[Megathread] Star Citizen

[KyrtF]

So your telling me that CiG had 400 plus personell and studios between LA,uk and germany before they even started the kickstarter in Oct 2012, i mean thats a fairly large financial strain before you even start progress on the game, if they have that sort of money at the start before a kickstarter then you should stop the discussions on not having money to complete the game.

They had 48. That made them larger than many other dev teams.

Truth is...CIG don't need 450 people even now. They should be concentrating on getting their engine up and running and then that same team should move over to game function and content. Right now game development is being hamstrung because they don't have a finished engine and while they are developing content, a lot of that will need to be reworked because of the realities of software development.

Your statement above is a complete lie, it took a few years before they got the personnel they currently have.

I never said they had the people they have now.

Fact of the matter is, even a studio with a full roster of personel from the beginning would have a hard time creating this game.

They'd have a much easier time if they followed best practise for game development and worked on creating their basic engine and game framework first. Polishing the game and creating assets is what Beta is for.

What it comes down to is that CIG are creating a lot of content...but 99% of that content...by necessity...is going to be proc generated and mostly empty. The rest of that content is going to be divided between a space sim and a FPS...both of which have been done before, and done well.

Whats keeping CIG ftom moving faster is a mix of incompetence, which led them to throw away years of work, feature creep which forces them to go back and rework aspects of the game and poor development practise which sees them...as an example...create assets and features which SHOULD be created in Beta created in the pre-Alpha stage instead...and which will require reworking later on in the development process, not to mention the potential for bad code, performance issues and bugs.

For all the hype and excitement about 3.0....the simple truth is that it shouldn't exist until the engine work is complete. With a finalised engine, with a common framework around which to build the game, development is easier, simpler, cheaper and quicker. That CIG is developing assets which should be created during Beta at a time when the engine and pre-Alpha work is still ongoing tells me a lot about their priorities and ability to create the game.

It can still be done. It will just be a lot slower, more expensive and complex and more prone to various bugs. CIG will need to redo a lot of work...and we see from 3.0 that that work has already begun.

[nocturnus]

Snip

Oh dear, the way you're defending the game makes me cringe. How much money did you sink in this pile of bugs?

You sound awefully much like someone with buyer's remorse and choice supportive bias; you know you bought something you shouldn't have but hate to admit it because you think it would reflect poorly on you. Au contraire, you hysterically defend your purchase beyond all rationality by denying tangible facts.

Quite interesting.

[MrAnderson]

Well this is typical case of a boy who fell in love with an idea of a game and got his heart broken instead.

Coping with the fact that his dream game is not exactly like how he expected to be (usually it's because o the flight model or for being banned from the official forum) has turned high expectation into high frustration.

The only way to end this deeply engraved type of frustration is by finding a "new love" (They wanted Elite to be it but...lol) and suppress the feeling of emptiness with newborn hype or seeing the "true love" die so they can get some closure and finally move on with their life's.

As for the few non backers who seem to be on a crusade to criticize CIG and Star Citizen for everything and some more are usually goons riding the wave, envious elite dangerous fanboys afraid that SC undermines their "lover's success" or folks that think they look witty by being cynical despite only following the game by reading the media clickbate headlines.

That's about it. Give or take.

Love hurts.

Guess you allways have Elite to help you sleep at night.

[1001]

Love hurts.

Guess you allways have Elite to help you sleep at night.

Funny how it's always the antagonising zealots like yourself who need to feel it's an "us vs them" situation rather than accepting it could simply be space game fans who are disappointed with the way CIG are doing things.

If you have to put down other games to make yours sound better then it's you that has the problem.

[MrAnderson]

If you have to put down other games to make yours sound better then it's you that has the problem.

Exactly why Star Citizen gets so many oblivious haters. They cant handle it being so popular and stealing the limelight whille continuously showcasing more features that "other released games" promised but will never deliver.

Funny indeed.

[Deleted]

Exactly why Star Citizen gets so many oblivious haters. They cant handle it being so popular and stealing the limelight whille continuously showcasing more features that "other released games" promised but will never deliver.

Funny indeed.

I think the majority if gamers dont even remember Star Citizen anymore, I forgot about it. Is it released or do they still just release/update "modules" which they will combine later? Or the way it's now, is that how it will be?
This game have been in development for how many years now? Will it ever be finished, probably not.

[Wilian]

I think the majority if gamers dont even remember Star Citizen anymore, I forgot about it. Is it released or do they still just release/update "modules" which they will combine later? Or the way it's now, is that how it will be?
This game have been in development for how many years now? Will it ever be finished, probably not.

They might release first vertical slice this year but it's highly doubtful.

[zealo]

Exactly why Star Citizen gets so many oblivious haters. They cant handle it being so popular and stealing the limelight whille continuously showcasing more features that "other released games" promised but will never deliver.

Funny indeed.

With 3.0 being nearly a year late, and with all signs pointing to that they wont hit a 2017 release at all for that, Star Citizen isn't stealing the limelight from anything.

[KyrtF]

Exactly why Star Citizen gets so many oblivious haters. They cant handle it being so popular and stealing the limelight whille continuously showcasing more features that "other released games" promised but will never deliver.

Funny indeed.

Popular? It has a few dozen "players" on board most of the time....that isn't popular.

And other games can easily do what CIG are doing and promise the world and the sky and stars for their feature list.

CIG has a problem delivering...so far, there is no game and the demos have limited playability and content. Even 3.0 won't improve on that much.

Maybe when 4.0 is released we'll see some semblence of a game.

[Wilian]

Popular? It has a few dozen "players" on board most of the time....that isn't popular.

And other games can easily do what CIG are doing and promise the world and the sky and stars for their feature list.

CIG has a problem delivering...so far, there is no game and the demos have limited playability and content. Even 3.0 won't improve on that much.

Maybe when 4.0 is released we'll see some semblencecof a game.

3.0 - Vertical Slice
4.0 - Alpha
5.0 - Beta
6.0 - First third of the game is released and rest is cut up to DLC

This is assuming they don't run out of money somewhere between 3-5

[MrAnderson]

With 3.0 being nearly a year late, and with all signs pointing to that they wont hit a 2017 release at all for that, Star Citizen isn't stealing the limelight from anything.

Every week its on the frontpage of the major gaming news website and makes ~1 million on a bad month...

If the haters are buthurt now by the simple showcase of the player increase wait until the really amazing footage of the planetary landings, player models, day/night cycles new ships and much more start to surface...

Prepare your negative spin drivel nonsense because you will need it.

Group Smeltdown incoming. Screeech

[1001]

Every week its on the frontpage of the major gaming news website and makes ~1 million on a bad month...

If the haters are buthurt now by the simple showcase of the player increase wait until the really amazing footage of the planetary landings, player models, day/night cycles new ships and much more start to surface...

Prepare your negative spin drivel nonsense because you will need it.

Group Smeltdown incoming. Screeech

Is it not possible to discuss these things without being so obnoxious, or are you a goon just trolling people?

1 million a month is $2188 per month per employee. Studio costs are approximately $10,000 per month per employee, so a shortfall of $7812.

[Mister K]

No...it isn't. And it is still years behind schedule.

There is an argument when exactly the development started. The problem is that there is no universal definitions when a software development starts.


Do it starts with a idea? Or with a prototype? Or when there is a (full) development team and money? Or take we just the official starting date?
To give a short reverse timeline of the beginning:

• The official development start date for SC is January 2013 with the foundation of the first game studio (source: Gamescome 2016 presentation)
  
  
• the game was "funded" with the end of the kickstarter in November 2012 (that why we have the fourth anniversary last month)
  
• the firm CIG was funded in April 2012 (sources: their webside)
  
• CR said that he worked on the prototype and preproduction since a year before october2012 (sources: some interviews in that time)
  
  

Therefore there are arguments for several stating dates between the end of 2011 and January 2013.

Also game of this scope, 4-6 years development time is not that much. Like I said in my previous points, they could have shaved of year or two from the useless gimmicks they have been so keen on adding however, I and many others (majority it looks like) do not care.

The engine isn't complete and it's not feature complete. Thst is what the industry calls pre-Alpha. CIG are working TOWARDS an Alpha build but they don't have one yet. They are at least a year away from an Alpha build. And then they need to work on a Beta build.

And THEN....and not before...is when they should be adding much of the content such as ships and missions and planets. You can't even say they're getting a head start; one of the reasons assets like that are created in Beta is because most developers don't like reworking assets and content that is created too early. You know....the way CIG have already started to do.

No, this is alpha. They have a working game running which is open to public. Engine is not complete, no engine is ever "complete"

Haven't you been keeping up to date with their funding charts?

Are the monthly subscriptions added to the charts? Even so, I am not surprised the montary gain has lowered. This is not Microsoft, Apple etc... Its a gaming company. Rapid deceleration was to be expected otherwise with your logic, we would be at what, 350-450 mill now?

You don't know you can check on search frequencies on Google?

https://trends.google.co.uk/trends/e...,squadron%2042 right, still means f* all...

Looks like the traffic has gone down yes, but according to you, search frequencies are down, well not according to Alexa. Although, its Alexa and useless parameters, unless you have GA/FB Insights you won't be seeing any accurate results... https://www.alexa.com/siteinfo/rober...industries.com

CRs vision of ignoring standard practise in how the game is being developed is costing his company millions of YOUR dollars

Wait so you have not purchased the game? Why are you even in this thread then LOL! I am fine with it, they are creating tech. Worst case, their tech will be outsourced to other games which will utilize the tech.

There is a difference between refining and improving an engine...and adding basic core functionality. CIGs engine lacks core functionality needed for the game.

I take it you work there?

The netcode has been delayed from 3.0 because it isn't finished. If it were finished it would potentially solve several of the performance issues they are experiencing and allow for much bigger more stable instances. It may come in 3.x but it is NOT ready now. It would be a MAJOR addition to the game and worthy of a great deal of hype if it were. If it WERE ready and CIG weren't adding it, that would be one more sign of incompetence.

They still found time to add FOIP. And regardless of how you think server meshes work, CIG have not even started to develop them yet. I don't need access to their internal files to hear what their developers state in their posts and interviews

Well you do. Their developers have stated push-backs, its what happens when there is no 3rd party publisher breathing down their necks. More time for polish and refinement.

He estimated 3.0 would take weeks till release. Its now been almost a year....FOUR times longer. That's not a delay caused by competent management.

I guess you prefer games like BF1, or every other game on this current market, same old rehashed model because "lets meet deadlines and release to public"... "lets not take any risks"...

Yeah....which does NOT change that he still needed and should have had the engine ready BEFORE he started work on missions, planets, ships and all else.

Best way to build a framework is to begin working on the actual environment the framework is going to be used in. Start with a basic layout, go from there and build upon it. Blizzard has done it.

You don't get it...do you? A competent company would not have shown a pre Alpha to the public but if they did, they'd have ensured only to show the parts that worked. As it was...it was a shambles and poorly produced.

Yes they usually wouldn't. Why? Investors and publishers would go into an uproar. It was stated before why this game is accessible to public.



_______________________

Honestly, I don't care how this game goes. The possibility if they achieve majority of what they have layed out, I would be very happy.

I am sick an tired of games these days. They are the same, not pushing ANY boundaries. You name them, BF1, AC, GTA, PUBG, MOBAS, RTS, and SPECIALLY MMOs are all the same copy/paste with a different skin. It has been like this for decades.

Games like Minecraft, CS:GO, WoW have all done something to change the reality of how games are played today. Implemented QoL features we see. Its time for a change and Star Citizen is doing that. Sure, the game could be in a better state however if worst comes to worst and it burns and crashes, there are technologies and assets which are most likely going to be reused/sold off...

Chris Roberts is pushing boundaries of gaming and specifically MMOS (I take SC is a space/sim/mmo?).

- - - Updated - - -

Popular? It has a few dozen "players" on board most of the time....that isn't popular.

It is popular, not in public eye as marketing it would probably not the smartest of moves right now. It runs like dog shit, I am surprised people are online.

[Shadowswann]

There is an argument when exactly the development started. The problem is that there is no universal definitions when a software development starts.


Do it starts with a idea? Or with a prototype? Or when there is a (full) development team and money? Or take we just the official starting date?
To give a short reverse timeline of the beginning:

• The official development start date for SC is January 2013 with the foundation of the first game studio (source: Gamescome 2016 presentation)
  
  
• the game was "funded" with the end of the kickstarter in November 2012 (that why we have the fourth anniversary last month)
  
• the firm CIG was funded in April 2012 (sources: their webside)
  
• CR said that he worked on the prototype and preproduction since a year before october2012 (sources: some interviews in that time)
  
  

Therefore there are arguments for several stating dates between the end of 2011 and January 2013.

Also game of this scope, 4-6 years development time is not that much. Like I said in my previous points, they could have shaved of year or two from the useless gimmicks they have been so keen on adding however, I and many others (majority it looks like) do not care.






No, this is alpha. They have a working game running which is open to public. Engine is not complete, no engine is ever "complete"



Are the monthly subscriptions added to the charts? Even so, I am not surprised the montary gain has lowered. This is not Microsoft, Apple etc... Its a gaming company. Rapid deceleration was to be expected otherwise with your logic, we would be at what, 350-450 mill now?



https://trends.google.co.uk/trends/e...,squadron%2042 right, still means f* all...

Looks like the traffic has gone down yes, but according to you, search frequencies are down, well not according to Alexa. Although, its Alexa and useless parameters, unless you have GA/FB Insights you won't be seeing any accurate results... https://www.alexa.com/siteinfo/rober...industries.com




Wait so you have not purchased the game? Why are you even in this thread then LOL! I am fine with it, they are creating tech. Worst case, their tech will be outsourced to other games which will utilize the tech.




I take it you work there?




Well you do. Their developers have stated push-backs, its what happens when there is no 3rd party publisher breathing down their necks. More time for polish and refinement.




I guess you prefer games like BF1, or every other game on this current market, same old rehashed model because "lets meet deadlines and release to public"... "lets not take any risks"...



Best way to build a framework is to begin working on the actual environment the framework is going to be used in. Start with a basic layout, go from there and build upon it. Blizzard has done it.



Yes they usually wouldn't. Why? Investors and publishers would go into an uproar. It was stated before why this game is accessible to public.



_______________________

Honestly, I don't care how this game goes. The possibility if they achieve majority of what they have layed out, I would be very happy.

I am sick an tired of games these days. They are the same, not pushing ANY boundaries. You name them, BF1, AC, GTA, PUBG, MOBAS, RTS, and SPECIALLY MMOs are all the same copy/paste with a different skin. It has been like this for decades.

Games like Minecraft, CS:GO, WoW have all done something to change the reality of how games are played today. Implemented QoL features we see. Its time for a change and Star Citizen is doing that. Sure, the game could be in a better state however if worst comes to worst and it burns and crashes, there are technologies and assets which are most likely going to be reused/sold off...

Chris Roberts is pushing boundaries of gaming and specifically MMOS (I take SC is a space/sim/mmo?).

- - - Updated - - -



It is popular, not in public eye as marketing it would probably not the smartest of moves right now. It runs like dog shit, I am surprised people are online.

Don't bother with troll and SC , they can still open their mouth , we just have to wait a few years (yeah again ) to make them stfu.
Also not sure its a great think talking/advertising SC here , not sure i would like wow plebs in there :/. Let them be busy with their new korean grind fest that wow became =)

[Mister K]

Don't bother with troll and SC , they can still open their mouth , we just have to wait a few years (yeah again ) to make them stfu.
Also not sure its a great think talking/advertising SC here , not sure i would like wow plebs in there :/. Let them be busy with their new korean grind fest that wow became =)

I will probably forget about SC as I did before. I haven't touched it for solid 2 years and I tried it again and was impressed. Its a slow process but I think it will be very rewarding. I think we all have concerns, my one being the content/"end-game" but nothing great is made quickly, unless its those copy-paste games we have been getting for a while now, specially MMOs.

[MrAnderson]

Don't bother with troll and SC , they can still open their mouth , we just have to wait a few years (yeah again ) to make them stfu.
Also not sure its a great think talking/advertising SC here , not sure i would like wow plebs in there :/. Let them be busy with their new korean grind fest that wow became =)

It would be the righteous thing to do but since they have such a hard on for seeing SC fail and can't help to pollute every Star Citizen subject with a comment section they find with their ignorant spiel might as well an join the fun.

Is it not possible to discuss these things without being so obnoxious, or are you a goon just trolling people?

1 million a month is $2188 per month per employee. Studio costs are approximately $10,000 per month per employee, so a shortfall of $7812.

"CIG Is About To Close Any Minute Now"
circa 2015

[KyrtF]

There is an argument when exactly the development started. The problem is that there is no universal definitions when a software development starts.

No...there isn't. 2011.
There is a "debate" as to whether we should ignore the first two years or the first three years or the first four years by trying to redefine what is meant by "development" so as to make Star Citizen and CIG look better by making it seem the game was not started in 2011.

So far, I don't see any reason to treat CIG as a special snowflake or give them any favours by redefining what people and industry means by "development".

The official development start date for SC is January 2013 with the foundation of the first game studio (source: Gamescome 2016

I'll go with 2011. Source....Chris Roberts. Like it or not....all that prototyping and other work? That IS part of the development process. It isn't my fault Star Citizens developnent has been more troubled than most games or experienced more delays so why should I redefine standard terminology?

SC started development in 2011. CIG was founded in 2010. Star Citizen has been in development for 6 years now...almost 7.

Also game of this scope, 4-6 years development time is not that much.

Four years is normal...but on the high side
Six years start to finish is high but not unknown.

Six years....still in the pre Alpha stage....game engine is not finished...developing an MMO without viable netcode or critical server technology....

THAT isn't usual. These days it is VERY unusual.

You are right. Four-Six years isn't unusual. Four to six years...START TO FINISH. Not "start to halfway through preAlpha".

Like I said in my previous points, they could have shaved of year or two from the useless gimmicks they have been so keen on adding however, I and many others (majority it looks like) do not care.

They could have shaved off even more if they'd had competent management.

No, this is alpha. They have a working game running which is open to public. Engine is not complete, no engine is ever "complete"

The engine is still missing core systems. The game is missing core functionality. By definition it is in a preAlpha state.

CIG is developing Beta level assets..yes. Most developer teams avoid doing such work at this stage because changes that take place mean such work is usually thrown out or repeated during Beta anyway.

Trying to redefine standard terms used by industry to make CIG look better? I'm not going to do that.

Are the monthly subscriptions added to the charts? Even so, I am not surprised the montary gain has lowered. This is not Microsoft, Apple etc... Its a gaming company. Rapid deceleration was to be expected otherwise with your logic, we would be at what, 350-450 mill now?

Those subscriptions pay for CRs production company to make all those vids. And the problems isn't that revenue is falling...rather than CIG is now losing money.

https://trends.google.co.uk/trends/e...,squadron%2042 right, still means f* all...

Not my problem you don't know how to use such websites.

Wait so you have not purchased the game? Why are you even in this thread then LOL! I am fine with it, they are creating tech. Worst case, their tech will be outsourced to other games which will utilize the tech.

It isn't THEIR tech to outsource. Even the engine isn't theirs. They are creating a game using technology and concepts created by others.

I take it you work there?

No. CIG tells us this stuff.

Well you do. Their developers have stated push-backs, its what happens when there is no 3rd party publisher breathing down their necks. More time for polish and refinement.

Polish and refinement during the preAlpha state is a waste of time and money. A lot of the work you are praising will need to be thrown out and redone because of changes that take place during development.

You are praising them for going out of their way to burn your money.

They really should not be developing Beta level assets and content right now.

I guess you prefer games like BF1, or every other game on this current market, same old rehashed model because "lets meet deadlines and release to public"... "lets not take any risks"...

I prefer games that are fun to play. Star Citizen might fall into that category. Someday...when it is released. If Chris Roberts abandons some of his poorer gameplay ideas.

Best way to build a framework is to begin working on the actual environment the framework is going to be used in. Start with a basic layout, go from there and build upon it. Blizzard has done it.

I wonder if you really believe that or if you are getting paid?

What you've said is gibberish. You don't need an "environment" to create an engine or framework. You do need an engine, do need that common framework to create the environment. You need some common core around which elements of the game can be created so they can...putting it very simply....talk to and work with each other.

CIG got off to a good start by licensing CryEngine. It is quicker to tweak and adjust an engine than create one from scratch....within reason. But CIG have done more than tweak the engine. They've ripped out most of its functionality and rewritten most of it anyway. Only its taken longer than necessary because they've also been trying to create Alpha and Beta level assets and having to rework huge segments at the same time.

Yes they usually wouldn't. Why? Investors and publishers would go into an uproar. It was stated before why this game is accessible to public.

But it isn't. And this was a PR demo at a fund raising event. That they showed what they did shows much about their competency. They tried...they shut down functionality. They had a special build. They rehearsed the demo.

They tried to do what a competent company would do...and they failed.

That isn't being "open"...that is trying and failing.

Sure, the game could be in a better state however if worst comes to worst and it burns and crashes, there are technologies and assets which are most likely going to be reused/sold off...

What technologies? They've developed nothing new and StarEngine is a modified version of a licensed engine. What assets? Their PCs?

FOIP? Licensed. Serialised variables? RaaT? 64 bit computing? Not theirs. Procedural generation? That isn't new. And what they've handcrafted is usable only in Star Citizen

There is nothing new or innovative or ground breaking here.

[MrAnderson]

There is nothing new or innovative or ground breaking here.

O'rly? That's funny because some companies seem to think other wise...





https://www.intel.com/content/www/us...00p-brief.html




http://www.amd.com/en-us/markets/gam.../star-citizen#

[KyrtF]

O'rly? That's funny because some companies seem to think other wise...

Perhaps then, instead of repeating yourself, you can instead point out something which is "new" or "groundbreaking" or "innovative"?

It isn't serialised variables or RaaT, nor is it sublimation AI or procedurally generated cities. It isn't procedurally generated solar systems or localise physics grids, all of which and more is technology used before...sometimes for decades.

At best, CIG amended its game engine to include these systems but none of them were developed by CIG nor were any of them innovated by CIG nor are any of them ground breaking for having been used by CIG.

Star Citizen is built on the innovations of other teams. It is following where they led.

[MrAnderson]

Perhaps then, instead of repeating yourself, you can instead point out something which is "new" or "groundbreaking" or "innovative"?

It isn't serialised variables or RaaT, nor is it sublimation AI or procedurally generated cities. It isn't procedurally generated solar systems or localise physics grids, all of which and more is technology used before...sometimes for decades.

At best, CIG amended its game engine to include these systems but none of them were developed by CIG nor were any of them innovated by CIG nor are any of them ground breaking for having been used by CIG.

Star Citizen is built on the innovations of other teams. It is following where they led.

Please post productively. Infracted. -Edge

Sorry about that but I couldn't help it really, you know what they say...

"If a picture is worth a thousand words, a GIF is surely worth a million"