Im not disputing your argument but do you literally KNOW things are hidden loading screens or are you making a judgement call on what you find more plausible?
Definition of seamless:
having no awkward transitions, interruptions, or indications of disparity
The forced animation which you cannot interrupt, shortcut or avoid is a disruption of the seamless flow. I call it a loading screen and that might be arguable but the main point which my statement proves is simply that the gameplay is NOT seamless. So lets not focus on semantics but stay on topic = seamless gameplay.
The mini-pu is STARTING to stitch things together but it IS very much a mix of single system demo area UNTIL they add more content - And especially when they add planetary landing with outposts there. And that's hardly rocket science either but rather a matter of scale since they are going the 1:1 scale.
And without 3.0 and improvements to netcode and FPS they WILL have a problem. I see no point in going into the PU when I get constant stutter and freezes due to netcode issues.
I m not hating but the majority has been waiting for YEARS now for things to "start" getting together. There have been various excuses (different focus, third-party mock-ups, "blockers" etc) over the years and the fact that remains is that any tangible release of meaningfull content is getting pushed more and more back every time. There is a reason why 3.0 is called the "jesus patch" because so many hopes rely on that single patch but the underlying strategy is the same since 2012
"Wait till X gets out, that ll fix everything and show you haters"
Planetary landings, multicrew, balanced flight model, so many ships which are sold but still missing, second system, first system to get more content......still waiting here.
Planetary landing especially is a nice distraction. There has been ONE demo video and ONE supposed "gameplay" video (which already has been shown to be heavily disrupted with cinebox footage as they mocked up the transition between cinebox and live gameplay) about this main feature. The established blocker for this is supposed to be PG technology which we have various good looking screenshots of but nothing we could actually WATCH. For that reason alone it may as well be non-existant.
And the game we can test now IS not a game.
I wonder why you get hung up on a single term NOW when you and Orlando and everybody else is talking about "the game" all the time but NOW its suddenly not one but "technically" an alpha. I know that. We all know that. Being an alpha is why its getting so much leeway but that still doesnt explain nor excuse the sad state in which "the game" currently is. I mean if we are very exact then Star Citizen in its current state doesnt even fullfill alpha status. Its a pre-alpha or "maybe" a very very early alpha. I mean they are still not done with the design phase.
Maybe its necessary to use extreme terms and descriptions to counter all the posts and reports (see INN) acting as if the game is already perfect and has achieved its milestones which are theory only at this point...to get people back to reality. Its easy to get lost in the hype. After all we need to evaluate the "game" on its current status not what 3.0 will bring because for all we know......3.0 might not appear. You remember the last deadlines or modules being scratched? Yes that.
I agree that the discussions get very polarized as well.
And no-one really have any indisputable facts. All we have are either the information from CIG or basically blogs and rumors talking about their demise.
There are cultists on both sides and they are the larger problems when one either white washes a problem or outright lie about a problem. Or worse, spreading false information about things that are NOT a problem.
This is a nice bit so I saved it for last
Polarized. Yes.....a LOT. Its not the topic which results in polarization tho....its the participating posters. Lets not start to point fingers but you can pinpoint the pages at which certain people "contribute" when suddenly the whole discussion kicks up a few notches and the mods are foced to walk in bats swinging...its pretty reliable.
I beg to difer. There are a LOT of undisputable facts around Star Citizen. In case you refer to the list of "facts" Mister Smart holds....thats not what I mean. Current discrepancy to the official roadmap. Missing features. Bugs as reported in the bug database many of which are sitting there since the first days of the PU. Official statements by Chris Roberts. Proven lies given to the community over the years. And. So. On.
These are things which you cannot argue away. There HAVE been delays, there HAVE been cuts, there HAVE been lies. Those things stand. You can opt to ignore them or deem them "unimportant" but they are there. Now when it comes to facts that are PRO Star Citizen there are also many (Arena commander, Star Marine, PU, ships, flight model etc etc) its just that each one of these facts isnt really mipressive or special in its own regard. Or reason for a victory dance ala Commander Orlando. People like to get ahead of themselves when a small thing is added and rave in the POTENTIAL of the things this first little step holds but soon get lost in fiction...its called hype. Its just that none of all these small things we currently have in SC culminated in any of these daydreams spouted around on the net to date so it all remains hype.
Now my personal opinion of course isnt always ONLY based on current facts. I also rely on experience. I guess a lot of people do. And in my experiece CiG has been very VERY unreliable when it comes to deadlines, delivery of promises or progression. Giving people another chance or maybe a third was done and some people keep hanging in there but theres a point at which you drift into faith and drop facts alltogether despite them staring into your face. Now whenever I hear another deadline given I match that versus their standing record when it comes to these things. Needless to say I dont believe that Star Citizen will release in 2017 nor will Squadron 42. Or better.....I give it a very VERY low probability to do so.
CiG announces a new feature or describes its current course of action regarding development. I simply correlate previous items of interest versus their released version. Some of which are still missing or are very subpar to the descriptions given to us. This somehow "taints" the announcement of 3.0 and what its supposed to fix. I ll wait before I give them any credit. How convinient that that 3.0 is various dates away as we are missing an official statement for it. Is it late 2017 or 2018 already? I dont know and one could get the suspicion that Chris Roberts is simply trying to buy more time to stay in the business because as long as he does so the money is rolling in.
CiG has missed a lot of dealines in the past (all?). And the "logical" conclusion is to stop giving any? Are you kidding? Shouldnt the whole process be rather re-evaluated and realistic goals be taken into account. Maybe put someone in charge who is actually able to evaluate timeframes in a reliable manner? Thats not how companies work, churches and religions maybe but not anything real. Which takes us to the last point.
Cultists. I realize the term has gotten a real negative impact over the course of this project but the definition of a cultist stands long before Star Citizen hit kickstarter. The definition has been formed over time by observing cultists behaviour, it wasnt "tailored" to match Star Citizen ultra fans. There are a lot of similarities between the "positive" SC crowd and cultists.
Now whats true is that EVERY GAME has cultists but case of Star Citizen only ONE side of the argument has them. You could call the opposing side "haters" maybe (oh wait, the SC extremists already call me that.....along with everybody whos not on his knees). The faction of "haters" consists of sceptics and hard-to-enthusiate people. It also includes all the people who have been interested in the game in the past but since came to the conclusion that its bad and doesnt reflect a successfull development cycle. In short EVERYTHING negative is labeled "hater" which basically makes it a "US versus THEM" dispute. Humanity is prone to culticism. It appears in all forms be it family, friends, loved ones, territorial neighbours etc. The "hating" faction of SC has time and time again (in this thread) given credit where credit was due (as rare as that was). Thats not something a cultist is capable of. Derek Smart regardless how despised he is WAS right on a great number of things in the past. There never has been an acknowlegment for that tho. In cases where he cannot be denied victory reality gets redefined or people dismiss previously heated diuscussed topics as "common knowledge" effectively backpaddling. The death threats might be extreme singular exceptions but they again only happen on ONE side of the argument.
I am not a cultist. I simply refuse to swallow all the promises and announcements Chris Roberts gives me untested and remain unconvinced until he proves me different (still waiting btw). I dont "hate" the man. But he has abused my trust and my hopes too often in the past that I could meet him with anything but distrust. Cultists try to make me their equal opposite and thats simply not true. I am not in this thread to "win no matter what" and I m not trying to sell others anything while the cultists are trying to "convince" you to invest and become one of the faithful.
Extremists. Yes thats something both sides have. That doesnt equal cultists tho. So again. I STRONGLY DISAGREE with your notion.
