The Star Citizen Thread v8

Status
Thread Closed: Not open for further replies.
On the topic of planets, i do think CIG should have left this for later until they have got more core mechanics in game. However, they have done it, and its pretty good, although admittedly a buggy mess. But hey, we are on the FD forums where every patch FD add new (and old) bugs to ED.

Given time, the planets might become a good feature of SC... but it still needs work, as does the rest of the game, and i remain skeptical about their ability to deliver on what they have promised.

As we see, each time they firm up their plans, another part of the playerbase starts to understand that what CIG hyped, or the playered dreamt up themselves, isn't going to match what CIG are going to deliver.
 
Their planets look really nice, seams between tiles notwithstanding, though it's to be expected when the game requires uses around 12GB of RAM. As for the plans, I think they're going to reach ED's level of sophistication in game mechanics somewhere next year, but it's pretty obvious the design documents, whose superiority fans of the game held over literally everyone are pretty unlikely to be implemented.
 
I wish more games would publish roadmaps like this.

Why? What do you feel you (or CIG) have gained from it? It starts off as an exercise in wishful thinking and then gradually, as the time between releases becomes indefensible (or more recently, as the set-in-stone quarterly release deadline approaches), items just get trimmed and pushed back until it converges on the minimal amount that has actually been achieved, by which point there was no point having a roadmap in the first place.
I would rather other developers didn't adopt any of CIG's practices.
 
Last edited:
Why? What do you feel you (or CIG) have gained from it? It starts off as an exercise in wishful thinking and then gradually, as the time between releases becomes indefensible (or more recently, as the set-in-stone quarterly release deadline approaches), items just get trimmed and pushed back until it converges on the minimal amount that has actually been achieved, by which point there was no point having a roadmap in the first place.
I would rather other developers didn't adopt any of CIG's practices.

So, because the trains are never on time you would prefer there was no schedule.

These roadmaps always exist behind the scenes. It's nice to be able to see them and see what they're working towards regardless of whether or not they're able to stay on schedule.

I own a lot of games where I'm waiting for patches or new features and I have no idea if they're even working on these.
 
Last edited:
So, because the trains are never on time you would prefer there was no schedule.
It would be nice if RSI was able to achieve at least some of its goals on schedule. It seems like it's publishing aspirations rather than plans.

If you plan your work right, then at least sometimes you should be able to hit the target dates. You break the work down into components, estimate effort and resources, then build it up again into a plan with a derived end-date, and measure progress against the plan. Sometimes the unexpected happens and things slip. That's inevitable, but it shouldn't happen all the time.

Even the Italian state railway's timetable is more reliable than RSI's schedule. RSI is slowly but surely building a reputation for non-delivery that is hurting the backers' faith in the project. It is not a good practice to continually fail to deliver on what you promised, because people stop believing you.
 
So, because the trains are never on time you would prefer there was no schedule.

Would you prefer no schedule, or one that was a lie?

These roadmaps always exist behind the scenes. It's nice to be able to see them and see what they're working towards regardless of whether or not they're able to stay on schedule.

I own a lot of games where I'm waiting for patches or new features and I have no idea if they're even working on these.

The point being made is that even with this supposed road map, we don't really have any idea what CIG are doing or are working on.

We know what they NEED to be working on. They NEED to be getting their engine finalised, getting their netcode sorted out, getting their server code into a state fit for duty. They NEED to start designing the game and nailing down its intended gameplay and mechanics, to work put the required gameloops so developers have something concrete they can start developing around. They NEED to stop worrying so much about polishing a preAlpha or making it playable because every dollar they spend polishing or bug fixing a preAlpha tech demo is a dollar-fifty they can't spend on the game and two dollars spent on assets that will be thrown away as the game transitions to
Alpha and Beta and Gold.

That's what they NEED to do.

The roadmap they show us? I doubt it is the one they use. This appears to be drawn up by marketing and at best is a wishlist with some eye catching items spread throughout the year. It probably has some bearing in reality, but just looking at it shows that they aren't likely to get through it in a year and that they had to shift project critical code to 3.2, starting off a cascade effect of too much work and too little time and features delayed and delayed as a result, isn't promising.
 
So, because the trains are never on time you would prefer there was no schedule.

