[Megathread] Star Citizen

[Nirawen]

Rather than blame my "Failure of understanding"...why not simply tell me how Star Citizen is so much grander and better than similar games with similar premises and similar featuresets and how this is worth tens of millions of dollars and four years development time.

Look at games like Eve or ED and what they did with less. What is Star Citizen doing differently that justifies the manpower and money spent on it and excuses the low quality and quantity of demos released so far?

Comparisons to Elite, even say X-Rebirth, are fair enough when looking at the bulletin points of features but NMS is an insult to all of them. There is no depth to NMS where there is in the others, everything it does it does light. The reason I say it's a naive comparison is because the weak similarities are only on the surface and entirely ignore the design and technical intricacy that allow for more complex gameplay, gameplay that is different whether you acknowledge it or not.

On top of what others have said a single example on how they differ; the way CIG are tackling physics. Before they started development the system they've created had never been successfully done before and while others are now adopting it it's still not on the same scale. Seperate physics systems within physics systems, all 'interactable' with each other on a large scale.. that's what allows them to have ships flying around with people walking around inside them alongside other ships with other people (as simple as that sounds, it's not and thus why all previous attempts had essentially failed), it's that level of technical depth where these games vary massively and it comes through in how the gameplay actually functions such as breaching the side of a ship while it's in motion and flying inside it to engage in person Vs person combat without the need of scripted events or instancing while maintaining the same physics system (ever tried to physically ride on a vehicle in something like Arma?). Other space sims didn't just choose to not have that aspect of gameplay, they weren't/aren't capable of it. As said some games are beginning to introduce it now but it's rudimentary and often at the expense of other aspects, CIG are attempting to reach that level with all areas of all features of the game.

Star Citizen isn't doing anything different, or new more appropriately, in the sense of having spaceships, planets, mining or combat etc. The difference is in how it is doing those things and while that seems to be irrelevant to you for some reason it's what governs how the game is played & feels, what is possible and what isn't. The pursuit of a greater level of technical depth & general quality are what justifies the cost & time and will also be what potentially ruins them if they can't achieve it, they aren't just failing to do what's already been done.

And yet when you get down to it....NMS and SC are space sims, you fly ships and explore worlds and fight and mine and so on.

By that simple mindset space sims have had the 4X list of features for decades and therefore every game you've named is pointless, we may as well have stopped with X: Beyond the Frontier. Why have developers and publishers shelled out hundreds of millions of dollars between them to create more advanced game engines and assets?

*edit* For the record I honestly don't believe they'll achieve what they've claimed, I think they'll land somewhere between current specs and where they're aiming and every step they take towards the latter will potentially cause more and more issues with gameplay in the released product (physics lag etc).

[Deleted]

please, stop saying EVE in this thread , that game has nothing related to SC , it's like comparing an elephant to an amoeba.

[KyrtF]

Comparisons to Elite, even say X-Rebirth, are fair enough when looking at the bulletin points of features but NMS is an insult to all of them.

The point being that NMS contains much of what Star Citizen is shooting for. There is a different gameplay focus and it is lacking in many respects but it still contains much of what SC is promising.

entirely ignore the design and technical intricacy that allow for more complex gameplay, gameplay that is different whether you acknowledge it or not.

And is that any better than Star Citizens complexity for the sake of complexity approach?

The gameplay is different because each has a different focus. But in what each is trying to create? A space sim with flight...trade...exploration...mining...combat...etc we see that NMS did create a "universe", did create content, did implement mining and fighting, did implement FPS and so on.

And did it all with a fraction of the money and developers available to CIG.

You are arguing that SC will end up delivering a BETTER game. But "better" isn't the same as innovative or pushing the edge. NMS built a game that offers pretty much most or all of what SC is offering...did so with a team of 12 and a much smaller budget...and got itself released within three years of its reveal.

It has "problems" to put it mildly....but that doesn't detract from the fact that a dozen developers were able to create a game that offers pretty much everything Star Citizen plans to offer and did so in four years.

