Star Citizen: Development & Controversy

Octagon7711

Here's an interesting review of Star Citizen.  

Erillion

Its even more interesting what followed this review.

When TheSmarty literally declared WAR on the creator of this video for a 20 seconds piece at the end of the video. Dozens of twitter posts followed.

CIG and Chris Roberts more or less ignored the video.


Have fun

Aethaeryn

Some very interesting ideas in that video.  It seemed fairly balanced to me.  Just holding with the initial buy in to idea will be fine for me

rodarin

Erillion said:

Its even more interesting what followed this review.

When TheSmarty literally declared WAR on the creator of this video for a 20 seconds piece at the end of the video. Dozens of twitter posts followed.

CIG and Chris Roberts more or less ignored the video.


Have fun

Why do you and everyone that supports star citizen ALWAYS go to Derek Smart? EVERY SINGLE TIME.

No matter what ANYONE posts about this you and the other disciples MUST (as if youre contractually obligated) bring up Derek Smart.

Just stop.

Albatroes

Honestly, I'm hoping the game fails so people can stop being impatient and let the professional companies just buy the ideas and earn customer money. Companies have been producing garbage because people are impatient and will literally buy into anything that sounds halfway hopeful. Then you have too many people want to do their own thing in general and be their own boss so they can take advantage of that consumer impatience and tug on the nostalgia strings. The problem with everyone being a boss is that the talent you need becomes further divided to make anything actually good. People need to stop being greedy and just make form up to make quality products, so that customers get more guarantees and less hope being sold to them. Leave selling faith and hope to priests.

laxie

Albatroes said:

Honestly, I'm hoping the game fails so people can stop being impatient and let the professional companies just buy the ideas and earn customer money.

I'm not sure failure of SC would change anything.

Assassin's Creed Unity was a terrible release, yet people still happily bought Syndicate only a year later. You are right that companies will keep on releasing trash, as long as people keep buying it. I don't see people not buying it in the near future.

The way in which SC could help, is if it prompted legislative change. Over the years, Kickstarter TOS have become less in favour of the customer. They used to have clauses about failure of delivery, now they just say the developer should make an effort. With majority of Kickstarters failing, I don't blame them. Failed Kickstarters are an important chunk of their business.

That said, I think SC won't outright fail. As long as people keep donating, it is in their best interest to keep doing what they are doing. So unless someone files a successful lawsuit, they will probably keep doing the incremental updates.

When people ask where Squadron 42 is, in 2020, they will say "Look, we have added mining recently, progress is happening."

Arglebargle

Not skeptical enough about Roberts, but he's getting there.

MaxBacon

Rhoklaw said:

we just aren't buying the whole, SC is going to be the EPIC MMO it was pitched as waaaay back before they even had $1 million dollars

You damm right you haven't bought that. Back on KS SC wasn't even meant that big massive MMO that it shaped to after the crowdfund lol, maybe you forgot how they back then barely described it as on MMO, because how big SQ42 represented of what was the game meant to be back then, and the possibility of playing SC SP offline what changed today.

laxie said:

When people ask where Squadron 42 is, in 2020, they will say "Look, we have added mining recently, progress is happening."

I think you'll end up disappointed on those time-frames. I never get when people blow out of proportion how things actually work.  While they keep a crowdfund going by no means i ever believe it would last by 2020 at the rate of progress you just exemplified, and i'd bet you don't believe it either. It's a matter of using simple logic to understand how the funding will be influenced by their ability to deliver.

H0urg1ass

This is some of the best 30 minutes of video I've wasted time watching.  I had no clue about all the freelancer crap which sets a huge precedence for this project.  If a guy robs your house, gets arrested and goes to prison and then gets out and you catch him opening your back window again, chances are he's not there give back all the stuff he took last time.

The best part at the beginning is where he states that pre-ordering is really stupid, but crowdfunding is even more stupid because you don't even know what you're going to end up with.  At least with pre-ordering you know what the finished product does.  With SC, it's changed so much since the first people who pledged, that it's two separate damn games now.

adamlotus75

Good video. Pretty much sums it up.

Kyleran

They are in a "no win" scenario, at this point no matter what they launch with in terms of features or quality it will never silence the claims of financial or managerial malfeasance.

The hype is too great, the expectations are over the top, and the hate too strong.

DKLond

They're not in it to make everyone happy, and Chris Roberts knows that - and has stated it repeatedly. They're going above and beyond, trying to make a PC-centric next generation space game. That's all it is, really.

If you're not into space games, chances are this won't really change anything for you.

However, if you ARE into space games - and this game is released with a reasonable amount of content - and it's remotely close to the "dream vision" - then you'll be a big fan almost certainly.

All this bullshit drama will be forgotten "just like that" - by the majority of the involved parties. There will always be a few trying to keep the hate alive - but it won't amount to much at all.