These roadmaps always exist behind the scenes. It's nice to be able to see them and see what they're working towards regardless of whether or not they're able to stay on schedule.

I own a lot of games where I'm waiting for patches or new features and I have no idea if they're even working on these.

This is the first year CIG have published a roadmap, Chris said he was no longer giving out dates, remember?

So they have had NO roadmap since about 2015, NO delivery dates for any digital items on their store and a roadmap for 2018 which has already started to shrink by the end of Q1.

Would I rather have no schedule because the trains are never on time? Well if the trains are never on time then the schedule is redundant - regardless if anyone wants one or not.


Edit- the Q1 roadmap shrunk by 50%. So your question should really be 'if half the trains are cancelled and the other half are delayed, do you still want a schedule'
 
Last edited:
One thing i really appreciate in ED is how i can choose whatever ship i want to do almost anything. It might not be the best ship for the job, but i can configure it to my desires.

If this was SC, then i'd need different ship types for different tasks. Ok, some might say that's a good thing, specialized ships. Still, at this point, no flying ships you haven't bought anyway.

True, most ships in SC seems to be made for a single purpose. I think it's because they want to sell more concepts since owning 1 or 2 ships that can be refitted for various roles won't keep the cash flowing with the ever increasing roles they dream up.

There are a few ships that did have concepts made for modularity like the Avenger, Retaliator, Vanguard and Redeemer. Avenger comes in 3 variants and you're supposed to be able to swap out the rear section, there's cargo, holding cells and a EMP variant, it's getting reworked for 3.2. You could see the reworked version in the SQ42 demo they showed around x-mas, the ship is getting bigger. Assets and ships that are going to be needed for SQ42 seems to be a priority.

Vanguard is a heavy fighter, they came up with variants and the base model became the Warden with variants for electronic warfare, torpedo bomber and dropship. They had BUK's (modules) that would allow owners to swap between the various variants, but that seems to have been scrapped.

Redeemer was a hybrid gunship/dropship, it will most likely be made into a pure gunship based on the latest info.

The Retaliator heavy bomber is modular and is supposed to let you swap the 2 torpedo bays for cargo holds, dropship modules, titan armour recharge station, living quarters, a mining module and much more, this ship is perhaps the most versatile of them all and similar to how Elite works with optional internals, though more limited since you only have 2 modules. They've removed the ship from the list of buyable ships, no word has been given about reworks and it's not on the roadmap. It is flyable as the bomber variant atm, and if you had the base variant you get the bomber as a loaner.

So far I've tried the Aurora, Mustang, Dragonfly, Ursa Rover, Cutlass, Freelancer and Constellation. They won't let you melt ships and rebuy with store credit as often as you like, you get 1 token to use each quarter of the year, I believe the reasoning behind that was that backers were abusing the system, more of an encouragement to make us buy more ships I think. $0 CCUs (Cross Chassis Upgrade) are being removed without warning, but I managed to grab a Connie Taurus -> Retaliator Base yesterday since the ship cannot be obtained anymore.

I settled for the Avenger Titan and Retaliator Base based on their modularity and both ships are flyable right now. I've no idea on how the mechanics for all the roles are going to work and neither do the devs in some cases, nothing solid anyway. Cutlass Blue and Red rework is being pushed back because they need to figure out how bounty hunting and medical gameplay mechanics are going to work, that's a positive IMO.
 
Reading this thread on the subreddit https://www.reddit.com/r/starcitize...ract_to_retrieve_black_box_from_crashed_star/

I didn't realise that only a single mission item spawned but many people could be undertaking the mission at the same time, that sounds like it would end up being exasperating rather than enjoyable. Another idea that is great on paper but not so much in game (imo).


Edit: Where Do You See Star Citizen In 1-2 years?

I've not played these MMOs of which the poster speaks, but that sounds...brilliant!

If there were missions like that in Elite I certainly wouldn't mind if they were only available in Open. You've got to bring a black box over many jumps back to a station, and of course being a black box it will be giving off a strong signal, just like a wing signal, to make it easy for "rescue" ships to locate
 
Last edited:
Oh my.... 1 box for everyone running the same mission. Effectively PvP missions (in the sense of player vs player rather than pew-pew vs player).