If they'd managed expectations better and sold the game at a realistic price point it would have been better received.

But NMS also shows the danger of overhyping a product. A charge I believe CIG is guilty of. There is nothing new in Star Citizen, nothing that hasn't been done before. There are many similar games.

Seperate physics systems within physics systems, all 'interactable' with each other on a large scale.. that's what allows them to have ships flying around with people walking around inside them alongside other ships with other people (as simple as that sounds, it's not and thus why all previous attempts had essentially failed), it's that level of technical depth where these games vary massively and it comes through in how the gameplay actually functions such as breaching the side of a ship while it's in motion and flying inside it to engage in person Vs person combat without the need of scripted events or instancing while maintaining the same physics system (ever tried to physically ride on a vehicle in something like Arma?). Other space sims didn't just choose to not have that aspect of gameplay, they weren't/aren't capable of it. As said some games are beginning to introduce it now but it's rudimentary and often at the expense of other aspects, CIG are attempting to reach that level with all areas of all features of the game.

Star Citizen does use instancing. And will continue to use instancing. And it will uses Zones to separate content...separating out boarding action into separate ship based instances.

The use of instancing and zones in games isn't new or unique or even particularly innovative. There are parts of WoW where vessels moving within an instance can be explored and boarded and fighting can take place. How then is it innovative and cutting edge just because Star Citizen is doing it?

What you say has never been done....is having groups of players standing on a moving platform in an instance and engaging in combat. The platforms in this case happens to be a number of ships. Worse...because the target ship will need to be "disabled", you are talking about a static platform.

So....yes. CR is good at hyping the product this isn't an example that shows money well spent or innovation.

The pursuit of a greater level of technical depth & general quality are what justifies the cost & time and will also be what potentially ruins them if they can't achieve it, they aren't just failing to do what's already been done.

Other games are high quality. I wouldn't call SWTOR or EVE or ED or COWIW as poor quality games. Or lacking technical depth. One can easily point out problems with each...but that'll be the same with SC as well.

But these games achieved that quality without $130million in funding.

y that simple mindset space sims have had the 4X list of features for decades and therefore every game you've named is pointless, we may as well have stopped with X: Beyond the Frontier. Why have developers and publishers shelled out hundreds of millions of dollars between them to create more advanced game engines and assets?

Two things come to mind.

First...people see SC as daring...innovative...on the cutting edge. They aren't doing anything new. Or innovative. Other games that exist now already offer pretty much everything SC has to offer and at a similar level of quality.

Second...these games have often been developed with a fraction of the money and workers available to CIG. And have delivered a working published game in a fraction of the time and cost.

The question SC has to answer is not if it is being innovative. It isn't. Its whether or not it ends up being a better game as a result. A technically perfect physics engine is fine....and if it detracts from the game by making it dull as dishwater, it'll be wasted money.

CIG is hyping up SC with this talk of innovation. And that is dangerous. Look at NMS. Overhyping led to raised expectations and because people clamoured to buy it, Sony bumped up the price far beyond what it was worth - both of which led to the backlash.

CIG is risking the same for SC...especially given the talk about releasing a MVP and then patching in additional features and content later.

Would people feel happy if SC launched without Star Marine or mining, without crafting and with only 25 worlds alongside the promise that the rest of the worlds, ships, professions, etc would be along later as patches or XPacs?

*edit* For the record I honestly don't believe they'll achieve what they've claimed, I think they'll land somewhere between current specs and where they're aiming and every step they take towards the latter will potentially cause more and more issues with gameplay in the released product (physics lag etc).

I think they are being over ambitious. I see their feature list....and a lot of the time I think "This sounds good....but it'll be aggravating as anything in an actual game".

Multi crew for example. A great concept....but it means tasks need to be overly complex to justify it, it creates balance concerns, it means players will often times have nothing to do.....and so on. Some people will no doubt love playing an engineer...but I think most will want the piloting and gunnery chairs.

