Star Citizen Megathread - Star Marine isn't doomed after all! - Games

Star Citizen Megathread - Star Marine isn't doomed after all!

5,001 replies, posted
In This Thread

[QUOTE=dai;50094699]you moderated this forum, you should know full well if you approach a thread (let alone the reddit or home forums) of anything with the "thousand dollar jpg" snark it's not gonna be well received in the end I hope things even out and it's left in a state where you'd reconsider picking it up. It's a rocky development, no questions about it, but it's also one of those things where development up to this point is usually something that's hidden internally and not even announced to the public til we reach roughly this point in the timeline, before going dark for a year and finally having a 'beta' a month or two before release if you ever want a direct answer on features and progress just drop a line here, if you couldn't tell elix is a walking wiki page and despite the walls of text looking like fanboy spazzing, he's very realistic with his expectations and understanding and doesn't sugarcoat things on the basis of wishful thinking [editline]e[/editline] legitimate question (though if I haven't heard it from elix yet I don't know if the answer's out there), does derek get his money from disability? There's no way he's making any sort of living off his games, especially when he's spent the better part of the last several years just writing about start citizen[/QUOTE] One of the reasons I requested a refund was the fact that we had been waiting years for the game to materialise and it never did. Years later, we have some janky CryEngine mod that is barely functional (or was the last time I played anyway) and yet CIG are still selling literally nothing more than jpegs and concept ships for hundreds / thousands of dollars a pop. It's not a snark, it's a reality. A "rocky" development is being very polite, it's been abysmal! Yes, Derek can occasionally be off the mark with certain things but funnily enough a lot of his predictions have come true. I think a lot of people underestimate how much sway he holds within Game Development circles. I have no idea where Derek gets his money from. I'm thinking he probably made megabucks with his first couple of games (they were pretty great for their time) and invested that wisely. Likely he also works as a "consultant" in various IT sectors as he has quite a lot of experience even if it hasn't exactly translated to modern AAA blockbusting games

Derek's sources of funding are a mystery, and I've never personally gone digging because wtf stalking/doxxing. However, people [I]claim[/I] that Derek's money allegedly comes from one or more of the following: being a trust fund baby, money from his mom/family/(ex?)wife, money from court case settlements (note, not victories), money from his hostile takeover of Quest Online and the subsequent ruining of Alganon into an uninspired clone of WoW that duplicates it so closely it offers literally nothing and has had single-digit player numbers. Public records for property tax leins and such paint a blurry picture, but one of Derek not having the $200 million he has claimed to be worth. I've never wanted to invade Derek's privacy that much because I don't give a shit about him except that he won't shut up with his groundless FUD campaign. Reposting for Hezzy's sake: [video=youtube;au6mMl5A79Q]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=au6mMl5A79Q[/video] I want to make it clear that there [B]are[/B] valid criticisms of Star Citizen and its development process. But using Derek Smart as the starting point for criticizing SC is like using Hitler as a starting point for criticizing fox hunting (this is justified, Hitler banned fox hunting for being immoral). The argument against fox hunting is valid, but there are so many better starting points that don't bring along a ton of other toxic baggage. [QUOTE=Hezzy;50094752]A "rocky" development is being very polite, it's been abysmal! Yes, Derek can occasionally be off the mark with certain things [B]but funnily enough a lot of his predictions have come true.[/B][/QUOTE] Please list these predictions, because I have a long list of failed predictions and the video I posted contains at minimum seven along with one instance of Derek's constant, unsupported assertion that almost everything he has predicted has come true. For reference he's claimed about six times that CIG Austin was closing down. Strangely enough CIG Austin continues to hire and grow. [QUOTE=Hezzy;50094752]I think a lot of people underestimate how much sway he holds within Game Development circles.[/QUOTE] Kevin Dent, who actually has an established reputation in game development, says that Derek is an industry joke. :v:

[QUOTE=elixwhitetail;50094784]Derek's sources of funding are a mystery, and I've never personally gone digging because wtf stalking/doxxing. However, people [I]claim[/I] that Derek's money allegedly comes from one or more of the following: being a trust fund baby, money from his mom/family/(ex?)wife, money from court case settlements (note, not victories), money from his hostile takeover of Quest Online and the subsequent ruining of Alganon into an uninspired clone of WoW that duplicates it so closely it offers literally nothing and has had single-digit player numbers. Public records for property tax leins and such paint a blurry picture, but one of Derek not having the $200 million he has claimed to be worth. I've never wanted to invade Derek's privacy that much because I don't give a shit about him except that he won't shut up with his groundless FUD campaign. Reposting for Hezzy's sake: [video=youtube;au6mMl5A79Q]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=au6mMl5A79Q[/video] I want to make it clear that there [B]are[/B] valid criticisms of Star Citizen and its development process. But using Derek Smart as the starting point for criticizing SC is like using Hitler as a starting point for criticizing fox hunting (this is justified, Hitler banned fox hunting for being immoral). The argument against fox hunting is valid, but there are so many better starting points that don't bring along a ton of other toxic baggage. Please list these predictions, because I have a long list of failed predictions and the video I posted contains at minimum seven along with one instance of Derek's constant, unsupported assertion that almost everything he has predicted has come true. For reference he's claimed about six times that CIG Austin was closing down. Strangely enough CIG Austin continues to hire and grow. Kevin Dent, who actually has an established reputation in game development, says that Derek is an industry joke. :v:[/QUOTE] I don't specifically remember the nature of the claims and do not care to take the time to research them, just that at the time I remember laughing about it because he said several things and they all came true. Off the top of my head, there were some claims that were fulfilled about the nature of development (such as Star Marine being dropped / the whole debacle with the studio contracted to program it), as well claims of racism / abuse that eventually lead up to the publishing of that controversial article with anonymous employees back in October last year. If CIG Austin continues to hire and grow, why did they sublease the majority of their office in December 2013, leaving only a small room, in comparison? [URL]http://ecrtx.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/12/13420_Galleria_Flyer_Sublease.pdf[/URL] Also, Sandi is an awful person. [img]http://i.imgur.com/8bEDeHg.gif[/img]