ED has its detractors due to the instancing and missions, but at least if i take a mission i can always complete it if i don't mess it up. Wasting time because another person has took the box, that will be annoying. And no matter how big the game becomes, assuming a decent sized playerbase and mission sharing, people will get their boxes taken. I can see a few complaints about that, and some bug reports from those who are not aware.
 
Oh my.... 1 box for everyone running the same mission. Effectively PvP missions (in the sense of player vs player rather than pew-pew vs player).

ED has its detractors due to the instancing and missions, but at least if i take a mission i can always complete it if i don't mess it up. Wasting time because another person has took the box, that will be annoying. And no matter how big the game becomes, assuming a decent sized playerbase and mission sharing, people will get their boxes taken. I can see a few complaints about that, and some bug reports from those who are not aware.

Yep, that's the problem when your mmo dream is wishful thought around solo centric tropes. You end up with cool ideas on paper but hard to implement in a multi-player context at best flawed, at worst huge leaks where frustration and griefing will prosper.

Every show where they showed mission gameplay (Eckhart, sandworm and such) could have been quite alright for a solo game but clearly not for a multi-player one.
 
So, because the trains are never on time you would prefer there was no schedule.

To be totally blunt staying in the scenario you set up. If the trains would prove to be unreliable all the time and the schedules shown wrong then I would simply look for an alternate modes of travel to reach my destination and drop the train altogether or at least the company managing those tracks. Maybe investing into a bicycle or a car (depending on distance) might be a better choice long-term or a combination of walking/bus. Delays are annoying but if a train drops out altogether its a minor catastrophe. (Heavy) Delays are the normal modus operandi with CiG, many trains simply dont show up leaving the passengers stranded and waiting.

The fact that CiG operates its trains like this and still is in business has to be lying in the fact that all its users are tourists looking for pleasure. They might moan, they might be unhappy but chances are theres very little backlash over it. If investors or other companies would be affected by how CiG handles its business there would be lawsuits.....oh wait :)

Would you prefer no schedule, or one that was a lie?

Company decisions are usually not made on the basis of what the user wants but rather what the company needs/can get away with/etc. Dropping schedules altogether would hurt consumer trust critically or make people turn away for good. By keeping up a schedule regardless of how bogus or wrong it is people keep hoping, you will have newcomers who dont know yet getting fooled by it in short.....by keeping up false schedules you secure company interests and thats why its done. In case of CiG history has shown that the dates and promises coming from CiG cannot be trusted but due to basic human psychology the farce keeps this show running despite all the facts.


I've not played these MMOs of which the poster speaks, but that sounds...brilliant!

If there were missions like that in Elite I certainly wouldn't mind if they were only available in Open. You've got to bring a black box over many jumps back to a station, and of course being a black box it will be giving off a strong signal, just like a wing signal, to make it easy for "rescue" ships to locate

Mission architecture like would result in a kind of gameplay I despise and resent completely. It would force actions on you you wouldnt consider otherwise. This starts at cutting into your responsibilities or duties so you can log in "early" and ends at harming other people either ingame or through toxic behavior. This kind of competition would be refreshing and invigorating for sure IF everybody participating would be playing on the basis of "fair play" and "honest competition" but you dont really believe that do you?

Lots of MMOs I played in the past introduced this kind of events by marking certain people as "fugitives" where the rest of the world would hunt them down or place a specific item somewhere for people to find it and bring it back. Usually these events are tightly controlled and monitored to avoid toxic behavior or cheating (I participated in several as a guide). An "automated" system wouldnt work, probably "couldnt" even. I havent seen a single game in the last 35 years which, despite its programming and careful structure, wasnt exploited or cheated upon without moderator watch.

So it might still be "brilliant" in a naive way but honestly....its an "old hat" by now.


Well put by Skiozmeuh......its usually other people messing up your fun and regarding Star Citizen.....I m not sure I d want to be part of that community.
 
True, most ships in SC seems to be made for a single purpose. I think it's because they want to sell more concepts since owning 1 or 2 ships that can be refitted for various roles won't keep the cash flowing with the ever increasing roles they dream up.

Bingo - plus this way they get to claim they have more ships than Elite. Saw someone on facey claiming 52!!!!
 
Status
Thread Closed: Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom