[Megathread] Star Citizen

[Jastall]

Feature bloat is a common problem with crowdfunded games, and no title I've seen suffers from it more than Star Citizen. Fans want all the things in their game, without thinking much about how they actually tie together into a coherent and satisfying experience. And of course the studio wants to placate the fans to gain their loyalty and attract more backers.

There's also the problem that crowdfunding doesn't encourage you to actually finish the game. Not when you're already making lots of money by releasing tech demos, building up hype, selling outrageously priced ships ''temporarily'' and so forth. You can keep the circus going for years on end. You see it on Steam so freaking much, look at all these Early Access titles that never get finished because there's no reason for them to be finished, the devs already have your money. I'm not saying Star Citizen is 100% in that situation, but it does make one think.

[KyrtF]

They aren't going to give away the Squadron 42 expansions for free, that much I am sure of. Backers will get chapter 1 for free and maybe the rest discounted, but they will cost money.

Which still means they need to market and publicise the game. Not every backer is going to stick around for Chapter 2 and fewer still for Chapter 3. CIG will need new blood.

[Odeezee]

Doesn’t really matter if you said they can’t or shouldn’t, it still makes no sense…

what are you even talking about? i said that since those other games are so good, why take time out of your day to "critique" a game you do not even like nor support? especially when people are not even being honest in their critiques and instead use Strawman arguments to try and push an agenda that has nothing to do with trying to improve the game at all.

Why waste time critiquing a politician you do not like nor support?

politicians affect the lives of other people whether or not they are in their districts so critiquing a politician is a part of being an informed and engaged citizen and there is literally NO analogy that can be created between critiquing a politician and critiquing a game you don't like as SC's development will not affect your ability to enjoy other games.

Why waste time critiquing a movie you did not like?

you have invested time and money into the movie as a finished product, so yes you can critique it, but again i ask how that correlates to critiquing a game still in development that those people openly claim they do not like nor support?

In most of these situations there will always be something else you enjoy more, are you really going to tell me you never done it before? When you cross with a movie you find pretty bad for whatever reason, do you point out what you personally believe to be its flaws or do you rush towards home to quickly pop up your favorite movie instead? Because this is the kind of logic you are reaching for here… and if you truly believed in it, instead of being here “wasting time” talking about these people “critiquing" the game, you would probably be doing something else, no?

what are you even saying? like really? how are those things even remotely related? smh. again the game is NOT a finished product, so your comparison to a bad movie is irrelevant. a more apt analogy would be saying that you don't like a movie because you have seen a few early takes of them physically setting up and actively recording a handful of scenes for the movie and then claiming that it'll be shit without experiencing the edits, special effects, post production and score in a coherent manner yet.

From the looks of it, people seem to be complaining more about it's developed process than the game itself, regardless, no I don’t really find it laughable considering how its development is being funded. As for your question, you already seem to have figured that out already, otherwise we wouldn’t be having this discussion, would we?

we are not having a discussion of substance, because of your reaction to what i said, instead we are having an discussion about terms and context. no one is forced to pledge to SC, if people find so many things terrible about the game they can literally leave those who enjoy it to continue about their merry way. the way detractors of the game argue it's as though they have a personal vendetta against other people enjoying what they do not enjoy and that i find laughable. they repeat the same arguments, i do not like this, how could they do that, they should have done this, this is why i asked for a refund, ok duly noted, now why would they still complaining about something that gives you such displeasure and then complain that people are still supporting what they don't like? is it confirmation bias? what? i do not like Elite: Dangerous (i have read up on it, watched many videos about it, yet i never got it, even when it was on Steam's summer sale) it just does not grab me or entice me to want to play it (the whole you are the ship makes me think of not being able to jump in an MMO only orders of magnitude worse) and i also have never played it, but i do not go around "critiquing" E: D and wishing it were more like SC or just better/different. i live and let live.

people don't have to like SC, if they have valid concerns they can and should voice them by all means, but if they just want to talk smack because they somehow feel slighted by the game, it's devs, backers, it's funding structure then that is an issue with them because they can just walk away and go find something else that makes them happier (it's not mandatory for them to play every space sim or game for that matter) or, like i keep suggesting, just go and play those other space games that they believe are so much better than SC and they will be better for it. we don't all have to agree or like the same things. they can do them and i will do me. simple.

