[Megathread] Star Citizen

[Rennadrel]

Cool. Can you guarantee every other player who's thrown money at the game and is still waiting feels the same way?

I don't give a damn about other people's feelings on this game, personally. When it's ready, I'll be ready.

[kenn9530]

And I agree. But the game has been delayed multiple times. I don't blame people if they are slightly annoyed at this point.

i have put more money into the game already than most of the people thats moaning about a game which would take around 7 years to be ready, its in year 5 now and even at the kickstarter stage if you knew chris you knew he was a dreamer and not to pay attention to dates because he gets over excited.

the company only got up and running in 2013 and it took a while before it was at a reasonably strength to start bashing out whats needed for the game.

Fact is this game is taking so long because of the level of detail going into every aspect and it will be ready when its ready, most likely end of 2019/early 2020 when we are to see at least beta stage where the game is pretty much complete.

[Odeezee]

Updated Schedule Report

Schedule Guide

[Odeezee]

Introducing the Tumbril



- - - Updated - - -

New AtV is up: Kiosks



Courtesy of Mr-Hasgaha on Reddit



love the details in the animations.

[Odeezee]

just discovered these from CIG

[masterhorus8]

Look at those fancy jpegs of a tech demo.

[Odeezee]

Those pictures while they look nice are still not interesting. I care about the gameplay more than fancy graphics.

Game could look as pretty as it wants and can still play like hot garbage.

i don't understand. am i supposed to only post pictures of gameplay? are art assets not required for the gameplay you seek? there are gameplay mechanics that currently exist and more that will come in the future (game still in active development and all), so your statements are really confusing. i mean it's rather premature to judge the "perceived" lack of mechanics in the game when they are still in the alpha-phase of development, making the very mechanics you are after. smh.

[Odeezee]

And again. You can post all the pretty pictures you want. Game could still end up playing like a mess.

And read my post. I said can. Not that it will. I said it CAN end up being bad gameplay wise. Not that it WILL be.

And again no. I want to see actual gameplay. Not some pretty pictures of some random vehicles. To me Gameplay>Graphics. Those images mean nothing to me. Videos of actual gameplay do.

If you really think art assets of vehicles is something to be in awe about then I guess we have different concepts of it.

wtf are you even talking about? i am not here to meet your expectations of content YOU want to see. i am here to shareANY Star Citizen related content and discuss the game. i mean who are you even arguing with? who said that art assets are more important than gameplay mechanics for your comment to even be necessary? if you do not like the pics, then do not participate and are you just going to gloss over the potential gameplay that the pictures show, aka exploration on planetary bodies? or is that a mechanic you are not going to be interested in? i don't even understand the logic of your position, haha. smh.

anyway, back on topic, new sneak peak of a moonside multiplayer performance test! ​oh and Eleccybubb, there are no game mechanics in the video to save you the trouble.

[1001]

wtf are you even talking about? i am not here to meet your expectations of content YOU want to see. i am here to shareANY Star Citizen related content and discuss the game. i mean who are you even arguing with? who said that art assets are more important than gameplay mechanics for your comment to even be necessary? if you do not like the pics, then do not participate and are you just going to gloss over the potential gameplay that the pictures show, aka exploration on planetary bodies? or is that a mechanic you are not going to be interested in? i don't even understand the logic of your position, haha. smh.

Nice meltdown.

[masterhorus8]

Nice meltdown.

Nice contribution.

Regardless of his enthusiasm, he is right. At the moment, he's posting pictures. Other times, he's posted the weekly videos that shows the mechanic updates. He is just showing what pops up and thinks is cool to share.

[1001]

Nice contribution.

Regardless of his enthusiasm, he is right. At the moment, he's posting pictures. Other times, he's posted the weekly videos that shows the mechanic updates. He is just showing what pops up and thinks is cool to share.

It's not his enthusiasm I was pointing to, it was his complete over-reaction to some guy saying gameplay > graphics. He could've easily got the point across without being a gommo about it.

[Odeezee]

I want to see gameplay videos. Not some random images of whatever you believe is cool.

Again if you think 2 pictures of vehicles is awe inspiring or something to be enthusiastic about then we have different concepts of both. Stop pretending those recent images give any feeling of "planetary exploration" either. That's just grasping at straws to defend the game.

But it seems Star Citizen can do no wrong to you right? God forbid I want to see some actual gameplay rather than a picture of 2 vehicles or some damn facial animations.

Your pictures again tell me one thing about the game so far. That it looks pretty. Nice to see you calling me out personally though when I say I want to see gameplay rather than images. Shows you don't really have an argument here.

If you don't understand that I'm simply asking to see some gameplay videos then not much I can do I guess. Surely even in this stage there are some right?

you do realize that you are the one who has no argument, right? i post many gameplay videos, if you want to take a look at those they are there, just because i post screenshots does not invalidate gameplay videos or vice versa. THIS is why i called you out, you are literally arguing with yourself. NO ONE said that gameplay is not important so you even bringing it up was irrelevant. every AtV showcases some form of gameplay mechanics and i post those, so why complain? meh, nevermind you just want something to gripe about because the current 2.6.3 alpha test build has gameplay mechanics in it and you do not even acknowledge that, but w/e do you. smh.

[masterhorus8]

Then show me the mechanics.

Facial animations and pictures of 2 vehicles do not interest me. Nor do they give any insight into mechanics. Yes I'm sure that guy making those weird animations is a vital part of the game.

But thank you for proving my point. You vehemently defended the game just because I wanted to see some gameplay. And then went on a tirade after I said gameplay>graphics. I won't bother replying to you because I've been down this road in another forum before and it's not worth the time or effort.

I'll start with the top of this page with his GIFs from 2 weeks ago.

Those two GIFs of the derelict ships shows what you could find and interact with in the universe. And to a potential extent, what might happen with your own ships when they blow up. We do know that you're supposed to be able to salvage ships when you destroy them.

Onto the pictures of the new ground based vehicle. These show that there are ground based vehicles, and IIRC, will be specific reasons to use a buggy over a flying vehicle for the planetside activities. Although he didn't post them, there is an anti-aircraft version of one of those buggies too, so you can even use it to defend from hostiles buzzing around your place.

As for the kiosks, that is actually flat-out a game mechanic system. It'll be used as part of the shopping/economy system. It'll be used to purchase/manage items from shops or your own items/ships that you own among a few other things mentioned about halfway through the video.

But lastly, do remember. This thread isn't just for people that already follow the project. It's also for new people to see and understand what they might see in the game with a quick glimpse.

EDIT: Not to mention, some/a lot of peopel do care about the graphics. "Fidelity" is one of the selling points of this game.

[masterhorus8]

Thank you. See had there been some information to go along with the pictures I would have had a better understanding.

On the derelict ships thing at least you say "to an extent". Meaning there is no confirmation. The key word in all this is supposed on the salvage thing since a development process can change obviously.

And again on the ground based vehicles. Some explanation would have helped me better understand it. My point is a picture explains nothing without a description and some information.

And I still maintain I wouldn't mind seeing some full on gameplay videos. As I said imo Gameplay>Graphics. Both are important but I think gameplay just inches it out.

I mean images of stuff is nice and all but surely there has to be some Pre Alpha gameplay? Surely the game is in a somewhat playable state now? And no I don't mean ready to launch.

And I agree this thread isn't just for those people who are following. But surely you agree someone looking at those images would still want some context? New player or existing?

Yeah, some descriptions of why these things are being worked on and what they mean would be cool. But at this point, without it, it stirred up discussion, albeit effectively as clickbait. So I guess it did its job?

[Odeezee]

I don't think it did since it created confusion more than discussion. Creating confusion isn't the best way to discussion. Thankfully you cleared it all up.

I mean putting "this is so and so from this site" on an image just causes confusion. A brief description like "this is one of the ground vehicles you will use on the planets" takes no time to type at all.

dude wtf are you talking about? how does an image create confusion? the very image that you claim was somehow confusing actually describes exactly what you wanted me to add, as an image in itself; it is a ground vehicle you can use on planets because guess what? it's a ground vehicle being used by a player/npc on a planetary body. wow...and don't act like you were just asking a question and needed some clarification, you straight up dissed the picture as you thought that it did not hold any gameplay value, which of course, unless your eyes were closed, it did. smh.

[masterhorus8]

New PC Gamer article from someone that went into the studio and got to mess around with 3.0:



*Note: if these pictures are too big...not sure how to make them smaller. I can switch to links if needed.
http://i.imgur.com/6AAwcGe.jpg
http://i.imgur.com/LIQGxID.jpg
http://i.imgur.com/trru48X.jpg
I'll just put this here regardless, so people don't need to right-click and open picture in new tab.

[Odeezee]

My point proven. Thank you.

Thankfully @masterhorus8 was being helpful. You just went on the attack because I said gameplay>graphics. Again thankfully the poster I mentioned was being helpful and clarifying for me. I mean the few images are minor gameplay things right now but the images do show off the graphics capability more than anything else.

Just going to add you to ignore if you are going to be like this. Not going to waste my time with the whole "game can do no wrong" attitude. I dissed the picture because I don't think graphics should be the main focus. In gameplay terms a vehicle/mount is a minor thing. So it wouldn't have hurt had you added a small description.

you make no sense. it's not my fault you messed up and instead of acknowledging it, you decided to double down then move the goalposts. when did i ever say that the "game can do no wrong"? you were just trying to make an issue of content that you felt was inferior to that which you were interested in. so your mentality is if you don't like it then it doesn't matter??!!! haha. you can ignore me or not i really don't care, but it does not change the fact that you were wrong. plain and simple. and what makes you think that graphics alone are the main thing? why do i need to add a description for something that is self explanatory? and stop acting like i should educate you on the game when you are the one that drew ridiculous conclusions all on your own. do you think that the artists are also the ones designing game mechanics? or should they only release art assets when they explicitly show gameplay mechanics at the same time? if so how would you show that in a screenshot? yeah, you didn't think your stance through now did you and be glad that Masterhorus8 is here, because i will not coddle you.

[Tierbook]

Meh, I won't be to worried about major systems till the game exits Alpha.

[Odeezee]

Jesus fuck, just drop it already, he even already set you on ignore... all this bloody drama cuz the dude said that the images don’t really interest him, holy shit.

if that's what you think then that's on you. i asked him why he was stressing over images yet claims to be interested in gameplay, then asked him how do you show gameplay in images and does the image not actually show potential gameplay. so basically my issue with him was his confusing stance on something self-evident, couldn't care less if he ignores the images, CIG, the game or me, his lack of reasoning is what got me that and the fact that he didn't even answer the questions i asked him but instead went on a rant, so i obliged.

anyway, new AtV's up today:



best parts for me were the Miles Eckhart showcase and the persistence deep-dive. i want to see how they handle Mile's logic seeing as he is duplicitous and how that impacts the actual mission giving process and how they will handle over-crowding around him, etc. the persistence showcased really promising tech and the way it's being handled in this game gives it such scalability and varying applicability to different game mechanics! i also want to see just how fast they can pump out the Cyclone, i know the ship pipeline has the best cadence of all the pipelines but i'm timing them on this one, haha.

[stellvia]

Just throwing this out there: If you don't find someone's posts relevant, keep it to yourself and/or block them. Tired of seeing 1 person's post devolve into 3 pages of meta shitposting. Nobody cares for you repeating for the Nth time why you hate the game. We get it. We've heard it. Repeatedly. If you don't have (new) constructive criticism to make, just don't post at all.