[Megathread] Star Citizen

[Rennadrel]

Some of what he said came true, and some hasn't.

The BIG concern I have is simple.

At the core, he is right. The developers have expanded far beyond what was originally promised. More, while they have had astonishing success with fund raising, some of what Derek Smart is saying does ring true. Namely, that even with their funding, they are trying to do a lot with this game. They are trying to create a AAA title on a scale and level of involvement not really achieved before and do so with a fraction of the resources other teams spend on such titles.

Yes, they are only 5 years into game development and such titles can take 5 or 7 years to develop. But they are also working with a team that even at 400 strong is smaller than some other development studios. Over 1000 people reportedly worked on GTA5 for example...and the game cost over $100 million and took about 4 years to develop.

Now, they say that they are making efficiencies elsewhere. That they don't need to budget so much for marketing. That working smart - pardon the pun - ensures they can do with $1 what other studios need $3-4 to do. Are they right? Maybe. But they also seem to be raising a lot of expectations. How will players react fit he released game is simply - OK. What if it isn't the explosive experience that has been promised? Or what if it is buggy? Or has a great FPS part but a pitiful flying part?

As it is - I haven't contributed. I'm not going to either. I've tried the free fly and it does get better each time...but so far, I haven't been blown away. But then, I wasn't impressed with NMS either.

As regards Gamescom....so far so good. But was it scripted? NMS are reported to have created a dedicated planet for testing and PR for example, so that the game looked and played better than it actually was everywhere else. Could the demos at Gamescom be the same? Scripted as DS stated? OTOH...for all its faults, NMS is an impressive achievement given the size of the team involved. So that should help allay concerns over similar issues in SC.

I hope Star Citizen succeeds. I hope it fills all its aims. It's a very, very ambitious project....but I also wonder if Derek Smart has a point

Derek Smart has failed to deliver more times as a developer with that fucking pile of garbage of a game that has been in early access for 3 years than RSI has done in 3 years of actual worthwhile game development. This whole notion that SC has been in development for 5 years is stupid, considering 2 years was pretty much spent doing concept and initial engineering, it's pretty hard to suggest that the game is failing to deliver when real progress is just getting started.

[Waaldo]

But for the things DS says, even a dead clock will be right twice a day. The shear number of his absurd statements that have actually been true have been few and far between. I really doubt that the Gamescom demo was scripted just because of how buggy it was and unscripted it felt. Yes, it could have been intentionally done to seem unscripted, but that's highly unlikely. Some of their previous demos would have been more likely to be scripted than this one, really. The one thing that did bother me about the presentation, was there was a spot where CR said to turn off the second display when they were exiting the planet, then turned it back on after they escaped the atmosphere. That did feel like they were trying to hide a bug that they knew about. But outside of that, it had a few hiccups here and there.

I'm pretty sure he said to remove the second display because he wanted the atmospheric exit to be full screen. It's definitely possible they were trying to hide some sort of bug, but considering how everything in this game is rendered in real time, the second camera angle would have just been the same view from the cockpit so we would have seen the bug anyways. I could be wrong, but that's my take from it.


As far as being scripted, some press are claiming they had private viewings of the demo and there is nothing scripted about it. I will believe them over the conspiracy theorists claiming the shadows don't line up.

And if you’re wondering if there are any smoke and mirrors involved, there aren’t. The demo was played right in front of me, and I could request to do things that would have failed in a staged presentation.

[masterhorus8]

I'm pretty sure he said to remove the second display because he wanted the atmospheric exit to be full screen. It's definitely possible they were trying to hide some sort of bug, but considering how everything in this game is rendered in real time, the second camera angle would have just been the same view from the cockpit so we would have seen the bug anyways. I could be wrong, but that's my take from it.

As far as being scripted, some press are claiming they had private viewings of the demo and there is nothing scripted about it. I will believe them over the conspiracy theorists claiming the shadows don't line up.

And if you’re wondering if there are any smoke and mirrors involved, there aren’t. The demo was played right in front of me, and I could request to do things that would have failed in a staged presentation.

Ahh, okay. Fair enough. I just wasn't sure if there was some known problem with the turret and leaving atmos. Good to know! And thanks for the link. It was a better read than a lot of the other drivel I've been seeing lately.

[KyrtF]

Derek Smart has failed to deliver more times as a developer with that fucking pile of garbage of a game that has been in early access for 3 years than RSI has done in 3 years of actual worthwhile game development. This whole notion that SC has been in development for 5 years is stupid, considering 2 years was pretty much spent doing concept and initial engineering, it's pretty hard to suggest that the game is failing to deliver when real progress is just getting started.

To be honest, I don't really care about Derek Smart. I don't care for his games.