[Rennadrel]

Which still means they need to market and publicise the game. Bot every backer is going to stick around for Chapter 2 and fewer still for Chapter 3. CIG will need new blood.

SC already has almost 2 million registered accounts, and averages over 1 million a month in revenue. They only need to market the game to the general consumer, they already have their core of players interested. Constant email updates at least keeps people in the loop, even if they aren't aggressively following it (people like myself) so they are continually aware of the game still being in development. But Star Citizen won't have very high marketability because the general consumer in the gaming world is either a casual gamer or a console gamer. Most people won't have rigs capable of running the game, heck even I know by the time it does come out, I'll need to invest in a fairly substantial rig in order to run the game smoothly.

[Eleccybubb]

Dear lord... yeah, you are totally right, fuck it ~ screw those guys who dare to critique shit I like cuz reasons, just how dare them to critique something they don’t even like! If they don’t like it they should just go do whatever they enjoy doing instead of spreading such negativity all over the damn place.

As I said. Some people will defend a game like it's the best thing since sliced bread mate. Best thing to do is not bother with them. Ironically they hurt the game more by ignoring any critique and having a "this is fine" attitude.

One game I know of where that's severly hurt it among other things is RIFT. Any critique of the game on the official forums is shut down and Reddit is no better despite being barely active.

My point is it exists in a lot of games. Sometimes those people are sadly the vocal majority and critique is ignored but a lot of the time the devs do listen which is good.

I mean look what happened a few pages ago when I said Gameplay>Graphics.

[Rennadrel]

Which still means they need to market and publicise the game. Bot every backer is going to stick around for Chapter 2 and fewer still for Chapter 3. CIG will need new blood.

SC already has almost 2 million registered accounts, and averages over 1 million a month in revenue. They only need to market the game to the general consumer, they already have their core of players interested. Constant email updates at least keeps people in the loop, even if they aren't aggressively following it (people like myself) so they are continually aware of the game still being in development and what is going on. But Star Citizen won't have very high marketability because the general consumer in the gaming world is either a casual mobile gamer or a console gamer. Most people won't have rigs capable of running the game, heck even I know by the time it does come out, I'll need to invest in a fairly substantial rig in order to run the game smoothly. I doubt the player base for SC as a whole ever exceeds 5 million players unless as an MMO space sim it utterly blows everyone away. It's a game that at release, will still not run optimally on the average PC.

[Majestic12]

And they've already paid for it. Which means the money for future development will have to come from future sales and microtransactions. More sales requires that the game be marketed over and beyond the audience it has already reached.

Which is likely to be expensive. I suppose you could argue that CIG will simply reserve a portion of the funding it has received to give it a buffer for that timeframe but if so that money can't be used to develop the game. Or it may be that they'll be happy with the player base they have now and so won't market it at all. In which case, they get few new players.

They aren't going to give away the Squadron 42 expansions for free, that much I am sure of. Backers will get chapter 1 for free and maybe the rest discounted, but they will cost money.

This. And there are a lot of people that are waiting for the game to come out before doing anything (as they probably should be) before purchasing it. I have personally told more people to wait to buy it than to buy in now.

The problem here is that CIG in that case has little economic incentive to release the game. This is because:

1. It's been confirmed(and repeated) that CIG will stop ship sales once the game launches.
2. There is no way that any form of microtransaction-system or people buying the game will make up for the loss of the ship sales.

In business terms, CIG has in that case financial motives for keeping the game in development for as long as possible. Providing that they don't back down on their word, of course.

Star Citizen fans seem generally a bit confused about how CIG is going to make money. Recently there was this:

https://www.reddit.com/r/starcitizen...me=starcitizen

... Where SC fans are practically begging CIG
to not even sell cosmetics or make them unlockable for free.

The reality will look far different than that. CIG has to make money somehow and they've already cashed in on a lot of presales.

[kenn9530]

The problem here is that CIG in that case has little economic incentive to release the game. This is because:

1. It's been confirmed(and repeated) that CIG will stop ship sales once the game launches.
2. There is no way that any form of microtransaction-system or people buying the game will make up for the loss of the ship sales.

