[Megathread] Star Citizen

[1001]

Also everything will be obtainable in game so everyone can get stuff. They don't sell any extra powerful weaons or ships, just the ones you can get in the game for "free".

Earning them in game is kind of irrelevant though. The point is that some people can start with them immediately while other people have to spend time earning credits to buy them, and while they're doing those jobs they are more vulnerable because they aren't kitted out so well. For all we know the hulls could be reasonably cheap and the real cost lies in the modules which would give an even larger advantage to paying customers.

Big ships needs a lot of crews, maintenance is high, and if they blow up the insurance takes longer the bigger the ship. Small ships minutes/hours big ships days even weeks.

Or NPC crews. We don't know how high the maintenance is, more importantly we don't know how high it is in comparison to smaller ships.
The insurance wait is not so drastic, you can simply pay UEC to speed things up by 4x or whatever it is.

Lastly this is still a skill based game, bigger guns/ship not necessarily means winning.

That's the intention, will it be the reality though? Until the ships are finished, ie all features and mechanics implemented, it's nothing more than conjecture.

It would be nice if there was more detail from CIG's camp on how all of these things will function, it would save so many arguments and speculative discussions

[masterhorus8]

That's the intention, will it be the reality though? Until the ships are finished, ie all features and mechanics implemented, it's nothing more than conjecture.

Regarding this bit, there is indeed a pretty big difference between the $170 Saber and the start $45 Aurora. The TTK is pretty high, and last time I played, just high enough that the shields would easily recharge before being able to hit again. On the other hand, I have seen a skill player demolish everyone with the starter ship, but I'm pretty sure everyone else weren't exactly the best.

[Malibutomi]

Earning them in game is kind of irrelevant though. The point is that some people can start with them immediately while other people have to spend time earning credits to buy them, and while they're doing those jobs they are more vulnerable because they aren't kitted out so well. For all we know the hulls could be reasonably cheap and the real cost lies in the modules which would give an even larger advantage to paying customers.

That is really a pointless debate. By this logic noones allowed to play the game sooner then you - if you start later for some reason - because they would have an advantage. Or noone should be allowed to play it more than you because they gain an advantage? What is the difference, if you play 2-3 hours on the first day, a nolifer play 22 and on the next day you log in still to your small starter ship and he already comes in a Hornet and blow your ass up?Is it make you feel better that he spent a day and night grinding? You won't even know, but your ship is still blown up. You just gonna say fkin pay to win.
Also as you so easily pop the point "noone knows until it's finished and we see how it works out" on other topics, that applies here as well.

Or NPC crews. We don't know how high the maintenance is, more importantly we don't know how high it is in comparison to smaller ships.
The insurance wait is not so drastic, you can simply pay UEC to speed things up by 4x or whatever it is.

Well we just know they said the maintenance will behigh, fuel costs will be huge, and they couldn't even dock anywhere with the big ships.

That's the intention, will it be the reality though? Until the ships are finished, ie all features and mechanics implemented, it's nothing more than conjecture.

It would be nice if there was more detail from CIG's camp on how all of these things will function, it would save so many arguments and speculative discussions

Agree on that until things are finished, and nothing set in stone we don't know sure things. That's why i don't get the pages long debate about it.

Just to be clear: ofc everyone should voice their opinions and criticism. I just think the several pages debate is pointless when we don't know any facts basically.

[Miyani]

That is really a pointless debate. By this logic noones allowed to play the game sooner then you - if you start later for some reason - because they would have an advantage. Or noone should be allowed to play it more than you because they gain an advantage? What is the difference, if you play 2-3 hours on the first day, a nolifer play 22 and on the next day you log in still to your small starter ship and he already comes in a Hornet and blow your ass up?Is it make you feel better that he spent a day and night grinding? You won't even know, but your ship is still blown up. You just gonna say fkin pay to win.
Also as you so easily pop the point "noone knows until it's finished and we see how it works out" on other topics, that applies here as well.

Indeed, the whole pay to win cause someone has a ship before them makes no sense to me. This isn't a pvp only game and there will be safe starting zones. Some of the bigger ships like the javelin wont even have turrets when the game goes live, they have said they wont come installed with them and will be up to the player to equip them first. A lot of the medium/bigger ships also come with downgraded weapons, so size 5 turrets but only come with size 4 installed. Voyages direct is kinda meh for what it offers, i have a friend who spent a lot decking out one of his fighters in weapons from voyager only for those weapons to later go through a balance patch and be worse than the standard ones the ship came with in the first place.

