[Megathread] Star Citizen

[kenn9530]

Okay so you backpedaled so far you're back to attacking what was said and who said it instead of trying to cover for the BS you got called out on. I'm not the one claiming 10% of SC is equal to COD or Pubg bud. Oh wait you claim it is better! My bad. ?

The current version of SC has miles more to do than you can ever do in COD and PUBG combined thats simple fact, if you think otherwise then your just lying at this point for the sake of it. Your so deep in your lies you cant even tell what the truth is anymore.

[Mister K]

Don't you actually feel there is reason for that? And you are actually acting that SC fans here want to discuss problematic development at all. Whole development breeds toxicity. Again, just go read spectrum. In moment, someone is not happy with development, it's stomped by fanboys. But you are saying "just don't discuss it and move on - oh you spent hundreds and thousand dollars on this game? Yea, just move on" ..

In moment, you are selling access to your game, it's fair game. And noone, including you, is in position to tell others what and how they should discuss development.

The fans here probably wouldn't discuss the problematic development but then again everyone is too busy fighting each other to actually have any meaningful discussion. No idea what Spectrum is and the other forum thing you mentioned earlier. I am saying discuss the problems but there are clearly two very opposite agendas which make for a difficult constructive discussion. The die hard fanboys and the negative nancies who love to tease (im not saying you but certain others) the other side and its working.

Sure is, they shot themself in foot when they made everything public but then again if you are taking "free money" do you have any other choice? Usually games take years to make but are under strict NDAs so that these very discussions don't happen until a later point but as you say, it's fair game.

I wonder if there are any forecasts to see how long CiG will last with the development of SC before bankruptcy. They will need to have significant progress with game systems being finalised by end of 2021 so they can focus strictly on content for 2022 with release for 2023. At that point if the game is not out, it's GG. This is already pushing it but at the current state I can't see a solid release with PTU for 2021. A decade or however long to make a game is a long time but in reality as a development project of this scale, it isn't.

However, it is in ALL our best interests for this game to succeed.

This is what I mean, year after year, argument after argument, same thread, constantly. Years from 2020, 2019, 2018, 2017, 2016, 2015... the tone slightly changes more negative but you can see an agenda here, just as bad as the die hard fan boys.
https://i.imgur.com/ZTTQmKh.png


I will probably sign off from here again until either major update or another year when all of us are going to have the same conversation again about the tech demo.

I don't care if it fails or not, that's irrelevant to me. That doesn't mean it should be free from scrutiny though. And if people want to say it's the best game ever then we're allowed to see if their statements hold up.

Clearly it's relevant since you keep going round in circles for the past 5 years or so.

And if developers don't try again maybe it's because they can see how expensive and time consuming it is and that the returns on investment simply wouldn't be worth it.

No one takes risks, this is why games are going down hill. Blizzard being the last that probably did something that revolutionised their niche.

[Kyanion]

The current version of SC has miles more to do than you can ever do in COD and PUBG combined thats simple fact, if you think otherwise then your just lying at this point for the sake of it. Your so deep in your lies you cant even tell what the truth is anymore.

More to do = not more fun. Hell you could make the argument that floating through empty space is 'more to do' because it miles of space. Woopity do. You said it was better. It isn't. Also to be honest, it could be argued that there is more to do in pubg and other games. I don't even care to get into that pointless argument. You enjoy your 10% is better than 100% game. Judging by the numbers, not many are.

[MrAnderson]

Hasn't stopped people on both sides from comparing SC and ED though. Also, how long does sC get this 'still in development' pass? When it reaches Duke Nukem Forever years?

Well you can compare anything and everything while still understanding the different situations, approaches and stages each project needs.

Star Citizen will get a development pass by it's backers just like Elite get's a development pass from his.

Elite was made by an established studio and in an engine which was made specially for it. Star Citizen came from scratch.
Considering both approaches and how much each game as evolved I'd say Star Citizen is doing a better job at progressing into it's final goal:

Back in 2014 Frontier said this about their roadmap:

We do intend to release small, free updates after launch, but expansions that include significant new features and content will be charged for separately. For example, our current roadmap is to add (in no particular order):

- Landing/ driving / prospecting on airless rocky planets, moons & asteroids ✔️ (delivered and improved upon)
- Walking around interiors and combative boarding of other ships ✘ (Star Citizen has that since 2015)
- Combat and other interactions with other players and AIs in the internal areas of star ports ✘ (Star Citizen has that since 2015)
- Accessing richly detailed planetary surfaces ✘ (Star Citizen has that since 2018)
- Availability of giant ‘executive control’ ships to players ✔️

(Star Citizen has fully controllable giant ships like 890 Jump or the Carrack which can carry other ships inside them, Elite is releasing Carriers shortly that serve as mobile spawn/trade points and not much else (AFAIK) you can't fly them or walk inside them.

