Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Quick Links
Star Citizen, Holiday Sale (aka Sale 2.0)
This discussion has been closed.
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Comments
The fact they had to cut so much of it out also shows that his 'designs' (dreams) are often not possible and if they are it takes a whole lot of money to make them real. Or so far reaching they would not only cost too much but take forever to achieve. (see the pattern)
ANYONE who has payed a video game can dream up all kinds of hit, doesnt mean we are 'creators' or visionaries. Because anyone on this forum could 'create' a video game it just comes down to what is actually possible to create (again see a pattern)?
The fact this project got bigger and bigger and the scope became outlandishly intricate also shows a lack of perspective and a loss of reality.
The whole having to remake the engine (still dont believe they did that either) just shows how out of touch they (CR) are.
Its akin to what these guys making Elyria are doing every time they release an idea or something heyre going to add to the game the more impossible it sounds. Sure it looks awesome ON PAPER, doesnt mean it can be achieved in the real world or even a virtual one.
I go by what I see that people can play, what I see from SC is dogshit. Anyone claiming it isnt is lying or trying to convince themselves. I havent watched anything of the new updates but since there havent been any major videos of gameplay plastered around I will assume the changes are underwhelming.
Even as bad and broken as DayZ is guys can play it for hours and hours without crashing, and AFAIK its been in development about as long at SC has been, maybe a few months more. Depending on when each one claims actual 'development' started.
They created next to nothing for the game after he left, thus his role as a creative consultant would logically be minimal. That I said development was without him at DA isn't up for debate; it's how it happened. If you'd like to argue I didn't make it clear in the last sentence of the original paragraph you quoted that CR was still a "consultant," sure. You can have that hollow victory. But what does that matter? My point was if he had remained at the helm and Microsoft had not taken over, there would be no Freelancer. A vision without a product to show for it is just a dream. And people don't buy dreams to pop them into their PC and install them. Thus, the finished game was not really his so much as it was something he had been involved in, even if it was his original vision. It was, and still is to this day, Microsoft's title; not Chris Robert's as founder of Digital Anvil. The credits list Jörg Neumann as designer- not Roberts.
@Distopia As I said in my previous post, I do believe Microsoft consulted him. However, none of us know for sure how that went or how deeply he was consulted. What we do know is that Microsoft finished the product where CR didn't, that delays disappeared once he left DA, and that his role after Microsoft took over was minimal at best.
So Microsoft announced in 2000 that Freelancer would ship in 2003 ? Nope.
They announced no planned release date when they took over DA. Of course, you can't miss a deadline if you don't set one.
The first mention of a release date was in February 2002, when Microsoft announced that Freelancer was "on track" to ship at the end of that year. They missed that deadline, however, seeing as it shipped in March 2003...
i just dont agree with everything the critics say and overall its not a project that I am currently hopeful on despite the fact that the list of features sounds outstanding. I dont think CR can pull it off...
as I have said more than once
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Please do not respond to me
We do know the acquisition by Microsoft wasn't even announced until December 5, 2000. So announcing a release date in less than a month after the acquisition more than likely physically started isn't realistic anyways. In February of 2002, they announced that the game was "on track to be completed by the end of the year" (that was GameSpot's words from Microsoft, not mine). So, in reality, they announced a rough completion date of the project about a year after they finished the acquisition of Digital Anvil (maybe slightly more or less, depending upon how long the actual acquisition took and what that process meant for development of Freelancer; both of which we don't know and can only guess at). That doesn't seem to resemble a development delay considering the growing pains of cannibalizing DA and all its work into their own organization, in this man's opinion. Also consider, before Microsoft gained DA, there were only demos of the game shown (not anything even playable by folks outside DA). I also don't think they unreasonably delayed announcing a rough release date of the game, all things considered. Do you think so?
To be honest my opinion was that they kept him on as creative consultant just because he negotiated it with them. If you cut features left and right in order to get a game down into a state that is able to be completed in 3 more years and for only millions more then you sure as shit weren't consulting with the person who got everything into that mess to begin with. They probably asked him to name a few items so they could say they consulted with him and fulfilled their part of the deal and then they never called him again.
Like @MadFrenchie said how much do you really think CR would be needed if they removed a bunch of crap instead of adding it?
I'm pretty sure that Microsoft was uninterested in Roberts' advice once they looked at the Digital Anvil books.
It was reported that he was kept on as 'creative consultant' at the time of the sale. Not seen any reference to that later on, from anyone other than Roberts anyway. Whose remarks are always about increasing the glory of Chris Roberts.
