day. If deserved or not.

Additinally i would never suggest this thread to someone to find the "truth" about SC. For that, here are some too extrem persons. Its like i would suggest a forum full of the sc fanboy people to seek for truth [noob]. So i see no problem with people fading away, there are luckly still better places for neutral sc talk.

Take the 5 year development thing as an example, according to CiG, RSI, Chris Roberts, anyone whose read up on it and reality SC's been in development for 5 years. Yet people repeatedly claim this isn't the case, using all the tired old "you don't understand game development" arguments and "the first two years don't count for SC, but do for other games because reasons".

They do it to avoid having or thinking about the "five years and that's all they've got" conversation.

If we let it slide more innocent gamers will get suckered in by this empty hype.

Lol, who is doing that? Thats childish. Ok i can understand the argumentation that cig has to build up but i dont see why i should reduce the time because of that. Additionally i dont see way someone should feel ashemd for that time. For the progress cig made until this point with this big and ambitious project i think they are on a good roll.

 

[Hi-Ban]

just not reply and drag the conversation on, stretching it several pages but instead leave the post as is and let it die within countless pages of much more interesting discussion. I think it's a good tactic. If they want more visibility, they have to come up with more interesting and balanced posts, worthy of an exchange of ideas. Win win for everyone involved.

Ok so what's an "interesting discussion" for this guys? Maybe the recurrent and repeated ad nauseum "chris roberts is a <insert insult here>" or the really old and already proven wrong "CIG is out of money" "everything they show us is fake" "it's all a scam? really?
What's for you guys a "more interesting and balanced post"? Maybe the usual poor trollbait "buy an Idris" which some people continuously repeat in hope someone bites the bait?

Wow, so really interesting and balanced posts! such exchange of ideas!

Thank god there are a couple of skeptics in this thread which can actually have decent discussions, balanced posts, and real exchange of ideas, rather than the usual poor trolling attempts which plague this thread.

 

[Britney]

What amazes me the most is the celebration of hardcore capitalism not only in the game (Star Citizen is nothing else than making money by using space ships) but in the production of the game as well.

According to the Kotaku article Roberts has no problem hiring people and firing them 2 months later without hesitation if it is necessary to keep an efficient production process. This is the result of an extremely flexible organisation of work and a comprehensive abscence of any workers rights in some states.

According to the comments under the Kotaku article and on reddit quite a few fans like it this way. Hire and fire as if workers are no human beings, just like in the latest 'build your capitalist monopoly'-game where you click numbers without being confronted with human existences.

This crowdfunding approach is probably the worst that could happen to the videogame industry that already has precarious working conditions as the norm. Now you even have videogame fans looking over the shoulders of the slave master who exploits his employees beyond exhaution to get as much as possible for the money invested. I really hope Star Citizen puts the final nail into the coffin of this nightmare called crowdfunding that brings nothing but extreme short-term employment opportunities and undermining of the few workers rights remaining today.

 

[lysan]

I see that coming too, to be honest.
Considering the running cost for servers the moment population kicks a bit up. Could get out of hand fast...even more so if they still dont have a working patching system without downloading everything over and over again.

I am certain there will be a subscription model for SC. Something they said "would never happen". With clear advantages against those that dont have a subscription.

They said many things would never happen, LTI anyone????

 

[Cynaqq]

Maybe it is not that, maybe people are just sick of reading all the grumpy cat stuff here Not everyone like hate and negetivity in high dose every day. If deserved or not.

The dose of negativity is directly proportional to the dose of positivity. If you have relentless disregard of problems and heavy pushing of the 'everything's awesome!' vibe, you get to doom and gloom in return. When delays caused by mismanagement is spun into 'it's the best game evah, of course it'll take a long time!', than the same delays will become 'the game will never be out' for the other side of the coin.

This is the reason we need objectivity as an anchor point. If we say white is white and black is black, everything will fall into place. There'll be no need for hyperbole from either side, people will respect each other more, cynicism and sarcasm as a result will be kept minimal.

As a response to the last part of your post:

A big and ambitious project doesn't excuse the lack of tangible results and delays in releases. A big and ambitious project should progress at the same speed with a smaller and not so ambitious one but just take longer to finish. What happens with SC is that it's going much slower than a small, not ambitious but well managed project should go AND using the much voiced size and ambition as an excuse for this. Sorry but it doesn't work like that, it shouldn't work like that.

 

[frostypaw]

So at the Gamescom demo a few weeks ago CIG said that Alpha 3.0 was coming out at the end of the year, but now I see people saying its slipped till next year already? What's that based on, as I couldnt find anything discussing the delay from CIG itself?

It's based on 2.6 avocado testing being delayed, which then leaves only a month or so for 2.6 in the wild before xmas and the new year - with Sq42 being touted as launching in Q1 2016 there's simply no sign of there being development time any where to build the vast array of content promised in 3.0 - logically it must come after that so in summer 2017, and "insider sources" have said pretty much just the same

Ok so what's an "interesting discussion" for this guys? Maybe the recurrent and repeated ad nauseum "chris roberts is a <insert insult here>" or the really old and already proven wrong "CIG is out of money" "everything they show us is fake" "it's all a scam? really?

There's really very little of that. If you read folk's posts calmly they almost all have a decent point even if they do also express a negative opinion about chris's management skills. Have you ever worked under someone like that outta interest?

 

[Toumal]

I get where you are coming from but the more we engage in conversations, the more we give them opportunities to repeat those same age old arguments, increasing their visibility as a result.

What we should be doing, imho, is to just not reply and drag the conversation on, stretching it several pages but instead leave the post as is and let it die within countless pages of much more interesting discussion. I think it's a good tactic. If they want more visibility, they have to come up with more interesting and balanced posts, worthy of an exchange of ideas. Win win for everyone involved.

I'd love to agree, but it looks like this would actually be beneficial to their nefarious goals.
Just last week or so, there was a time when people stopped bothering to reply for a while, and suddenly the last few pages were filled with unbridled praise of Star Citizen. Most done by newly registered accounts only a few days old.
There's some genuine enthusiasts, sure, but also definitely a pattern of "let's drown out the criticism by rehearsing old propaganda", trying desperately to keep any inconvenient facts from bubbling to the top.

Like the 2.6 delay, note how certain accounts didn't respond to those at all? They're like "oh this is bad, gotta make sure this vanishes off of the most recent page"


Make no mistake: I'm all for posting the latest 10FTC and such - but we're talking about "OMG this is so AWESOME, nobody has EVER done something like THIIIIS"-posts.

 

[Cynaqq]

I'd love to agree, but it looks like this would actually be beneficial to their nefarious goals.
Just last week or so, there was a time when people stopped bothering to reply for a while, and suddenly the last few pages were filled with unbridled praise of Star Citizen. Most done by newly registered accounts only a few days old.
There's some genuine enthusiasts, sure, but also definitely a pattern of "let's drown out the criticism by rehearsing old propaganda", trying desperately to keep any inconvenient facts from bubbling to the top.

Like the 2.6 delay, note how certain accounts didn't respond to those at all? They're like "oh this is bad, gotta make sure this vanishes off of the most recent page"


Make no mistake: I'm all for posting the latest 10FTC and such - but we're talking about "OMG this is so AWESOME, nobody has EVER done something like THIIIIS"-posts.

The off-topic section is off limits now for new accounts. They have to gain a post count and rep before they can post here so the first part of your post is already addressed.

The last part is something I would reply to, simply by pointing out how it's done by whomever or how the reality isn't as awesome as one believes more often than not. The part I'm ignoring is the blatant marketing talk and nothing else. Otherwise, by all means. Voice your concerns about the delay of 2.6 as much as you can . Who am I to dictate what you can reply to anyway? Have a rep.

 

[Hi-Ban]

There's really very little of that. If you read folk's posts calmly they almost all have a decent point even if they do also express a negative opinion about chris's management skills. Have you ever worked under someone like that outta interest?

You're right, many of the posts have a decent point. But it's most of the times hidden behind a thick layer of trolling and disrespect, which some people post because "oh, there is optimism, so we must compensate that with negativism, aggresiveness and a bit of mocking and trolling, so maybe the optimists get angry and that way we can be happy and satisfied".

There is a big difference between being skeptical and posting an opinion, and what some people do here, which consists on insulting, being aggressive, mocking, trolling, being disrespectful...
You don't need to be offensive to express an opinion. But sometimes it looks like some people are actively being offensive, one day and another, and another, like if they wanted to start a flame war, and they keep trying the same day by day.

 

[Marcus]

It's based on 2.6 avocado testing being delayed, which then leaves only a month or so for 2.6 in the wild before xmas and the new year - with Sq42 being touted as launching in Q1 2016 there's simply no sign of there being development time any where to build the vast array of content promised in 3.0 - logically it must come after that so in summer 2017, and "insider sources" have said pretty much just the same



There's really very little of that. If you read folk's posts calmly they almost all have a decent point even if they do also express a negative opinion about chris's management skills. Have you ever worked under someone like that outta interest?

Ah, ok thanks for that. Alpha 3.0 was only announced a few weeks ago, I know CIG has a bad record for release date slips, but this must be a record surely?

I also take your point about people not seeming to want to engage in an actual discussion, a lot of people here just seem to want to score points, not talk about the issues.

