The Star Citizen Thread v5
- Thread starter Brett C
- Start date
- Status
For me, the flight model in 2.5 was "good enough" for take-off, travel and landing, but still sucky for dogfighting - if they have made a decent improvement in the dogfighting bit, without wrecking the other bits, then I will be happy enough.
In terms of "Star Marine is already in the game" - I would have considered adding a mission to the PU where you have to clear out "space rats" or something from the station with all the guns, or perhaps some kind of marksman "training" - something not too difficult to implement.
Yeah I'd like to see more regarding the flight model. The idea that ships can hit top speed twice as fast as they currently can is a bit disconcerting, it sounds like the game will be even more about aiming rather than flying.
Well there hasn't been any update to the original statement so technically it's still for the end of this year.
With that being unlikely people are postulating that it'll arrive between March and June next year.
It will be March 2017 until its March 2017, then it will be May or June 2017, until its May or June 2017....
In other words, it will be ready when its ready, and that March might be being optimistic considering the release of 2.6.
basically i agree with you.
but... if you remember well last year they surpised us all with the release of 2.0 for the end of the 2015.
could it happens the same thing for 3.0 ?
..to be honest i think that it's unlikely, but i still hope for a miracle.
p.s. with 3.0 (landable planets aka more real gameplay) i will finally (after years of ''waiting on the fence'') pledge starcitizen me too.
CMDR_Orlando
Banned
Yes it can and it's a glorious ship, cool iconic industrial design!
Here's a awesome 3d printed model making off!
[video=youtube;OAEkTqCLNxQ]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OAEkTqCLNxQ[/video]
Last edited:
New build for the Evocati but no news on the content/fixed done for now
To be frank, why would changelogs of Evocati have to be NDAed I don't know. It is one thing CIG can show without spoiling what's coming up.
I supposed that is because is a way of know possible leakers, it seems that these patch notes had some things changed in every tester so if someone leaked they would know who it was very easily. At least something like that was rumored some days back.
But who knows...
"Cool" and "iconic" are debatable, CIG's designs were always painfully generic.
"Cool" is subjective at best.
"Iconic" - in this context, this usually means it's been around for a long time and is very easily identifiable.
So perhaps not the best choice of adjectives by Orlando?
His point of view is perfectly valid though.
Nobody will ever announce this before the date that just slips past without the previously touted release. Only after that date, some begrudging note from "The Chairman", saviour of PC gaming and Space Games, will acknowledge that the date has been missed. Nobody could've ever seen this coming of course and announcing the delay some months in advance is unthinkable for an open development project.
Last edited:
Ohhh, no, not "iconic" again. As many pointed out, iconic means something that has overall respect from everyone and has been for some time around. You can't claim to be "iconic" for something just out of the gate.
While some of CIG ship designs looks really good, they feel without any visual consistency, being mishmash of styles of different sci-fi franchise properties. It's fanfic of classic space ships basically.
While some of CIG ship designs looks really good, they feel without any visual consistency, being mishmash of styles of different sci-fi franchise properties. It's fanfic of classic space ships basically.
Last edited:
I know it goes against forum doctrine to like anything SC related, but that's a good looking Industrial ship.
Have to say I like the look of that ship actually - much prefer that to the fighters in space thing they do.
Very impressive bit of 3D printing up top there too.
Well... iconic in lore it may be. It depends of the story of SC..."Cool" is subjective at best.
"Iconic" - in this context, this usually means it's been around for a long time and is very easily identifiable.
So perhaps not the best choice of adjectives by Orlando?
His point of view is perfectly valid though.
- Status