People who're into the genre will enjoy what's there - and they'll have more of a space game than they could ever have had from a publisher-funded game.

Unless it fails to release, of course, which I personally doubt. There's no way this many people working that hard - for so long - will simply not release it. No way.

The people who still believe it's a scam and that they'll never get anything working - even in the face of what's already there and playable - are going to be in for a shock. If you know anything about anything - you should see what things are already coming together at an increased pace, and that this isn't an elaborate hoax by some money-grabbing incompetent madmen. No one who's following development on a serious level could possibly believe that at this point.

Balmong

H0urg1ass said:

With SC, it's changed so much since the first people who pledged, that it's two separate damn games now.

SQ42 has always been an intended feature, it didn't just randomly pop up. The only thing that changed about SQ42 was that it was made episodic, rather than one game.

Kyleran said:

They are in a "no win" scenario, at this point no matter what they launch with in terms of features or quality it will never silence the claims of financial or managerial malfeasance.

The hype is too great, the expectations are over the top, and the hate too strong.

This is how I feel it will play out. It's been a "damned if you do, and damned if you don't" scenario for awhile now. This game has had such a polarizing effect, with people who don't even care about it chiming in with their hopes of it failing for "just because", and the people who feel they need to defend their investment (sometimes vehemently).

At the end of the day, I have no more invested in this game than a special edition copy of a AAA. I invested in an idea, if pays out I get a game in the genre I most enjoy. If it doesn't pay out, well that's the nature of investing in something.

The part that gets me every time though, are the unrealistic expectations of the game development cycle. SC is still well within the average time frame of a game of it's size. MMO's tend to be on the higher end of the spectrum for the time taken for development. 

rodarin

Balmong said:

H0urg1ass said:

With SC, it's changed so much since the first people who pledged, that it's two separate damn games now.

SQ42 has always been an intended feature, it didn't just randomly pop up. The only thing that changed about SQ42 was that it was made episodic, rather than one game.

Kyleran said:

They are in a "no win" scenario, at this point no matter what they launch with in terms of features or quality it will never silence the claims of financial or managerial malfeasance.

The hype is too great, the expectations are over the top, and the hate too strong.

This is how I feel it will play out. It's been a "damned if you do, and damned if you don't" scenario for awhile now. This game has had such a polarizing effect, with people who don't even care about it chiming in with their hopes of it failing for "just because", and the people who feel they need to defend their investment (sometimes vehemently).

At the end of the day, I have no more invested in this game than a special edition copy of a AAA. I invested in an idea, if pays out I get a game in the genre I most enjoy. If it doesn't pay out, well that's the nature of investing in something.

The part that gets me every time though, are the unrealistic expectations of the game development cycle. SC is still well within the average time frame of a game of it's size. MMO's tend to be on the higher end of the spectrum for the time taken for development. 

And what size is that? We dont know. We do kow it is going to be basically all instanced. So that surely makes any 'size' claim tainted. But what has been shown so far isnt anything that one would be able to call epic in proportions.

Thats where defenders and even guys who are still optimistic start on the slippery slope. They still assume the best even when faced with overwhelming anecdotal issues that show that to not be the case.

The whole 'size and scope' arguments went out the window a long time ago. Now its mini modules and instances, as this video pretty accurately highlighted.

Balmong

rodarin said:

Balmong said:

H0urg1ass said:

With SC, it's changed so much since the first people who pledged, that it's two separate damn games now.

SQ42 has always been an intended feature, it didn't just randomly pop up. The only thing that changed about SQ42 was that it was made episodic, rather than one game.

Kyleran said:

They are in a "no win" scenario, at this point no matter what they launch with in terms of features or quality it will never silence the claims of financial or managerial malfeasance.

The hype is too great, the expectations are over the top, and the hate too strong.

This is how I feel it will play out. It's been a "damned if you do, and damned if you don't" scenario for awhile now. This game has had such a polarizing effect, with people who don't even care about it chiming in with their hopes of it failing for "just because", and the people who feel they need to defend their investment (sometimes vehemently).

At the end of the day, I have no more invested in this game than a special edition copy of a AAA. I invested in an idea, if pays out I get a game in the genre I most enjoy. If it doesn't pay out, well that's the nature of investing in something.

The part that gets me every time though, are the unrealistic expectations of the game development cycle. SC is still well within the average time frame of a game of it's size. MMO's tend to be on the higher end of the spectrum for the time taken for development. 

And what size is that? We dont know. We do kow it is going to be basically all instanced. So that surely makes any 'size' claim tainted. But what has been shown so far isnt anything that one would be able to call epic in proportions.

Thats where defenders and even guys who are still optimistic start on the slippery slope. They still assume the best even when faced with overwhelming anecdotal issues that show that to not be the case.

The whole 'size and scope' arguments went out the window a long time ago. Now its mini modules and instances, as this video pretty accurately highlighted.

So the size of the players in an instance is now the measure of work the dev's have to put into the game? 

Kefo

DKLond said:

They're not in it to make everyone happy, and Chris Roberts knows that - and has stated it repeatedly. They're going above and beyond, trying to make a PC-centric next generation space game. That's all it is, really.

If you're not into space games, chances are this won't really change anything for you.

However, if you ARE into space games - and this game is released with a reasonable amount of content - and it's remotely close to the "dream vision" - then you'll be a big fan almost certainly.

All this bullshit drama will be forgotten "just like that" - by the majority of the involved parties. There will always be a few trying to keep the hate alive - but it won't amount to much at all.

People who're into the genre will enjoy what's there - and they'll have more of a space game than they could ever have had from a publisher-funded game.

Unless it fails to release, of course, which I personally doubt. There's no way this many people working that hard - for so long - will simply not release it. No way.

The people who still believe it's a scam and that they'll never get anything working - even in the face of what's already there and playable - are going to be in for a shock. If you know anything about anything - you should see what things are already coming together at an increased pace, and that this isn't an elaborate hoax by some money-grabbing incompetent madmen. No one who's following development on a serious level could possibly believe that at this point.

The problem, in my opinion, is that by the time they actually release the damn game, if ever, it will no longer be next gen and chances are someone will have released something that already does what they are promising and probably do it better.

Balmong

Kefo said:

DKLond said:

They're not in it to make everyone happy, and Chris Roberts knows that - and has stated it repeatedly. They're going above and beyond, trying to make a PC-centric next generation space game. That's all it is, really.

If you're not into space games, chances are this won't really change anything for you.

However, if you ARE into space games - and this game is released with a reasonable amount of content - and it's remotely close to the "dream vision" - then you'll be a big fan almost certainly.

All this bullshit drama will be forgotten "just like that" - by the majority of the involved parties. There will always be a few trying to keep the hate alive - but it won't amount to much at all.

People who're into the genre will enjoy what's there - and they'll have more of a space game than they could ever have had from a publisher-funded game.

Unless it fails to release, of course, which I personally doubt. There's no way this many people working that hard - for so long - will simply not release it. No way.

The people who still believe it's a scam and that they'll never get anything working - even in the face of what's already there and playable - are going to be in for a shock. If you know anything about anything - you should see what things are already coming together at an increased pace, and that this isn't an elaborate hoax by some money-grabbing incompetent madmen. No one who's following development on a serious level could possibly believe that at this point.

The problem, in my opinion, is that by the time they actually release the damn game, if ever, it will no longer be next gen and chances are someone will have released something that already does what they are promising and probably do it better.

That very well could happen. EA though has already made the mistake of passing up the opportunity to get their grubby little fingers all over this. Roberts originally approached them for the Wing Commander/Origin IP back before the kickstarter, they didn't think there was a market for space sims.

Frankly Next Gen graphics are great and all, but that's icing on the cake. Current Gen (when SC is released) level of graphics, combined with good gameplay would be enough for me.

SEANMCAD

Rhoklaw said:

I've backed off a lot from my so called "crusade" against SC. Although I was never really against it in the first place. I mean sure, I still think it's a scam....

honestly I think you are giving CR more credit then he is really do. A mastermind of clever management he is not. a grown man with a childs understanding of amount of effort and sun rotation is more like it.

filmoret

Balmong said:

Kefo said:

DKLond said:

They're not in it to make everyone happy, and Chris Roberts knows that - and has stated it repeatedly. They're going above and beyond, trying to make a PC-centric next generation space game. That's all it is, really.

If you're not into space games, chances are this won't really change anything for you.

However, if you ARE into space games - and this game is released with a reasonable amount of content - and it's remotely close to the "dream vision" - then you'll be a big fan almost certainly.

All this bullshit drama will be forgotten "just like that" - by the majority of the involved parties. There will always be a few trying to keep the hate alive - but it won't amount to much at all.

People who're into the genre will enjoy what's there - and they'll have more of a space game than they could ever have had from a publisher-funded game.

Unless it fails to release, of course, which I personally doubt. There's no way this many people working that hard - for so long - will simply not release it. No way.

The people who still believe it's a scam and that they'll never get anything working - even in the face of what's already there and playable - are going to be in for a shock. If you know anything about anything - you should see what things are already coming together at an increased pace, and that this isn't an elaborate hoax by some money-grabbing incompetent madmen. No one who's following development on a serious level could possibly believe that at this point.

The problem, in my opinion, is that by the time they actually release the damn game, if ever, it will no longer be next gen and chances are someone will have released something that already does what they are promising and probably do it better.

That very well could happen. EA though has already made the mistake of passing up the opportunity to get their grubby little fingers all over this. Roberts originally approached them for the Wing Commander/Origin IP back before the kickstarter, they didn't think there was a market for space sims.

Frankly Next Gen graphics are great and all, but that's icing on the cake. Current Gen (when SC is released) level of graphics, combined with good gameplay would be enough for me.

Actually EA passed up having their name mixed up with this fiasco money grab scam.  I don't know many AAA companies willing to sell out their good names for this kind of marketing.

Shodanas

rodarin said:

Erillion said:

Its even more interesting what followed this review.

When TheSmarty literally declared WAR on the creator of this video for a 20 seconds piece at the end of the video. Dozens of twitter posts followed.

CIG and Chris Roberts more or less ignored the video.


Have fun

Why do you and everyone that supports star citizen ALWAYS go to Derek Smart? EVERY SINGLE TIME.

No matter what ANYONE posts about this you and the other disciples MUST (as if youre contractually obligated) bring up Derek Smart.

Just stop.

Ermm.. Because DS did exactly what Erillion wrote ?

He ripped the maker of this video to pieces and declared war on him because of some opinions said narrator expressed about SC, CR and DS. Again, opinions..

If this makes you hurt inside you have my sympathies.

Also.. It's Derek Smart who ALWAYS goes to SC. Not the other way around.


Note: thank you everyone for the 100 LOL's badge!

adamlotus75

There are three camps:
Derek Smart - fixated on SC
SC backers - fixated on Derek Smart
Onlookers - don't care about either of the above, just looking at the game as it stands.

Backers think 1 and 3 are the same. Very wrong.

laserit

adamlotus75 said:

There are three camps:
Derek Smart - fixated on SC
SC backers - fixated on Derek Smart
Onlookers - don't care about either of the above, just looking at the game as it stands.

Backers think 1 and 3 are the same. Very wrong.

[mod edit]

As to the thread:

It's impossible to have any kind of rational intelligent conversation about anything to do with Star Citizen. I usually don't bother participating in any of these threads, but sometimes a poster like the one I quoted will say something that's totally stupid, retarded and/or ignorant, to which l'll want to retort. 

adamlotus75

the irony.

Burntvet

Kyleran said:

They are in a "no win" scenario, at this point no matter what they launch with in terms of features or quality it will never silence the claims of financial or managerial malfeasance.

The hype is too great, the expectations are over the top, and the hate too strong.

And the amount of "donations" and pre-sales they have made fuels these expectations.

Had they not taken in almost $120 mil of customer money before the game(s) even existed, no one would care.

But they took the "free money", they created the hype, and now they have to take the heat for being 2 years late and not doing what was promised.

And that is completely fair.

rodarin

Balmong said:

So the size of the players in an instance is now the measure of work the dev's have to put into the game? 

No but the fact they wanted to make an open universe with no load screens and have now had to resort to what they think they can do (still havent seen anything working yet) says a lot. And if they are going ot have 16 player max instances then what? What good are half the ships they have sold that carry that many people or more?

Irony to all that is we still dont know we have what they have said and what people think. But it might be a couple years before we know for sure. And thats just to get it to a workable test phase by the sounds of it.

The measure of work is meaningless and a semantics argument because someone can tliterally do a lot of work but if 90% of it is wasted or redundant then what? Do they still get credit?

If they spend a million man hours doing something a competent company could do in 200K how does that work out?

As for the Derek Smart stuff...yeah he said it there isnt a need to post it. He said plenty about Smart in that video but the usual suspects still have to make sure his name is posted in any thread releating to SC especially if its a critical one. Even if Smart had nothing directly to do wit the criticism.

The fact you cant see that is the biggest part of the problem.

donger56

Roberts is an "idea man" and a great salesman, no question about it. What he is not so good at is managing a company or a budget. He is a control freak who has to micromanage every detail. That is a terrible way to try to manage a large project like this. He is also notorious for going way over budget and past deadlines. Everything he does ends up the same way. He promises the universe, but doesn't deliver. People that just keep defending this project at this point are either completely delusional or have some other interest involved.

The whole Derek Smart thing, while mildly entertaining, has really been a distraction from the real problems with this project. I think crowdfunding is mostly a complete waste of money. I'm sure Roberts had every intention of making an amazing game, but now he is at the point where he has to constantly backtrack on everything he promised. He started with the wrong engine that didn't work for the game he wanted to make. DayZ stand alone in space is what this disaster has become. Sometime soon when the funding dries up, he will just dump the game out in whatever shape it is in, call it complete, and jump ship like he has done before. I'm sure he has stashed away a nice chunk of money for him to retire on already anyway. I hope crowdfunding for MMO's dies with this project. RIP.