In business terms, CIG has in that case financial motives for keeping the game in development for as long as possible. Providing that they don't back down on their word, of course.

Star Citizen fans seem generally a bit confused about how CIG is going to make money. Recently there was this:

https://www.reddit.com/r/starcitizen...me=starcitizen

... Where SC fans are practically begging CIG
to not even sell cosmetics or make them unlockable for free.

The reality will look far different than that. CIG has to make money somehow and they've already cashed in on a lot of presales.

Theres obviously going to be an optional sub to help generate income, says its a general 9.99 and only 250k maintain a sub then that should bring in around 2.5 million a month, theres most likely going to be micro transactions also for cosmetic to help bring in some more income.

If a sub give benefits like increased revenue from doing things ingame, maybe shorter timers on getting ships from insurance providers, maybe access to rare ship skins and such, then there will always be a playbase who will sub if the benefits are worthwhile, yes there is no info or anything about a sub option at the moment but it more than likely and its a good way to make money and rewards players.

A sub option in the game will be needed to generate more content and keep the game evolving as well as help with running costs, once the game is finished im sure there won't be a need for as many employees or maybe he can out source work and get income from doing things for other game developers.

Ships sales now won't really be bringing in as much income as it used to as most people have what they want, there will the the small minority that is waiting for a certain ship to come back around but most people have what they want now. Once the game is released a sub option has potential to generate more income than ship sales over time.

[KyrtF]

SC already has almost 2 million registered accounts, and averages over 1 million a month in revenue. They only need to market the game to the general consumer, they already have their core of players interested.

This is part of the problem.

Their core user base has already bought the game meaning no post launch funds unless they have a reserve. They need to market the game to bring in new blood.

Seriously - why is this even in doubt? They are marketing the game right now with their videos and cons. The problem is that the audience is limited. They aren't doing the type of saturation marketing a supposedly "AAA" game needs. They can't rely on the proceeds form the sales of 1 or 2 million game copies simply because they already have that money.

Or do they think people are going to keep crowdfunding them after the game launch? Is CIGs income going to remain at whatever it is because players want the XPac? I don't think so.

CIG need to maintain a sizeable reserve dedicated purely for marketing the game post launch. And that is a problem because existing publishers can spend huge amounts, but gain efficiencies through scale. CIG won't have that advantage without a publisher.

Now...whether they spend a little or a lot is up to them. But they will need to market the game

[kenn9530]

This is part of the problem.

Their core user base has already bought the game meaning no post launch funds unless they have a reserve. They need to market the game to bring in new blood.

Seriously - why is this even in doubt? They are marketing the game right now with their videos and cons. The problem is that the audience is limited. They aren't doing the type of saturation marketing a supposedly "AAA" game needs. They can't rely on the proceeds form the sales of 1 or 2 million game copies simply because they already have that money.

Or do they think people are going to keep crowdfunding them after the game launch? Is CIGs income going to remain at whatever it is because players want the XPac? I don't think so.

CIG need to maintain a sizeable reserve dedicated purely for marketing the game post launch. And that is a problem because existing publishers can spend huge amounts, but gain efficiencies through scale. CIG won't have that advantage without a publisher.

Now...whether they spend a little or a lot is up to them. But they will need to market the game

You do realise there will most likely be an optional sub, there is always players that sub to games for the extra benefits, even if only 10% of current numbers keep an active sub that should generate 2 million plus a month, combine that with micro transactions for people that want to but UEC and cosmetic items and that will be more than enough to put out content and keep the game running.

Also there will be a number of players waiting till the game is released before buying.

[KyrtF]

You do realise there will most likely be an optional sub, there is always players that sub to games for the extra benefits, even if only 10% of current numbers keep an active sub that should generate 2 million plus a month, combine that with micro transactions for people that want to but UEC and cosmetic items and that will be more than enough to put out content and keep the game running.

Also there will be a number of players waiting till the game is released before buying.

IIRC...game subscriptions have been ruled out so, no. I don't realise that.
Nor would an "optional sub" really work unless the game becomes pay to win.

That leaves microtransactions...which I stated...

But even assuming all of that, nothing here removes the need for CIG to engage in marketing the game in order to sell as many copies as possible.

And a decent marketing and launch campaign...including the possible production and distribution of physical copies and media...can be very expensive.

And then there are running costs. Even with microtransactions, its going to cost a fair bit to have AWS provide their services. CIG are going to want to reserve enough cash for 12-18 months depending on the scale of operations they want. Would that cost them $5000 or $5000000?

In short...CIG are going to need to reserve a substantial sum to cover aspects such as marketing and a certain degree of operational costs. It is impossible to guess how much that reserve should be because we don't know the scale at which SC will operate or the exact margin with which they woyld feel safe


But neither are likely to be cheap.

But as I said, its possible CIG might see no need for a marketing campaign.

[Yunru]

IIRC...game subscriptions have been ruled out so, no. I don't realise that.
Nor would an "optional sub" really work unless the game becomes pay to win.

That leaves microtransactions...which I stated...

But even assuming all of that, nothing here removes the need for CIG to engage in marketing the game in order to sell as many copies as possible.

And a decent marketing and launch campaign...including the possible production and distribution of physical copies and media...can be very expensive.

And then there are running costs. Even with microtransactions, its going to cost a fair bit to have AWS provide their services. CIG are going to want to reserve enough cash for 12-18 months depending on the scale of operations they want. Would that cost them $5000 or $5000000?

In short...CIG are going to need to reserve a substantial sum to cover aspects such as marketing and a certain degree of operational costs. It is impossible to guess how much that reserve should be because we don't know the scale at which SC will operate or the exact margin with which they woyld feel safe


But neither are likely to be cheap.

But as I said, its possible CIG might see no need for a marketing campaign.

There is realy no need for marketing, since players are starving to play another like sandbox game, where you have full control of your ship movement.

They are only like 3 games that come to my mind (not counting x-3 or x-4 the failure):
Elite dangerous (wich it fells like it lacks something)
Darkstar one (pretty meh, but its one of those rare games where you can fight, trade and explore)
And the epic failure we know of.

[Odeezee]

well if their press interest while in development is anything to go by, they will get interviews from the gaming magazines that always cover SC/SQ42 milestones and then there are all the big streamers/youtubers who have shown great interest in the game in the past like Angry Joe, Level Cap, Draegast, FrankieOnPC, etc as well as general backers getting people to buy in through word of mouth.

3.0 being a success would help with this a great deal, just need a great update launch and experience for the backer/free fly newbies and a kickass 3.0 update trailer and yeah, new people will come. people need to remember that while SC may have many Space Sim fans already pledged many won't until full release, SC is also an MMO and FPS so has the potential to bring in those large gaming markets.

[1001]

3.0 being a success would help with this a great deal, just need a great update launch and experience for the backer/free fly newbies.

Chances of them having a great launch for the update and providing a stable experiece is probably 1,000,000:1 based on previous patches.

I'm kind of looking forward to the patch myself, I'd really like to see what gameplay they are going to offer because they seem rather quiet on that.

[kenn9530]

IIRC...game subscriptions have been ruled out so, no. I don't realise that.
Nor would an "optional sub" really work unless the game becomes pay to win.

That leaves microtransactions...which I stated...

But even assuming all of that, nothing here removes the need for CIG to engage in marketing the game in order to sell as many copies as possible.

And a decent marketing and launch campaign...including the possible production and distribution of physical copies and media...can be very expensive.

And then there are running costs. Even with microtransactions, its going to cost a fair bit to have AWS provide their services. CIG are going to want to reserve enough cash for 12-18 months depending on the scale of operations they want. Would that cost them $5000 or $5000000?

In short...CIG are going to need to reserve a substantial sum to cover aspects such as marketing and a certain degree of operational costs. It is impossible to guess how much that reserve should be because we don't know the scale at which SC will operate or the exact margin with which they woyld feel safe


But neither are likely to be cheap.

But as I said, its possible CIG might see no need for a marketing campaign.

It has not been stated there won't be an optional sub for the game, there is actually a current sub at the moment 12 and 24 versions, where they can add upon the current sub with ingame bonus's like extra credits every mission, a sub will always give a slight advantage to the player mostly to make thing take less time to aquire, and as an optional sub you still get full access to the game.

Marketing wise they don't need to do anything further, maybe something when the game is ready for full release but most players who are thinking about the game are either waiting for full release or already have a basic package so marketing is mostly irrelevant.

An optional sub and micro transactions make the most sense business wise to maintain and keep updates coming to the game, if they keep with the 2 optional subs atm they could add like 5% increased credits gain/rep on the cheaper one and 10% for the more expensive version, maybe access to certain ship skins and such or shorter times for ships to be recovered after a loss, a sub should only help the player to speed things up slightly with no other real advantages.

[masterhorus8]

It has not been stated there won't be an optional sub for the game, there is actually a current sub at the moment 12 and 24 versions, where they can add upon the current sub with ingame bonus's like extra credits* every mission, a sub will always give a slight advantage to the player mostly to make thing take less time to aquire, and as an optional sub you still get full access to the game.

Marketing wise they don't need to do anything further, maybe something when the game is ready for full release but most players who are thinking about the game are either waiting for full release or already have a basic package so marketing is mostly irrelevant.

An optional sub and micro transactions make the most sense business wise to maintain and keep updates coming to the game, if they keep with the 2 optional subs atm they could add like 5% increased credits gain/rep on the cheaper one and 10% for the more expensive version, maybe access to certain ship skins and such or shorter times for ships to be recovered after a loss, a sub should only help the player to speed things up slightly with no other real advantages.

*Note about the currency: It's alpha testing currency, not final currency. So none of that sticks through resets. As stated, no real information about the optional sub for the final game yet.

[kenn9530]

*Note about the currency: It's alpha testing currency, not final currency. So none of that sticks through resets. As stated, no real information about the optional sub for the final game yet.

Im hypothetically talking about the current subscriber option being enhanced to give a small ingame bonus, there would be little point in a sub option if it didnt have some ingame benefits.

An optional sub plus micro transaction shop would be the most ideal option to help maintain the game indefinately, as long as players can get full access to the game without it, benefits such as 5% increased uec from completed missions or veteran rewards for every 30 days subscribed like ship skins and such.

It would be hard to maintain the game and pump out content without an optional sub to bring in a few million each month.

[masterhorus8]

Im hypothetically talking about the current subscriber option being enhanced to give a small ingame bonus, there would be little point in a sub option if it didnt have some ingame benefits.

An optional sub plus micro transaction shop would be the most ideal option to help maintain the game indefinately, as long as players can get full access to the game without it, benefits such as 5% increased uec from completed missions or veteran rewards for every 30 days subscribed like ship skins and such.

It would be hard to maintain the game and pump out content without an optional sub to bring in a few million each month.

I can certainly see a monthly sub for currency boosts/currency per month (or week or whatever). As long as none of that bypasses the earning limits that there will supposedly be on UEC in the game.

[Majestic12]

They will make an optional sub for sure. They will also sell ingame credits for rl-cash(that part is confirmed).

The biggest trick will be not making it more pay 2 win than it has the reputation of being now. A lot of people criticise SC because the bigger bucks you toss at the game, the bigger mechanical advantage you have on launch. Mechanical advantages for RL cash leaves a sour taste in many people's mouths. I think they have a point. Just look at the total fleet number vs. actual backers. The ship-to-player ratio is very unbalanced and it is purely because they have sold all ships for rl cash.

Also; it goes without saying that people who bought ships will attack you on sight even on day 1. That and/or grief people with expensive ships using their alt accounts (that we know exists). CIG will have lots of drama on their hands once that starts happening aka Eve style. They will need systems in place to combat this without making people invulnerable.

[stellvia]

The "mechanical advantage" is a bit dubious atm, since the hull doesn't include better fittings, maintenance and crew costs, etc. And until 4.0 or the PU alpha we just won't have a good feel for what it really means. I think people are blowing that part out of proportion, but we'll see I suppose.

I certainly wouldn't want to risk an expensive hull until I had a good feel for safe vs. risky shipping lanes, profitable areas to do various things, etc. Otherwise you're just risking the hull and wasting a ton of fuel aimlessly wandering around.

If people really feel like they would be "missing out", they can join a player corp or w/e and share a larger ship at launch.