The Star Citizen Thread

[Alric]

I also learned of SC through Elite - specifically people complaining about Elite running a Kickstarter. But I backed it too.

Undoubtedly I would have heard about it anyway, but perhaps not taken notice until much later. Without some context, a startup making a game called star citizen would not have got past the uninteresting generic game filter.

 

[Bains]

I backed both projects early but thought the big bucks of SC would mean they'd make the bench mark game. I have SC to thank for teaching me the error of my ways and taking ED more seriously.

 

[Boomotang]

I backed both projects early but thought the big bucks of SC would mean they'd make the bench mark game. I have SC to thank for teaching me the error of my ways and taking ED more seriously.

It doesn't matter to me who makes the 'better'/benchmark game. I don't know why you're so caught up on it.

I backed both of them because they both look like sweet space sims. And I found out about ED because of SC.

I hate it how fanboys need to declare certain games 'winners'. Actually on second thought, I hate discussions about fanboys because the discussions are never constructive or interesting, no matter how you try to dress it up.

 

[Mr.Nowak]

New Arena Commander Update.

Greetings Citizens,

As promised, we are updating each day Arena Commander V.8 is delayed with a copy of the same bug list we track internally. Do not be too concerned that today’s list is longer than what appeared yesterday: it’s not unusual for additional bugs to be generated as we squash more serious issues. The news today is very positive: the programming team eliminated the major DirectX bug that was encountered yesterday and excellent strides are being made to put the game into a releasable state! Thank you for bearing with us; we know you’re here to play (and help us test this game!), and we’re eager to let you. We are anticipating having these issues resolved very soon.

Blockers

Dogfight Module – Multiplayer – Camera – After respawn character is stuck looking up
Lag in feedback and update of essential game events resulting in increasingly divergent multiplayer sync

Critical

After respawning, the player immediately blackout, couldn’t get back into gameplay
Character shakes and twitches when freelooking left or right in any cockpit
Free look does not work in Single Player in the Hornet
Server put into a bad state after round end, unable to accept further player connections or recover
Aurora – Crash after 3 deaths from border in 3rd person
300i does not seem to be able to lock / fire missiles in multiplayer
Cockpit camera shakes when seated in DFM Aurora

Major

Dogfighting Module – Vanduul Swarm – All Maps – Animation – Missing flight animations for the pilot in the cockpit when flying the Aurora

Moderate

300i – The player character’s hands are contorted in the cockpit view
Walk through railing, fall out of map after interacting with helmet pedestal

RESOLVED!

Vanduul Swarm – Display drivers can crash when Vanduul spawn or blow up
Battle Royale (Crash) – While Flying (Shader)
Vanduul Swarm (Crash) – Shortly after missile lock
All Maps – Occasionally, when first spawning into the maps lasers and ballistic fire * is invisible but can be heard when firing – they eventually appear
Crash on exit after returning from DFM match
Character is unable to exit DFM Aurora bed if helmet is on
Gforce animations are not playing on the pilot in any of the ships
Character and parts of cockpit interior vanish while accelerating


Source : https://robertsspaceindustries.com/...ena-Commander-V8-Daily-Bug-Update-May-29-2014

 

[Andrew Sayers]

No of course they are not all bad by any stretch. I'm sorry some people got the impression I think that.

Ok, here's a challenge: post an unswervingly positive post about the things you really like about Star Citizen. No need to lie or anything, and feel free to link to this post if you want to make it clear you're only giving half a story, just write from the heart about why you're still backing the game.

I think that will go a long way towards correcting the impression people have got.

 

[adam]

That's a very short bug list I'll bet they release within 7 days

 

[Bains]

Ok, here's a challenge: post an unswervingly positive post about the things you really like about Star Citizen. No need to lie or anything, and feel free to link to this post if you want to make it clear you're only giving half a story, just write from the heart about why you're still backing the game.

I think that will go a long way towards correcting the impression people have got.

Prior to CR's Star Citizen KS launch, never mind space sims, people were seriously talking about the PC as a dying platform for gaming. Developers were even taking titles that had originated on the PC, and when developing the next version, not even bothering to include the PC as a release platform.

I think CR was clearly just as frustrated about this as your regular die-hard PC Gamer, something that shone through from his initial KS video. And what he did with SC is smash that perception and restore huge credibility and support to the PC as a gaming platform. As such SC stands as a demonstration and champion of the potential of the PC game, both technically and commercially. In particular he has highlighted what is possible when the game is made exclusively for the PC with no need to throttle the technical level of ambition to ensure it can also be ported to these living room toys also known as consoles - a fate that has routinely befallen so many other titles that are launched on the PC.

As such he deserves great credit for bringing the PC out of the shadow of consoles and restoring its image as the state of the art gaming platform.

 

[Mr.Nowak]

I am PC Gamer. Prior to CR's Star Citizen KS launch people were seriously talking about the PC as a dying platform for gaming.

I think he was clearly just as frustrated about this as your regular die-hard PC Gamer, something that shone through from in his initial KS video. And what he did with SC is smash that perception and restore huge credibility and support to the PC as a gaming platform. As such SC stands as an excellent demonstration and champion of the potential of PC platform, both technically and commercially and deserves credit for bringing the PC out of the shadow of consoles and back closer to center stage as a gaming platform.

 

[Neo-ST]

I am PC Gamer. Prior to CR's Star Citizen KS launch people were seriously talking about the PC as a dying platform for gaming.

I think he was clearly just as frustrated about this as your regular die-hard PC Gamer. Something that shone through from in his initial KS video. And what he did with SC is smash that perception and give huge credibility and support to the PC as a gaming platform. As such SC stands as an excellent demonstration and champion of the potential of PC platform, both technically and commercially and deserves credit for bringing out of the shadow of consoles and back closer to center stage as a gaming platform.

I agree.
Atmosphere and forums back then (in 2012) and today are nothing alike.
There was a good cause worth fighting for (dying PC, as you said) and many people (including me) didn't mind to throw more money than usual for a game. Forums were like entering a chat room with 10 people in it, today it is an overcrowded stadium. The first reveal was anticipated more than they would anticipate the return of Jesus
The rest is the history, welcome to mainstream

 

[fourty6to3]

Without resorting to cheap slur, I think discussion of the phenomenon of fanboyism and the part it plays in Star Citizen is unavoidable and important.

It actually relates to a serious and topical issue in gaming in general, and especially problematic when dealing dealing with backer projects.

In the case of these projects where communication with backers and their feedback is important, having a group who bizarrely set themselves up as defenders of the faith, and go on to relentless defend every single action, inaction, or decision can be downright fractious and disastrous on so any levels.

I'm not sure how behind closed doors the companies themselves react to these fanboys, because while they clearly resent backers complaining I have yet to see them call out the phalanxes of fanboys engaged in defending them regardless of how groundless, misguided, or fractious they are being.

In other words make a simple statement that serves to stand them down/confirm its OK to say something that isn't singing praises, for example a statement along the lines of "hold up there guys, what these people are saying is fair enough and we've taken note - no need to attack them for it". Of course the complete absence of such statements only serves to empower these fanboys, in effect sending them a clear message of encouragement.

For me this is an issue right up there wide-scale corruption of video game journalism, but far more of an issue during the development stage of a backer project.

For reasons I have yet to work out, Star Citizen is a project particularly beset with misguided defensively entrenched fanboys - to the extent that for this reason alone I may never have backed it in the first place had I realised just how many of these guys were going to show up. So I don't see how you can have any kind of honest and serious discussion of Star Citizen and the experience of being a backer without also talking about them.

In other words, you think the developers are silently acquiescing. As in, "if you don't object then you accept."

 

[Bains]

In other words, you think the developers are silently acquiescing. As in, "if you don't object then you accept."

I don't know. Perhaps its just a case that the disorder and division of the community is a reflection of the company.

Ok, here's a challenge: post an unswervingly positive post about the things you really like about Star Citizen. No need to lie or anything, and feel free to link to this post if you want to make it clear you're only giving half a story, just write from the heart about why you're still backing the game.

I think that will go a long way towards correcting the impression people have got.

This challenge, and the answer I already gave, got me thinking. Got me asking myself what is the one issue that's really turned me into a detractor. The truth is I could disregard or live with all others except for one.

It's the issue of selling out. Starting with the ambition of making game for a core group of PC Gamer space sim fans, at a time when he'd have given his left nut for 5-10 million backing, but then selling out into making a game for the mainstream and their pony-ass gameboy tastes just as soon as he realised the project had big hollywood mainstream appeal.

Somewhere between 5 million and 20 million it went from the Terminator to Toy Story.

Some people might argue his vision hasnt changed or he was never making a game for core group of sim fans - I'm sorry I will never be convinced otherwise of this because I damn well remember exactly how he positioned it.

Others might argue that the game is not out and its too early to tell - technically true but you'd have to be blind not to sense the change in terms of whose tastes and preferences he's catering to.

Anyway. This is my main issue. I could live with the patronising comms, the hoards of fan boys, the inability to release a single realistic deadline, the mypotic focus on ships, a universe of boxes with cut scenes, the gouging etc etc if only he hadn't sold out.

 

[Boomotang]

I don't know. Perhaps its just a case that the disorder and division of the community is a reflection of the company.

It's a reflection of video game culture, and society as a whole. If you make an MMO, this will happen with the community no matter how the developing company is run. Quit trying to pin this on CIG.

The only reason it isn't as noticeable here is because the community hasn't gotten as big. Reasons why it might not get as big are numerous. Some being the art direction and gameplay design. But I doubt ED's game design choices are driven by wanting to keep the community small. In other words, the community's size is driven by design choices, but their design choices aren't driven by a desire to only have 'hardcore players' in the community.

I'm sure David Braben would love for ED to have mainstream success like SC seems to be having. But he isn't compromising gameplay design choices in order to get it. Which is great. On the other hand Chris Roberts isn't compromising his vision in order to get mainstream success. He has only expanded his goals when his original limitations were exceeded. His vision just lends itself better to mainstream success. Which is also great.

...what is the one issue that's really turned me into a detractor.

...if only he hadn't sold out.

So basically, it boils down to a 'hardcore gamer vs mainstream' argument for you. Because CIG has most certainly NOT 'sold out' in the typical sense of giving up control to a publisher. They've done the polar opposite by being 100% crowd funded.

Like I said before. Don't turn this into a bloody 'hardcore vs mainstream' squabble. It's as stupid as the console vs PC debate. It doesn't get more childish.

 

[Bains]

It's a reflection of video game culture, and society as a whole. If you make an MMO, this will happen with the community no matter how the developing company is run. Quit trying to pin this on CIG.



So basically, it boils down to a 'hardcore gamer vs mainstream' argument for you. Because CIG has most certainly NOT 'sold out' in the typical sense of giving up control to a publisher. They've done the polar opposite by being 100% crowd funded.

Like I said before. Don't turn this into a bloody 'hardcore vs mainstream' squabble. It's as stupid as the console vs PC debate. It doesn't get more childish.

This is most horrifying thing for me, in selling out you're exactly the kind of gamer he's decided to cater to.

 

[Andrew Sayers]

It's the issue of selling out. Starting with the ambition of making game for a core group of space sim fans, at a time when he'd have given his left nut for 5-10 million backing, but then selling out into making a game for the mainstream and their tastes just as soon as he realised the project had big hollywood mainstream appeal.

I saw a documentary many years ago, looking at whether Hollywood was racist. I'm sure I've forgotten many important details, and I'm equally sure the industry has changed since then, but the gist seems relevant...

A filmmaker was trying to get a movie made about the African-American experience. It was a good script, but telling the story within an independent film budget was becoming a stretch, so he started shopping it around bigger producers. Being a good script it got a lot of interest, but the amount he was asking for was too small to make sense in their big mainstream publishing channels. They were happy to throw more money at project, but as businessmen they were compelled to say "not enough Americans will empathise with a black character, you'll need some white people in there to make your money back".

Interestingly, because they were professional producers that knew what they wanted, they were able to bring that conflict of interest out into the open before they'd handed over their money. A crowdfunding campaign with a donation button on its website doesn't have that luxury.

 

[Bains]

I saw a documentary many years ago, looking at whether Hollywood was racist. I'm sure I've forgotten many important details, and I'm equally sure the industry has changed since then, but the gist seems relevant...

A filmmaker was trying to get a movie made about the African-American experience. It was a good script, but telling the story within an independent film budget was becoming a stretch, so he started shopping it around bigger producers. Being a good script it got a lot of interest, but the amount he was asking for was too small to make sense in their big mainstream publishing channels. They were happy to throw more money at project, but as businessmen they were compelled to say "not enough Americans will empathise with a black character, you'll need some white people in there to make your money back".

Interestingly, because they were professional producers that knew what they wanted, they were able to bring that conflict of interest out into the open before they'd handed over their money. A crowdfunding campaign with a donation button on its website doesn't have that luxury.

EDIT
To be honest not 100% sure what you're driving. The comparison couldn't be further form CR's story of freedom to develop his project due to successful self-funding

 

[Boomotang]

This is most horrifying thing for me, in selling out your exactly the kind of gamer he's decided to go after.

You need to get out more if ANY of this is horrifying for you.

 

[Bains]

You need to get out more if ANY of this is horrifying for you.

Perhaps you're right. I hear the ED beta is up and running right on schedule as promised. See you later.

 

[Boomotang]

Perhaps you're right. I hear the ED beta is up and running right on schedule as promised. Laters.

Well..... video games isn't what I meant, but I won't complain.

 

[Andrew Sayers]

To be honest not 100% sure what you're driving. The comparison couldn't be further form CR's story of freedom to develop his project due to successful self-funding

Two points really - first that the basic dilemma between a low-budget cult classic and an expensive blockbuster isn't unique to games, and second that it's very easy to start out with a cult project then wake up one morning to find yourself making a blockbuster. With people funding the project that can't spell out their requirements before backing, and without an exceptionally clear vision to tell you when more money starts working against your interests, even a saint would find it difficult to keep the project anchored to its original intentions.

Not saying that makes the outcome right (or wrong), just that it's consistent with a newbie crowdfunding mistake.

 

[Bains]

Two points really - first that the basic dilemma between a low-budget cult classic and an expensive blockbuster isn't unique to games, and second that it's very easy to start out with a cult project then wake up one morning to find yourself making a blockbuster. With people funding the project that can't spell out their requirements before backing, and without an exceptionally clear vision to tell you when more money starts working against your interests, even a saint would find it difficult to keep the project anchored to its original intentions.

Not saying that makes the outcome right (or wrong), just that it's consistent with a newbie crowdfunding mistake.

I've afraid he doesn't get away with it that lightly for me.

It was very clear who he was making this for then. As clear as it to me now that he's making it for a different group.

Just compare the two:

Vision at the time of Kickstarter
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VhsgiliheP0

New Vision
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RqbpzEHuO2g