I wonder what happen if you buy a car for $100 000 in real life and it gets stolen...hmm.
to be fair cars are insured, hard to 'stay' stolen, and is for more people a need.
Having said that from my understanding all these ships really will not be worth much when the game goes live from my understanding. I am not exactly sure the plan but from what I have heard they are fully aware of the pay to win problem
Well, if your Acc or the game gets hacked and your ship gets stolen, no matter if it has any value in game anymore, you will get, normally, a compensation from the developer, just like the insurance work in real life. If you can prove it of course.
what you will get is a ship, not $100,000
Of course not.
Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.
If the anti-Star Citizen crowd is getting this loud and this impatient this early in the development, i cannot fathom how volatile they're gonna get closer to release
The "pls stop wasting money on things i think are wasteful" rhetoric has literally exploded since CIG showed procedural planets, coincidence ?
And in a few weeks/months when we get closer to next big release the above rhetoric will just morph into "what they say they are going to release soon is impossible" and then a fine print "in the scope, form and quality that is acceptable".
Which in turns morphs into "Haha, look at that, the not so impossible thing is so bugged and bad, nobody can get 5 min out of it"
And that then morphs into the wasteful rhetoric so we make a full circle.
There's also my favourite : "this part is wasteful thus they run out of money", but if it doesn't get shown then its "the same part is missing, thus they are wasting your money".
The cyclical nature of the arguments is priceless and extremely predictable.
And not mention the quasi-altruistic ROI argument is nothing but hypocritical, and would require a person to go and "mentor" someone for each and every piece of anything bought with money with bad ROI to not be hypocritical, which would in turn make that person do the exact opposite just in spite, because of the excessive nagging, thus making the whole endeavor fruitless from the very start.
The question is not if they get hacked, but rather how much resources will be spent to fight of hacking and cheating. This has been my n1 reason to leave quite a few online games and I hope they fight it with no boundaries. I am willing to give money to companies just for this.
The question is not if they get hacked, but rather how much resources will be spent to fight of hacking and cheating. This has been my n1 reason to leave quite a few online games and I hope they fight it with no boundaries. I am willing to give money to companies just for this.
Send them the suggestions. They are out of ideas in how to milk people. They probably will appreciate and will claim that needs more 50 million dollars to cover that, which the awesome community will happily give them.
The question is not if they get hacked, but rather how much resources will be spent to fight of hacking and cheating. This has been my n1 reason to leave quite a few online games and I hope they fight it with no boundaries. I am willing to give money to companies just for this.
Send them the suggestions. They are out of ideas in how to milk people. They probably will appreciate and will claim that needs more 50 million dollars to cover that, which the awesome community will happily give them.
What they claim they need or not is directly correlated to only and only if they will succeed or not in the end, or do you feel they need to go out of their way in an illogical and counter-productive manner to prove inconsequential things to people inconsequential to their day to day programming ?
If people who donated or may donate or are interested in the project are in a higher medium value as a target group, but they would be content with a finished project regardless of what happens until it is finished, is it not purely logical from all encompassing points of view to ignore all their short-to-medium time-related concerns to fulfill the long-time-related concern which would negate any short-to-medium concerns and fulfill at least the basis of their expectations while minimizing most of the negative bias that may arise ?
I personally believe that what i mentioned in the above paragraph is the most viable choice of progressing, that provides equal opportunities and protection while managing expectations, but i would be happy to hear any and all input to how it could be modified to provide more statistical chance of success if indeed Chris Roberts could have made some managerial caveats pertaining to present day
i would also alike to ask for input and opinions whether CIG are proceeding in a way aspiring to what i mentioned above or in a fashion slight-to-more dissimilar to it, and whether they might have had started to do that recently, a while back or from the start.(personally i lean towards from between near a while back to slightly recently).
It will 100% get hacked because no game is going to run 100% server side,that is always the problem with pvp in any game. That is also the reason i never want pvp in my mmorpg because i am stuck there on that server with cheats.If i was playing a fps i could simply find another match/server and leave the cheats to themselves.Even better is with private servers the admin can ban/block out the cheats,while in a game it takes years before the developer acts and even then they act in a half ass manner.
