[Megathread] Star Citizen

[masterhorus8]

Not quite.

An Alpha is feature complete....but lacks functionality and most assets.

As good a definition as most:

First playable
The first playable is the game version containing representative gameplay and assets, this is the first version with functional major gameplay elements. It is often based on the prototype created in pre-production. Alpha and first playable are sometimes used to refer to a single milestone, however large projects require first playable before feature complete alpha. First playable occurs 12 to 18 months before code release. It is sometimes referred to as the "Pre-Alpha" stage.



Star Citizen is still working on the engine, netcode, features, functionality, assets, gameplay. Currently, CIG are working towards an Alpha release and are currently in the pre-Alpha stage of game development.

The closest they have planned for an Alpha will be 4.0, so long as nothing is cut from 3.x.

Alpha is where they add functionality and start work on game assets to produce a Beta. Beta is where they construct most of the assets and add most of the game content to produce the Gold.

And yes....until they produce an Alpha, it will be a demo. A tech demo. And until the game is released, it'll also be vapourware because until then, it won't exist as a game

From your own source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Video_game_development
First playable is way past Tech demo. Can't go making your own definitions.

One other thing I will point out about SC development. They're using the normal development cycles in segments of their productions. Due to them making a playable version for the backers to use, they're constantly at a mix of the different stages at once.

[KyrtF]

From your own source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Video_game_development
First playable is way past Tech demo. Can't go making your own definitions.

One other thing I will point out about SC development. They're using the normal development cycles in segments of their productions. Due to them making a playable version for the backers to use, they're constantly at a mix of the different stages at once.

Ummmm...I don't know how to break this to you gently, but "Tech Demo" doesn't appear on the link to Video Game development that you posted. Leastways, I can't see it.

And the Tech Demo link goes to a totally separate page and includes the following definition...

A technology demonstration or Demonstrator model, informally known as a "tech demo", is a prototype, rough example or an otherwise incomplete version of a conceivable product

Of course, in context thats referring to a physical item.

Under computer gaming, we have this...

Computer game developers use tech demos to rouse and maintain interest to titles still in development (because game engines are usually ready before the art is finished) and to ensure functionality by early testing.

Note the part about game engines normally being ready before the art is finished? Part of that is to ensure the artwork is compatible with the game. CIG had to throw out a lot of third party stuff because they didn't keep them up to date with the engine, and they are redoing a lot more right now for the same reason.

And yes...they are mixing development cycles. And as a result, they are having to redo a lot of work which has increased development time and costs while also reducing quality by ensuring a large number of bugs. This is why hyping FOIP and VOIP and adding so many features and assets which should be added in Beta and not pre-Alpha is a bad idea.

This is a result of their need to ensure backers keep giving them money...and alongside removing any incentive to develop or release the game, is a major problem with the crowdfunding model.

None of this changes the fact that SC right now lacks functionality, gameplay, contents, mechanics and even basic stuff such as the game engine is incomplete.

CIG don't have an Alpha release to show off...they are working to create an Alpha and the releases we have are there simply to maintain interest in the product and demonstrate the feasibility of the concept and technology

Tech demos.

[masterhorus8]

Ummmm...I don't know how to break this to you gently, but "Tech Demo" doesn't appear on the link to Video Game development that you posted. Leastways, I can't see it.

And the Tech Demo link goes to a totally separate page and includes the following definition...

A technology demonstration or Demonstrator model, informally known as a "tech demo", is a prototype, rough example or an otherwise incomplete version of a conceivable product

Of course, in context thats referring to a physical item.

Under computer gaming, we have this...

Computer game developers use tech demos to rouse and maintain interest to titles still in development (because game engines are usually ready before the art is finished) and to ensure functionality by early testing.

Note the part about game engines normally being ready before the art is finished? Part of that is to ensure the artwork is compatible with the game. CIG had to throw out a lot of third party stuff because they didn't keep them up to date with the engine, and they are redoing a lot more right now for the same reason.

And yes...they are mixing development cycles. And as a result, they are having to redo a lot of work which has increased development time and costs while also reducing quality by ensuring a large number of bugs. This is why hyping FOIP and VOIP and adding so many features and assets which should be added in Beta and not pre-Alpha is a bad idea.

This is a result of their need to ensure backers keep giving them money...and alongside removing any incentive to develop or release the game, is a major problem with the crowdfunding model.

None of this changes the fact that SC right now lacks functionality, gameplay, contents, mechanics and even basic stuff such as the game engine is incomplete.

CIG don't have an Alpha release to show off...they are working to create an Alpha and the releases we have are there simply to maintain interest in the product and demonstrate the feasibility of the concept and technology

Tech demos.

In my own post, Tech Demo has a link. Click it. It is the exact same description as what you used. And you copied the exact word needed. "Prototype". Now go back to your Video Game Development link. Go find prototype. Tell me where that is. Using "incomplete" as your definition is asinine.

And your continued use of "hype" is still annoying as fuck. You're doing more hyping of anything CIG does than anyone else. They have not mentioned any of it outside of those initial videos mentioning it, along the same veins as your previous constant whining about RTT.

[KyrtF]

In my own post, Tech Demo has a link. Click it. It is the exact same description as what you used. And you copied the exact word needed. "Prototype". Now go back to your Video Game Development link. Go find prototype. Tell me where that is. Using "incomplete" as your definition is asinine.

And your continued use of "hype" is still annoying as fuck. You're doing more hyping of anything CIG does than anyone else. They have not mentioned any of it outside of those initial videos mentioning it, along the same veins as your previous constant whining about RTT.

I did click it...that's where I got the quotes to prove my point.

What you either don't understand or are deliberately obfuscating is that the definition you refer to is referring to physical prototypes, and not the specific definition which occurs later on...in the section marked Computer gaming.

Further, you also don't seem to realise that in the computer gaming industry, the term Tech Demo covers any product which... rouse and maintain interest to titles still in development (because game engines are usually ready before the art is finished) and to ensure functionality by early testing.

Which is what the current releases by CIG currently are. A Tech Demo in this case, as opposed to a physical prototype of a tangible asset, can take place at ANY phase in the development. You can even have a Tech Demo of a released product. Companies use them to generate interest for sales.

No matter how you want to try and rewrite English and the terminology of software development, it remains the case that SC is in the pre-Alpha state and is currently nothing but a series of Tech Demos inyended to rouse and maintain interest in the project and demonstrate to backers that progress...glacially slow progress but progress nonetheless...is being made.

[masterhorus8]

I did click it...that's where I got the quotes to prove my point.

What you either don't understand or are deliberately obfuscating is that the definition you refer to is referring to physical prototypes, and not the specific definition which occurs later on...in the section marked Computer gaming.

Further, you also don't seem to realise that in the computer gaming industry, the term Tech Demo covers any product which... rouse and maintain interest to titles still in development (because game engines are usually ready before the art is finished) and to ensure functionality by early testing.

Which is what the current releases by CIG currently are. A Tech Demo in this case, as opposed to a physical prototype of a tangible asset, can take place at ANY phase in the development. You can even have a Tech Demo of a released product. Companies use them to generate interest for sales.

No matter how you want to try and rewrite English and the terminology of software development, it remains the case that SC is in the pre-Alpha state and is currently nothing but a series of Tech Demos inyended to rouse and maintain interest in the project and demonstrate to backers that progress...glacially slow progress but progress nonetheless...is being made.

You're cherry picking your words, dude. The part that you bolded, "incomplete version of a conceivable product" has more meaning. A conceivable product has not been conceived yet, hence "-able". Words have meanings. (I did say this was semantics earlier today).

"Computer game developers use tech demos to rouse and maintain interest to titles still in development (because game engines are usually ready before the art is finished) and to ensure functionality by early testing. Short segments using finished game engines may be presented as game demos." From the Tech Demo link. No change in the definition. Only saying when it's used. What they show in their ATV segments are closer to tech demos than what they have on stage or on the floor of the conventions, and certainly not what is playable, which as you so kindly pointed out earlier, was the First playable stage.

And again, you then point out pre-alpha, which is the first playable stage, past pre-production, where proof of concept is.

I'll just tack this on the list with the word "hype" for you.

[Deleted]

i said i wont post until 4.0 lol

but latest news are hilarious

1. CIG started denying refunds claiming this abortion called 3.0 is the minimum viable product delivered.
2. star citizen white knights, making perjury in fake DMCA claims, are trying to DMCA take down 3.0 video leaks claiming that material is their own. hahaha

the desperation is at an all time high

i predict total collapse by january 2018.

[KyrtF]

You're cherry picking your words

And you are quoting a definition that refers to a physical prototype.

"Computer game developers use tech demos to rouse and maintain interest to titles still in development (because game engines are usually ready before the art is finished) and to ensure functionality by early testing. Short segments using finished game engines may be presented as game demos." From the Tech Demo link. No change in the definition. Only saying when it's used. What they show in their ATV segments are closer to tech demos than what they have on stage or on the floor of the conventions, and certainly not what is playable, which as you so kindly pointed out earlier, was the First playable stage.

See...you CAN use the scroll button.

Are CIG using these releases to rouse and maintain interest"? Yes
Are CIG using these releases to provide early testing? Yes.
Are they using these releases to test and showvase the "groundbreaking" technologies they'be developed? Yes.

Tech demos

And yes....This is pre Alpha. But wait...you seem to be getting confused. Do you think a tech demo for a computer game only exists as a specific phase of development?

Really? You think a Tech Demo can only exist as part of the proof of concept phase?

That would be wrong...a tech demo of computer software can exist in ANY phase of computer development. Right now CIG are pushing out tech demos of the pre-Alpha and using it to showcase their work, to generate and maintain interest and to conduct testing.

[masterhorus8]

1. CIG started denying refunds claiming this abortion called 3.0 is the minimum viable product delivered.

Knee-jerk reaction much?



At the bottom of the refund emails: "We consider each request on a case by case basis and will work with you to find the best solution. Given the focus on the release of Star Citizen Alpha 3.0 right now, it will be a few weeks before we can give this request the detailed attention requires."

CIG is just adding to the bottom what it has been since they switched from Kickstarter (that's what the timeframe is being referenced). They're just letting people know that they are busy at the moment and that the refund process will take longer.

This is what happens when you listen to a certain someone.

[Onvious]

Im not sure but people simply donate money to star citizen right? For their donation they have access to game so asking refund for donation isn't bit weird? I mean I gave 45dollar years ago but I didn't care much

[Majestic12]

Knee-jerk reaction much?



At the bottom of the refund emails: "We consider each request on a case by case basis and will work with you to find the best solution. Given the focus on the release of Star Citizen Alpha 3.0 right now, it will be a few weeks before we can give this request the detailed attention requires."

CIG is just adding to the bottom what it has been since they switched from Kickstarter (that's what the timeframe is being referenced). They're just letting people know that they are busy at the moment and that the refund process will take longer.

This is what happens when you listen to a certain someone.

CIG do refunds but honestly it depends on when you backed. A long-time backer has a much higher chance to get theirs because the scope did change quite a bit and nobody has denied that.

I will also say (slightly in defense of CIG) that it's a bit of a grey line when somebody who spends 120+ hours playing SC then refunds the full amount. It's borderline theft if you've played that much and get a full refund. I still think that due to the scope/TOS change they should be warranted a full refund, but if it weren't for those things I would support partial refunds or no refunds at all.

Pretty easy to make a refund case when CIG blatantly removed the financial disclosure part of the TOS and basically wrote "You will agree not to sue us". But that only applies if you backed before they did that, otherwise they have the leverage.

[masterhorus8]

CIG do refunds but honestly it depends on when you backed. A long-time backer has a much higher chance to get theirs because the scope did change quite a bit and nobody has denied that.

I will also say (slightly in defense of CIG) that it's a bit of a grey line when somebody who spends 120+ hours playing SC then refunds the full amount. It's borderline theft if you've played that much and get a full refund. I still think that due to the scope/TOS change they should be warranted a full refund, but if it weren't for those things I would support partial refunds or no refunds at all.

Pretty easy to make a refund case when CIG blatantly removed the financial disclosure part of the TOS and basically wrote "You will agree not to sue us". But that only applies if you backed before they did that, otherwise they have the leverage.

Yeah, but to flat out say that "CIG is now denying refunds because 3.0 is out" was what I was addressing. The answer being "no, they're not denying anything more than usual, just taking longer due to being busy."

EDIT: Also, what financial disclosure was ever on the ToS? Source? Because this is the full change and I do not see anything regarding what you mentioned (but my legalese is a bit rough).

EDIT 2: Do you happen to mean the Financial Accountability? If so, then yeah, it got a bit murkier for newer buyers (limited more so to what you were saying), but anyone that had purchased prior to the change are still held to the old ToS, as stated in the update.

[Wilian]

when somebody who spends 120+ hours playing SC then refunds the full amount. It's borderline theft if you've played that much and get a full refund.

That implies there's a -game- to play.

[Edge-]

That implies there's a -game- to play.

Or that alpha testers aren't providing a free service (well, they're paying to be able to provide this free service) to CIG by testing the unfinished pieces of their game and reporting bugs/generating metrics/providing feedback.

It's a strange argument to make when you present it in proper context and not as if they're playing the final game.

[Mahourai]

The documentary on the development of this game is gonna be sick.

[Puupi]

The documentary on the development of this game is gonna be sick.

Where is the kickstarter for that for us to chime in?

[MrAnderson]

Where is the kickstarter for that for us to chime in?

It's already part of the kickstarter goals to make the documentary, CIG has been filming since they started the project. We've seen parts of it last citizencon.

[Deleted]

starting today there are no more refunds from CIG

money fountain problems ?

https://www.reddit.com/r/starcitizen_refunds/

they claim delivery with 3.0 hahaha nice one.

Like really, these are not new refund requests, but ones from almost a month ago, after having been answered to by CS, had them jump through the hoops of identifying themselves (providing ID), and giving them current PayPal address for depositing the funds, then BLAM, nope we changed our minds, you are no longer entitled to your refund.

[Majestic12]

Yeah, but to flat out say that "CIG is now denying refunds because 3.0 is out" was what I was addressing. The answer being "no, they're not denying anything more than usual, just taking longer due to being busy."

EDIT: Also, what financial disclosure was ever on the ToS? Source? Because this is the full change and I do not see anything regarding what you mentioned (but my legalese is a bit rough).

EDIT 2: Do you happen to mean the Financial Accountability? If so, then yeah, it got a bit murkier for newer buyers (limited more so to what you were saying), but anyone that had purchased prior to the change are still held to the old ToS, as stated in the update.

Yeah that's the one. My concern with it is that CIG at one point felt that it was appropriate (for a crowdfunding project) to put that in there in the first place but when the time came, postponed it and ultimately backed down on it entirely.

It was originally a genuine and thoughtful thing. That they then felt the need to remove it to me says that they were either 1. Never serious in the first place (misled us) or 2. That they were serious but don't want us to see something. Could show Chris' mismanagement/priority/whatever that would spill negative light on him. It's anybody's guess really, but to me there was no good reason for doing that. It just tells me they have incentive to hide something.

[Deleted]

let's relax and laugh a bit

Old McCrobberts had a game ELELE
And in that game he had some bugs ELELE
With a jpeg here and a demo there
Some refunds
No refunds
Never any refunds
Old McCrobberts went to jail HEHEHEHEHE

Please post productively and don't troll. Infracted. -Edge

[Mahourai]

It's already part of the kickstarter goals to make the documentary, CIG has been filming since they started the project. We've seen parts of it last citizencon.

I don't mean a CIG-produced one, although it may eventually be made out of footage they release. I mean like an actual, unbiased look at how the development of this game went down.