[Megathread] Star Citizen

[Eleccybubb]

No idea where you're seeing insults. But considering your track record, it doesn't surprise me at all.

Guys, do with your money what you want. If you're seeing judges here, that means you're feeling guilty, because no one is judging, we're merely questioning your reasons. But every time we do, you throw a hissy fit and jump defence.

Exactly. I've not once told anyone how to spend their money. When someone has asked I've given my opinion that it could be better spent elsewhere but if they want to spend it on this then that decision solely lies with them and nobody else.

[nocturnus]

Exactly. I've not once told anyone how to spend their money. When someone has asked I've given my opinion that it could be better spent elsewhere but if they want to spend it on this then that decision solely lies with them and nobody else.

And as far as I can tell, that's the only thing we did; ask why they still throw money at a product that's being developed by what they call incompetent people.

[Dextroden]

Exactly. I've not once told anyone how to spend their money. When someone has asked I've given my opinion that it could be better spent elsewhere but if they want to spend it on this then that decision solely lies with them and nobody else.

Except you keep screaming it's a scam and they are being scammed.

So, clearly this upsets you like people buying holiday outfits.

[Eleccybubb]

And as far as I can tell, that's the only thing we did; ask why they still throw money at a product that's being developed by what they call incompetent people.

I mean I do have to ask it as well.

You throw a money at a developer you openly admit is incompetent?

Why? That would be like me throwing money at Trion well Gamigo now for Rift. Why throw money at an incompetent developer which they openly admitted to not me when you could throw it at a competent/good one?

I'm not saying don't I'm just curious.

[Dextroden]

I mean I do have to ask it as well.

You throw a money at a developer you openly admit is incompetent?

Why? That would be like me throwing money at Trion well Gamigo now for Rift. Why throw money at an incompetent developer which they openly admitted to not me when you could throw it at a competent/good one?

I'm not saying don't I'm just curious.

If you're fine with people spending money, why do they have to explain themselves to you?

[nocturnus]

If you're fine with people spending money, why do they have to explain themselves to you?

Curiosity. That's all.

[Dextroden]

Curiosity. That's all.

They already sated your curiosity and answered why. Now, it's just being upset that they won't spend their money as you want them to.

[Orange Joe]

They already sated your curiosity and answered why. Now, it's just being upset that they won't spend their money as you want them to.

Not to mention. When we ask them why it's us being upset too.

[nocturnus]

They already sated your curiosity and answered why. Now, it's just being upset that they won't spend their money as you want them to.

Oh, they did?

I had no idea you were the authority that determined whether my curiosity is sated or not. Nor did I know that you decide when someone's upset.

How is that fantasy world you live in?

[Dextroden]

Oh, they did?

I had no idea you were the authority that determined whether my curiosity is sated or not. Nor did I know that you decide when someone's upset.

How is that fantasy world you live in?

I do believe Joe clearly laid out why he spent his money. I'm sorry if you ignored that to rub shoulders with Eleccy.

[nocturnus]

I do believe Joe clearly laid out why he spent his money. I'm sorry if you ignored that to rub shoulders with Eleccy.

Great, you thought Joe was clear. I thought his answer was a deviation, to distract me from the sound of crickets and bouncing hay bales his thought process makes.

As I already said, you do not determine whether others are satisfied or not. Your opinion is irrelevant. Get used to it

[Dextroden]

Great, you thought Joe was clear. I thought his answer was a deviation, to distract me from the sound of crickets and bouncing hay bales his thought process makes.

As I already said, you do not determine whether others are satisfied or not. Your opinion is irrelevant. Get used to it

So great. As stated, the curiosity is sated. It's just being upset now.

Remember. No one has to justify how they spend their money to internet randos.

[nocturnus]

So great. As stated, the curiosity is sated. It's just being upset now.

Remember. No one has to justify how they spend their money to internet randos.

Now you're just repeating what others have been saying. The question is why?

I'll ask again;

- What makes you think the answers provided were satisfactory?
- What makes you continuously suggest I'm "upset"?
- Could it be you're projecting your own feelings?

1. It's their answer. If the answer was I hate having money, that's an answer.
2. Not accepting how people spend their money.

Yes, it is. So? Not accepting? We said more than once we don't care about how they spend their dimes.

I can explain it in eight other languages, but I have an inkling you still wouldn't understand ^^

That's fine though; we're all blessed differently.

[Dextroden]

Now you're just repeating what others have been saying. The question is why?

I'll ask again;

- What makes you think the answers provided were satisfactory?
- What makes you continuously suggest I'm "upset"?

1. It's their answer. If the answer was I hate having money, that's an answer.
2. Not accepting how people spend their money.

[Cyclone Jack]

Nah I just despise devs who take money and fail to deliver.

That's actually far more devs that you realize. Tons of devs, even prominent ones, fail to deliver after taking money. The only difference is, you rarely hear about them. Not to compare, but here are just a few examples that we know about: Star Fox 2, Saint's Row Undercover, Rainbow 6: Patriots, Prey 2, Star Wars 1313, Silent Hills, Mega Man Legends 3, Agent (R* game, in case you hadn't heard of this one), Doom 4, Zone of the Enders 3, Scalebound. In all of those examples, the developers took money and failed to deliver. Heck, I worked on a game that was shelved mid-way through production because another game was released using the same engine, and the publisher thought it would create too much competition with itself. I guess you despise me now, too.

"But SC is crowdfunded." True, but it still doesn't make the above untrue.

Not my problem the game has pissed away the majority of it's resources and only has an Alpha to show for it where an actual studio would have a game or a product close to a release state.

Many studios only run with 1-2 months of money in the banks. They get paid by the publisher for completing milestones, and that's how they stay in the black. Why do you think some studios shut down immediately after releasing a game? Its because they were unable to get another project picked up by a publisher before their current project was completed. Look at Ensemble, they kicked out numerous great games that are still played today (Age of Empires); but that didn't prevent them from shutting down 1-2 weeks before their last game was released.

Neither of the above points are meant to give SC a free pass. I'm just pointing out the obvious that many people conveniently forget, or are ignorant about. SC is just peeling back the covers and letting you see inside the industry, and the gaming industry is not pretty.

I mean I'm talking to the person who got hyped over some cloth. So I imagine you are the same person who got hyped over the constipated facial animations they showed off. Not even kidding. All they did was show the guy with facial animations that literally look like someone who is constipated.

Nowhere did I say I was hyped on cloth. I simply stated that it was probably the best real-time cloth simulation I've seen, I acknowledged that what what shown was indeed nothing more than a demo, and that part of it still needed work. I'm not sure how you inferred that I was hyped on cloth. As for FOIP, eh, I guess if someone was really into RP it could be cool, and I guess(?) its an improvement over what EQ2 had, but I never paid much attention to it.

LOL @ Tiger. You need to go find one of those old Coleco miniature cabinet games like Pac Man or Galaxian. They were slightly a step up from Tiger (not really), but they were still horrible. Of course being a kid at the time, and that they were shaped like little arcade cabinets, made them cool; before you actually got your hands on one.

[Kyanion]

That's actually far more devs that you realize. Tons of devs, even prominent ones, fail to deliver after taking money. The only difference is, you rarely hear about them. Not to compare, but here are just a few examples that we know about: Star Fox 2, Saint's Row Undercover, Rainbow 6: Patriots, Prey 2, Star Wars 1313, Silent Hills, Mega Man Legends 3, Agent (R* game, in case you hadn't heard of this one), Doom 4, Zone of the Enders 3, Scalebound. In all of those examples, the developers took money and failed to deliver. Heck, I worked on a game that was shelved mid-way through production because another game was released using the same engine, and the publisher thought it would create too much competition with itself. I guess you despise me now, too.

"But SC is crowdfunded." True, but it still doesn't make the above untrue.

You are right. It makes the stuff above you irrelevant.

[Majestic12]

They will probably counter you by calling you an "armchair analyst", moving onto a long winded post that makes them seem somewhat intelligent, talk about the "scope and ambition" and then end with a minor insult.



But yeah this literally proves that they've pissed money away with barely anything to show.

Turns out that not even one of the Star Citizen fans dared to contest the points. It's easy for them to write in generalities and run, but to face facts and sources of said claims is too much for them.

People can lie, facts simply don't. With that, it's a victory for our camp.

[Kyanion]

snip.

Many of the things you say make sense and I agree with them. But despite SC showing us an open look at just how the industry is ran does not give them much of a pass. It is crowdfunded and needed to have some transparency. They just haven't done a great job at meeting self imposed deadlines and have spread out so far in what they are trying to deliver.

[Cyclone Jack]

I'll rephrase it, so someone of your cognitive breadth can understand it:

What is the reason that you spend money on a product you yourself say is being developed by incompetent people?

There's a reason beyond "It's mah money, yo!" I hope?

For me, I bought in during the KS, and now I'm just along for the ride.

- - - Updated - - -

Many of the things you say make sense and I agree with them. But despite SC showing us an open look at just how the industry is ran does not give them much of a pass. It is crowdfunded and needed to have some transparency. They just haven't done a great job at meeting self imposed deadlines and have spread out so far in what they are trying to deliver.

Oh, I agree. In fact, I would say other than 2018, the project was all over the place. I think they focused on the wrong things at the wrong time, they brought in 3rd parties to help with developing a game they themselves still hadn't fully mapped out, and because of that they had to redo a huge amount of work. It also didn't help that CR couldn't stop spewing mounds of bullshit year after year. It took them far too long to put a muzzle on him.

EDIT: I also think that bringing the planet tech in so early caused them to shift focus too much. This is a feature that was scheduled to be added in post-launch, but since the engineers were able to get it working when they did it shifted a huge amount of development around and forced them to grow the team even more; now you need to bring in terrain artists, add ground-based content and vehicles, new transports for those new vehicles, you need to create more tools to create biomes, you need to add in atmospheric flight, etc. It ballooned the project 100 fold.

Planets also affected SQ42, vastly delaying it. Now they've got to go back and add additional content to the game that they hadn't planned on. When they say that someone played through the game, it might have actually been true when they said it. But with the addition of planets, now they've gone back through and rescripted the game to add in all of this new planetary content. Now they're probably adding some vehicle sections, much more FPS combat, etc. I wouldn't be surprised if planets doubled the scope of the game.

[stellvia]

Is it just me, or does anyone else feel "I don't like crowdfunding, therefore this game is a scam and stealing peoples money" isn't a valid criticism? The game may or may not come out yet, but the entire point of going to crowdfunding route was that no publisher would finance making the game Roberts wanted to make. Those crowdfunding understand (or should understand) that it's not a guarantee, but that everyone also expresses their wish to finally see a space sim game that is the "complete package", as it were.

I just don't see where that line of reasoning is supposed to go and how it contributes meaningfully to discussion. It wasn't going to get funded and be able to compile all the features they wanted through a traditional publisher. So we have people complaining about why didn't they fund normally through a publisher and they should have just cut features and released it sooner, etc. Which is like the literal anti-thesis of the game they wanted to make...