[Kyanion]

Well you can compare anything and everything while still understanding the different situations, approaches and stages each project needs.

Star Citizen will get a development pass by it's backers just like Elite get's a development pass from his.

Elite was made by an established studio and in an engine which was made specially for it. Star Citizen came from scratch.
Considering both approaches and how much each game as evolved I'd say Star Citizen is doing a better job at progressing into it's final goal:

I mean you may give it a pass but I'm not sure all of the backers/players/people watching the project would. It was their choice to go and make their own engine. It is what it is though, it does not matter in now, what matters is if this game actually launches in a complete state. I don't know what percentage people would put on it but it surely is a long long way away from being done. We'll see how patient people get over the next 18 months.

- - - Updated - - -

(Star Citizen has fully controllable giant ships like 890 Jump or the Carrack which can carry other ships inside them, Elite is releasing Carriers shortly that serve as mobile spawn/trade points and not much else (AFAIK) you can't fly them or walk inside them.

I mean Elite is also working with a lot smaller team and budget from what I understand. I don't play either game as I just have an interest in following kickstarter projects over the years. Sounds like ED has their own problems, no question, but the retention rate they had from base game to expansion was pretty remarkable I will admit. Sure beats the numbers some MMO's have put out over the years just going from release to month 2 let alone release to expansion.

[1001]

Frontier agrees or else they wouldn't have cancelled their yearly seasons plans, cancelled their official PVP tournament+prize money and focused on other franchises. Their release sold reasonably for a niche game (825k in the first months) but the general gaming community called the game convoluted and shallow. "A mile wide, but an inch deep" and didn't stick for long. Compare the evolution of Elite with NoManSky for example and it's night and day.

When Elite released it was undoubtably bare bones but what can really be expected for 2 years work? You talk about people not understanding development and being impatient about Star Citizen (even after 8 years of waiting) but aren't willing to hold anywhere near the same line of thinking for other games. It's a perfect example of your bias.

For all of Elite's faults, and there are many, it released virtually when they said it would and it has been regularly patched on a 3-4 month cadence since then.

You want to diss their removal of their yearly season plans but ignore that it means people have been getting free quarterly patches for the base game and the expansion for the last 4 years. From a customer perspective that's fantastic.

You claim NMS's growth is night and day over Elite but why should we trust your opinion when it is so clearly biased against one of those?
And more importantly it's nothing but a subjective opinion which typically translates to "I like what this game added and I don't like what that game added". When I have looked at the Steam stats in the past it has always been Elite with the higher average concurrency. So for all of NMS's supposed night and day difference, it doesn't hold up in player numbers.

From SteamDB
Followers:
NMS - 645.718
Elite - 271.651

Median playtime last 2 weeks:
NMS - 2.4 hours
Elite - 51.3 hours

Average total playtime:
NMS - 33.4 hours
Elite - 95.1 hours

So despite being on the radar of almost 3x as many people the game is much less popular in both time played daily and 3x less popular in total time played. Yet according to your logic, NMS is the game getting it right and Elite is getting it all wrong... Facts vs feelings and all that.

No matter how much you want to diss on Elite does not change anything about Star Citizen and that's why your attempts at deflecting are laughable. Even if we were all to come to the conclusion that Elite is terrible it still doesn't mean that Star Citizen is better. It's still 8 years, it's still $350 million and it's still a fraction of what was sold to people.

As for comparing with Star Citizen numbers, you can't, first because there's no updated official numbers to how many backers have bought a game package and second because one is game still in development but has seen it's unit price/value increase with time (more than double now with the separation of the online universe and single-player campaign) while the other has had 3 official releases in multiple platforms (PC, XBOX, PS4) and as seen it's price go for as low as 5$.

Oh bog off. Always with the fucking excuses. If there's no official numbers whose fault is that?

[Deus Mortis]

Your the one making assumptions as i was always talking about what the game offers because there is not point in discussing what game is better as its personal choice.

Doesnt matter how many play a certain game doesnt mean it has more content than another game does it. Space games are always for a niche community and thats why they dont get made that often, companies would rather remake the same thing over and over like COD because people will just buy it, CoD, fortnite and similar gameplay is so bland its makes you not want to play any game.

Yes that is why Call of Duty Warzone has 132k viewers atm. And has been played by 60 fucking million people before it is even two months old, so your statement that I bolded is factually false. It would be different if you said "It makes me not want to play". Yes while SC will have more to do than COD(I mean I sure fucking hope it does otherwise that would be embarrassing), what Warzone does it does extremely well. Plenty of games have come and gone that had a lot you could do in the game but if those things you can do are boring/bugged/pointless than what is the purpose. Sometimes a jack of all trades is not a good thing if it can't master any of them.

Before you get after me for being a hater. I want this game to succeed. What it wants to do is what I also wanted when I used to play EVE Online/Dust 514. One of the reasons I have a 1080ti is for this game. In my opinion though there is a lot that has me concerned.

[Antipathy1018]

@MrAnderson, @Mister K, @kenn9530 Mr.A and Kenn can't you ever admit you are wrong about anything in your life, as for Mr. K you seem at least halfway reasonable. The other 2 seem to never want to admit any wrong doing by CiG. Hell even @Edge has come in to try and show these 2 what is reality but neither wants to admit it and that is only in the last few months.
@Mister K You at the very least seen to be half-way reasonable and I respect that, but sadly if you keep trying to explain rational stuff to everyone people like @MrAnderson, and @kenn9530 will turn on you like rats in a cage. In fact I am very surprised those 2 have not turned on @Val the Moofia Boss given his criticism of the current patch, though I think they haven't b/c Val has been overall positive about the game till 3.9 came along.

This edit is to show that I am not an alt, but just a lurker since 2014, I don't post a lot bc F social media and only things that interest me or piss me off greatly cause my to post, I will let everyone else decide which is why I am posting.

[Bothand]

they have a highly profitable agenda.
and are clearly willing to invest the keystrokes to defend it.


and the consumer has nothing but a long history of being on the receiving end of broken promises,patches and deadlines.

[masterblaster0]

Star Citizen will get a development pass by it's backers just like Elite get's a development pass from his.

Not so. Frontier receives a lot of pushback over their plans, the forums and subreddit are very critical. Contrast this to the overwhelming defense from the fanboys of SC shouting down criticism and it is no contest.

(Star Citizen has fully controllable giant ships like 890 Jump or the Carrack which can carry other ships inside them, Elite is releasing Carriers shortly that serve as mobile spawn/trade points and not much else (AFAIK) you can't fly them or walk inside them.

The 890 Jump (210m) and Carrack (126m) are not giant. The Anaconda (155m), Federal Corvette (167m) and Imperial Cutter (192m) are all of a similar size. One can also equip multiple Ship Launched Fighters within these ships.

The fleet carriers are 1500m or more in length by comparison

The fleet carrier loadouts one can use

• Bounty Hunter
• Mercenary
• Pirate
• Trader
• Smuggler
• Miner
• Explorer
• Search and Rescue

8 large landing pads, 4 medium and 4 small. Fleet carriers are a mobile base first and foremost.

The arrival and departure animations are amazing as well

[kenn9530]

Yes that is why Call of Duty Warzone has 132k viewers atm. And has been played by 60 fucking million people before it is even two months old, so your statement that I bolded is factually false. It would be different if you said "It makes me not want to play". Yes while SC will have more to do than COD(I mean I sure fucking hope it does otherwise that would be embarrassing), what Warzone does it does extremely well. Plenty of games have come and gone that had a lot you could do in the game but if those things you can do are boring/bugged/pointless than what is the purpose. Sometimes a jack of all trades is not a good thing if it can't master any of them.

Before you get after me for being a hater. I want this game to succeed. What it wants to do is what I also wanted when I used to play EVE Online/Dust 514. One of the reasons I have a 1080ti is for this game. In my opinion though there is a lot that has me concerned.

Popular and having actually interesting gameplay are 2 different things, but the point is the current version of the game has just as much to do as many games fully released. They like to ignore what is already been done by star citizen to find anyway to talk BS about it.

@MrAnderson, @Mister K, @kenn9530 Mr.A and Kenn can't you ever admit you are wrong about anything in your life, as for Mr. K you seem at least halfway reasonable. The other 2 seem to never want to admit any wrong doing by CiG. Hell even @Edge has come in to try and show these 2 what is reality but neither wants to admit it and that is only in the last few months.
@Mister K You at the very least seen to be half-way reasonable and I respect that, but sadly if you keep trying to explain rational stuff to everyone people like @MrAnderson, and @kenn9530 will turn on you like rats in a cage. In fact I am very surprised those 2 have not turned on @Val the Moofia Boss given his criticism of the current patch, though I think they haven't b/c Val has been overall positive about the game till 3.9 came along.

This edit is to show that I am not an alt, but just a lurker since 2014, I don't post a lot bc F social media and only things that interest me or piss me off greatly cause my to post, I will let everyone else decide which is why I am posting.

There are certain posters with no interest in the game that keep spouting of any reason they can to talk bad about anything to do with the game, they are just here to do anything they can to talk BS, normally if a game as at this stage you wouldnt get to play it at all so having it run at all is more than reasonable.

Facts are the game increased in size slowly until just before 2015 and there are those that still claim the game should be released in 2014, the game takes as long as it takes and chris has said on many occasions it will release when its ready.

The 890 Jump (210m) and Carrack (126m) are not giant. The Anaconda (155m), Federal Corvette (167m) and Imperial Cutter (192m) are all of a similar size. One can also equip multiple Ship Launched Fighters within these ships.

The fleet carriers are 1500m or more in length by comparison

The fleet carrier loadouts one can use

• Bounty Hunter
• Mercenary
• Pirate
• Trader
• Smuggler
• Miner
• Explorer
• Search and Rescue

8 large landing pads, 4 medium and 4 small. Fleet carriers are a mobile base first and foremost.

The arrival and departure animations are amazing as well

If you could fly them and they had full interiors then that may be something but just an outer skin doesnt really do it for me.

The bengall carrier at 1000m has a full interior and there are 2 dreadnaughts at 1500m that will likely have interior also but making a ship of that size with an interior that works to the size of the ship is a ton of work so we can find that out in SQ42.

I would take a ship of 200m with full interior over a ship 10 times the size any day of the week.

[1001]

Popular and having actually interesting gameplay are 2 different things,

Tell that to the guy who likes to show off Twitch stats as a sign of Star Citizen's success.

but the point is the current version of the game has just as much to do as many games fully released. They like to ignore what is already been done by star citizen to find anyway to talk BS about it.

No matter how many times you say this, it's not going to make it true. So far you've compared it to lazer-focused games like COD and PUBG who are literally a case of 'Do one thing and do it well'. What's next, comparing it to Tic Tac Toe?

Star Citizen has a few things to do but none of it works without failing 50% of the time. You seem to hold this idea that because it has a quantity of things to do (albeit badly) it means it is equal or better to completed games and then in the next breath you say that Elite's 400 billion systems are pointless. So what is it, quantity or quality? You can't have your cake and eat it as well.
Everything in Star Citizen now is at an extremely basic level, does the world building compare to Divison 2? No. Does the AI compare? No. Does the combat compare? No. Do the animations compare? No. Do the missions compare? No. Does group content compare? No. Does the variety compare? No. And so on.

[kenn9530]

Tell that to the guy who likes to show off Twitch stats as a sign of Star Citizen's success.



No matter how many times you say this, it's not going to make it true. So far you've compared it to lazer-focused games like COD and PUBG who are literally a case of 'Do one thing and do it well'. What's next, comparing it to Tic Tac Toe?

Star Citizen has a few things to do but none of it works without failing 50% of the time. You seem to hold this idea that because it has a quantity of things to do (albeit badly) it means it is equal or better to completed games and then in the next breath you say that Elite's 400 billion systems are pointless. So what is it, quantity or quality? You can't have your cake and eat it as well.
Everything in Star Citizen now is at an extremely basic level, does the world building compare to Divison 2? No. Does the AI compare? No. Does the combat compare? No. Do the animations compare? No. Do the missions compare? No. Does group content compare? No. Does the variety compare? No. And so on.

And have you played the game for yourself, if the answer is no then you dont actually know anything about the game, and the game is in a development stage only developers would normally have access to so complaining this and that is actually redundant. You never actually discuss mechanics just say this and that is bad.

I would rather have 100 custom star systems than a randomly generated universe with next to nothing to do unless your in the core worlds, everything is current SC is better than what ED offers otherwise i would play ED and not get bored of it after 5 mins.

[1001]

And have you played the game for yourself,

Yes.

if the answer is no then you dont actually know anything about the game,

Don't be absurd. With the multitude of ways to find out information one could easily learn about the game. Whether that is from watching Twitch streams, youtube videos, forum posts, game site articles etc

and the game is in a development stage only developers would normally have access to so complaining this and that is actually redundant.

Completely irrelevant, ignoring that this is year 8 of development...

I would rather have 100 custom star systems than a randomly generated universe with next to nothing to do unless your in the core worlds,

So quality is more important to you. If that is the case how can you say Star Citizen is as good as completed games when the quality disparity is so extreme?

planets are essentially pointless in ED

and the combat is even more basic than SC currently has.

Missions in SC are much better than in ED and SC is focussed on group content

there is much more variety in SC than ED.

Again with the iditotic claims. This is just you lashing out and it's really funny seeing you just posted

There are certain posters with no interest in the game that keep spouting of any reason they can to talk bad about anything to do with the game, they are just here to do anything they can to talk BS,

[kenn9530]

snip

Doesnt matter what year of development the game is currently in, its not up to you to decide what a game should be or not, if something is not ready then its not ready.

To see what the game is actually like you have to play yourself when new patches release, twitch and stuff dont give a true version of the game.

What quality are you on about, the only thing is game optimising but still the performance is more than adequate for a game in development. I can play several hours straight most of the time with little or no issues. It impossible to optimise a game when new things are constantly being added.

They are not idiotic claims, if ED is so much better why is there barely anyone playing it.

[1001]

Doesnt matter what year of development the game is currently in, its not up to you to decide what a game should be or not, if something is not ready then its not ready.

So let me get this straight. How can you say the above and then move straight on to criticising another game? If it's under develpoment it doesn't matter what year it is. It's not up to you to decide if something is ready or not and nor is it up to you to decide what a game should be?

This is cognitive dissonance.

To see what the game is actually like you have to play yourself when new patches release, twitch and stuff dont give a true version of the game.

This is just gatekeeping criticism.

What quality are you on about, the only thing is game optimising but still the performance is more than adequate for a game in development. I can play several hours straight most of the time with little or no issues. It impossible to optimise a game when new things are constantly being added.

Animation quality, flight model quality, physics quality, mission quality etc.

They are not idiotic claims, if ED is so much better why is there barely anyone playing it.

Haha funny boy. Star Citizen had 1300 avg concurrency over a 10 month period

[kenn9530]

So let me get this straight. How can you say the above and then move straight on to criticising another game? If it's under develpoment it doesn't matter what year it is. It's not up to you to decide if something is ready or not and nor is it up to you to decide what a game should be?

This is cognitive dissonance.



This is just gatekeeping criticism.



Animation quality, flight model quality, physics quality, mission quality etc.



Haha funny boy. Star Citizen had 1300 avg concurrency over a 10 month period

A game is ready when its ready, your just choosing to talk BS in a game in development when usually at this stage the players wouldnt be playing it at all, the game is not meant to be perfect and run smoothly with everything in place.

Your opinion on quality is not the same as everyone elses.

where are you getting your numbers lol, https://mmo-population.com/r/starcitizen, numbers look pretty good to me, SC uses amazon servers so they have access to as much server space as the playerbase requires. The 2.7 million citizens is actual ship packages not including any free to play accounts.

[Odeezee]

This is one of the most disingenuous arguments from your camp. Backers voted for an increased scope, but I'd bet my life savings that they didn't want this.

If you asked all of those people if they'd be fine with getting to 2020 and being nowhere near release, that poll would've been diametrically opposed to what it was.

forgive me but you do understand what disingenuous means, right? backers voted for increases in scope through funding milestones, you do get that right? and orders of magnitude MORE people voted with their wallets for these increases than those who were there for the initial kickstarter. how can you then say they did not vote for "this" as though this is the final released game? your statement is hella confused. people are not voting for an arbitrary date during development, they are voting for the final release of the game when it's finished. you also did not mention that the majority of the devs are not even focused on Star Citizen atm, but on Squadron 42? why can you never seem to argue in good faith? /sigh

I voted no in that poll and I was in a very small minority. That's what happens when you, very early in development, ask a kid in a candystore if they want more candy. When RSI made that poll, they knew what the result would be. Chris knew it too and it's precisely what he wanted.

You know enough to know this too.

I personally didn't think that much about it until the later years when Chris' mismanagement started getting apparent. That was 2015, and when I started to look in to Chris' background with Freelancer, everything became so clear. Chris wanted retribution and wanted to go the featurecreep route yet again, despite his horrible fail last time which caused him to be kicked off the project.

you don't have to like the direction that the game took, but there are some things you should have paid attention to when you pledged. first, you agreed to give your money to the devs and allowed them to spend it on development as they saw fit and to change the game any way they saw fit, so if you were not comfortable with uncertainty then you should not have backed the game initially and instead waited until the game reached a point (if ever) that you were comfortable backing at. second, CIG gave all initial backers 5 years to request a refund if you were disappointed with the direction of the game (though they were not legally obliged to do so). third, what you call feature-creep, i call progress. i am an MMO gamer first and if all Star Citizen was was Freelancer 2 of Elite: Dangerous then i would not have backed the game at all. i think people are underestimating the impact Star Citizen could have on not only space sims, MMOs or tactical fps games, but on gaming as a whole. can you imagine a fantasy MMO using the planet tech on just one planet even, with no loading screens, systemic weather/magical systems and locomotion and the level of interactivity with the gameworld and other players, it could be amazing.

Three biggest for me:

Financial accountability - slowly modifying the ToS to screw over the backers.

they have released their financials for the last 2 years. they are also legally allowed to change the TOS, you can refuse to agree with a change in TOS and talk to Customer Support. no one if forcing you to agree to it and or any changes made to it.

Delivery/release dates - Touted endlessly year after year, referenced in the ToS only to eventually disappear entirely.

not sure about this so i cannot meaningfully comment of the TOS dates you are referring to, but as far as their broad "Answer The Call" dates, they were estimates, though i can see why people would not like them being broad and shifting, but they can also change those dates as needed and as is stated in the TOS. CIG has issues with timely and adequate communication, that is something few can disagree with, but Chris since 2017 has stopped giving such optimistic dates and also remember one of the biggest changes was the stretch goal of procedural planet tech coming before release which made them leverage it for both games as it made more sense to have it as a base now rather than try and add it after release like they were planning to.

LTI - Marketing bullshit which promised certain things that they backed down on for the sake of $. This is the original "broken promise".

while it might suck for original backers (it can be argued that the devs should have done a better job addressing this or maybe offered original backers something else to compensate, like maybe free ship names? /shrug), this is good for the health of the game, imo, as it makes the game more accessible to more people as well as giving the devs more support through pledges.

There's been some serious scumfuckery in this project ever since its inception especially on the marketing department. This isn't a broken promise per se, but it's a night and day difference from "The Pledge" that Chris sent out after the successful funding of the kickstarter.

CIG used to be a very humble and down-to-earth company. Now they're a big company that can't deliver, pull off shady marketing strategies, communicates extremely poorly and often just shuts up completely while letting dates pass.

how is the marketing shady? you don't have to pledge for any of the other ships other than a starter ship. vote with your wallet, if you don't like it, don't pledge for it. /shrug

Also, mandatory shoutout to Derek Smart. I don't agree with everything he has done, especially attacking Sandi Gardiner on the porn publically, but he really did poke holes in this project and exposed Chris for what he is.

Derek Smart was right. No game.

/sigh

out of curiosity are you still a backer and do you still test the alpha?

So if you want be critical, how game is managed, it's better for you just STFU? This reminds me exactly what some fanboys from Chronicles of Elyria said - they just shut down any criticism towards development because "it's toxic" but fact was, many people saw writing on the wall for very long time.

If the game would be good, don't worry, discussion would be about game design and core mechanics, but as far as everything is in tier 0 implementation without idea what tier 1 means, there is not much to discuss. Yea, people would be still bitching, but at least they would be bitching about "balance" and "this system sucks".

now Majestic this is an example of a disingenuous comment. you guys do know that you are passing judgement on an alpha right? where the game is still in heavy development and is not yet even feature complete, let alone content complete?

by chance are you a backer and do you actively test the alpha?

I think the idris's crew were just T standing on their pillot seats.... "advanced" AI indeed

haha, that was a friendly NPC ship that was set to be invincible, but the players force rammed the ship to the planet surface and in doing so bugged the AI out, but they were able to destroy it via an exploit through a shield hole, but ultimately this is a great thing as it gives the devs data, right? which is what you want during an alpha? also the AI is not where they want the devs to be but that is literally why the capital class fleet is in the PU now so they can test the impact to servers as well as the AI which is why yesterday they patched the game allowing the AI to fight back at players.

The problem is this. That over the last few years the same posters have had the very same discussions over and over again (you know who you are). The topics have not moved forward and it's constantly regarding the same problem. You have both sides making moronic arguments, hearsay and overall non constructive discussions which are only creating more of a shitty toxic environment (I've been part of it). Some people do not even play this game yet they still find time to come in here to cause drama which really is a waste of energy, but how you spend your time is not my business, some people love watching paint dry, whatever floats your goat. It might be some form of satisfaction from arguments and to constantly bash the anti CiG/CR drum. Now I get negative feedback and snarks at the game from occasional posters but again, to keep going round and round, year after year is just mindboggling.

If you care about the game and want to voice problems (and I am not saying this game has none) there is the official forum. If you do not care about the problem, then why are you even posting? I am still trying to figure out the reason why you would post ("why not bru i got rights!?" is not an answer of a fully developed adult) as it does not seem logical to post about something you do not care, want to see fail or simply dislike. Maybe once but months on end, years?

Is the game good? Subjective, mostly it has a good base with many problems and lacks content which itself is going to be a big task to complete. While buggy already has many features and better feel than other competitors which ambitions are much, much smaller.
Is this game a scam? Yes, CR is on the black market now flipping your money, getting that crypto and building a castle and pays his team in chocolate coins.
Is this game mismanaged? Seems so, which is why we have delays, is it a common problem to have internal issues from management to feature creep to rushed game from investors etc? Yes, no studio is perfect, specially if you a juggling between multiple studios and LARGE teams.
CiG bitten off more than it can chew? Certainly, but without great risks and passion does not come a paradigm shift. What better way for a development company to take these risks than with large source of crowfunded cash?
Is it waste of money? Have we wasted hundreds of dollars? Sure, personally I have spent around £100 GBP. Do I feel it's wasted? No, I knew what I was getting into as logic applies to products like these. Don't spend what you cannot afford to loose.

1) State a problem.
2) Discuss the problem and solutions (we shouldn't do a job for them but it makes for a more interesting discussion).
3) Don't discuss the same problem time and time again with no light at the end of the tunnel. What logic does that make? Unless some weird fantasy.
4) Live a happy life.

This sums up this thread perfectly.

+1

Don't you actually feel there is reason for that? And you are actually acting that SC fans here want to discuss problematic development at all. Whole development breeds toxicity. Again, just go read spectrum. In moment, someone is not happy with development, it's stomped by fanboys. But you are saying "just don't discuss it and move on - oh you spent hundreds and thousand dollars on this game? Yea, just move on" ..

criticism that is uncharitable and without content is not good feedback.

In moment, you are selling access to your game, it's fair game. And noone, including you, is in position to tell others what and how they should discuss development.

this is not true in the way that you think. can you give constructive feedback? ofc! that's part of why backers are allowed to test the alpha as they develop it. but you cannot judge the game as though it's a released title just because you can test it.

i5-3570 CPU
20 GB of RAM
Radeon RX 580

your cpu seems like it could be causing a lot of your issues. as you need to brute force the game during alpha as it is nowhere near release optimized and it's heavily dependent on a lot of streaming in/out of content. how is your ping in game btw?

I've had a few crashes this patch, but the vast majority of the bugs were server related, not client related.

• Random 30ks (server crash). If you log in on a server, you'll be lucky if it doesn't crash within 30 minutes.

• Quantum Drive not working, where it either says I don't have enough fuel (when I do) or my target is obstructed (when it isn't) so I have to reboot my ship or QT to another location and THEN qt to my destination.

• Personal inventory disappears when you log out. No point wasting five minutes stocking up on food and water when you won't be able to play long enough to need to use it, much less actually have the food and water in your inventory when you DO need to use it. Better off holding backspace.

• Bounty missions bug out. You get a bounty, QT to the quantum beacon, travel to the marker on your HUD, and... a friendly NPC spawns. If you kill the NPC, you may or may not get crimestat, and you won't fulfill the contract.

• FPS guns not firing when you hold down the left click button, which has led to me dying during FPS combat because I exposed myself to take a shot at my enemies and then couldn't kill them. You have to holster your gun and then bring it out, and then it MIGHT work again. Then again, FPS combat is really horrible right now due to latency (not talking about framerate stuttering; I can be firing into a dude's chest in medium armor with a F55 for two seconds and he won't go down, but then he pulls out his little pea shooter and kills me with four shots, even though I was wearing heavy armor).

• Elevators not working.

• Delivery missions bugged.

• QTing to a point on Hurston may or may not end with you spontaneously exploding while hundreds of KM over the surface.

• Your ship spontaneously exploding for no apparent reason with no one around or anything to collide with.

it's tough that you are experiencing all these issues, but let me see if i can shed some light on some that i know about.
30ks are a catch-all for server issues that can be either server, client or both related.
QT issues, well you have the workarounds which is the most you can hope for during alpha i'm afraid.
Personal inventory, the devs said that with the latest patch (yesterdays) they were no longer persisting food/drinks in Long Term Persistence.
Bounty missions, not sure about this one as i am more of a mercenary, but also remember that NPC Bounty Hunters also go after bounties.
FPS weapon firing bug is a known bug that has been around since 3.7. so the work around that i use is to bind your Inspect interaction to a key and then before i enter a fight i take out the weapon, then press my inspect key, then i click right-mouse-button to aim-down-sights and it should work after that.
Elevators not working, is a good and a bad thing as it shows you if a server is regressing and could possibly 30k, but it also sucks if you have currency on the line.
Delivery missions being bugged at pickup means you have to abandon and then require the mission or if it's at the destination, you have to either wait a big or try and "pick-up" before you try and "drop-off" at the pick-up/drop-off Amazon box.
QTing above Hurston and exploding is a new one i am not familiar with, but if it's like the one where you QT through Hurston's surface, maybe try and QT to Orbital Markers first if your travel distance if over 1000km.
Ship spontaneously exploding, idk anything about. could be server lag, could be Quantanium if you are mining (:P), or maybe from a griefer using a torpedo from out of your scanners range?

let me know if any of that helps. also check issue council for any of your issues and to repro.

I seriously doubt the programmers and the artists were making the game for 8 years. More than likely, 8 years ago the game planners were beginning pre-production work on the game, ie working out the game design and mechanics and experimenting with prototype mockups and stuff. Once they had that all worked out, THEN they swung into full production with game programmers and artists doing their stuff.

Similarly, GTA V "development" began in 2008, but it wasn't until 2010 that they actually went into full production, so the programmers and artists were working for three years, not five.

i think people also count these years when referring to other games because some detractors of SC also use CR brainstorming the original pitch for the original scope of the game as "dev time" for it as well. it's silly but people like harping on this stuff. imo a game takes as long as it takes to get it good. but from what i have heard about RDR, even though it took an extra year to release on PC it is still a very buggy game even now, so there is that too.

I wonder if there are any forecasts to see how long CiG will last with the development of SC before bankruptcy. They will need to have significant progress with game systems being finalised by end of 2021 so they can focus strictly on content for 2022 with release for 2023. At that point if the game is not out, it's GG. This is already pushing it but at the current state I can't see a solid release with PTU for 2021. A decade or however long to make a game is a long time but in reality as a development project of this scale, it isn't.

the dev's main focus is not on Star Citizen but Squadron 42, the single player campaign, which should hopefully go into closed beta at the end of this year or early next year and then maybe if they are satisfied with the game and polish it for about 9-12 months it will be out end of 2021 1st quarter 2022. then all of those devs, which are around 450/600 devs, will be able to focus on Star Citizen, so maybe another 3-4 years from that point, but really this is all just speculation and i'd rather just wait and see.

However, it is in ALL our best interests for this game to succeed.
[...]
No one takes risks, this is why games are going down hill. Blizzard being the last that probably did something that revolutionised their niche.

couldn't agree more!

they have a highly profitable agenda.
and are clearly willing to invest the keystrokes to defend it.


and the consumer has nothing but a long history of being on the receiving end of broken promises,patches and deadlines.

but they are clearly developing 2 games at the same time, they update the game every quarter. i can get not liking the game, not wanting to support their funding platform, but why misrepresent what is actually being done? /sigh

[1001]

A game is ready when its ready, your just choosing to talk BS in a game in development when usually at this stage the players wouldnt be playing it at all, the game is not meant to be perfect and run smoothly with everything in place.


Your opinion on quality is not the same as everyone elses.

I see no reason my opinion would not be in the majority. Only a tiny minority of people would say that animations, physics, missions and flight are of sufficient quality.

where are you getting your numbers lol, https://mmo-population.com/r/starcitizen, numbers look pretty good to me, SC uses amazon servers so they have access to as much server space as the playerbase requires.

I got my numbers from the infographic that CIG released, not some idiotic site that says Star Citizen is estimated to have 11,127,998 players or that they have 634,296 players per day.

How can you even look at that and think it is a good source to link? Unless you're only here to troll....

Only 1 post ago you said Elite had no players, then you link this site which says Elite has 11.34 million players with 431,000 players a day and it is ranked #9 on that site, ahead of Star Citizen which is ranked #10...

What a self own, you cannot make this shit up.

The 2.7 million citizens is actual ship packages not including any free to play accounts.

And this is how you out yourself as a troll. Even CIG have said that the 'citizens' number is not the amount of paid accounts. People have known this since 2015.

[kenn9530]

I see no reason my opinion would not be in the majority. Only a tiny minority of people would say that animations, physics, missions and flight are of sufficient quality.



I got my numbers from the infographic that CIG released, not some idiotic site that says Star Citizen is estimated to have 11,127,998 players or that they have 634,296 players per day.

How can you even look at that and think it is a good source to link? Unless you're only here to troll....

Only 1 post ago you said Elite had no players, then you link this site which says Elite has 11.34 million players with 431,000 players a day and it is ranked #9 on that site, ahead of Star Citizen which is ranked #10...

What a self own, you cannot make this shit up.



And this is how you out yourself as a troll. Even CIG have said that the 'citizens' number is not the amount of paid accounts. People have known this since 2015.

In 2015 both numbers were seperate for accounts with ships and normal citizens, back in 2018 they combined that number and there were around 1.7 million accounts with ships with around 20% just being normal citizens, so stop giving incorrect information and lying just because you dont like SC.

CiG have not stated anywhere that the citizen count is just total accounts made and many players have tested this and it doesnt effect the numbers at all making free acounts.

Show this infographic that shows a playerbase of only 1300 concurrent players which is obviously not true. Again and again you just choose to ignore information directly in your face and provide nothing to back up your stupid claims.