It is natural that such a long wait raises questions to what we will see at launch, the idea it won't launch though is just silly.
they could put out what they have now and call it a 'launch'. And every fanbois would defend it so that really isnt an argument.
Minimum Viable Product.
100 systems, is now just 1.
Able to module your ship to fit any role, is now ship "variants" (each sold separately of course).
Whatever happened to hiring NPCs to multicrew your ship?
etc etc.
Don’t forget that right now they have to remove assets if they want to put new stuff in cause the engine can’t handle anymore until they fix a bunch of stuff.
It is natural that such a long wait raises questions to what we will see at launch, the idea it won't launch though is just silly.
they could put out what they have now and call it a 'launch'. And every fanbois would defend it so that really isnt an argument.
Minimum Viable Product.
100 systems, is now just 1.
Able to module your ship to fit any role, is now ship "variants" (each sold separately of course).
Whatever happened to hiring NPCs to multicrew your ship?
etc etc.
Don’t forget that right now they have to remove assets if they want to put new stuff in cause the engine can’t handle anymore until they fix a bunch of stuff.
Scary isn't it? Who builds a game, then the game engine?
Every time I hear about Star Citizen, I think to myself .. if only all that money had been put into a EqNext like concept or something similarly progressive.
oh so there IS an engine excuse still? Well then that makes it all the better. Remember 4 years ago when THE excuse was the engine and how it had to be rebuilt? THEN everything was going to be perfect with Amazon LY? That whole super secret pact. You know all the reasons theyre getting sued?
It so amazing people still defend this garbage. But some people have a pretty cheap price tag when they sell out.
oh so there IS an engine excuse still? Well then that makes it all the better. Remember 4 years ago when THE excuse was the engine and how it had to be rebuilt? THEN everything was going to be perfect with Amazon LY? That whole super secret pact. You know all the reasons theyre getting sued?
It so amazing people still defend this garbage. But some people have a pretty cheap price tag when they sell out.
I keep seeing TwitchTracker linked as if it's indicative of anything. Plenty of people watch it, but if they're watching it they're most likely not playing it. I suppose it shows interest, is that what people are aiming for?
With regards to Star Citizen, I was playing just last night. I spent about 3 hours trying to navigate my friend's Freelancer to the Yela Drug Lab: "Jumptown". You know, with being capable of space travel and all, you would think there'd be some sort of coordinate system or a way to have a beacon? Irritating, but it's likely something that could come in the future I guess. However, I can't say it wasn't fun, or something akin to satisfying. Actually finding the lab (Eventually), through the use of landmarks and starting positions carried with it a great sense of accomplishment.
Flying the ship was fantastically immersive. Sure enough, there were graphical glitches and various bugs that broke that immersion occasionally, but it couldn't quite stop me playing. Something about it just kept me going.
Should development take this long? Is their, seemingly, singular focus on pumping out new ships for people to buy suspicious? I don't know, I'm just having fun selling drugs.
With the amount of money Chris has received for this game and the product as of right now,we can EASILY call this amateur hour. I play this little game called Atlas,it does MORE as an Indie game than SC will likely EVER do and likely took about 5 months or less to make on a shoestring budget.
With the amount of money this team has,they should have completed 3 triple A games already. To say this team has WASTED a bus load of money would be a gross understatement.
What value would i put on SC right now,well a few million tops,definitely not 200+ million lol. Chris Robert's is an embarrassment,he should go down in the gaming hall of fame as the most incompetent developer of all time,something he was already good at but now masters it.
I noticed somebody said they could release the game right now as finished and many would defend it still,well i look no further than Eve a rubbish game making loads of money.SO i guess it is the genre,seems to be an EASY sell even if the games are bad.
Never forget 3 mile Island and never trust a government official or company spokesman.
It is natural that such a long wait raises questions to what we will see at launch, the idea it won't launch though is just silly.
they could put out what they have now and call it a 'launch'. And every fanbois would defend it so that really isnt an argument.