If you are holding out for the perfect game, the only game you play will be the waiting one.
Star Citizen – The Extinction Level Event
4/13/15 > ELE has been updated look for 16-04-13.
http://www.dereksmart.org/2016/04/star-citizen-the-ele/
Enjoy and know the truth always comes to light!
It's running a highly souped up CryEngine. They had to change a LOT of it for the very reason you're saying there's "impossible" aspects to their development. The modifications to the engine are meant to allow previously impossible additions to become possible. EG: The Javelin-Class-Destroyer. With the Javelin's abundance of high detail rendering/geometry, nobody would be able to use the ship until they modified specific elements of the CryEngine to change the way the engine renders in game assets. The same can be said about space to planetside travel. They had to tweak how the game handled rendering to allow decent frame rates while still being able to load the geometry on the planets surface quickly.
Actual development began February 2013 iirc. So it's been little under 3 years since RSI started development. I backed the game early when they still only had 7 or 8 employees, so I'm quite impressed with how the company has grown.
oh and please do link about lets say 5 post on one game from another fourm related to a different game that was late. because MOST are.
I venture that you are NOT upset when someone gives a date and breaks it just when CR does it. Not when EA does it, not when ubisoft does it...no no..just CR
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Please do not respond to me
Intel® Core™ i7-6700K Processor (4x 4.00GHz/8MB L3 Cache)
Corsair Hydro Series H55 120mm Liquid CPU Cooler
32 GB DDR4-2800 ADATA XPG Ram
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 970 - 4GB ASUS TURBO Graphics Card
ASUS Z170 Pro Gaming Motherboard
512 GB SanDisk X300 SSD
Been wanting to try the PU and spent many hours in it yesterday as well as arena commander really learning to fly. Running the game on very high graphics settings with no issues and I have to say it's amazing. Buggy of course as it's alpha, but I had no crashes during game play.
The flight model is awesome and feels very polished and played with both keyboard/mouse and joystick. I'm definitely going to need a joystick for racing for the increased twitch for drifting. Keyboard and mouse seem to be a little better for combat but again..easier targeting but less ship control for me.
The scale is massive. Running across a landing pad and jumping off and using your space suit thrusters to EVA across spaces is incredible. Explored a station with no gravity, in the dark with few lights besides my flash light and it was creepy as hell. I even tucked my ship behind a station and cut power waiting for other players to come into range and then powered up and went after them. Incredibly fun.
Been an MMO gamer since the launch of UO and though there is much work still to be done, this is something really special. From the frost on my visor in the airlock to small particles smacking the outside of my ship near an asteroid field I explored, the sense if immersion was awesome.
It's one thing to read about Star Citizen, but actually having a PC which could play it removed any doubts I had. Glad to be a part of the journey.
"delays disappeared once he left DA"
How can you say that, when there's no way to measure it ?
After CR left DA, no possible release date was mentioned until Feb 2002. There's no way of knowing how many internal deadlines were missed, but given the earlier history of the project, it's very likely that they were.
Even Microsoft's suggested deadline given in February 2002 was missed. The game didn't in fact ship at the end of that year.
Hell, if crowdfunding was a thing back in 2000, Freelancer would have raised the required funds in a heartbeat. Who's to say it would not have shipped in 2003 with CR at the helm ?
My OPINION is that if MS didnt take over/buy out Freelancer it probably NEVER would have been made. The other ''what if" pertaining to crowdfunding and CR. Great for him it didnt because that failure to deliver would be there for people to definitely attribute it to him and his methodology. So NOT being able to do it then has given him free reign to do it now and in the process accumulate 105 million (and growing) dollars from true believers.
The only thing the last two pages have shown is even with history and written 'evidence' (knowledge) people still try and spin it to fit their argument. So how can anyone make arguments on shit that we dont have KNOWLEDGE (evidence) of what exactly is going on right now (which is the relevant topic not shit that happened 15 years ago).
What are the facts here:
Several claims have been made in this thread that contradict the above.
People are free to give their own interpretation of these facts, but if they attempt to change them, objections will definitely be heard.
By the way, this whole "missed end of 2002" point is also unsupported. This was before every game ever was offered as a download as soon as the final build was completed. This was the time of boxes and CD keys. Microsoft said the game was on track to be completed by the end of 2002. It was printed, shipped, marketed and released in the very next fiscal quarter. That doesn't seem like a missed deadline so much as a logistical and marketing build-up once they had the game 100% ready to me. At most I'd imagine a month "delay" for completion, meaning January of 2003. Compare that to no release at all because Roberts couldn't deal with the reality that he didn't have the resources to implement every single feature that had popped into his head over the course of development..
The writing is on the wall, you just seem to want to paint over it with Roberts Semi-Gloss.
People can take those 'facts' and try and spin them in multiple ways. I could spin it that MS took over not knowing how Fd up the project was. And the reason it was so Fd up was Roberts. Or that Roberts misrepresented to them (so he could sell it for a quick buck) where the project was. So they thought he was dealing in good faith and based on those good faith statements were confident they could release it on time. But once they got in there they saw the mess it was and it was delayed a year.
See how I spun that in a negative way towards Chris Roberts? I would also say one of those is a fairly accurate portrayal of what happened.
There is a common denominator in all this, and it doesnt take a magnifying glass to find it.
It appears that the release date was quietly changed in Feb 2001 to "Spring 2002". Previous release date is unknown at this point.
http://http//www.bluesnews.com/s/22790/freelancer-delayed
Which subsequently must have been changed to "Spring 2003" or some such, if we set aside squabbling over the definition of "complete".
So, clearly the claim that "delays disappeared once he left DA" is completely false...
And all this just kind of brushing off the fact that Roberts lost the project because he burned through the money without finishing the game due to his ambitions, and that it took him leaving the project for DA to rid themselves of the feature creep and actually finish the game. Again, what kind of hollow victory are you trying to win here?
The game would have never released if Roberts hadn't relenquished control to Microsoft because he could not control his desire to add everything he could imagine to the project. He missed his original planned development time to the point that he eventually ran out of money to develop with. Once his leadership position was filled by someone else, the game was able to curb many of these features that didn't fit the scope of the development power or resources available, and the game released.
If that's the case, Microsoft didn't seem to mind. They certainly raised no objections and didn't ask for their money back. They seem to be real pushovers, lol, how did they survive in business all these years ?
The first revised shipping date (fall 2000 was changed to end 2001) for Freelancer was announced well before the sale to Microsoft was concluded. One would think that Microsoft would have done due diligence to get a feel for the state of development, specially in the light of a 1 year delay being announced.
Your feeble attempts to slander CR make Microsoft look like real patsies. I don't care much for MS as a game developer, but I'd hate to have to tangle with their lawyers in a contract dispute. I don't believe for a second that they would have taken any "misrepresentation" lying down, lol
Talks between Microsoft and Digital Anvil started mid-2000. In early December the deal was finalised and made public. By then MS would have had a thorough understanding of what they were buying.
The first delayed shipping date was announced by CR early in 2000, so MS would have known well in advance that the shipping date had slipped from "fall 2000" to "end 2001".
MS subsequently couldn't meet that deadline, and changed it to "Spring 2002".
Then missed it again and changed it to "Spring 2003".
Can you cite some sources for this alleged "feature creep" in Freelancer that you keep mentioning ?
Microsoft subsequently stated they were cutting some of the planned features in order to finish the game.
So Roberts, being the director of the project, planned grand features for the game. He runs out of money trying to develop the game with all these grand features he wanted in the game. Subsequently, DA has to look to Microsoft for more funding. In the process, Roberts leaves the project (retaining only a minimal consultant role and having no authority to make any design decisions from that point on). Microsoft cuts some of Roberts planned features and, lo and behold, we get a gold release to favorable reviews.
What part of that is confusing? Do you think, had Microsoft told Roberts, "Here's a bunch of money, you can continue development however you like!" Roberts still would have been like, "Nah, F the man, dude! I'm going indie!" And threw up the hang loose sign as we walked out the door?
Or is it a much more likely scenario that Microsoft said, "Yea, we will fund, but we don't see this releasing within a reasonable timeframe with all your planned features. You'll have to cut some of those." At which point Roberts, seeing the game would not see the light of day but not wanting to be under the heel of Microsoft, probably did what was best for his team at DA and the game by simply bowing out to allow them to get paid to finish the game like Microsoft wanted while he moved on to another project without Microsoft's oversight?
Which goes back to my point about someone reigning Roberts in. Had Microsoft not offered to fund in exchange for the authority to cut features, Freelancer would never have released. Remember, Roberts isn't even credited as the game's designer- Neumann is.
All of this (Roberts admitting he needed more funding and Microsoft narrowing the scope) can be found in GameSpot's coverage of the game around the year 2000, if you'd like to check it.