[Megathread] Star Citizen

[masterhorus8]

The correct wording is to say it is simply late. By a lot of time. But yes, you are correct.

No, the game itself is not late. This has been beaten to death a million of times already. No estimation date for release has been given since. The original estimation was based on NONE of the stretch goals being in. Anyone with half a brain would realize this. But hey, who am I kidding. I was wondering why I had you on my ignore list, but your last few responses answered that question.

[Tradewind]

I am well aware of how the instances work. Or at least how they want them to work in 2020 if the game launches.

Look, SC would have been a great game if they just stuck to the original pitch. It is too bad that Chris couldn't help going back to Hollywood with SC's money after failing there on his own. Then he stuck his wife in alongside the A-list actors. It is hilarious to think about that in hindsight, considering that they tried to keep their marriage a secret to the community.

When SC comes crashing down at least I can say that I was on the right side in the end. Guys like you (and all the people in this thread flaunting their referral codes like cultists) will either hang your head in shame, or just dissapear entirely like your kind did at No Man's Sky's failure.

You're not doing SC a favour by defending Chris like he is the Lord and Saviour of gaming. He is just a dreamer who lost his footing, failed in Hollywood and now wants to go again.

Yawn. Too edgy for me.

[Rennadrel]

I am well aware of how the instances work. Or at least how they want them to work in 2020 if the game launches.

Look, SC would have been a great game if they just stuck to the original pitch. It is too bad that Chris couldn't help going back to Hollywood with SC's money after failing there on his own. Then he stuck his wife in alongside the A-list actors. It is hilarious to think about that in hindsight, considering that they tried to keep their marriage a secret to the community.

When SC comes crashing down at least I can say that I was on the right side in the end. Guys like you (and all the people in this thread flaunting their referral codes like cultists) will either hang your head in shame, or just dissapear entirely like your kind did at No Man's Sky's failure.

You're not doing SC a favour by defending Chris like he is the Lord and Saviour of gaming. He is just a dreamer who lost his footing, failed in Hollywood and now wants to go again.

Considering no one else in the gaming industry is fucking innovating anything these days, it may as well be the one guy who actually wants to make a quality product rather than just another game or rehash after rehash like pretty much every other developer is doing. Honestly, the gaming industry is probably in the most mediocre state it's been in since the early 80's when an over abundance of games caused the market to collapse on itself. Now the lack of games, as well as the lack of truly innovative titles, will eventually draw gamer's away from big name franchises, and the mediocrity of some big budget and big name titles has been apparent the last couple of years. With 3-5 year development cycles for big name titles, it's no wonder people are banking on Star Citizen being something truly innovative. A couple of years down the road, SC is still going to look like a real next generation game, and one that no console is going to be capable of playing at the fidelity of PC's for another 2 generations at least, based on the current tech level of consoles versus PC.

[Majestic12]

No, the game itself is not late. This has been beaten to death a million of times already. No estimation date for release has been given since. The original estimation was based on NONE of the stretch goals being in. Anyone with half a brain would realize this. But hey, who am I kidding. I was wondering why I had you on my ignore list, but your last few responses answered that question.

If you're seriously saying that the game isn't late, then you're just so far gone that nothing anyone will say can change your mind. Next you're going to tell us that Star Marine wasn't supposed to be released 1.5 years ago, lol.

Well, what can I say. I never really got along with Shillizens. You guys link your referral codes everywhere. It's like you're in some massive MLM recruitment chain where you get rewarded if your referrals buy game packages. Oh wait...

[1001]

how can you not see that the issue is that you have to wait at all? and calling them expansions is a far cry from what they really are, so that is a misnomer in and of itself. compare an ED expansion to a typical MMO expansion, it pales painfully in comparison. so basically what you would get from other games for free, you have to pay for in ED.

Because you don't have to fucking wait do you. You can buy the bloody thing as soon as it's made available. And yes, they are expansions, take a look at the patch notes for (1 of the 5 patches for the Horizons expansion) and tell me again it somehow doesn't qualify as an expansion https://forums.frontier.co.uk/showth...pdate-incoming
The guy was making some weird point about how paying stupid money for a single spaceship now is better than paying for an expansion later, if he's worried about spending $40 every 18 months or so then I was simply offering a counterpoint to calm his sad little wallet.

NO! just NO! please do not even try to compare ED's lack of content with Star Citizen's as some form of justification for a FULLY released game STILL being barebones 2 years after release. they chose to go full release and with it there are certain things which are required like having a good amount of content to tide people over until more features get put in. you do realise that people are effectively paying to beta test a RELEASED game past the initial cost of the game with ED, right?

It is no different, I am talking about what is managable within a set timescale, if a game is released after 2 years of development then it is only going to have a limited amount of content, even the village idiot would understand that, expecting anything different is plain idiocy. EVE did a similar thing, it was pretty barebones when it released and it took CCP a number of years to build a game that provided content to different playstyles.

The point being that if you can argue for Star Citizen's delays, defend its woeful lack of content on the PU and their pathetically miniscule patches and then have the gall to turn around and call out another game for lack of content, claiming their expansions are not really expansions and so on. it is only you who is making yourself look like a fool.

[Rennadrel]

If you're seriously saying that the game isn't late, then you're just so far gone that nothing anyone will say can change your mind. Next you're going to tell us that Star Marine wasn't supposed to be released 1.5 years ago, lol.

No, it was due out this time last year. Technical issues clearly forced it to be delayed, and they even showed why it was getting delayed. Too many server and client side problems prevented it and rather than releasing a half baked, half assed component that is supposed to be the basis of their game, they held it back. And that makes sense to me and thousands of others who have backed the game. Do it right or don't do it at all, something most developers could learn.

[Odeezee]

Because you don't have to fucking wait do you. You can buy the bloody thing as soon as it's made available. And yes, they are expansions, take a look at the patch notes for (1 of the 5 patches for the Horizons expansion) and tell me again it somehow doesn't qualify as an expansion https://forums.frontier.co.uk/showth...pdate-incoming
The guy was making some weird point about how paying stupid money for a single spaceship now is better than paying for an expansion later, if he's worried about spending $40 every 18 months or so then I was simply offering a counterpoint to calm his sad little wallet.

and that point you were trying to make is invalid as if you want to play when you want to in ED you have to pay up now, not wait until there is a sale, and you act like it's the only game ever to go on sale, hence the whole counterpoint you were trying to make is non-existent.

speaking on Expansions have you ever played an MMO before? if you have then you will know the difference between base game and expansions. ED does not even compare because look at the game after 2 seasons, it's STILL barebones!

It is no different, I am talking about what is managable within a set timescale, if a game is released after 2 years of development then it is only going to have a limited amount of content, even the village idiot would understand that, expecting anything different is plain idiocy. EVE did a similar thing, it was pretty barebones when it released and it took CCP a number of years to build a game that provided content to different playstyles.

The point being that if you can argue for Star Citizen's delays, defend its woeful lack of content on the PU and their pathetically miniscule patches and then have the gall to turn around and call out another game for lack of content, claiming their expansions are not really expansions and so on. it is only you who is making yourself look like a fool.

you have definitely made yourself look foolish here then. is ED a fully release title yes or no? is Star Citizen STILL in development, yes or no? you cannot judge a game that is released with one that is still in development the same way. NO ONE told Frontier to release ED when they did, it's their fault and as such they put themselves in a position where they are judged differently than a game still in development. just because similar times have elapsed is of no consequence as ED thought that it was ready to actually be scrutinized by the masses and deliver a title worthy of release. which we now know is a very mixed bag with the moniker (made by ED players no doubt) being a "mile wide yet and inch deep". and comparing ED to a game over a decade old, really? tech was at a different stage back then and besides ED still does not even give you the full MMO experience we expect from MMOs today, coz despite what you may feel ED launched in 2014 and not in 2003.

[kenn9530]

If you're seriously saying that the game isn't late, then you're just so far gone that nothing anyone will say can change your mind. Next you're going to tell us that Star Marine wasn't supposed to be released 1.5 years ago, lol.

Well, what can I say. I never really got along with Shillizens. You guys link your referral codes everywhere. It's like you're in some massive MLM recruitment chain where you get rewarded if your referrals buy game packages. Oh wait...

original kick starter started in oct 2012, the game was barely just out of concept phase at that point, not to mention no studios or personnel to help develop it, the game is coming along quicker than most and its at the 4 year point now, if the Chris had what he does now 4 years ago then at least sq42 would be almost ready.

your very naive to think a game can be built in 4 years even with a full team to start with.

[Majestic12]

original kick starter started in oct 2012, the game was barely just out of concept phase at that point, not to mention no studios or personnel to help develop it, the game is coming along quicker than most and its at the 4 year point now, if the Chris had what he does now 4 years ago then at least sq42 would be almost ready.

your very naive to think a game can be built in 4 years even with a full team to start with.

You should tell that to Chris who repeatedly uses false dates. Oh wait, you're not going to question your lord and saviour. He has been out of the field for a decade and it's showing. The guy has no clue what he is doing anymore.

No one has said that the game should be completed. Another strawman argument from Shillizens like you who can't accept that there is a distinct lack of progress for the game.

Please post respectfully and productively. Infracted. -Edge

[Tradewind]

This new EvCro is even more boring than the old one.

[masterhorus8]

This new EvCro is even more boring than the old one.

At least EvcRo used more up-to-date information, even if it was copy/pasted from SA.

[KyrtF]

By his reasoning, why have normal hotel rooms when a capsule hotel with communal bathrooms already does the same thing? He's so far off-base its not even worth the effort.

Assuming "his reasoning" is mine....SC so far hasn't shown us that it is with the analogy with a capsule hotel.

Most of the gameplay mechanics haven't been seen.
The Netcoding is still woefully subpar
Star Marine has finally surfaced but the modelling looks out of kilter and the gameplay is nothing special
CIG have yet to settle on a flight model for the game.

SC has a lot of stuff planned. But even when...if...everything gets added, that doesn't mean the game will be fun or that it will be universally better than ED or other games in every aspect.

SC is doing nothing that hasn't been done. It isn't adding anything new. So far it isn't unique in scope or scale or ambition.

Saying it is somehow pushing the boundaries is simple hype. Its overstating things.

You may think i'm wrong...but rather than simply saying so, instead of merely saying the Star Citizen is so much bigger and better why don't you explain HOW Star Citizen is so much grander in scope and scale than other games and how doing stuff other games already do and how having a similar feature set makes it so impressive and innovative.

[Odeezee]

hew Intergalactic Aerospace Expo update; Origin!



love the look of the 85x and i am really looking forward to seeing the remodel of the 300 series. if the Cutlass and Hornet are anything to go by they should look hella sweet!

[KyrtF]

A failure of understanding on your part. If you look at the way in which Star Citizen is attempting it's independent physics instancing and then look at NMS and think they are comparable because 'spaceships' then you aren't capable of understanding where the difference is. GTAV is the same game as the original GTA right? Why should there be any difference in cost or development time, they both have cars and guns.

And just to note, because in these discussions it's basically necessary, I'm not actually praising CIG. They could very well fail to achieve what they've set out to do but the idea that what they're attempting is just the same thing as games like NMS is, again, naive.

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

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

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

[Rennadrel]

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

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

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

Considering the voiceover work and the fact that they have hired on some fairly big name actors and actresses to do both Squadron 42 and the Persistent Universe, that alone sets it apart from other games, especially when you consider the single player aspect of the game is tied to the MMO in many ways. The game has been pretty well built from the ground up using an existing engine that has been modified so heavily it isn't even in the same realm as the original design, that is another thing. Frontier designed their own engine, which isn't nearly as advanced in complexity or capability as CryEngine was, nor does it have the same visual capability. Sure, they might wind up with similar features as Star Citizen, but many aren't going to be part of the base game, and cash grabbing for those features is not the best way to retain players. While I am not a fool to think that all of SC's features will make it into the initial live release, there is a much higher chance that they have way more content when the game goes live than Elite does now or even when it went live.

[Tradewind]

You may think i'm wrong...but rather than simply saying so, instead of merely saying the Star Citizen is so much bigger and better why don't you explain HOW Star Citizen is so much grander in scope and scale than other games and how doing stuff other games already do and how having a similar feature set makes it so impressive and innovative.

What's unique about it?

To me, it boils down to the first "promo video" I saw for it, that most of us probably saw, about 3 years ago. On the surface it wasn't much really, you had a Bengal (much smaller Bengal than what is whiteboxed now) full of people doing shit, pilots jumping into Hornets and flying off into space and engaging a bunch of mean looking "pirates" to the tune of Jablosnky's Battleship score. It looked nice, my first venture for more info showed it was using the Crytek 3 engine, neat...but then I read more and it was the cumulative buildup of features and the scope that got me hooked.

I shall try and enumerate my reasons for why I feel SC is unique and innovative...

#1 - Doing shit online with friends!

Presumably all or most of us are playing or had played WoW. Personally I ran my own guild for 8 years and it was pretty decent, but what I loved most about it was that I had my own little "team" as it were of 30ish players, all of us doing shit together, a good chunk of us had been friends for a long ass time even before WoW. Obviously not unique to MMO's, I was running 8 man "raids" in Neverwinter Nights with friends before WoW was even released and those same WoW friends and I had played Team Fortress together for a fuckin half decade before that too. Either way, to me the whole idea of doing shit with your buddies is awesome.

So when I found out that the ships in SC are not just a ship shaped avatar, I was getting erections. The whole idea of having my buddies or a guild/organization of people all flying together in ships and working as a team, is absolutely what I want. Which leads to number 2, kind of...

#2 - SPAAAAAAACESHIPS!

In addition to WoW, I also liked EVE Online. Though more accurately, the idea of EVE Online. I never really got into the whole Alliances/Corporations side of things, I just liked doing my own thing, ratting, making cash and avoiding griefers. But it was always missing the social aspect because of that. That and the game at the time was really inaccessible for my closer friends who couldn't really get into it. But for me, the size of the universe and all of the politics and economics going on around me was fascinating, while I cannot say that I am a mega EVE player at all, it's often my go to when trying to explain to people how crazy shit can be. The whole BoB alliance fiasco is often a crowdpleaser even to people who have no fuckin clue what EVE is.

So again, when Star Citizen was announced as wanting to have the same kind of organic open world experience, in addition to flying ships with your buddies and being able to not just walk around those ships, but your interactions and skills actually have a marked impact on your success, my boners increased exponentially.

#3 - Shooting Stuff

Another of my more favourite games in recent memory is Planetside 2. I played a shit load of it until SOE died, then I kind of lost interest. But shockingly enough (read: not shocking), I loved it because it combined a lot of what I loved again. Playing with friends and having vehicles and stuff you and your buddies can pilot/crew, driving or flying around and killing nerds in glorious fireballs of fun. Add to it that it was effectively an MMO setting, with hundreds of players at times vying for the exact same piece of real estate. It was intense and awesome.

So when CIG says "there's going to be seamless transition from flying/crewing ships into FPS combat with boarding parties and such," guess what my boners were doing again. Exploding everywhere.

...

Now you might be thinking "well that's great, but you just cited examples of games already doing those things." You'd be right, but the difference here is that this one game is tackling all 3 things simultaneously. That and despite some technical issues currently in 2.5, they're doing it rather successfully imo. Even the basic, dog shit alpha version available today, with all of its flaws (both real and perceived), you can do all of those things...well, minus the economics/massive universe things, but respectfully...those are coming and it'd be daft to assume they never will at this point.

Now, maybe I'm crazy but at what point has there been any game to combine all of these aspects into a single title? Open world (galaxy) sandbox, emergent gameplay, multiplayer ship crews in an MMO space, FPS combat in an MMO space, high end graphics and fidelity. I'm hard pressed to think of one. That's why it's unique and innovative to me. Even in its attempt to combine all of these divergent game genres, to do it seamlessly, how can anyone look at it and think; "naw fuck that shit."

[kenn9530]

You should tell that to Chris who repeatedly uses false dates. Oh wait, you're not going to question your lord and saviour. He has been out of the field for a decade and it's showing. The guy has no clue what he is doing anymore.

No one has said that the game should be completed. Another strawman argument from Shillizens like you who can't accept that there is a distinct lack of progress for the game.

Please post respectfully and productively. Infracted. -Edge

you do know that for a game in active development those dates set are just guidelines to try to achieve, if something is not ready then its obvious it can be pushed back, everything thats been set has been implemented before or within a reasonable time, we all know that its going to be around a year before sq42 may be ready and once thats sorted the persistent universe will fall in place much faster due to everything already being ready to implement.

There is plenty progress in the game, just log onto the PTU and see for yourself, also the next major patch is steaming along and will hopefully be ready by the end of december, the reason things take so long as the detail is 10 time for than any other game out there, along with having to build tech from scratch, which in 4 years not even many AAA developers could have do as much as CIG have with a fraction on the man power and resources.

[Nirawen]

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

[Deleted]

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

[KyrtF]

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Two things come to mind.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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