I don't see what @Scot said as an argument. Just a statement of the obvious. Which your own comment "they could launch today" supports.
Now whether it is 95% unplayable today, as you suggested in an earlier comment, or some other number - opinions will vary! - its a reflection of how the discussion has shifted. From "there is no game", "there is no team", "out of money", "show me footage" to a discussion about "bugs", "features" and "game play".
Just do yourself a favor and play Elite Dangerous. Its actually released, working and progressing. SC will possibly release in 6 more years with out dated graphics, sub par systems by that time.
It is natural that such a long wait raises questions to what we will see at launch, the idea it won't launch though is just silly.
they could put out what they have now and call it a 'launch'. And every fanbois would defend it so that really isnt an argument.
I don't see what @Scot said as an argument. Just a statement of the obvious. Which your own comment "they could launch today" supports.
Now whether it is 95% unplayable today, as you suggested in an earlier comment, or some other number - opinions will vary! - its a reflection of how the discussion has shifted. From "there is no game", "there is no team", "out of money", "show me footage" to a discussion about "bugs", "features" and "game play".
That is absurd.
>there is no game
There isn't. It's a flight sim tech demo at best. You even said so yourself, that if anyone expects content, they need to buy the separate single-player game.
>there is no team
???
>out of money
Yeah. Last year they ran out of money and a private investor had to buy part of the studio.
>show me the footage
Except, you guys never do. Show me hired NPCs flying multicrew ships. Show me law enforcement boarding ships looking for contraband. Go ahead. I would love to see it.
The discussion never shifted. The rest of us just don't accept "hater" as a defense. Calling everyone "hater" is not an argument, it's losing one.
It is natural that such a long wait raises questions to what we will see at launch, the idea it won't launch though is just silly.
they could put out what they have now and call it a 'launch'. And every fanbois would defend it so that really isnt an argument.
I don't see what @Scot said as an argument. Just a statement of the obvious. Which your own comment "they could launch today" supports.
Now whether it is 95% unplayable today, as you suggested in an earlier comment, or some other number - opinions will vary! - its a reflection of how the discussion has shifted. From "there is no game", "there is no team", "out of money", "show me footage" to a discussion about "bugs", "features" and "game play".
That is absurd.
>there is no game
There isn't. It's a flight sim tech demo at best. You even said so yourself, that if anyone expects content, they need to buy the separate single-player game.
>there is no team
???
>out of money
Yeah. Last year they ran out of money and a private investor had to buy part of the studio.
>show me the footage
Except, you guys never do. Show me hired NPCs flying multicrew ships. Show me law enforcement boarding ships looking for contraband. Go ahead. I would love to see it.
The discussion never shifted. The rest of us just don't accept "hater" as a defense. Calling everyone "hater" is not an argument, it's losing one.
You really do need to read what people write.
I did not say there is no "game" I said - in the context of a discussion about "content locusts" that SC has nothing I regard as "content". And - frankly - I am amazed that people even bother to bring it up.
ESO came up and I replied that Cyrodiil (in ESO) also had no content. EVE is another example. FIFA, NBA, BFX, CoD ... There are many, many games that have no "content". They are still games however just not games for content locusts.
Go read the comments. Properly.
As to comments like "there is no team" - that was common. CR had, for example, used the money to buy an island.
Ran out of money last year. No. Again learn to read. What was released were accounts from 12 months previously which showed that they came close to "running out of money". However - since a further 12 months had passed - they clearly did not run out of money.
And that private investment? It was specifically stated that that was for marketing. Not for game development.
And - as I said in a previous thread - my assumption is that the investment, made in return for a % of the company, would come with caveats. The main one - in my opinion - being that the game has to release. I have no proof of this but to me that would simply be sound business sense. The alternative is that you believe someone threw $46M at the game whilst also saying the game will never release. You must think these investors are real idiots then. Me I think they will have put some caveats in the contract: like no money until it releases.
Go read the comments about the financial statement and the investment. Properly.
"show me the footage".
This simply suggests that you never boarded the SC discussion train at departure station back long before alpha. Those who did will understand. And since then there have been a whole host of other "steps". The discussion has shifted - significantly.
Nor - btw - have I ever called anyone a hater.
Now if you want to believe that SC will never release - fine.
I am with @Scot though. And like @Scot the question is what will the game offer and by extension will it be playable, fun etc. And, as I said I don't expect SC to have "content for locusts" Mining, farming, trading, flying - stuff I don't regard as content but stuff I know that a lot of people get a lot of enjoyment from. No doubt in the same way that I can enjoy Cyrodiil in ESO - despite it having (essentially) zero content.
I did not say there is no "game" I said - in the context of a discussion about "content locusts" that SC has nothing I regard as "content". And - frankly - I am amazed that people even bother to bring it up.
Please share what your suggestion was, for those looking for content.
I did not say there is no "game" I said - in the context of a discussion about "content locusts" that SC has nothing I regard as "content". And - frankly - I am amazed that people even bother to bring it up.
Please share what your suggestion was, for those looking for content.
As I posted above on page 2 of this thread - did you not read it? I will just copy and paste it for you:
---------
I don't consider mining etc. to be "content". Nothiing wrong with it being in the game - many enjoy it as was pointed out in a recent thread. Same goes for; trading ..... or farming say - that is an etc. btw. An example of something else ...
Peoples views on "content" vary though.
In context of the thread however the term "content locusts" applies to people who play an "mmo" for the "story based stuff" and then move on to something else. These people, imo, should be looking to SQ42 rather than SC.
In the same way that content locusts should stay away from a game like Eve. Not a game renowned for "content" (some tinkering around the edges e.g. Drifters & Triglavians). Doesn't mean there isn't stuff to do in Eve though.
So - just to re-iterate my spin: content locusts should stay away from SC.
--------------
Edit: glad you re-read what I wrote and picked up that I did not say there was no game.
I did not say there is no "game" I said - in the context of a discussion about "content locusts" that SC has nothing I regard as "content". And - frankly - I am amazed that people even bother to bring it up.
Please share what your suggestion was, for those looking for content.
As I posted above on page 2 of this thread - did you not read it? I will just copy and paste it for you:
---------
I don't consider mining etc. to be "content". Nothiing wrong with it being in the game - many enjoy it as was pointed out in a recent thread. Same goes for; trading ..... or farming say - that is an etc. btw. An example of something else ...
Peoples views on "content" vary though.
In context of the thread however the term "content locusts" applies to people who play an "mmo" for the "story based stuff" and then move on to something else. These people, imo, should be looking to SQ42 rather than SC.
In the same way that content locusts should stay away from a game like Eve. Not a game renowned for "content" (some tinkering around the edges e.g. Drifters & Triglavians). Doesn't mean there isn't stuff to do in Eve though.
So - just to re-iterate my spin: content locusts should stay away from SC.
--------------
Ok? So what are you arguing about? That's exactly what I said. If you want content, then buy the separate single-player game.
Ok? So what are you arguing about? That's exactly what I said. If you want content, then buy the separate single-player game.
I wouldn't "argue" with that at all.
Nor was I arguing just correcting a few errors. Your comment I said there was "no game" for example.
Ditto that SC ran out of money - the results were from a year earlier.
Ditto that they had to bring in private investment. Better speculation - we don't know - they didn't. Think about it: they got a "large" investment for a "tiny" % of the company. Bailouts don't work like that. And - as I said - I don't think they can touch it. But that is speculation on my part; that release of funding will be tied to the achievement of one (or more) milestones.
Ok? So what are you arguing about? That's exactly what I said. If you want content, then buy the separate single-player game.
I wouldn't "argue" with that at all.
Nor was I arguing just correcting a few errors. Your comment I said there was "no game" for example.
Ditto that SC ran out of money - the results were from a year earlier.
Ditto that they had to bring in private investment. Better speculation - we don't know - they didn't. Think about it: they got a "large" investment for a "tiny" % of the company. Bailouts don't work like that. And - as I said - I don't think they can touch it. But that is speculation on my part; that release of funding will be tied to the achievement of one (or more) milestones.
Ok? So what are you arguing about? That's exactly what I said. If you want content, then buy the separate single-player game.
I wouldn't "argue" with that at all.
Nor was I arguing just correcting a few errors. Your comment I said there was "no game" for example.
Ditto that SC ran out of money - the results were from a year earlier.
Ditto that they had to bring in private investment. Better speculation - we don't know - they didn't. Think about it: they got a "large" investment for a "tiny" % of the company. Bailouts don't work like that. And - as I said - I don't think they can touch it. But that is speculation on my part; that release of funding will be tied to the achievement of one (or more) milestones.
Business bailouts where one is seeking profit don't work like that, but didn't the investor invest so much because they wanted the game to be created and not for any particular business profit reason? (IE, it's not like a typical bail out because the motivations of the bailor are different and untypical too). That's the impression I was under although I can't recall why. Coulda sworn I read something about it but it's been like, a year since then so I don't remember the details anymore.
.....well, regardless with that much money in play, I hope they're satisfied or will be satisfied with what they got with their investment.
It is natural that such a long wait raises questions to what we will see at launch, the idea it won't launch though is just silly.
they could put out what they have now and call it a 'launch'. And every fanbois would defend it so that really isnt an argument.
I don't see what @Scot said as an argument. Just a statement of the obvious. Which your own comment "they could launch today" supports.
Now whether it is 95% unplayable today, as you suggested in an earlier comment, or some other number - opinions will vary! - its a reflection of how the discussion has shifted. From "there is no game", "there is no team", "out of money", "show me footage" to a discussion about "bugs", "features" and "game play".
This is exactly what I was getting at, think of all the games we have seen that have launched as early access, a term not used so much now as it has picked up a bad reputation? I have seen a lot of content in SC videos what I don't know is how much of this has been put together in something I like to call a Space MMO. What I was arguing against was the idea this was vapourware, it will launch in some fashion, we have seen players doing gameplay activities online. My concern is we will not see the game in anything near the state we would have hoped for in even an EA or whatever term is chosen for the launch.
Comments
I especially liked the part when hired NPCs multi-crewed player ships! lol Or the one travelling through 100 systems. lmao
Watch out though. Law enforcement NPCs will stop and board your ship, searching for contraband!
Oh wait, those were just lies to sell more ships for hundreds of dollars each.
In case you haven't noticed most games nowadays receive patches almost immediately after being available to buy and play and many more after.
Maybe get with the times and stop acting like grumpy old farts
100 systems, is now just 1.
Able to module your ship to fit any role, is now ship "variants" (each sold separately of course).
Whatever happened to hiring NPCs to multicrew your ship?
etc etc.
"I am my connectome" https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=HA7GwKXfJB0
It so amazing people still defend this garbage. But some people have a pretty cheap price tag when they sell out.
With regards to Star Citizen, I was playing just last night. I spent about 3 hours trying to navigate my friend's Freelancer to the Yela Drug Lab: "Jumptown". You know, with being capable of space travel and all, you would think there'd be some sort of coordinate system or a way to have a beacon? Irritating, but it's likely something that could come in the future I guess. However, I can't say it wasn't fun, or something akin to satisfying. Actually finding the lab (Eventually), through the use of landmarks and starting positions carried with it a great sense of accomplishment.
Flying the ship was fantastically immersive. Sure enough, there were graphical glitches and various bugs that broke that immersion occasionally, but it couldn't quite stop me playing. Something about it just kept me going.
Should development take this long? Is their, seemingly, singular focus on pumping out new ships for people to buy suspicious? I don't know, I'm just having fun selling drugs.
I play this little game called Atlas,it does MORE as an Indie game than SC will likely EVER do and likely took about 5 months or less to make on a shoestring budget.
With the amount of money this team has,they should have completed 3 triple A games already.
To say this team has WASTED a bus load of money would be a gross understatement.
What value would i put on SC right now,well a few million tops,definitely not 200+ million lol.
Chris Robert's is an embarrassment,he should go down in the gaming hall of fame as the most incompetent developer of all time,something he was already good at but now masters it.
I noticed somebody said they could release the game right now as finished and many would defend it still,well i look no further than Eve a rubbish game making loads of money.SO i guess it is the genre,seems to be an EASY sell even if the games are bad.
Never forget 3 mile Island and never trust a government official or company spokesman.
Now whether it is 95% unplayable today, as you suggested in an earlier comment, or some other number - opinions will vary! - its a reflection of how the discussion has shifted. From "there is no game", "there is no team", "out of money", "show me footage" to a discussion about "bugs", "features" and "game play".
>there is no game
There isn't. It's a flight sim tech demo at best. You even said so yourself, that if anyone expects content, they need to buy the separate single-player game.
>there is no team
???
>out of money
Yeah. Last year they ran out of money and a private investor had to buy part of the studio.
>show me the footage
Except, you guys never do. Show me hired NPCs flying multicrew ships. Show me law enforcement boarding ships looking for contraband. Go ahead. I would love to see it.
The discussion never shifted. The rest of us just don't accept "hater" as a defense. Calling everyone "hater" is not an argument, it's losing one.
You really do need to read what people write.
I did not say there is no "game" I said - in the context of a discussion about "content locusts" that SC has nothing I regard as "content". And - frankly - I am amazed that people even bother to bring it up.
ESO came up and I replied that Cyrodiil (in ESO) also had no content. EVE is another example. FIFA, NBA, BFX, CoD ... There are many, many games that have no "content". They are still games however just not games for content locusts.
Go read the comments. Properly.
As to comments like "there is no team" - that was common. CR had, for example, used the money to buy an island.
Ran out of money last year. No. Again learn to read. What was released were accounts from 12 months previously which showed that they came close to "running out of money". However - since a further 12 months had passed - they clearly did not run out of money.
And that private investment? It was specifically stated that that was for marketing. Not for game development.
And - as I said in a previous thread - my assumption is that the investment, made in return for a % of the company, would come with caveats. The main one - in my opinion - being that the game has to release. I have no proof of this but to me that would simply be sound business sense. The alternative is that you believe someone threw $46M at the game whilst also saying the game will never release. You must think these investors are real idiots then. Me I think they will have put some caveats in the contract: like no money until it releases.
Go read the comments about the financial statement and the investment. Properly.
"show me the footage".
This simply suggests that you never boarded the SC discussion train at departure station back long before alpha. Those who did will understand. And since then there have been a whole host of other "steps". The discussion has shifted - significantly.
Nor - btw - have I ever called anyone a hater.
Now if you want to believe that SC will never release - fine.
I am with @Scot though. And like @Scot the question is what will the game offer and by extension will it be playable, fun etc. And, as I said I don't expect SC to have "content for locusts" Mining, farming, trading, flying - stuff I don't regard as content but stuff I know that a lot of people get a lot of enjoyment from. No doubt in the same way that I can enjoy Cyrodiil in ESO - despite it having (essentially) zero content.
Edit: glad you re-read what I wrote and picked up that I did not say there was no game.
I wouldn't "argue" with that at all.
Nor was I arguing just correcting a few errors. Your comment I said there was "no game" for example.
Ditto that SC ran out of money - the results were from a year earlier.
Ditto that they had to bring in private investment. Better speculation - we don't know - they didn't. Think about it: they got a "large" investment for a "tiny" % of the company. Bailouts don't work like that. And - as I said - I don't think they can touch it. But that is speculation on my part; that release of funding will be tied to the achievement of one (or more) milestones.
I was right with the first part then, yes?
.....well, regardless with that much money in play, I hope they're satisfied or will be satisfied with what they got with their investment.