People that complain about people starting with bigger ships than them make no sense to me, whats the difference with this and someone joining the game 1-2 years after it goes live and encountering a player who has played since launch? What do they want to happen? maybe yearly resets on the anniversary date where everyone loses all their ships and saved UEC and has to start with an aurora again each year so new joiners don't feel left out?

Besides funding for the game the other ships will allow people to spread out and enter different niches so not everyone on day one will be running errands in an aurora/mustang in the same area for a couple of hours... I always hated that rush when a new expansion came out in say WOW and all of a sudden thousands of people were stuck in the same area doing the same quest and making it impossible to progress with that one questline that had a queue just for a chance to kill the spawned mob.

As stated starting with a big ship won't be all fun and games for everyone either, the maintenance/fuel and crewing will be a nightmare come the first days of launch. People won't be able to afford NPCs and wont have the best equipment available. Try taking your no turret javelin into deep space with zero crew and you are in for a bad time. People that wish to prey on the new players even if fully decked out in the best of the best equipment will have t deal with the UEE NPC defence in safe high sec zones. Maybe they will kill the new player before defence arrives maybe, but they will not last long as a pirate in high sec space to make it worth their while. (reminds me of WoW when a max lvl player would try sneaking into a starting zone to target new players, sometimes they would kill them sometimes not a lot of the time i'd see them slaughtered by a guard or a max level player of an opposing faction). My only wish is if in a starter area or with only so much play time and your ship is destroyed by griefers that you can get a replacement quicker at maybe no charge but this will have to be done properly so it doesn't just include idiots that flew into a building upon take off for the first time, something i am guilty off doing myself on more than one occasion ><

By the time a new player is ready to venture out of high sec they will have enough funds saved to buy/upgrade their ships to deal with pirates even if those pirates had previously brought/upgraded their weapons. The pirates will still be situated in lawless areas and be more prone to coming under attack themselves from other pirates/aliens and have most likely incurred larger monetary problems just trying to always keep repaired and ready, so will ultimately probably equal out their standings with someone who hasn't had t deal with that.

The voyager cap on buying in game money has not even been established yet, they may change values of it or even still get rid of the idea completely. It was just a method they were looking into for future funding of the game and they have stated multiple times that the figure wont be high enough to interfere with none paying players the figure will probably be enough for some fuel and ammo and will have a cap on how much can be brought each month.

I'am sure if the complainer can come up with an amazing way to fund the game after launch instead of you know just complaining then CIG will be all ears and happy to hear them out. But complainers very rarely actually help out in such cases and would just rather moan at what they don't like than offer potential solutions for what they would like instead.

[thyNoobthyPrey]

A very interesting discussion about microtransactions in Star Citizen. Although I do think the pro Star Citizen chaps have the upper hand on this one

[Eleccybubb]

A very interesting discussion about microtransactions in Star Citizen. Although I do think the pro Star Citizen chaps have the upper hand on this one

Well no they don't.

They are defending really scummy practices along with borderline P2W mechanics.

Not to mention throwing them in during an Alpha test which is just blatant cash grabbing.

The "pro Star Citizen" bunch are the part of the community I'd want to avoid personally. As with any game community. Because they are the people who act like their game is the greatest gift to mankind and flawless and any critique you post is "hating or bashing".

It's a rancid side of a community imo and one that causes good games to go down the tube in the future because they encourage this behavior and do their utmost best to block out the critique of said systems. As do community moderators of said games.

No game is flawless. No game is perfect.

[thyNoobthyPrey]

Well no they don't.

They are defending really scummy practices along with borderline P2W mechanics.

Not to mention throwing them in during an Alpha test which is just blatant cash grabbing.

The "pro Star Citizen" bunch are the part of the community I'd want to avoid personally. As with any game community. Because they are the people who act like their game is the greatest gift to mankind and flawless and any critique you post is "hating or bashing". It's a rancid side of a community imo and one that causes good games to go down the tube in the future.

No game is flawless. No game is perfect.

No the rancid side of the community is the one who hates, and bashes everything and makes it their point in life to find flaws in others work while creating nothing of value themselves. Like literally spending years in thread bashing someone elses work lol, it's just pathetic.

[Eleccybubb]

No the rancid side of the community is the one who hates, and bashes everything and makes it their point in life to find flaws in others work while creating nothing of value themselves. Like literally spending years in thread bashing someone elses work lol, it's just pathetic.

Who here is bashing other than a couple of people? If you feel that way about them then report them to a moderator or use the ignore function on this website. As I have for those who are defending the game and attacking any critique as "hating".

Hate to tell you but bashing the game is just as bad as blindly defending a game. Critique is needed. Don't pretend that some of the critique presented in this forum is "bashing" because that's just grasping at straws.

So both sides are rancid. People bashing a game without fair critique are just as bad as those defending awful practices put into the game and like the game is the greatest gift to mankind.

Right now those people are acting like this game is already out when it's just a really early Alpha build. Praising it and acting like it's Game of the Year 2017 although ironically the game isn't fully out yet so it couldn't even get that award.

- - - Updated - - -

Tons "pro star citizen chaps" are against them.

But it’s thanks to these people who have the “upper hand” that companies such as EA keep going deeper and deeper up everyone’s ass.

But yeah, welcome to mmo-champ.

Pretty much.

I mean I'm all for cosmetic microtransactions but putting them in an Alpha or bordering on P2W mechanics is just gross and greedy.

I mean as I said earlier I wish they were never a thing at all but well... times change sadly.

And it's because of these kinds of players that good games have gone down the tubes by focusing on how much you can squeeze out of people rather than making quality content or half decent content.

[thyNoobthyPrey]

Who here is bashing other than a couple of people?

Hate to tell you but bashing the game is just as bad as blindly defending a game. Critique is needed. Don't pretend that some of the critique presented in this forum is "bashing" because that's just grasping at straws.

So both sides are rancid. People bashing a game without fair critique are just as bad as those defending awful practices put into the game and like the game is the greatest gift to mankind.

Right now those people are acting like this game is already out when it's just a really early Alpha build. Praising it and acting like it's Game of the Year 2017 although ironically the game isn't fully out yet so it couldn't even get that award.

They are defending it because you have to admit, there have been some detractors that don't exactly have benign intentions for the project and rub their hands together in glee at thought of the project failing. So when it looks like people are just looking for any old excuse to bash the game, since alot of their original claims have been proven to be nonsense, you're going to get thrown into that camp by default. It's probably best to see how the game turns out or at least wait until closer to release if you haven't already thrown your hat into the ring by buying into the project yourself. You have to see how their monitization model fits within the context of the game before judging it, and like other posters have mentioned, the huge scope of Star Citizen puts it in a different category than say Overwatch or Battlefront II. Personally I think at CIG should adopt a subscription and currency token model like WoW for the MMO side of things and not try to rely on microtransactions to support the game but we will have to wait and see.

[Eleccybubb]

They are defending it because you have to admit, there have been some detractors that don't exactly have benign intentions for the project and rub their hands together in glee at thought of the project failing. So when it looks like people are just looking for any old excuse to bash the game, since alot of their original claims have been proven to be nonsense, you're going to get thrown into that camp by default. It's probably best to see how the game turns out or at least wait until closer to release if you haven't already thrown your hat into the ring by buying into the project yourself. You have to see how their monitization model fits within the context of the game before judging it, and like other posters have mentioned, the huge scope of Star Citizen puts it in a different category than say Overwatch or Battlefront II. Personally I think at CIG should adopt a subscription and currency token model like WoW for the MMO side of things and not try to rely on microtransactions to support the game but we will have to wait and see.

I disagree.

The game has been delayed consistently, managed poorly and the guy incharge hasn't got the best track record other than 1 good game among other things.

The game is open to fair criticism. Throwing microtransactions in during the Alpha phase is greedy and cash grabby.

And no it should really not go for a sub model. A modern sub game is a recipe for failure. Name me 2 big games outside of WoW and FF14 that use a sub by default.

[thyNoobthyPrey]

And no it should really not go for a sub model. A modern sub game is a recipe for failure. Name me 2 big games outside of WoW and FF14 that use a sub by default.

Big games is the keyword, a game can only succeed with a subscription model if it reaches critical mass, and I do believe Star Citizen has a good shot at reaching that point. There are other benefits to having a subscription model like keeping out the riff-raff, multiplayer community based games that are too affordable for everyone really do have extremely toxic communities.

- - - Updated - - -

I disagree.

The game has been delayed consistently, managed poorly, the guy incharge hasn't got the best track record other than 1 good game among other things.

Considering the pedigree of the developers working on the game, if the game is taking this long to make then that's how long it needs, it was going to take that long anyway. I will say that I don't like how they promised release dates that were then delayed, I think they shouldn't have given dates at all except for within a much smaller time frame, but then again announcing release dates is a good way to get the attention of the media.

'1 good game among other things' isn't really fair way to describe the achievements of Chris Roberts, more like 22 releases including expansions, with a lot more than 1 good game in there that's for sure. Not to mention the ten movies that were released that he produced. Talk about misrepresenting someone, jesus.

[thyNoobthyPrey]

And no it should really not go for a sub model. A modern sub game is a recipe for failure. Name me 2 big games outside of WoW and FF14 that use a sub by default.

Big games is the keyword, a game can only succeed with a subscription model if it reaches critical mass, and I do believe Star Citizen has a good shot at reaching that point. There are other benefits to having a subscription model like keeping out the riff-raff, multiplayer community based games that are too affordable for everyone really do have extremely toxic communities.

- - - Updated - - -

I disagree.

The game has been delayed consistently, managed poorly, the guy incharge hasn't got the best track record other than 1 good game among other things.

I agree that they should have handled the release date annoucement thing a bit better, a lot better actually, they should never have given any release dates until it was obvious they would have something to release.

Now, considering the pedigree of the developers working on the game, Star Citizen is simply taking as long as it needs to get where it wants to be, nothing is going to speed up development when you already have some of the best guys in the business working on your game. And as for Chris Roberts who has 22 video game release under his belt with more than one good game in there, that's for sure. Not to mention the ten movies he's produced. I think you're misrepresenting him unfairly to be honest.

[Kazgrel]

I've a coworker who's obsessed with this game, but soon as the convo brings up things like his organization purchasing ships to the tune of several hundred USD, my face contorts into a meme-like "dafuq?" expression. Given what I know of the game from him, I've taken to the moniker Scam Citizen. I think it's fair, honestly; the game isn't even a live release (still an "alpha") yet sporting all sorts of "preorder bonuses" that are no more than cash shop items for a game that isn't even officially released.

While I think my opinion of the game is a little unfair due to the info I have being through someone else (although said someone else is very much a fanboy of the game), it is what it is, and until the game is an actual release in 2037, I'll remain very skeptical, and they (the devs) will remain far from my wallet.

[thyNoobthyPrey]

I disagree.

The game has been delayed consistently, managed poorly and the guy incharge hasn't got the best track record other than 1 good game among other things.

The game is open to fair criticism. Throwing microtransactions in during the Alpha phase is greedy and cash grabby.

And no it should really not go for a sub model. A modern sub game is a recipe for failure. Name me 2 big games outside of WoW and FF14 that use a sub by default.

The sub model works when a game reaches critical mass in popularity like the two you mentioned. I think Star Citizen certainly has potentional to be critically successfully.

As for Chris Roberts track record.... 22 video game releases not including Star Citizen and producer of ten movies that have cast people like Nicolas Cage and Morgan Freeman. Yeah terrible track record, what an absolute failure. Hope you're going to share your brilliant achievements if you think that isn't the best track record as you say.

[Eleccybubb]

Fucking mod keeps deleting my post.

- - - Updated - - -



The sub model works when a game reaches critical mass in popularity like the two you mentioned. I think Star Citizen certainly has potentional to be critically successfully at the level necessary. Sub helps keep the riff-raff out as well.

The guy in charge has 22 video game releases under his belt, with more alot more than 1 of them being good. He's also the producer of 10 movies some of which featured big name hollywood actors. Yeah terrible track record. Would be nice to know of some of your achievements, if this is a terrible track record. In my opinion, this track record is one of a consistant overachiever, not being terrible by any stretch of the imagination.

Ah so we are pulling the "if you think you can do better then go for it card" are we? Also movies have nothing to do with this topic so let's leave that for the thread dedicated to them.

Let's not start trying to claim that I once said I could do this but by that logic nobody in this forum is entitled to an opinion or critique right?

Wing Commander was amazing and it's sequels were the only half decent thing that Chris Roberts pulled out. That is solely opinion and not once did I try to pass it off as fact. I would love to know where I stated that it was objectively bad and anyone who disagrees with me is wrong. Little hint- I didn't.

And what he's done with other projects is of no relevance. Star Citizen is what he is working on now so let's focus on Star Citizen. He has consistently created release dates that have been delayed among other things. Forgive me for doubting what people dub this "consistent overachiever" leader of the project when he cannot stick to a release date on a consistent basis.

From what I've seen of SC now again is what I see of a lot of Kickstarter games. That it looks like it's trying too hard with a bit too much whistles and bells aka feature bloat to be the next big thing. Which is what a lot of MMOs do this and end up in EA and shutdown before release or a really poor product on release.

And again a sub model would absolutely destroy this game. It would have to go against 2 very popular games which has been tried loads of times with and without a sub model and either gone F2P, B2P or shutdown.

This game has a niche fanbase and are already milking players through MTs in the Alpha. A sub model would create more disdain than there already is within the community.

[Eleccybubb]

Nonsense, movies are creative projects like video games, of course the nitty gritty details of creating a movie or video game is very different, but both require a high level of creative vision and resourcefulness. Being very succesful across multiple domains is the hallmark of an extremely gifted individual. They used to call this type of person a polymath. And yes I don't think you should try and portray someone as incompetent unless you can do a better job(unless negatively affect you like a incompetent doctor or local politician etc...). You should probably find something else to pick on. Of course you can say what you like but don't expect to be taken seriously afterwards.

Are you some sort of business analyst now? Star Citizen already has thousands of subscribers giving regular monthly donations for extra benefits like the magazine etc.., it wouldn't be far fetched for this to evolve into a subscription for the game itself.[/QUOTE]

And again if you want to discuss his movies we can do so in the forum dedicated to it.

Ah so we are just pulling the "you're a hater" line out now are we along with the "you are no expert" line which by your logic invalidates everyone's opinions in this thread?

Safe to say I shouldn't take you seriously then. Another one for the ignore pile methinks.

[Eleccybubb]

I've a coworker who's obsessed with this game, but soon as the convo brings up things like his organization purchasing ships to the tune of several hundred USD, my face contorts into a meme-like "dafuq?" expression. Given what I know of the game from him, I've taken to the moniker Scam Citizen. I think it's fair, honestly; the game isn't even a live release (still an "alpha") yet sporting all sorts of "preorder bonuses" that are no more than cash shop items for a game that isn't even officially released.

While I think my opinion of the game is a little unfair due to the info I have being through someone else (although said someone else is very much a fanboy of the game), it is what it is, and until the game is an actual release in 2037, I'll remain very skeptical, and they (the devs) will remain far from my wallet.

I have a couple of coworkers as well who harp on at me that it's going to revolutionize the gaming industry. They keep asking me to buy it and well after PUBG I ain't buying into EA/Alphas anymore.

But from what I've watched of it I just don't see how it's going to.

I mean from what I've seen and what it eventually looks like it's going to be it'll have a decent launch then a year or two down the line only the hardcore/dedicated players who act like CIG/SC/Chris Roberts is the greatest gift to mankind will still be playing it.

[Eleccybubb]

Nonsense, movies are creative projects like video games, of course the nitty gritty details of creating a movie or video game is very different, but both require a high level of creative vision and resourcefulness. Being succesful across multiple domains is the hallmark of a gifted individual. They used to call this type of person a polymath. And yes I don't think you should try and portray someone as incompetent unless you can do a better job(unless negatively directly affect you like a incompetent doctor or local politician etc...). You should probably find something else to pick on. Of course you can say what you like but don't expect to be taken seriously afterwards or just being perceived as spiteful or jealous in nature.

Are you some sort of business analyst now? Star Citizen already has thousands of subscribers giving regular monthly donations for extra benefits like the magazine etc.., it wouldn't be far fetched for this to evolve into a subscription for the game itself. Most of the people with access to 3.0 PTU are subscribers.

Ah so we are going down the same road. "Must be a business analyst/game dev to have an opinion or critique or you are just a hater"?

Yeah throwing you on ignore because this is just going to go down the same road as it has done countless times.

By your own logic everyone in here is not entitled to an opinion or critique. I get it. "SC is the best game and can do no wrong and anyone posting anything mean about it is a hater". Heard it all before...

[Jastall]

I mean, they are selling, ships, weapons, components, in-game currency… what do they consider “pay to win” then?

Hey now, you might able to get these same ships four years from now, when the game releases, after 50 hours of grinding, so clearly the fact that you can just open your wallet and get it for 200$ right now means it is not pay to win!




/s.

[Eleccybubb]

No clue what’s going on with the posts, but moderators usually don’t temper much with them unless it’s something extremely against the rules (advertisements, shady links…), either way using alt accounts to by-pass temporary bans is against the rules mate (and probably the reason of it...) =/

Anyway, I highly doubt that SC would survive long as p2p game, MMORPG is a far more popular genre and besides WoW & FF14 that have insanely large and loyal fan-bases they have all been forced to drop it, even Star Wars that is based in one of the most popular franchises ever.

SC should simply go for a similar Overwatch route, 40$ price tag & a cosmetic shop, but considering they are already selling ships, weapons, components and apparently are even going to sell in-game money… I don’t know mate, I’m just hoping they allow players to host their own servers at this point, because I would love to avoid all that kind of shit.

I would love to see what happens if it goes a sub model personally. Just out of curiosity.

But it shouldn't. Even more hyped games have gone up against the main 2 sub games and failed although the hype for SC is debatable atm.