[QUOTE=Hezzy;50094903]If CIG Austin continues to hire and grow, why did they sublease the majority of their office in December 2013, leaving only a small room, in comparison? [url]http://ecrtx.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/12/13420_Galleria_Flyer_Sublease.pdf[/url][/QUOTE] This means they were looking to fill some blank space 2.5 years ago. you don't have to [I]leave[/I] the space when you put up an offer like that, seems like it's more like they're willing to negotiate someone utilizing space, if not taking over the location, letting them move to a larger location elsewhere. Same thing's happening where I work right now, we're potentially moving down the road just to keep up with how many employees we're taking in

[QUOTE=Hezzy;50094752]One of the reasons I requested a refund was the fact that we had been waiting years for the game to materialise and it never did. Years later, we have some janky CryEngine mod that is barely functional (or was the last time I played anyway) and yet CIG are still selling literally nothing more than jpegs and concept ships for hundreds / thousands of dollars a pop. It's not a snark, it's a reality. A "rocky" development is being very polite, it's been abysmal! Yes, Derek can occasionally be off the mark with certain things but funnily enough a lot of his predictions have come true. I think a lot of people underestimate how much sway he holds within Game Development circles. I have no idea where Derek gets his money from. I'm thinking he probably made megabucks with his first couple of games (they were pretty great for their time) and invested that wisely. Likely he also works as a "consultant" in various IT sectors as he has quite a lot of experience even if it hasn't exactly translated to modern AAA blockbusting games[/QUOTE] The game has been in development for only around 5 years, a lot less than that if you only consider when the current version started being worked on. The game was announced at the end of 2012, so at most you've waited a little over 3 years which is no time at all when it comes to games development of this scale. I don't know how you could have expected a full size with a graphics level and scope far above that of any other game to date to appear in a short time span. That "Janky cryengine mod" is the foundations for the game, of course all the features aren't going to be there at this point but they're very clearly working on it. None of his 'predictions' about the game have came true at all. If you're really convinced they have, what are they? Requesting a refund makes no sense to me, if the game had just vanished then i could understand it, but Star Citizen has perhaps the most open development i've seen for any game with updates on it daily. Acting like Star Citizen is an exception and that other games get developed perfectly and don't end up having similar problems is not a good view to have. We don't normally find out about problem that occur early on because it isn't until right before the game is ready to be released that we usually even find out a game is being made. I'm not saying it's been perfect but so far there hasn't been anything that caused any serious concerns about the development of the game. [QUOTE=Hezzy;50094903]I don't specifically remember the nature of the claims and do not care to take the time to research them, just that at the time I remember laughing about it because he said several things and they all came true. Off the top of my head, there were some claims that were fulfilled about the nature of development (such as Star Marine being dropped / the whole debacle with the studio contracted to program it), as well claims of racism / abuse that eventually lead up to the publishing of that controversial article with anonymous employees back in October last year. If CIG Austin continues to hire and grow, why did they sublease the majority of their office in December 2013, leaving only a small room, in comparison? [URL]http://ecrtx.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/12/13420_Galleria_Flyer_Sublease.pdf[/URL] Also, Sandi is an awful person. [img]http://i.imgur.com/8bEDeHg.gif[/img][/QUOTE] Except those things aren't really true, either. Star Marine has not in any way been dropped, and from what i remember about those claims of racism (or at least that article) there were a few things about it which made its validity quite suspicious.

The new, small mining ship concept seems to be named the MISC Prospector. [QUOTE=Hezzy;50094903]I don't specifically remember the nature of the claims and do not care to take the time to research them, just that at the time I remember laughing about it because he said several things and [B]they all came true.[/B] Off the top of my head, there were some claims that were fulfilled about the nature of development (such as Star Marine being dropped / the whole debacle with the studio contracted to program it), [B]as well claims of racism / abuse that eventually lead up to the publishing of that controversial article with anonymous employees back in October last year.[/B] If CIG Austin continues to hire and grow, why did they sublease the majority of their office in December 2013, leaving only a small room, in comparison? [url]http://ecrtx.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/12/13420_Galleria_Flyer_Sublease.pdf[/url][/QUOTE] Derek claimed that Star Marine was [U]cancelled[/U] and he continues to repeat this. The reality is more nuanced and complicated but the answer ultimately is "No it is not canceled". Star Marine was intended to fit into the development schedule as a test bench for fps gameplay in advance of the Persistent Universe/Squadron 42, in much the same way that Arena Commander was the test bench for everything space before the baby PU came out. It was intended to go live in early 2015. Something happened to the fps module around the end of 2014 or the beginning of 2015; neither CIG nor Illfonic has publicly discussed what happened and anyone who claims to know the truth should be suspected of having an agenda unless they're instead violating their employment confidentiality agreements. Derek, naturally, has a theory he's convinced is fact. My personal speculation is to lay blame on Chris Roberts' perfectionism more than any failure by Illfonic to perform, but as I said nobody who would know is public about it. CIG's patch planning strategy in 2015 was to target patch releases when certain features were ready. When the next patch was the fps module, and it hit whatever massive blocker kicked things off the rails, this resulted in six months of practically no meaningful updates. That six months of 'no updates' didn't mean a halt in programming on the back end, but it caused visible progress to crawl and that unsettled the backer community. Derek capitalized on this summer of unrest to launch his entire campaign. The patch strategy has now changed to release a patch every month with whatever's ready to go live, instead, in order to preserve visible public momentum and keep backer confidence up. At some point, likely sometime in May or June, CIG made a go/no-go decision on trying to shove Star Marine out the door ahead of Alpha 2.0 with basic fps functionality, starting with the crunch to Gamescom. However, here's the important thing to know: The Gamescom demo with the amazing (if buggy) multicrew demo? That was [I]Illfonic's branch[/I] with the fps stuff built in. CIG had to import the entire social module (which only existed in main) into Illfonic's branch for the demo. I've seen claims that CIG threw out everything Illfonic did except weapon animations or some shit and that's simply not true because the Gamescom multicrew and social module demos ran on it, Star Citizen Alpha 1.2 (the release with ArcCorp) was the Illfonic branch (basically the Gamescom demo merged back in and cleaned up for release) prior to the big merge, and 1.3 was the main-plus-merged-Illfonic branch that SC would use going forward into 2.0 up to now. The baby PU has the fps gameplay active, so it can be tested. All that is actually missing are the two maps, a couple weapons that haven't been fully implemented yet, and the scoreboard assets and game rules for the actual dedicated standalone game mode, which is [I]an aside to Star Citizen itself[/I]. Now that the baby PU is out and players can test fps gameplay in open space instead of round-based closed-off maps, Star Marine is lower in priority -- but not canceled. True fact: Derek Smart linked to a 10 For The Chairman video of Chris Roberts, and he claimed that Chris said Star Marine was canceled. If you actually watch the video, Chris says Star Marine is [B]not[/B] canceled. Derek depends on people reading his tweets/posts and then not checking up on his references; he will link to things that outright contradict him in the first paragraph, as he counts on most people not reading the link and he can just block anyone who does and gives him any kind of lip. Also lmao show me one shred of actual evidence of the alleged racism/abuse in the CIG LA office that was eventually the topic of an [B]extremely shittily sourced[/B] article by The Escapist (blurry Skype webcam video of blank HID ProxCard IIs were supposedly CIG employee IDs -- Lizzy deleted this tweet conversation and there's an archived copy somewhere). Show me, since you claim that this is something Derek said that came true. As for CIG Austin, there was some restructuring in October as previously announced in September after Erin Roberts was promoted to what might as well be titled Global Director of Getting Shit Done Around Here. Some positions were moved to LA (and people moved), some positions were consolidated in the UK or Germany studios, and the people that were able/important enough to move moved and the rest unfortunately got pink slipped because their positions were no longer where they were -- it sucks but that's corporate restructuring for you. I also believe that CIG Austin moved buildings last year, but I'd have to go digging back through pages of shit to really sort that out. At any rate find something more conclusive about CIG Austin's headcount than a sublease. [URL="https://archive.is/VAK1d"]Here's another thing Derek said.[/URL] He's salty because he said the technology wouldn't exist for another decade and then CIG demos it with live in-engine gameplay on livestream just before Christmas. He links to a moddb tutorial on how to generate realistic-looking heightmaps in the vanilla Cryeditor sandbox (reminder: 4km cube, while the procgen demo worked with a planet 1000km in diameter) and claims that this is what they did, which is why they're cheating and it's so easy (but I thought the tech was 10 years out Derek?). Leaving aside the false comparison, it's worth noting that this tutorial was written and posted by Sean Tracy and Paul Reindell, [I]senior staff at CIG[/I]. :v:

on the note of star marine, it's still a thing where they'll be bringing the whole arcade shooter thing like AC but that as an overall feature is (oh no) 'on the backburner'. Last year's shitty delays in the spring were all about that feature too and they've learned hard from the lesson (after all, it was a major point of contention DS legitimately latched onto, prompting his call for mass refunds in the summer) HOWEVER, many features of it are in the current 'universe' content, with player control, interaction, the 'physicalized EVA' system which contains a number of other aspects to the damage system, and overall FPS gameplay with various weapons is present. Given the state of those I expect SM to be a lot sooner than not [editline]e[/editline] whoa big elix post [editline]e[/editline] I blame the star marine debaucle on the inability to aim due to some weird shit with the double coordinate system and the model-coupled camera stuff, whatever it was called. All the demos they showed of it early on it would embarass a stormtrooper how far off all the shots were, there was something really weird with player character aim like it was using too loose of coordinates or snapping to the wrong grid somehow (which is something we more recently saw when the freelancer came out and we were all hanging out inside trying to shoot out of it with our pistols while traveling at cruise speeds)

[QUOTE=nightlord;50095017]The game has been in development for only around 5 years, a lot less than that if you only consider when the current version started being worked on. The game was announced at the end of 2012, so at most you've waited a little over 3 years which is no time at all when it comes to games development of this scale. I don't know how you could have expected a full size with a graphics level and scope far above that of any other game to date to appear in a short time span. That "Janky cryengine mod" is the foundations for the game, of course all the features aren't going to be there at this point but they're very clearly working on it. None of his 'predictions' about the game have came true at all. If you're really convinced they have, what are they? Requesting a refund makes no sense to me, if the game had just vanished then i could understand it, but Star Citizen has perhaps the most open development i've seen for any game with updates on it daily. Acting like Star Citizen is an exception and that other games get developed perfectly and don't end up having similar problems is not a good view to have. We don't normally find out about problem that occur early on because it isn't until right before the game is ready to be released that we usually even find out a game is being made.[/QUOTE] For three years I would have expected more progress than we have now. It seems that the scope of Star Citizen keeps expanding and is no longer the game that was promised on Kickstarter; which had an estimated delivery date of November 2014. It was a year behind schedule, with barely anything to show. That is why I requested a refund. Once the game has just "vanished", it would be too late to request a refund. The usual cycle of game development is that you release a product and add on to it. This cycle has been successfully used by AAA game studios as well as indie developers. The cycle is not to begin to produce a product and then constantly redefine what that product is, essentially entering into a perpetual spin of product redevelopment. This ensures the product goes nowhere, which is what we are all witness to now. You can wrap it up in whatever variety of excuses you would like, but the fact of the matter is that we are now 3 and a bit years down the line and have very little to show in terms of the game. Not to mention that the game has successfully managed to fund [B]$111,000,000[/B]. What do you think a competent studio could achieve in the same time frame with the same budget? Rockstar developed GTA 5 in 4 years with a $137 mil budget. [URL="https://www.theguardian.com/technology/gamesblog/2012/nov/12/grand-theft-auto-v-preview-gta-5"]This is a link[/URL] to a preview written by the Guardian Newspaper in 2012, roughly 3 years after development began on GTA 5 in 2009. [URL="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M56nsC-NuBg"]Here is also a link[/URL] to a trailer released around the same time. Do you see the difference in functionality? Nobody is making vast changes, promising minigames or introducing brand new, game changing content in the form of ships and their associated professions. They had a working game with a Singleplayer component and were probably working on the Multiplayer component. "But GTA 5 doesn't have the same scope as Star Citizen! You can't compare the two!" I hear you cry. Yes, that's true. But look what a professional and experienced workforce managed to do with the same amount of time and a slightly larger budget. Now look at what we have with Star Citizen. That's why I had my pledge refunded. [QUOTE=elixwhitetail;50095132]Words[/QUOTE] How much money have you sank into Star Citizen?

It's definitely a fact that the fps status reports and references to fps in monthly reports mentioned problems with guns not shooting where you're aiming across several points of time. There definitely were some problems and setbacks with fps, and there was also that huge animation set overhaul where all 3,000 animations had to be retargeted to a new rig (one where your hips weren't fucking pinned in place) but it was also finished in two weeks instead of two months. The fps module is also the provider of the hard lesson CIG learned about not giving deadlines until they know they can satisfy them, because if they give a deadline (really, a suggestion of when they hope to have something finished, not a hard date) and then miss it, backers rip their heads off in the forums, and that was Star Marine, week after week. And they've learned. Well, mostly, at the beginning of this year Chris promised the Starfarer would be hangar-ready two months prematurely, whoops. [QUOTE=Hezzy;50094752]I have no idea where Derek gets his money from. I'm thinking he probably made megabucks with his first couple of games (they were pretty great for their time)[/QUOTE] :weeb: [QUOTE=Hezzy;50095238]How much money have you sank into Star Citizen?[/QUOTE] Oh look it's this again. Not taking your bait, off with you. Your eyes glaze over when you see paragraphs or something?

so about that whole 'approaching the thread about a thing explicitly with a negative view' thing, is there any point here other than venting your frustrations and accusing explanations of just being sugar coated hopes and dreams to an extent I sympathize with the "they promised a game in 2014" thing since they [i]did[/i], albeit when their budget was 2 million dollars, and the entire campaign said they'd love to make a bigger game than their pitch and would be adjusting the project if they gain money. It's planned bloat I guess? They've expanded studios and have been paying a lot of employees over all this time, with a lot getting stowed away for future development security because a majority of the money they're making is also full game sales (at a discounted price). The 1million backers right now [I]all own a copy of the game[/I], and as such launch isn't going to be some big payout break so much as the fact launch has to be successful for a time before it rakes in more players. [quote]Rockstar developed GTA 5 in 4 years with a $137 mil budget[/quote] this is a really weak comparison to pick out, a company that makes GTA games for a living spent all that money to make a new rendition of the same game formula in a neat new location with better graphics. Like great they just had to spend a bunch of time making nice models and updating well established code, then dump a shitton of cash into advertising because aside from being a decent game, publishers act like they'll only sell on raw brand recognition rather than the content being worthwhile