As an example I was asking for clarification on what the MVP on four or five occasions was a few days ago, I was expecting some of the people on here who are Star Citizen supporters to answer my question, but not a single on of them did. What that says to me is that those people who carefully avoided answering this question (but answered some of my others tellingly) are not really interested in having an honest conversation about SC and its development, but instead just pretend these issues dont exist.

I am glad there are those on here who are SC fans who ARE willing to engage in a real debate over this game. Kudos to you guys, please dont get put off by the somewhat combative atmosphere that this thread can exhibit. It would be pointless without the too and fro and exchange of viewpoints that any interesting conversation needs to flourish.

 

[milligna]

The Citizencon videos will have to last all the way to the next Gamescom, so for MONTHS we'll get them reposted here over and over, nothing will be released, more features will be promised, "The new Gambia studio allows us to accelerate the pipeline even more! Rumors that Ben Lesnick, Developer went insane like an H.P. Lovecraft character due to archiving Wing Commander excretia are complete false, his not appearing in public or on streams for almost a year is merely to keep Around the 'Verse even fresher than ever."

Ah but everything will be fine, just fine and posters who Know About Game Development will appear by the dozen, with smooth patter and jpgs falling like dominoes: "They have a secret build that's even better, with 500 employees how could they not? And who wouldn't want to be Space Friends with Oldman and Old Man like in Squadron 42: Prelude which despite only being two missions and 35 minutes of cut scenes with talking heads standing ramrod straight due to none of the mocap working or any of the mocap reshoots or any of the third refactors of the handmade animation.. it's is better than every AAA game combined, and now I'm going to post three old videos to distract from any criticism of why there isn't a finished game anywhere in sight by summer of 2017!"

So they better make it a pretty, pretty planet with all kinds of spacemen with dead eyes running up hills and hiding behind one REALLY good alien tree model and a bunch of not as good alien tree models that suddenly explode in a hail of particles as new jpgs are unveiled to sell THAT VERY WEEK OH WHAT A COINCIDENCE at CitizenCon! Crunch, devs, crunch! Jpg sales are counting on your otherwise totally useless tech demo builds for the show!

Extra points if one of the ships flying over the pretty PG-hand-crafted-Wodehouse-milk-chocolate-planet launches a fighter... that launches ANOTHER fighter, that launches a space motorcycle, that launches a little itty bitty space bald man that nipple jets up to the camera and salutes as a really gaudy logo flies on the screen. That'll show those Frontier boys who REALLY wears the cowboy hats.

 

[Stigbob]

You're right, many of the posts have a decent point. But it's most of the times hidden behind a thick layer of trolling and disrespect, which some people post because "oh, there is optimism, so we must compensate that with negativism, aggresiveness and a bit of mocking and trolling, so maybe the optimists get angry and that way we can be happy and satisfied".

There is a big difference between being skeptical and posting an opinion, and what some people do here, which consists on insulting, being aggressive, mocking, trolling, being disrespectful...
You don't need to be offensive to express an opinion. But sometimes it looks like some people are actively being offensive, one day and another, and another, like if they wanted to start a flame war, and they keep trying the same day by day.

Report posts if you think they break the rules, you'll notice the mods recently got rid of a lot of naughty stuff for exactly those reasons.

They were pretty much all pro-SC posters, well more anti Derek than pro SC but the two seem to go hand in hand.

 

[darkoff]

new kotaku article.
Its even longer than the last one
http://www.kotaku.co.uk/2016/09/26/the-24-year-feud-that-has-dogged-star-citizen
I would quote some bits but it would just turn out to be too long.

 

[frostypaw]

You're right, many of the posts have a decent point. But it's most of the times hidden behind a thick layer of trolling and disrespect, which some people post because "oh, there is optimism, so we must compensate that with negativism, aggresiveness and a bit of mocking and trolling, so maybe the optimists get angry and that way we can be happy and satisfied".

I'm not sure it's against the optimism but the blatant marketing efforts. It's those marketing lies that aren't respected - as an example the claim that sc is better than ed because it has proper planetary landings and cities, despite nothing like that being in game, results in much drama. The people coming here to purposefully repost the same videos and the same lies that have been dismantled over the previous 10 pages again and again are pretty much begging for it - there's even record of them planning these attempts to derail and close this thread - to those who want to actually talk about this all that is in itself actively being offensive and disruptive.

So yeah, that's why I've blocked someone - they were affecting my ability to respond calmly to others like yourself who do actually talk - apologies for any snapping i've done btw

 

[xyphic]

There is a big difference between being skeptical and posting an opinion, and what some people do here, which consists on insulting, being aggressive, mocking, trolling, being disrespectful...
You don't need to be offensive to express an opinion. But sometimes it looks like some people are actively being offensive, one day and another, and another, like if they wanted to start a flame war, and they keep trying the same day by day.