[Odeezee]

...stuff...

there is so much you are missing, but it's you doing so willfully at this point. it's as though you know better but proceed to not believe it. can you fly a ship in NMS? yes but it's not a simulation of flight, it's very arcadey and there is NO 6DoF. can you fps in NMS? yes, but it's so simplistic and lacks any of even the common features from modern FPS games. do any of the games you mentioned EvE, SWToR, NMS, ED, CoD: IW have anywhere close to the graphical fidelity of SC especially in a multiplayer setting? NO, not even close! to say that SC is not THE most ambitious game in history is just you fooling yourself. what other game offers seamless transitions from space-station to planet with FPS, MMO-style multiplayer, a rich lore, procedurally generated artist driven planets with ecosystems and weather, space and atmospheric flight with dog-fighting, seamless 1st and 3rd person perspective, multi-crew ships, racing, various careers from pilot to pirate and much more? name one game like that and i will concede.

the one thing you forget about those games you mentioned, outside of EvE, is that they are not doing so well are they? have you seen the ED concurrent population on Steam? or that of NMS? so to use them as an example of what SC should have at the very least been able to do since they have more is silly. oh and SWTOR's budget was larger than Star Citizens and look at what happened to that game.

New Update from Galactic Tour: Exotics

[Tradewind]

Yeah, just give up trying to entreat these disingenuous shitposters into understanding why other people like different things. Fuck 'em.

Please post productively and on-topic. Infracted. -Edge

[KyrtF]

there is so much you are missing, but it's you doing so willfully at this point. it's as though you know better but proceed to not believe it. can you fly a ship in NMS? yes but it's not a simulation of flight, it's very arcadey and there is NO 6DoF. can you fps in NMS? yes, but it's so simplistic and lacks any of even the common features from modern FPS games. do any of the games you mentioned EvE, SWToR, NMS, ED, CoD: IW have anywhere close to the graphical fidelity of SC especially in a multiplayer setting? NO, not even close! to say that SC is not THE most ambitious game in history is just you fooling yourself. what other game offers seamless transitions from space-station to planet with FPS, MMO-style multiplayer, a rich lore, procedurally generated artist driven planets with ecosystems and weather, space and atmospheric flight with dog-fighting, seamless 1st and 3rd person perspective, multi-crew ships, racing, various careers from pilot to pirate and much more? name one game like that and i will concede.

Being blunt....Star Citizen doesn't offer that because Star Citizen isn't out yet.
We can hope Star Citizen will launch with these features....but even if that is the case, even if these are part of Chris Roberts new Minimum Viable Product release...you are positing about the state of the game in late 2018 at the earliest.

You try to disparage the simplicity of NMS here for example. And the response to that is easy.

So what? NMS offers flight. NMS offers FPS. Is it more simplistic than what SC hopes to offer? Yes. But that doesn't change the fact that NMS offers those features.

You are arguing that Star Citizen offers the same features and is doing it better. But that is the point. Star Citizen at best is EVOLUTIONARY...not revolutionary.

That isn't innovation. That isn't doing something new. That is simply improving on ideas and mechanics that already exist.

As for what other games will be able to offer in 2019 when Star Citizen is released...have a look at what games such as ED are planning and then tell me what Star Citizen will have that it doesn't.

the one thing you forget about those games you mentioned, outside of EvE, is that they are not doing so well are they? have you seen the ED concurrent population on Steam? or that of NMS? so to use them as an example of what SC should have at the very least been able to do since they have more is silly. oh and SWTOR's budget was larger than Star Citizens and look at what happened to that game.

New Update from Galactic Tour: Exotics

Other games have problems. Star Citizen also has problems...including the fact it isn't out yet and likely won't be out for at least another two years.

It is ironic that in a debate about innovation you point to a video which is a rip off of the Grand Tour and which mentions the new Prowler design, itself copied from the Final Fantasy movie.


And while SWTOR did cost a lot of money to develop....once you account for inflation and drop marketing costs - SC is in that territory now. SC might even cost more...especially if CIG wants to mount an effective marketing campaign to bring in new blood. And that isn't counting the money it is likely to raise in the next 2 or 3 years before it is released.

Whether or not those games are successful also is irrelevant. As games, they offer...or plan to offer...pretty much what Star Citizen plans and often do so with fewer developer, in less time and with less money.

As it is.....the game is now five years in development. The engine shown on the original Kickstarter appears to have been scrapped. Elite...kickstarted around the same time...was released two years ago and currently has 85% or so of Star Citizens feature list, and is working on the rest. It also has a workable balanced flight model.

Star Citizen has raised £130 million over four years. In that time it has grown to nearly 400 developers across 4 sites in 3 nations. Thise developers have provided us with a small number of interactive locations as playable demos and provided us with a number of tech demonstrators shown at various cons. They have also provided us with a large selection of ship designs, some of which are in game.

So....the output from CIG consists of a flight module...the hangar...planetside modules....a few playable ships and a few more that can be parked to look at...and some tech demos shown at cons which may or may not be scripted.

Now...I am looking forward to Star Citizen.
I am hoping it will be a good game.
I don't believe it is a scam as some would say.
I believe CIG are working to deliver the game they have promised.
The demos and modules so far haven't impressed me but show promise so if CIG do deliver on a decent flight model and fix the other issues I think it'll be fun to play.

But even if it fulfils all its goals, at best it is merely going to improve on features and designs that already exist. It is not particularly innovative...it is not especially grand in scope and its ambition is to do what other games have already done...only better.

And to counter this, to prove they are ambitious, to try and prove what seems obvious to me...that money and time has been squandered putting it behind schedule....you simply say Star Citizen has better graphical fidelity and is planning to release with features already available in other games.

[1001]

the one thing you forget about those games you mentioned, outside of EvE, is that they are not doing so well are they? have you seen the ED concurrent population on Steam? or that of NMS? so to use them as an example of what SC should have at the very least been able to do since they have more is silly. oh and SWTOR's budget was larger than Star Citizens and look at what happened to that game.

Completely ignoring that Elite has sold as many (if not more) copies through it's own store which does not require Steam, it has also sold very well on XBOX.
EVE has been on Steam considerably longer but until the recent F2P option Elite had 10x the concurrency of EVE from its Steam playerbase, how can you portray that as being a bad thing?

[Majestic12]

An interesting behaviour I've seen is as soon as CIG releases a basic feature, such as clothes being saved on your character, people praise it like it is some groundbreaking technology that nobody has ever achieved before.
The truth is that there is nothing groundbreaking about SC yet. You can say that the end product they imagine will be, that is true but it does not exist right now and not will it for many years(if it comes out).

[1001]

An interesting behaviour I've seen is as soon as CIG releases a basic feature, such as clothes being saved on your character, people praise it like it is some groundbreaking technology that nobody has ever achieved before.
The truth is that there is nothing groundbreaking about SC yet. You can say that the end product they imagine will be, that is true but it does not exist right now and not will it for many years(if it comes out).

Right. Aka 'Not Invented Here' syndrome.

[Deleted]

Anyone else here fan of BEST Star Citizen news channel on youtube - Demo Man? News, development, discounts, he got it all covered for you so you don't have to read stuff!

He makes daily videos like this one:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dO6qBIPIro0

[apelsinjuice]

No Mans Lie 2.0

Please post productively. Infracted. -Edge

[Odeezee]

...more stuff...

still failing to grasp that concept that while some games have some features available in Star Citizen, there is NO OTHER game that will have them ALL, persistent, in MMO multiplayer, and at the fidelity of SC. so to say so is being disparaging towards SC and our intelligence.

Completely ignoring that Elite has sold as many (if not more) copies through it's own store which does not require Steam, it has also sold very well on XBOX.
EVE has been on Steam considerably longer but until the recent F2P option Elite had 10x the concurrency of EVE from its Steam playerbase, how can you portray that as being a bad thing?

i did not bring EvE into this, the guy i quoted did, and i left it out as it's over a fucking decade old and carved out it's own niche. and to use your own point EvE has sold more on it's own site than on Steam.

but let's not gloss over the fact that ED is being outright beaten by a game STILL in development, which was my point. the other poster claimed that ED, NMS, SWTOR did this and that in half the time and with less money, blah, blah as though they were some beacon of success and all i did was point out that he was wrong to even use those as example. 1. only one of those games is truly an MMO (SWToR), 2. SWToR cost more money than SC to develop, 3. ALL of those games are embattled titles that did not perform as well as hoped so idk why they would even be used as examples of what to do. /shrug

New Updates:
AtV



RtV



Galactic Tour: Aegis Dynamics



Update on the Tevarin

[masterhorus8]

still failing to grasp that concept that while some games have some features available in Star Citizen, there is NO OTHER game that will have them ALL, persistent, in MMO multiplayer, and at the fidelity of SC. so to say so is being disparaging towards SC and our intelligence.
i did not bring EvE into this, the guy i quoted did, and i left it out as it's over a fucking decade old and carved out it's own niche. and to use your own point EvE has sold more on it's own site than on Steam.

but let's not gloss over the fact that ED is being outright beaten by a game STILL in development, which was my point. the other poster claimed that ED, NMS, SWTOR did this and that in half the time and with less money, blah, blah as though they were some beacon of success and all i did was point out that he was wrong to even use those as example. 1. only one of those games is truly an MMO (SWToR), 2. SWToR cost more money than SC to develop, 3. ALL of those games are embattled titles that did not perform as well as hoped so idk why they would even be used as examples of what to do. /shrug

TBF, whether a game is better or not is almost purely subjective. The main difference between ED and SC that I hear the most that people either love or hate is the flight model, which I am really looking forward to in 2.6 in SC.

As for his points about mechanics, he is technically right in one regard, a lot of the mechanics are not in SC, yet. Yes, they are planned, but not in yet. Which also means he can't use the FPS that is planned in ED if he's going to rag on the stuff that isn't in SC yet.

It is just semantics at that point though. The main differences between the games are/will be the graphics (aka fidelity), multicrew/multiplayer aspects (whether the other stations on a ship are fun or not is subjective and still a WIP), and, as stated earlier, the flight models.

[1001]

I guess when you have the CEO acting like a poorly trained ape and hollering crap like "Best Damn Space Sim Ever" and "Best Damn Everything Sim Ever" before they even have the basics of a game - it's not surprising that other tools pick up the mantra as some misguided way of showing their support.

[KyrtF]

still failing to grasp that concept that while some games have some features available in Star Citizen, there is NO OTHER game that will have them ALL, persistent, in MMO multiplayer, and at the fidelity of SC. so to say so is being disparaging towards SC and our intelligence.

OK - assuming Star Citizen launches in 2019 or so and it got the features you say it does.
Lets also assume that Elite also gets its planned features.

What's the difference? What would Star Citizen have than Elite would not? Space sim? Check. FPS and boarding? Check? Multicrew support? Check. Planetary landings? Check. Vehicular support? Check. Multiroles? Fighters? Trading? MIning? Salvaging? Piracy? Bounty Hunting? Check. Check. Check. Check. Check. And so on.

What is the big feature, the big aspect of the game that Star Citizen would have that Elite would not?

Star Citizen is doing nothing new. It is not innovating. It is not ground breaking. It will simply be doing things other game already do and will be doing it in a different manner. Those differences in how the game plays might end up making it more fun than other games...but they don't mean it is innovative.

but let's not gloss over the fact that ED is being outright beaten by a game STILL in development, which was my point. the other poster claimed that ED, NMS, SWTOR did this and that in half the time and with less money

Those games are out, they are released, they do most of what SC is promising and some of them are still being developed and expanded upon with a promised feature list that matches or exceeds what Star Citizen has promised.

And many have reached published status in less time...with less developers...with less money.

, blah, blah as though they were some beacon of success and all i did was point out that he was wrong to even use those as example. 1. only one of those games is truly an MMO (SWToR), 2. SWToR cost more money than SC to develop, 3. ALL of those games are embattled titles that did not perform as well as hoped so idk why they would even be used as examples of what to do. /shrug

Star Citizen itself is not an MMO. It is planned to incorporate MMO elements...but it isn't an MMO. CIG themselves deny it is an MMO and state they aren't working towards that goal. Star Citizen is - simply put - an Elite Clone with FPS and MMO elements. In that, it is as much an MMO as Elite Dangerous in that both games are massive, both allow you to interact with other players and both use instances and zoning technology to manage the workload on the server, alongside some RPG elements.

As to whether or not the games mentioned are successful - besides the point and if you really need to use a strawman argument to divert attention, you know you have lost.

These games pretty much offer NOW what Star Citizen promises to provide x years from now. Elite, for example, is currently missing only multicrew and FPS and both are planned. Multicrew in 2.3. OTOH...Elite is a fully published, viable game with a working, balanced flight and combat model. Something Star Citizen doesn't have.

It is hard to argue innovation on ideas and concepts and techniques that are already in use, and it is hard to say money well spent when CIG appears to be reinventing the wheel and is years behind schedule as a result.

Whether or not they are embattled as you put it doesn't really change those facts. The differences between Elite and Star Citizen will not be any particular innovation or whatever on CIGs part...it will be look and mechanics. Which graphical style will you prefer...which flight model do you think is best.

[kenn9530]

OK - assuming Star Citizen launches in 2019 or so and it got the features you say it does.
Lets also assume that Elite also gets its planned features.

What's the difference? What would Star Citizen have than Elite would not? Space sim? Check. FPS and boarding? Check? Multicrew support? Check. Planetary landings? Check. Vehicular support? Check. Multiroles? Fighters? Trading? MIning? Salvaging? Piracy? Bounty Hunting? Check. Check. Check. Check. Check. And so on.

What is the big feature, the big aspect of the game that Star Citizen would have that Elite would not?

Star Citizen is doing nothing new. It is not innovating. It is not ground breaking. It will simply be doing things other game already do and will be doing it in a different manner. Those differences in how the game plays might end up making it more fun than other games...but they don't mean it is innovative.



Those games are out, they are released, they do most of what SC is promising and some of them are still being developed and expanded upon with a promised feature list that matches or exceeds what Star Citizen has promised.

And many have reached published status in less time...with less developers...with less money.



Star Citizen itself is not an MMO. It is planned to incorporate MMO elements...but it isn't an MMO. CIG themselves deny it is an MMO and state they aren't working towards that goal. Star Citizen is - simply put - an Elite Clone with FPS and MMO elements. In that, it is as much an MMO as Elite Dangerous in that both games are massive, both allow you to interact with other players and both use instances and zoning technology to manage the workload on the server, alongside some RPG elements.

As to whether or not the games mentioned are successful - besides the point and if you really need to use a strawman argument to divert attention, you know you have lost.

These games pretty much offer NOW what Star Citizen promises to provide x years from now. Elite, for example, is currently missing only multicrew and FPS and both are planned. Multicrew in 2.3. OTOH...Elite is a fully published, viable game with a working, balanced flight and combat model. Something Star Citizen doesn't have.

It is hard to argue innovation on ideas and concepts and techniques that are already in use, and it is hard to say money well spent when CIG appears to be reinventing the wheel and is years behind schedule as a result.

Whether or not they are embattled as you put it doesn't really change those facts. The differences between Elite and Star Citizen will not be any particular innovation or whatever on CIGs part...it will be look and mechanics. Which graphical style will you prefer...which flight model do you think is best.

comparing ED to SC is like comparing apples to oranges.

SC is offering an MMO experience on a larger scale than ED will even be able to, they may implement multicrew and such but no where near on the scale of star citizen, everything ED offers is on such a basic level it offers no depth to gameplay and is outright boring, you can land on planets and such on ED but apart from land and drive around a little there is no point in even having them, star citizen will offer massive planets that are crafted in terms of lore and actually have stuff to do in them, even the flight model in current alpha is more evolved than what ED currently has and the combat structure is much more indepth.

Star citizen is offering all the features that any space MMO should have with depth and detail, i would rather have 50-100 star systems to explore that actually have meaning to them than a million pointless dots in the sky with a few orbiting stations and planets to land on with nothing to actually do on them, star citizen is nothing like ED and has likely been a lifelong pursuit by chris to make the space game he has always wanted, i wouldn't even be supprised if he had this concept already in the starting phases of what he wanted before ED was even put to paper, in any case SC is nowhere near a clone of ED.

Star citizen is the only game offering a true space experience, ED/NMS are poor representations of what a space game is all about and i have put in around at least 50 hours in most space game on the market.

Yes ED offers most if not all the features SC will offer when its ready but the quality and detail of each of the features is what will make star citizen rise above the rest, i look for quality and depth in a space game, ED/NMS does not offer that.

[KyrtF]

comparing ED to SC is like comparing apples to oranges.

SC is offering an MMO experience on a larger scale than ED will even be able to, they may implement multicrew and such but no where near on the scale of star citizen, everything ED offers is on such a basic level it offers no depth to gameplay and is outright boring, you can land on planets and such on ED but apart from land and drive around a little there is no point in even having them, star citizen will offer massive planets that are crafted in terms of lore and actually have stuff to do in them, even the flight model in current alpha is more evolved than what ED currently has and the combat structure is much more indepth.

And yet everyone is waiting on tenterhooks for 2.6 because CIG are changing the flight model. Because it apparently doesn't deliver. Because it encourages the "joust"

For a space sim, the flight model is a basic and core element of the game and CIG haven't settled on a working model yet. You might think it is more evolved than that of ED....but EDs flight model works, and Star Citizens doesn't.

You might also like to think SC offers a MMO experience on a larger scale than ED...and maybe it will. It depends on what you mean by MMO experience. Is it how many players by instance? The number of ships? Is it what a player can do in game? I mean, if you are talking about walking around station and interacting with NPCs and players, that type of activity is on the ToDo list for Elite.

Star citizen is offering all the features that any space MMO should have with depth and detail, i would rather have 50-100 star systems to explore that actually have meaning to them than a million pointless dots in the sky with a few orbiting stations and planets to land on with nothing to actually do on them, star citizen is nothing like ED and has likely been a lifelong pursuit by chris to make the space game he has always wanted, i wouldn't even be supprised if he had this concept already in the starting phases of what he wanted before ED was even put to paper, in any case SC is nowhere near a clone of ED.

An even if Star Citizen delivered that...so what? That doesn't change that it is still doing what Elite has already done. That it develops lore and puts more stuff on planets doesn't change that Elite is doing that NOW. You aren't addressing the argument that Star Citizen is being innovative or that it has little to show for its cash - you are arguing hat you think Star Citizen will be doing the same stuff...but better.

Star citizen is the only game offering a true space experience, ED/NMS are poor representations of what a space game is all about and i have put in around at least 50 hours in most space game on the market.

Yes ED offers most if not all the features SC will offer when its ready but the quality and detail of each of the features is what will make star citizen rise above the rest, i look for quality and depth in a space game, ED/NMS does not offer that.

Which is what I've been saying.

Star Citizen is offering nothing new to the genre. It is doing nothing that hasn't been done before. it isn't innovative. It isn't on the cutting edge. It isn't ground breaking.

Whether it will end up doing these thing **better** however is something that it might be able to boast of, but not until it is released. Saying anything else is simply pumping up the hype machine and as NMS shows, that brings its own dangers.

[Deleted]

I assume they will lose at their own game, taking too long. And that's a guy saying who's got 8k Euro in ships....

Sent from my ONEPLUS A3003 using Tapatalk

[kenn9530]

And yet everyone is waiting on tenterhooks for 2.6 because CIG are changing the flight model. Because it apparently doesn't deliver. Because it encourages the "joust"

For a space sim, the flight model is a basic and core element of the game and CIG haven't settled on a working model yet. You might think it is more evolved than that of ED....but EDs flight model works, and Star Citizens doesn't.

You might also like to think SC offers a MMO experience on a larger scale than ED...and maybe it will. It depends on what you mean by MMO experience. Is it how many players by instance? The number of ships? Is it what a player can do in game? I mean, if you are talking about walking around station and interacting with NPCs and players, that type of activity is on the ToDo list for Elite.



An even if Star Citizen delivered that...so what? That doesn't change that it is still doing what Elite has already done. That it develops lore and puts more stuff on planets doesn't change that Elite is doing that NOW. You aren't addressing the argument that Star Citizen is being innovative or that it has little to show for its cash - you are arguing hat you think Star Citizen will be doing the same stuff...but better.



Which is what I've been saying.

Star Citizen is offering nothing new to the genre. It is doing nothing that hasn't been done before. it isn't innovative. It isn't on the cutting edge. It isn't ground breaking.

Whether it will end up doing these thing **better** however is something that it might be able to boast of, but not until it is released. Saying anything else is simply pumping up the hype machine and as NMS shows, that brings its own dangers.

ED is not even an MMO, 1 of the largest ships in star citizen has more capacity than what limited multiplayer experience you get out of elite dangerous, the current flight model now is still better than ED where ships just fly around in a circle trying to kill you, since launch elite dangerous has not released anything relevant in terms of content, unless there is actually a point in landing on a planet what is the point at all in having them, ED has spent years trying to implement features that will be at release in star citizen and since the game was not designed for massive multiplayer in ED its just going to be more of the same irrelevant features you can only play in single player.

ED is a half decent game but it is massively lacking in depth and meaning, yes its will still take a while before star citizen is ready but that depth will be in the game at launch, ED is a glorified single player game and only has a small number of ships which are more than just a cockpit.

Attention to detail is everything in a space MMO, if there is no way to interact with things like panels in your ships, to self repairs, etc, its going to be pointless for ED to even implement ship interiors as its just going to be a room, with maybe a crew member to interact with and thats it.

Star citizen is offering the complete package with excellent graphics and attention to all the details that make a space game. Just tell me this what other game is offering for say a whole guild of 20 players to actually play on 1 ship together and be able to interact with other ships or whatever they want, hell no other game is even offering a group of 5 players to fly around space in one ship and there is only 1 ship in Elite the anaconda atm that could do that purpose.

[masterhorus8]

Star Citizen itself is not an MMO. It is planned to incorporate MMO elements...but it isn't an MMO. CIG themselves deny it is an MMO and state they aren't working towards that goal. Star Citizen is - simply put - an Elite Clone with FPS and MMO elements. In that, it is as much an MMO as Elite Dangerous in that both games are massive, both allow you to interact with other players and both use instances and zoning technology to manage the workload on the server, alongside some RPG elements.

This is actually wrong. SC is (will be) an MMO, but NOT an RPG. I've been over this before a few years ago. MMO and RPG are actually separate. To be an RPG, it needs to have character leveling/progression and player skills/abilities, which SC will not have since it will be player skill based and not character skill based. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Role-playing_video_game (Scroll down to the section on characteristics.)

And calling it an Elite clone is stupid. It's a space game. Space games usually have you fly around in ships, right? If you still want to call it a clone, then almost every space game ever is a clone of Spacewar!