I'd like to see SC released though, and I'd like to see it as epic as CIG have promised.

But - as I said, and I'm speaking as someone who simply wants to play the game - some of what he says makes sense. I think he's at the stage where he exaggerates and overblows a lot and leaps on every perceived fault or flaw...but at the core, his arguments do make some degree of sense.

The game has expanded
There is feature creep
Given the cost of other games, the $120m raised so far is not a lot of money for a game of the size scope and quality promised.
They are trying to do a lot with a team smaller than many others.
And CIG have had their own share of mistakes which at least gave Derek Smart a degree of "I told you so".

How accurate his statements are is another issue, but off the cuff, they do make a degree of sense.

And lest I misunderstand...that first two years of concept and initial engineering is something many other games do and is part of the timescale for game development.

Either way, I ain't going to let it bother me. I have nothing invested in this game apart from some time on the free play sessions.
I'll make up my mind when and if it is released.

[Waaldo]

Ahh, okay. Fair enough. I just wasn't sure if there was some known problem with the turret and leaving atmos. Good to know! And thanks for the link. It was a better read than a lot of the other drivel I've been seeing lately.

Its really hard to know for sure, because leaving the atmosphere isn't something we can do right now in the playable release. But we can definitely get in the turrets of other peoples ships flying around shooting things without much trouble.

This game, being the most ambitious crowd funded game ever, is going to receive a lot of hate and nay-saying. And I understand where it is coming from because there are so many crowd funded games that didn't even come closer to delivering if releasing at all. A lot of it made sense in the beginning because there was no gameplay at all, just a bunch of promises on a kickstater that sounded too good to be true. But now that it's playable, and these demos are being shown live, most of the nay-saying is becoming asinine.

It's okay to be skeptical, but the main source for this games "downfall" is Derek Smart, the guy who said the company was going to go bankrupt and stop development back in January. He claimed he had an "inside source" which clearly turned out to be bogus.

[stellvia]

I think their biggest sticking point even if it offers everything and more is: This game will take a lot of your time to play. It will be a very thorough and deliberate experience.

IE: You heard him say how the berths at Levski won't be instanced and you'll have to request landing and be given certain time before leaving. Are you going to sit in a holding pattern waiting to land or be forced to land outside nearby just to preserve the authenticity? Seems likely and I know some people will be rankled by that.

IMHO best bet is going to be managing a multi-player ship that can hangar some fighters and run it with your guild/corp. Log out on the ship and when you log back in you get to see what the ship/guild is up to at that time.

[1001]

I think their biggest sticking point even if it offers everything and more is: This game will take a lot of your time to play.

So it appears. Chris was talking about how they are increasing the time it takes to earn ships in game, significantly. How the disparity for what it would cost now and what it will cost after release which will be much larger.

Something like a Constellation could take around 180 hours to earn, which I don't mind except it gives those that paid a huge leg up the ladder.
He also said that bigger ships = bigger rewards., so not only is there a disparity between costs but there's going to be an increased disparity in wealth.

They're going to have to be very careful that this doesn't start feeling like a free-to-play game where it's so grindy that you feel like you're being pushed towards the cash shop.

[zealo]

I have a feeling 180 hours for a 4 man ship is a pipe dream, considering what that means about the sizes of ships above that. They should expect to get plenty of criticism if it takes that long for a constellation once beta starts and they get into the "numbers tuning" phase of development properly.

[Cyclone Jack]

So it appears. Chris was talking about how they are increasing the time it takes to earn ships in game, significantly. How the disparity for what it would cost now and what it will cost after release which will be much larger.

Something like a Constellation could take around 180 hours to earn, which I don't mind except it gives those that paid a huge leg up the ladder.
He also said that bigger ships = bigger rewards., so not only is there a disparity between costs but there's going to be an increased disparity in wealth.

They're going to have to be very careful that this doesn't start feeling like a free-to-play game where it's so grindy that you feel like you're being pushed towards the cash shop.

I'm OK with the ships being more of a long-term goal, as I always like having things to work towards. But I do agree with you on them needing to be careful not to price them too high, else it feel too much like a pay-to-win scenario. Granted, I doubt that would greatly impact my game experience, but I'm sure it would nag at me from time to time.

[masterhorus8]

So it appears. Chris was talking about how they are increasing the time it takes to earn ships in game, significantly. How the disparity for what it would cost now and what it will cost after release which will be much larger.

Something like a Constellation could take around 180 hours to earn, which I don't mind except it gives those that paid a huge leg up the ladder.
He also said that bigger ships = bigger rewards., so not only is there a disparity between costs but there's going to be an increased disparity in wealth.

They're going to have to be very careful that this doesn't start feeling like a free-to-play game where it's so grindy that you feel like you're being pushed towards the cash shop.

Let me start off by saying this. I completely agree with this. But thankfully, there are/will be things in place to help keep some of this from happening.

First off, there really won't be a cash shop. Ships will not be purchasable after game release (except for a few starting ships). One of the few things that will be sold is the in game currency, UEC. But there will be a cap on how much will be purchasable, based on how much you have in game already. So someone that plays the game extensively will not be able to buy much, if any, to get even farther ahead of other players. But if someone that doesn't play as much wants to get some, they'll be able to buy a bit to help with that time not spent in game, but will likely not be able to buy as much as someone who's playing frequently will have.

Secondly, all of the ships in the game will cost UEC to maintain. The bigger the ship, the more expensive it is to maintain and run. Fuel, ammo, repairs, and for the larger ships, you'll have to pay either the NPCs that you have helping crew your ships or split the rewards with the other players. So it is pretty much guaranteed that it will be quite a while before we see anyone flying around in any of the big multicrew ships.

But if none of that were in, I would most certainly be worried by the exact things you said and likely not have actually backed the game. Right now, ships are purchasable as a primary means of funding the game, nothing more.

[Beazy]

My Biggest issue with the game is its poor performance. The demo from last week looked like it was running @30fps on a PS3 and when they tried to look around with the camera, the frame rate drops to horrible levels. I noticed they were trying hard not to move the camera in the demo, and if they did, they moved it extremely slowly.

This could be the most feature rich game ever created, but if it plays like it does in the demos, it wont be worth the price of admission.

[masterhorus8]

My Biggest issue with the game is its poor performance. The demo from last week looked like it was running @30fps on a PS3 and when they tried to look around with the camera, the frame rate drops to horrible levels. I noticed they were trying hard not to move the camera in the demo, and if they did, they moved it extremely slowly.

This could be the most feature rich game ever created, but if it plays like it does in the demos, it wont be worth the price of admission.

I hate how over used this saying is, but "it is in alpha". Optimization comes during beta, aside from the few passes to make the game "playable". This game is using the actual terms for what they are meant for. Alpha = Feature Incomplete, just getting the pieces together and get it running. Beta = Feature complete, all of the pieces are together and it's time to iron out the wrinkles and optimize.

Plus, a lot of the frame rate issues are actually server side right now. Playing in the offline mode has a dramatic improvement in fps. In the online mode of arena commander, I got about 30-40 fps, the same fps that I got on the open universe portion as well. In the offline mode, I was at about 80-90 fps. (And mind you, this was back when I had a GTX 680 and a i7-860.)

[Beazy]

I hate how over used this saying is, but "it is in alpha". Optimization comes during beta, aside from the few passes to make the game "playable". This game is using the actual terms for what they are meant for. Alpha = Feature Incomplete, just getting the pieces together and get it running. Beta = Feature complete, all of the pieces are together and it's time to iron out the wrinkles and optimize.

We will have to wait and see. The scope of this games leaves me skeptical.
I just hope that I'm wrong. This features and content in this game is insane.

[stellvia]

I'm not too concerned about the costs of ships atm—all of that is likely to change/be tweaked further in PTU beta. And I assume the concern is they don't want to make it too easy to run the multi-crew ships alone. 180 hours is a decent time investment, but as its a 4-crew ship, 45 hours investment per person doesn't sound as unreasonable given the amount of time many people put into MMOs. That would be one week for a set of dedicated players to earn... and you could always station more than 4 on it as well, given everyone might not be online at the same time, or a few more might me passengers.

Bigger ship == more reward is also fairly obvious. More firepower to take on bigger enemies. More cargo space to carry more freight at the same time, etc.

[Rennadrel]

I have a feeling 180 hours for a 4 man ship is a pipe dream, considering what that means about the sizes of ships above that. They should expect to get plenty of criticism if it takes that long for a constellation once beta starts and they get into the "numbers tuning" phase of development properly.

I don't doubt it, and the time consumption for earning ships will definitely be getting tuned throughout beta, it is almost a bit silly to even have a predetermined idea as to how long it should take to earn a ship, because that could just be a put off for people. Either way, I only own 2 ships currently and intend on getting the best tech on each before buying other ships.

[carnifex2005]

2.5 Alpha is now released to everyone now. 24 GB download.

Star Citizen Alpha 2.5 Available!

Greetings Citizens,

We have published a major update to Star Citizen. Star Citizen Alpha 2.5 includes significant changes to Star Citizen’s Crusader persistent universe environment. This patch, now available in your Star Citizen launcher, introduces the detailed Grim HEX pirate base, which is a major addition to the game world and an important part of our evolving faction system. Three ships have been added to flight-ready status, the Reliant KORE and two variants of the ARGO MPUV short-range transport. Details on other aspects of the patch are available below, and a full list of changes, balance updates and bug fixes can be found in the complete Patch Notes.

[Pyromelter]

Legit question, I'm coming in late, have had my eye on SC casually for a while but wasn't really all that interested until I saw the Gamescon video.

Any thoughts on how much of this game is hype over it having a real chance of panning out into a AAA title? I'm not really interested in the MMO aspect, but the single player campaign in a universe that's this much of a sandbox seems almost too good to be true - almost like it's No Man's Sky but with stuff to actually do, an actual purpose and missions and such.

I mean I guess I can wait until the game eventually comes out (since I never pre-order), but I'm just wondering how much is hype versus how much is realistic (especially considering the debacle of NMS).

[stellvia]

Roberts has a lot of experience with Wing Commander and Privateer, so I would assume the campaign should be solid. That said, S42 is going to be more structured than the MMO-variant, so I doubt you can just choose to fly off wherever like its your own private MMO shard. They have mentioned at one point their intention to provide server software to run your own private server, but no idea if/when that would be delivered on.

Overall, I'd say the devil is in the details on exactly how this will pan out. Until we actually get our hands on the PTU with all the various parts working, we can't say if it will live up to the hype. Atm all thats up are a handful of locations and a few basic quests and one pvp meetup spot afaik. Larger scale multiplayer, quest/faction system, mining/manufacturing, inventory system, etc. aren't in yet.

[KyrtF]

Legit question, I'm coming in late, have had my eye on SC casually for a while but wasn't really all that interested until I saw the Gamescon video.

Any thoughts on how much of this game is hype over it having a real chance of panning out into a AAA title? I'm not really interested in the MMO aspect, but the single player campaign in a universe that's this much of a sandbox seems almost too good to be true - almost like it's No Man's Sky but with stuff to actually do, an actual purpose and missions and such.

I mean I guess I can wait until the game eventually comes out (since I never pre-order), but I'm just wondering how much is hype versus how much is realistic (especially considering the debacle of NMS).

My opinion?

A "AAA" title it won't be. I don't see it having the resources, time or staff to pull that off.

The game can never live up to the expectations and hype generated so far.
I think it'll be a decent to average game...with some nice moments here and there.

But right now, I think a lot of players are going to be disappointed at the final product.
Not because it will be a bad game, but because it cannot live up to the hype and hope that has been invested into it and because I suspect Chris Roberts has - to a degree - been overselling it.

Maybe I'll be wrong. I'm guessing plenty here will say I am.
Maybe I'll change my mind when this thing finally gets into Beta.

All I can say is I've tried a few of the free weekends and even allowing for the Alpha state, I'm not that impressed. It's an "OK" game...not a great one. I suspect it'll get great reviews when it launches, but I do think - at the minute - that like NMS, a people will be disappointed.

[Odeezee]

My opinion?

A "AAA" title it won't be. I don't see it having the resources, time or staff to pull that off.

The game can never live up to the expectations and hype generated so far.
I think it'll be a decent to average game...with some nice moments here and there.

But right now, I think a lot of players are going to be disappointed at the final product.
Not because it will be a bad game, but because it cannot live up to the hype and hope that has been invested into it and because I suspect Chris Roberts has - to a degree - been overselling it.

Maybe I'll be wrong. I'm guessing plenty here will say I am.
Maybe I'll change my mind when this thing finally gets into Beta.

All I can say is I've tried a few of the free weekends and even allowing for the Alpha state, I'm not that impressed. It's an "OK" game...not a great one. I suspect it'll get great reviews when it launches, but I do think - at the minute - that like NMS, a people will be disappointed.

out of curiosity, what are you basing this on? have you even played the alpha and if so when was the last time? how has CR been over selling the game if you can play the alpha as described right now if you have pledged? comparing it to NMS where players could not even beta test it to a game where backers could play it from the earliest stage of development? what other game in pre-alpha had a better experience for you that SC? what other game even let you play it this early in development? what other game gives you detailed info on *EVERYTHING* they are working on every week? i am really baffled at the disingenuous manner in which people place their own bias and incredulity onto the game and try to pass that off and an objective point of reason.

it's ok if you think the game is not for you, it's okay if you feel that the game is not fun for you, but to pass that off as anything *BUT* subjective is such a disservice and very dangerous as it curtails any sort of fair discussion of the game.

back on topic, for those interested:

New ATV









New RTV



apparently the scenes i linked above took the dev 1 day to make. now that is impressive.