It's impossible* to have a rational discussion with a Star Citizen zealot. The vast majority of SC supporters who end up in this thread of late are here because they've been triggered by a tell-tale post on one of the less savoury SC fora and feel they need to wade in to defend the honour of their lord and saviour. Of course the regulars here shut them down with sarcasm and derision, because it's all that's deserved.

* I say impossible, but that's being unfair. There have been a number of SC supporters over the years who've come here and were able to act like rational human beings and accept flaws when they see them. They tend to be the ones who debate well and don't fall back on fallacies like "you don't understand game development". There's a reason phraseology like that is mocked hard here. If you come here and engage in actual discourse about the game rather than trying to *convert* us you're actually much more likely to win us over.

I look at this game with the perspective of someone who has a reasonable level of experience in software development. I have learned to spot the signs of a poorly managed project, and usually there's very little you can do about it as an engineer other than get out or get on with it. I see a lot of that coming out of CIG, and it *worries* me. It worries me because I've backed this project and I'd like to play the game that was pitched to me. It worries me because CIG act very much like a confident, cocky startup tech firm who have lots of wonderful ideas and flashy presentations to elicit venture capital funding, but in the end aren't able to realise their product and go bust because it was either technically infeasible or they were too slow to market.

 

[Cmdr Eagleboy]

new kotaku article.
Its even longer than the last one
http://www.kotaku.co.uk/2016/09/26/the-24-year-feud-that-has-dogged-star-citizen
I would quote some bits but it would just turn out to be too long.

So much burn in that article. To be fair, game journalists should do such articles ON EVERY DAMN HYPED GAME EVER. Not only Star Citizen.

 

[Stigbob]

new kotaku article.
Its even longer than the last one
http://www.kotaku.co.uk/2016/09/26/the-24-year-feud-that-has-dogged-star-citizen
I would quote some bits but it would just turn out to be too long.

Thats a translation of the Swedish Level article from a few months back, it's worth a read if you didn't read the translation already.

The paragraphs about Chris Roberts trying and failing to play his own game are brutally funny. Here's a video of what happened.

[video=youtube;cTdchKUqUFY]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cTdchKUqUFY[/video]

 

[milligna]

Truly one of the best videos this project has yet produced.

 

[darkoff]

Gotta love how developers think alike. And everyone loves car analogies

“
If you’ve ever seen concept cars, it looks great, and then you see the final car… yes, you can see the concept car in the final car, but there’s obviously been changes for various different reasons. And I would say that is not to dissimilar to what goes on with what we do. It’s the same process, essentially we go through the same thing. Now we try to validate things much sooner but there are always people that will be like ‘Well, I like the curve of this thing on the concept and I don’t feel like the final one has exactly the same curve.’ And we will have a reason why that one has changed."

That’s like me trying to outfit my Tesla with the engine from a Prius. Bad things can and will happen.”

I leave it to reader to decide which one is Chris Roberts and which one is Derek Smart. The article talks about both derek's games and chris robert's games.

 

[CMDR_Orlando]

It's based on 2.6 avocado testing being delayed

Like the 2.6 delay, note how certain accounts didn't respond to those at all? They're like "oh this is bad, gotta make sure this vanishes off of the most recent page"

What delay? You guys keep making stuff up and running with it like it's completely normal. [squeeeee]

2.5 was delivered about a month ago and 2.6 testing was allways scheduled for October. We are still in September.

Not only most detractors here fail to acknowledge or understand the most simple reasons why the things that happen with Star Citizen are common to most other game's development's or any other company raised from scratch, but you keep making stuff up with impunity.

The last pages were an attack at CIG for making what they have been making since ever, gameshows that showcase LIVE gameplay while showcasing where they at in terms of technology advancements, game mechanics etc All that while gathering more funding to the game and getting exposure in the gaming press. (gamescom, citizencom, fps visual stabilization, characthers showreel etc)

So what's the problem with those? (besides leaving haters fuming and making up theory's to justify the awesomeness they witness?)

All gameplay done LIVE, in-engine with assets of the game. How many other even company's do that?

Maybe if they made a totally pre-rendered 'honest' trailer people would not be so hard on them.
I mean they could showcase nice choreographed dogfighting, lot's of explosions and completely awesomely frenetic gameplay..
All they had to do is just put a small text saying "not actual game footage" and it would be much more acceptable. [rolleyes]

CIG ant their marketing schemes made only with the sole purpose of selling their game and gaining more clients!
Who do they think they are? Making a business run successfully for so many years...
Shame on them. [squeeeee]

Just keep on passive-aggressively buying idris and pressing «use» that in 90 days everything will collapse. ELE. The End. Period.