[QUOTE=elixwhitetail;50095338]It's definitely a fact that the fps status reports and references to fps in monthly reports mentioned problems with guns not shooting where you're aiming across several points of time. There definitely were some problems and setbacks with fps, and there was also that huge animation set overhaul where all 3,000 animations had to be retargeted to a new rig (one where your hips weren't fucking pinned in place) but it was also finished in two weeks instead of two months. The fps module is also the provider of the hard lesson CIG learned about not giving deadlines until they know they can satisfy them, because if they give a deadline (really, a suggestion of when they hope to have something finished, not a hard date) and then miss it, backers rip their heads off in the forums, and that was Star Marine, week after week. And they've learned. Well, mostly, at the beginning of this year Chris promised the Starfarer would be hangar-ready two months prematurely, whoops. Oh look it's this again. Not taking your bait, off with you.[/QUOTE] It's not bait. It's a genuine question as you seem to be very adamant about defending this game. In my experience it's usually because the person in question has put a lot of money into the game. The fact you refused to comment on the matter means that people reading this will draw certain inferences. I see that you've edited your post making some insulting comment implying that I didn't read what you said. I did. That's fine and well, a good explanation of the FPS module situation with information that I wasn't party to. I don't really have much to comment on the matter other than the fact we were promised that it was coming, it was called Star Marine and that it would be a standalone module, then all of a sudden it was being merged / absorbed into something else because of some unknown dubious drama with the studio that was developing it. As for your request for me to show you evidence of the racism allegations, I can't. Because I'm just a random person on the internet who has no connection to CIG. All I can comment on is what I know; that is the fact that Derek was talking about these allegations of Sandi being a terrible person (pretty much what was stated in the interview, along with calling her on her lies about her education) a good 2 or 3 months before the article was released. There is that and the gif I posted previously, showing Sandi plonking down 3 cases of Krispy Kremes in front of four people, 3 of whom she knows are on a diet. Pretty fucking awful if you ask me. [QUOTE=dai;50095381]so about that whole 'approaching the thread about a thing explicitly with a negative view' thing, is there any point here other than venting your frustrations and accusing explanations of just being sugar coated hopes and dreams[/QUOTE] Sorry, I was under the impression that this was a [i]discussion[/i] forum.

If you're going to compare GTA V and SC at least have the decency to acknowledge that CIG did not start the next business day after the end of the crowdfunding campaign with >300 staff and four studios all installed and wired up and ready for work. Most of the first year was spent hiring people and getting the company built up. [IMG]http://i.imgur.com/vvsOTGD.png[/IMG] [URL="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lNoRbJHPqvI"]Source: CitizenCon 2015 presentation[/URL] Rockstar can kind of assumed to have facilities and at least some staff already around from other projects when the GTA V design documents started hitting manager desks with implementation tasks and deadlines. But sure whatever helps slant the narrative. [editline]8th April 2016[/editline] [QUOTE=Hezzy;50095420]It's not bait. It's a genuine question as you seem to be very adamant about defending this game. In my experience it's usually because the person in question has put a lot of money into the game. The fact you refused to comment on the matter means that people reading this will draw certain inferences.[/QUOTE] If the only thing you have to say to my post is "are you a victim of the sunken cost fallacy" then you have no argument worth discussing, and that makes it bait. What I have spent on Star Citizen is immaterial to documented fact. And if you really want I can go reference practically everything I stated as fact in that post -- but I figure neither of us really cares badly enough for me to devote the several hours it'd take. I'll agree that expectations for the fps module were handled and communicated horribly -- it was months of "soon but not yet" with no real explanation as to what the fuck was the hold-up and why all these things were going wrong when we were promised in February that it was coming in a month or two. If that's the bug up your butt, I'll agree that CIG mishandled the fuck out of that one. 2015 was not the CIG community team's finest moment in handling the project's public image. And they've learned to overcome some of their weaknesses. [QUOTE=Hezzy;50095420]As for your request for me to show you evidence of the racism allegations, I can't. Because I'm just a random person on the internet who has no connection to CIG. All I can comment on is what I know; that is the fact that Derek was talking about these allegations of Sandi being a terrible person (pretty much what was stated in the interview, along with calling her on her lies about her education) a good 2 or 3 months before the article was released.[/QUOTE] That's a fantastic chain of reasoning for declaring Derek "right" about something, right there. Bravo. :v:

[QUOTE=Hezzy;50095238]For three years I would have expected more progress than we have now. It seems that the scope of Star Citizen keeps expanding and is no longer the game that was promised on Kickstarter; which had an estimated delivery date of November 2014. It was a year behind schedule, with barely anything to show. That is why I requested a refund. Once the game has just "vanished", it would be too late to request a refund. The usual cycle of game development is that you release a product and add on to it. This cycle has been successfully used by AAA game studios as well as indie developers. The cycle is not to begin to produce a product and then constantly redefine what that product is, essentially entering into a perpetual spin of product redevelopment. This ensures the product goes nowhere, which is what we are all witness to now. You can wrap it up in whatever variety of excuses you would like, but the fact of the matter is that we are now 3 and a bit years down the line and have very little to show in terms of the game. Not to mention that the game has successfully managed to fund [B]$111,000,000[/B]. What do you think a competent studio could achieve in the same time frame with the same budget? Rockstar developed GTA 5 in 4 years with a $137 mil budget. [URL="https://www.theguardian.com/technology/gamesblog/2012/nov/12/grand-theft-auto-v-preview-gta-5"]This is a link[/URL] to a preview written by the Guardian Newspaper in 2012, roughly 3 years after development began on GTA 5 in 2009. [URL="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M56nsC-NuBg"]Here is also a link[/URL] to a trailer released around the same time. Do you see the difference in functionality? Nobody is making vast changes, promising minigames or introducing brand new, game changing content in the form of ships and their associated professions. They had a working game with a Singleplayer component and were probably working on the Multiplayer component. "But GTA 5 doesn't have the same scope as Star Citizen! You can't compare the two!" I hear you cry. Yes, that's true. But look what a professional and experienced workforce managed to do with the same amount of time and a slightly larger budget. Now look at what we have with Star Citizen. That's why I had my pledge refunded. How much money have you sank into Star Citizen?[/QUOTE] More progress than we have now? So all the ships, the FPS gameplay, the social gameplay, the racing gamemode, Crusader, the procedural generation for planets and all the other stuff that has been released or shown isn't enough? All they have to do now is expand things. The core of the gameplay is almost done and can just be filled be content. The beginnings of the persistent universe is playable right now with Crusader and will soon be expanded supposedly with things like actual full persistence, fueling and mining. Not to mention the huge amount of development updates released each month that clearly show what's being worked on. How does the foundation for the persistent universe including the space combat, First person gameplay, FPS gameplay, quantum travel, EVA, quests/missions, repairing etc being playable right now along with Squadron 42 being almost done and ready for release (probably this year) count as "very little"? The scope is not expanding at all. That stopped quite a while ago. It stopped in Early 2015 infact, and most of the stretch goals before that were relatively inconsequential additions to the game like new ships that they'd already planned for. You're also missing that the game isn't just increasing in scope for no reason, it increased so it could to [I]be the game they wanted it to be in the first place[/I]. The usual cycle is not that you release a product and then add to it. It's that you develop the product, release it, then decide to bolt on additional content afterwards. That only works when the content you want to add after isn't important to the game. That cannot be done with Star Citizen as all these features need to be there at the start. You can't just make the game and then decide you're suddenly going to stick something game-changing in without reworking huge portions of it. Core features need to be in place first and that's exactly what's being worked on at the moment. there isn't anything I've seen that's being focused on that doesn't need to be developed at this point and isn't important to the overall game. If you think really there is, what are they? As for the estimated 2014 date, that is wrong. That was for Squadron 42 and a few other smaller features, not Star Citizen. From Chris Roberts: [quote] [I]-In 2012, a Kickstarter FAQ indicated that the high cost of stretch goals was in order to ensure a 2014 delivery date. [/I] You will notice that this is saying that we would only be able to deliver Squadron 42, not the bigger game without additional funding. If you refer to the stretch goals you will notice that the base goal was enhanced community content (delivered), alpha dogfighting module (delivered) and Squadron 42 (in progress). That was the base game as described. [/quote] More about that here: [url]https://robertsspaceindustries.com/comm-link/transmission/14979-Chairmans-Response-To-The-Escapist[/url] There are no "vast changes, promising minigames or introducing brand new, game changing content" at the moment with Star Citizen, either. Comparing a fairly run-of-the-mill open-world singleplayer focused game to one that is actually trying to do something that hasn't really done before and to break boundaries is not entirely a fair comparison. If anything it makes more sense to compare Squadron 42 to that, and that will soon be playable. Don't forget that Star Citizen is a 10+ year game plan and isn't something they're just going to push out the door and forget about. I don't mean to come off as harsh or something with this reply, it just get a little annoying seeing posts say things like all the time when they're usually based on half-truths and misinformation. If you pay attention to the development of the game it isn't in a bad state at all.

Hezzy, a couple of things to remember. One, GTA V was developed by a studio using a proprietary engine, and one that was already had a lot of the tech in place to do what needed to be done. Star Citizen is working on converting and rebuilding CryEngine almost from the ground up to meet the technical needs of a space sim. That sort of R&D tends to take time. The biggest bit of the groundwork-laying involved enabling large maps - maps hunreds of thousands of times larger than anything CryEngine could natively support. Since that was squared away, development has accelerated precipitously. Two: They could easily have had Star Citizen out last year. If they had, it would've been another Elite: Dangerous: Very pretty to look at, but completely lacking in any depth or substance. Instead, those of us who haven't bought into Derek Smart's bullshit are actually pleased that Star Citizen is taking its time - Because the devs deliver quality when they finally do deliver, and it's usually worth the wait. I'd rather have that than another Elite: Dangerous - another buggy, unfinished, content-bare piece of garbage that the devs are claiming is a finished game.

[QUOTE=Hezzy;50094752] A "rocky" development is being very polite, it's been abysmal! Yes, Derek can occasionally be off the mark with certain things but funnily enough a lot of his predictions have come true. I think a lot of people underestimate how much sway he holds within Game Development circles.[/QUOTE] Are you fucking [I]kidding me[/I] First off, he's a delusional oldie programmer who uses sensationalism to get his ways. What does he have to back up his claims? Have you even LOOKED at his latest "magnum ophurs"? Second, yeah developement has been slow since they are making an actual working game with actual fucking innovation behind it that doesn't look like it came out of hells asshole Third, the "sold jpegs hurr durr" are a sign that someone didn't look past the first sentence in one of the HUNDREDS of pages of information regarding the ship sales, the planned system and the current testing environment. No really, tell me you can't find any info and you're gonna trigger elix so hard he's going to drop a literal 100-page book on your ass And finally, 2.3 came out almost a week ago with focus now on 2.4 with a flyable FUCKING TANKER the size of a multiplayer TDM MAP. Boy you best be trollin'

I can't believe somebody would spend close to $1000 on this game [QUOTE=MendozaMan;50095650]Third, the "sold jpegs hurr durr" are a sign that someone didn't look past the first sentence in one of the HUNDREDS of pages of information regarding the ship sales, the planned system and the current testing environment. No really, tell me you can't find any info and you're gonna trigger elix so hard he's going to drop a literal 100-page book on your ass[/QUOTE] In these hundreds of pages of information that you refer to, does it mention how large scale mining with the capital ship will work? How this will fit into the game's economy? Or how the modular ship that can function as a R&D lab, or mobile field hospital will work with the game mechanics? These are just two things I can't see explanations for, yet ships worth hundreds of dollars were put up for sale. For the price I would expect a fully fleshed out game mechanic to be explained. It's the least they could do, right? Considering it takes between $35,000 and $150,000 to develop ships. It just sounds like their train of thought was "This would be cool, let's draw some concept art, write some fluff about the ship and then worry about the function later". I want to say that I really do want this game to succeed. It looks amazing and if everything it promised is delivered, it will change the face of gaming forever. But at the same time, I'm not willing to drop a couple of hundred quid on it.

[QUOTE=Hezzy;50095688]I can't believe somebody would spend close to $1000 on this game[/QUOTE] It's no different from spending large amounts of money on any other hobby.

[QUOTE=Hezzy;50095688]I can't believe somebody would spend close to $1000 on this game[/QUOTE] People spend more on crack, hookers, cocaine and body pillows with anime chicks on them People spend more on [I]dragon dildos[/I] (real talk here yes people do spend over 1000 real dollars on a virtual spaceship and no, we actually don't support that behaviour. Those people tend be too special for FPCORP, and that's saying something)

[QUOTE=nightlord;50095696]It's no different from spending large amounts of money on any other hobby.[/QUOTE] [QUOTE=MendozaMan;50095714]People spend more on crack, hookers, cocaine and body pillows with anime chicks on them People spend more on [I]dragon dildos[/I] (real talk here yes people do spend over 1000 real dollars on a virtual spaceship and no, we actually don't support that behaviour. Those people tend be too special for FPCORP, and that's saying something)[/QUOTE] These are actual, tangible things. I'm sure I've managed to spend roughly the same amount of money on stock market speculation and useless photography trinkets. Somebody on this forum has actually spent just short of $1000 on ships if the raw ship data for FPCORP is to be believed. Entry 11 on the spreadsheet.

[QUOTE=Hezzy;50095688] In these hundreds of pages of information that you refer to, does it mention how large scale mining with the capital ship will work? How this will fit into the game's economy? Or how the modular ship that can function as a R&D lab, or mobile field hospital will work with the game mechanics? .[/QUOTE] [url]https://robertsspaceindustries.com/comm-link/transmission/14522-Star-Citizen-Careers-Mining[/url] [url]https://robertsspaceindustries.com/comm-link/engineering/14974-Design-The-Endeavor[/url]

[QUOTE=Hezzy;50095688] But at the same time, I'm not willing to drop a couple of hundred quid on it.[/QUOTE] If you don't want to spend that much, that's your right. But don't take it out on the people who do spend that much. At this point, the best option for someone in your shoes, is to wait until the game releases, or the company falls apart. [editline]8th April 2016[/editline] [QUOTE=Hezzy;50095755]These are actual, tangible things. I'm sure I've managed to spend roughly the same amount of money on stock market speculation and useless photography trinkets. Somebody on this forum has actually spent just short of $1000 on ships if the raw ship data for FPCORP is to be believed. Entry 11 on the spreadsheet.[/QUOTE] People have the right to spend their cash however they please. People pay hundreds for commissions on art pieces that are basically a .JPEG and nothing more. But it's their money to spend.

[QUOTE=Hezzy;50095755]These are actual, tangible things. I'm sure I've managed to spend roughly the same amount of money on stock market speculation and useless photography trinkets. Somebody on this forum has actually spent just short of $1000 on ships if the raw ship data for FPCORP is to be believed. Entry 11 on the spreadsheet.[/QUOTE] At this point, that's a trifling difference that you're arguing. We get it, you don't like thing. You think it's crazy or stupid when people would spend money on things that you wouldn't. You got your refund. The rest of us chose to stick with the project. It's that simple.

[QUOTE=Sgt. Khorn;50095776]If you don't want to spend that much, that's your right. But don't take it out on the people who do spend that much. At this point, the best option for someone in your shoes, is to wait until the game releases, or the company falls apart. [editline]8th April 2016[/editline] People have the right to spend their cash however they please. People pay hundreds for commissions on art pieces that are basically a .JPEG and nothing more. But it's their money to spend.[/QUOTE] In my shoes? And what shoes are those? The kind of shoes that should go away and not offer any criticism? I'm not taking anything out on anybody. I am merely expressing my disbelief at the fact that somebody should spend such an enormous amount of money on something such as this. As I speculated earlier, perhaps this person just had a very large disposable income. That's nearly 2 months of payments for my house.

[QUOTE=Hezzy;50095755]Somebody on this forum has actually spent just short of $1000 on ships if the raw ship data for FPCORP is to be believed. Entry 11 on the spreadsheet.[/QUOTE] Its kind of obvious that SC's internet spaceships arent actually "worth" that much and won't be valued that much in the grey market once the game releases and you can earn ships normally. Can you think of any other motivations people might have to give money to star citizen in disproportionate value with the rewards? Hint, the store you get ships from is called the pledge store. I always find people who yell about people buying spaceships for huge amounts of money disingenuous. You[I] know[/I] its like 90% a donation depending on how the person feels, im sure there are a people who think they're getting a good value or something because they're not very smart but there are always those people.

[QUOTE=Mattk50;50095829]Its kind of obvious that SC's internet spaceships arent actually "worth" that much and won't be valued that much in the grey market once the game releases and you can earn ships normally. Can you think of any other motivations people might have to give money to star citizen in disproportionate value with the rewards? Hint, the store you get ships from is called the pledge store.[/QUOTE] If it is a pledge or charitable gift, then why do we pay tax on our purchases?

[URL="https://robertsspaceindustries.com/comm-link/transmission/14522-Star-Citizen-Careers-Mining"]Mining design doc released with the RSI Orion (the 'capital'-scale mining ship).[/URL] Mining as a mechanic has been getting dev time periodically, but it's not a top priority right now. The procedural asteroid system is still being developed right now, and then after that they'll need to voxelize them and then mining pretty much snaps in. [URL="https://robertsspaceindustries.com/comm-link/engineering/14974-Design-The-Endeavor"]The science design docs for the Endeavour are a little more nebulous, I'll admit, but it's because it's tackling half a dozen different mechanics and gameplay divisions because of its modular pods.[/URL] [QUOTE=Hezzy;50095688]I want to say that I really do want this game to succeed. It looks amazing and if everything it promised is delivered, it will change the face of gaming forever. But at the same time, I'm not willing to drop a couple of hundred quid on it.[/QUOTE] You don't have to drop hundreds on it. You can buy in with an Aurora package and have full access to everything in the game (as it becomes available) for 39 pounds + VAT right now if you wanted to, and then never spend another cent. Everything will be obtainable in-game and the economy won't be set to "Korean F2P grind mode" because Chris Roberts is on the record on-camera, repeatedly, as being against steep grinds and intending to have a reasonably gentle scale to the economy in SC. The ship ladder is not the be-all-end-all to progression and so the economy won't price them that way, unlike Elite: Dangerous. Dude who blows his whole paycheck on a ship now and feels smug has only himself to blame when a month after release he's nothing fucking special because everyone who plays 7 hours a week has earned one. People who contribute more than the minimum are doing it either to support the project because they want to see it happen, or they're hoarding ships because they have the mistaken belief that they'll be allowed to P2W and are skipping some massive grind and we laugh at those people in this thread. Some people really are rich and can afford to throw down $5,000 worth of ships to share out to every grandkid and college student niece/nephew and not give a fuck. There's a Russian aluminum-baron billionaire who plays EVE and drops five-figure sums worth of PLEX into it casually in order to P2W and get whatever he wants, because he truly is too rich to give a shit. ...why is that anyone's business and why is that some sort of critical failing of a business? The point of a business is to make money and you don't make money by saying "please, no, stop giving me that money". However, CIG is taking steps to mitigate the P2W potential and I've gone over it at great length repeatedly in this thread, if you really want to hear it I'll go find the most recent incarnation.

[QUOTE=Hezzy;50095859]If it is a pledge or charitable gift, then why do we pay tax on our purchases?[/QUOTE] because its a video game not starving children, why the hell do you think? Speaking of, do you think those 500$ less than jpgs dsmart is selling for his 1999 less playable than hazeron pile of shit is any different? People just aren't convinced.

[url]https://www.twitch.tv/cigcommunity/v/59345687?t=58m[/url] What is the leak they're talking about in this stream? Seems like there's a bit of tension there

[QUOTE=Hezzy;50095828]In my shoes? And what shoes are those? The kind of shoes that should go away and not offer any criticism? I'm not taking anything out on anybody. I am merely expressing my disbelief at the fact that somebody should spend such an enormous amount of money on something such as this. As I speculated earlier, perhaps this person just had a very large disposable income. That's nearly 2 months of payments for my house.[/QUOTE] A thousand bucks over four years isn't that much money for some people, I guess. I do voice acting as a hobby. I've spent over a thousand dollars over the years on a good microphone, recording equipment and audio processing software. And I'm unemployed. [editline]8th April 2016[/editline] [QUOTE=Hezzy;50095894][url]https://www.twitch.tv/cigcommunity/v/59345687?t=58m[/url] What is the leak they're talking about in this stream? Seems like there's a bit of tension there[/QUOTE] They're probably referring to Disco Lando accidentally posting a screenshot with a URL that people followed up on, and found a massive leak of unfinished assets for the game that was meant as an internal thing for the dev team. They hadn't even password-protected it.

[QUOTE=Hezzy;50095894][url]https://www.twitch.tv/cigcommunity/v/59345687?t=58m[/url] What is the leak they're talking about in this stream? Seems like there's a bit of tension there[/QUOTE] Dunno, I'm sure the SA thread will give you an answer you will approve of. To me it sounds like bad puns and people taking the piss out of each other for reasons I don't follow or understand. [editline]8th April 2016[/editline] [QUOTE=archangel125;50095911] They're probably referring to Disco Lando accidentally posting a screenshot with a URL that people followed up on, and found a massive leak of unfinished assets for the game that was meant as an internal thing for the dev team. They hadn't even password-protected it.[/QUOTE] Wow great job Lando you did the thing for everyone, what a hero.

Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.