Also with a game like this,even after a long wait and tons of cheating,they would likely issue 1 week bans or a 1 month ban then the cheats are back at it.On a private pvp server they can ban the cheats forever because they are not in the business of making money.
I would also bet this team has not spent a single minute worrying about cheating in the game,develoeprs never do care,they leave it up to the players to complain in mass drones and then they usually try to cover it up because it is negativity surrounding the game.
Never forget 3 mile Island and never trust a government official or company spokesman.
It will 100% get hacked because no game is going to run 100% server side,that is always the problem with pvp in any game. That is also the reason i never want pvp in my mmorpg because i am stuck there on that server with cheats.If i was playing a fps i could simply find another match/server and leave the cheats to themselves.Even better is with private servers the admin can ban/block out the cheats,while in a game it takes years before the developer acts and even then they act in a half ass manner.
If the above-average(borderly and nominally excessive) amount of money donated is actually conscious considered by the donator to be given for theenhanced and enriched development of the game, does it really matter to what degree the hacking if any would be influencing anything ?
And if the opposite is actually what is nominal,and if the people who would have had spent possible disposable income are not burdened by the lack of direct correlations to their possible excessive donation to their in game advantage, who are we to raise our voices in their stead ?
I would also bet this team has not spent a single minute worrying about cheating in the game,develoeprs never do care,they leave it up to the players to complain in mass drones and then they usually try to cover it up because it is negativity surrounding the game.
If the wast overwhelming majority of developers technically give up, and do not suffer quantitatively measurable repercussions to their revenue and/or net profit, why would we and therefore anyone impose onto specific developers to spend time and money to counter this before the base game is out, if our thus impositors main concern is the base games release on time and/or scope and/or amount of bugs and/or quality we are expecting ?
We the impositors can either request absolute(or near as) completion or timely release, if we request both we and any of us and anything we say request or demand is technically inadmissible and thus irrelevant to the imposee, thus making our imposition pointless and our effort time wasting to either completion or the timely release, which in turn makes us inadvertently screw up both what we requested and what we didn't.
Just to clarify and add if we(the impositor) would theoretically want to to request that the developer think about and implement the aforementioned anti-hacking tools that would directly qualify us as actively expecting that whatever releases to be enough up to our standards for us to play it, that would in turn disqualify any of our previous stances to whether something would release to be enough up to our standards for us to actually play it.
Or we(thus the impositor) would have had to be altruistic enough to put ourselves in anyone else's shoes who would have had been possibly playing to preemptively make the pvp fairer to them before we would have had known how that pvp would have had been developed and would had had looked like.
They are using the cryengine. If you look at the history of games based on the Cryengine, and how leaky the network code is. The games tend to be hacked from top to bottom on day one, the hack is developed during beta and launched and sold on launch.
So those $25,000 ships will not only be worth nothing in real life, they will be worth nothing in the virtual word either once the game is hacked.
Why are people buying things that could instantly go valueless.
all people spend most of their money on things that end up valueless as it turns out.
Including their entire game collection
pretty sure most people spend most of their money on things they need to survive. Like rent, food, other bills, like car note, and paying off other debt.
which...
ends up valueless.
games...ROI = 0 or near 0 food...ROI = 0 cars....ROI less than original value
see the pattern yet?
Except:
No food = Death. Seems pretty meaningful to me Car = Transportation to work so I can buy food/shelter. So I don't die. Also seems pretty meaningful.
They are using the cryengine. If you look at the history of games based on the Cryengine, and how leaky the network code is. The games tend to be hacked from top to bottom on day one, the hack is developed during beta and launched and sold on launch.
So those $25,000 ships will not only be worth nothing in real life, they will be worth nothing in the virtual word either once the game is hacked.
Why are people buying things that could instantly go valueless.
from my understanding all the ships people have been spending money on during beta will be pretty much worthless once the game goes live. That is my understanding from CR himself.
Can you please provide a link to a Video, Transcript or Comlink where he actually says that all the ships people have been spending money on during beta will be pretty much worthless once the game goes live.
When you have cake, it is not the cake that creates the most magnificent of experiences, but it is the emotions attached to it. The cake is a lie.
They are using the cryengine. If you look at the history of games based on the Cryengine, and how leaky the network code is. The games tend to be hacked from top to bottom on day one, the hack is developed during beta and launched and sold on launch.
So those $25,000 ships will not only be worth nothing in real life, they will be worth nothing in the virtual word either once the game is hacked.
Why are people buying things that could instantly go valueless.
The engine powering 2.0 and 2.1 has very little in common with CE3. It is a heavily modified, almost rebuild, version of CE by CryEngine specialists who where hired and provided with a base in Frankfurt to do just that.
Nice try though.
And because they rebuild all the engine and use an own netcode, they have now problems with the Cry Netcode (as of latest 10FTC)
When you have cake, it is not the cake that creates the most magnificent of experiences, but it is the emotions attached to it. The cake is a lie.
Actually wouldn't care at all. I paid for a ship and as long as i have it im happy. I learned a while ago not to compare. If they hack and get biggest ship, no worries, i got what i paid.
If they hack and get the biggest ship, the central server (to which the hacker has no access) will recognize that the hacker has none of these ships in his account and ** poof** it will vanish.
If they hack ANOTHER players account, all the usual procedures apply, which you find in ANY MMORPG (report, lock, investigate, repair, follow the data trail for sold items, ban, delete extras from database).
If they hack the client ... going for things like speed- or wall-hacks....it will take some time because the CryEngine code was rewritten and all their stock solutions for standard CE code will most likely not work. But client side hacking WILL appear. CIG will need a typical solution a la Punkbuster to detect that and ban these people.
If they manipulate the game with duping error, doubling items or cash rewards in game due to errors not found in Alpha or Beta, standard database checks should soon reveal that - abnormal amounts of rare item XX or unusual high amounts of in game cash appearing.If its like in EVE Online or Elite:Dangerous, some people laughed about their 5 billion ISK or credits first, until they found a MINUS 5 billion ISK/credits in their balance as the devs deducted the duped money and added a fine, essentially making the account unplayable.
The question is not if they get hacked, but rather how much resources will be spent to fight of hacking and cheating. This has been my n1 reason to leave quite a few online games and I hope they fight it with no boundaries. I am willing to give money to companies just for this.
Send them the suggestions. They are out of ideas in how to milk people. They probably will appreciate and will claim that needs more 50 million dollars to cover that, which the awesome community will happily give them.
Well I'm not giving them any money for ships that's for sure.
They are using the cryengine. If you look at the history of games based on the Cryengine, and how leaky the network code is. The games tend to be hacked from top to bottom on day one, the hack is developed during beta and launched and sold on launch.
So those $25,000 ships will not only be worth nothing in real life, they will be worth nothing in the virtual word either once the game is hacked.
Why are people buying things that could instantly go valueless.
The engine powering 2.0 and 2.1 has very little in common with CE3. It is a heavily modified, almost rebuild, version of CE by CryEngine specialists who where hired and provided with a base in Frankfurt to do just that.
Nice try though.
And because they rebuild all the engine and use an own netcode, they have now problems with the Cry Netcode (as of latest 10FTC)
You're comprehension is a bit off. As per the 10FTC the original CryEngine netcode was not designed to handle the positioning of objects in 3d space the way that SC needs so they are refactoring it (i.e. replacing it with their custom code). That doesn't mean that they are now suddenly having problems with the netcode this is something they have been aware of for some time which is WHY they are refactoring it in the first place.
CR's reason for choosing CryEngine has always been based on it's graphics rendering. Anyone with half a brain would assume that turning an engine designed for single player games into an engine that can handle large amounts of players is going to require the netcode to be rebuilt.
I'm still shocked everyday by the amount of people I encounter that lack the most basic amount of common sense.
Comments
- Albert Einstein
You should use spoiler tags on this...
Life IS Feudal
If people who donated or may donate or are interested in the project are in a higher medium value as a target group, but they would be content with a finished project regardless of what happens until it is finished, is it not purely logical from all encompassing points of view to ignore all their short-to-medium time-related concerns to fulfill the long-time-related concern which would negate any short-to-medium concerns and fulfill at least the basis of their expectations while minimizing most of the negative bias that may arise ?
I personally believe that what i mentioned in the above paragraph is the most viable choice of progressing, that provides equal opportunities and protection while managing expectations, but i would be happy to hear any and all input to how it could be modified to provide more statistical chance of success if indeed Chris Roberts could have made some managerial caveats pertaining to present day
i would also alike to ask for input and opinions whether CIG are proceeding in a way aspiring to what i mentioned above or in a fashion slight-to-more dissimilar to it, and whether they might have had started to do that recently, a while back or from the start.(personally i lean towards from between near a while back to slightly recently).
That is also the reason i never want pvp in my mmorpg because i am stuck there on that server with cheats.If i was playing a fps i could simply find another match/server and leave the cheats to themselves.Even better is with private servers the admin can ban/block out the cheats,while in a game it takes years before the developer acts and even then they act in a half ass manner.
Also with a game like this,even after a long wait and tons of cheating,they would likely issue 1 week bans or a 1 month ban then the cheats are back at it.On a private pvp server they can ban the cheats forever because they are not in the business of making money.
I would also bet this team has not spent a single minute worrying about cheating in the game,develoeprs never do care,they leave it up to the players to complain in mass drones and then they usually try to cover it up because it is negativity surrounding the game.
Never forget 3 mile Island and never trust a government official or company spokesman.
And if the opposite is actually what is nominal,and if the people who would have had spent possible disposable income are not burdened by the lack of direct correlations to their possible excessive donation to their in game advantage, who are we to raise our voices in their stead ?
We the impositors can either request absolute(or near as) completion or timely release, if we request both we and any of us and anything we say request or demand is technically inadmissible and thus irrelevant to the imposee, thus making our imposition pointless and our effort time wasting to either completion or the timely release, which in turn makes us inadvertently screw up both what we requested and what we didn't.
Just to clarify and add if we(the impositor) would theoretically want to to request that the developer think about and implement the aforementioned anti-hacking tools that would directly qualify us as actively expecting that whatever releases to be enough up to our standards for us to play it, that would in turn disqualify any of our previous stances to whether something would release to be enough up to our standards for us to actually play it.
Or we(thus the impositor) would have had to be altruistic enough to put ourselves in anyone else's shoes who would have had been possibly playing to preemptively make the pvp fairer to them before we would have had known how that pvp would have had been developed and would had had looked like.
No food = Death. Seems pretty meaningful to me
Car = Transportation to work so I can buy food/shelter. So I don't die. Also seems pretty meaningful.
You = idiot. I figured out the pattern!
When you have cake, it is not the cake that creates the most magnificent of experiences, but it is the emotions attached to it.
The cake is a lie.
And because they rebuild all the engine and use an own netcode, they have now problems with the Cry Netcode (as of latest 10FTC)
When you have cake, it is not the cake that creates the most magnificent of experiences, but it is the emotions attached to it.
The cake is a lie.
If they hack ANOTHER players account, all the usual procedures apply, which you find in ANY MMORPG (report, lock, investigate, repair, follow the data trail for sold items, ban, delete extras from database).
If they hack the client ... going for things like speed- or wall-hacks....it will take some time because the CryEngine code was rewritten and all their stock solutions for standard CE code will most likely not work. But client side hacking WILL appear. CIG will need a typical solution a la Punkbuster to detect that and ban these people.
If they manipulate the game with duping error, doubling items or cash rewards in game due to errors not found in Alpha or Beta, standard database checks should soon reveal that - abnormal amounts of rare item XX or unusual high amounts of in game cash appearing.If its like in EVE Online or Elite:Dangerous, some people laughed about their 5 billion ISK or credits first, until they found a MINUS 5 billion ISK/credits in their balance as the devs deducted the duped money and added a fine, essentially making the account unplayable.
Have fun
You're comprehension is a bit off. As per the 10FTC the original CryEngine netcode was not designed to handle the positioning of objects in 3d space the way that SC needs so they are refactoring it (i.e. replacing it with their custom code). That doesn't mean that they are now suddenly having problems with the netcode this is something they have been aware of for some time which is WHY they are refactoring it in the first place.
CR's reason for choosing CryEngine has always been based on it's graphics rendering. Anyone with half a brain would assume that turning an engine designed for single player games into an engine that can handle large amounts of players is going to require the netcode to be rebuilt.
I'm still shocked everyday by the amount of people I encounter that lack the most basic amount of common sense.
It would add some napalm to the fire which might make things interesting :pleased: