All it will really take is for the game to come out and not be a complete mess and be as good as the budget scale.
Faith is not a viable currency for a lot of people when it comes to PC gmes. In this day and age you can't really blame folks for being HIGHLY skeptical especially for a record setting kickstarter game that has Hale Bopp level cult members.
"As far as the forum code of conduct, I would think it's a bit outdated and in need of a refre *CLOSED*"
All it will really take is for the game to come out and not be a complete mess and be as good as the budget scale.
Faith is not a viable currency for a lot of people when it comes to PC gmes. In this day and age you can't really blame folks for being HIGHLY skeptical especially for a record setting kickstarter game that has Hale Bopp level cult members.
True, but the SC community isn't an anomaly, it's just bigger. Go onto the Pantheon forums, CU forums, DAoC forums, you'll get the same type of feedback when you start spouting hate.
Aside from a full release with all modules working as intended and all stretch goals met? Nothing. "Minimum Viable Product" isn't what people donated hundreds of millions to play.
I thought I'd ask a serious question that I'm genuinely curious about:
Aside from the game actually being released - what would it take to make you believe the project ends up being worthwhile in the end?
So are you saying the people who are criticizing the game are doing so out of a lack in the belief of the end result and not in the way the money has been raised or the project has been run? Can't believe think the results could be viable but not like what it took to get there?
Kyleran: "Now there's the real trick, learning to accept and enjoy a game for what
it offers rather than pass on what might be a great playing experience
because it lacks a few features you prefer."
John Henry Newman: "A man would do nothing if he waited until he could do it so well that no one could find fault."
FreddyNoNose: "A good game needs no defense; a bad game has no defense." "Easily digested content is just as easily forgotten."
LacedOpium: "So the question that begs to be asked is, if you are not interested in
the game mechanics that define the MMORPG genre, then why are you
playing an MMORPG?"
All it will really take is for the game to come out and not be a complete mess and be as good as the budget scale.
Faith is not a viable currency for a lot of people when it comes to PC gmes. In this day and age you can't really blame folks for being HIGHLY skeptical especially for a record setting kickstarter game that has Hale Bopp level cult members.
True, but the SC community isn't an anomaly, it's just bigger. Go onto the Pantheon forums, CU forums, DAoC forums, you'll get the same type of feedback when you start spouting hate.
I have read through all three pages and I fail to see the hate being spouted by critics. The couple that are closest to spouting hate are SC supporters.
I thought I'd ask a serious question that I'm genuinely curious about:
Aside from the game actually being released - what would it take to make you believe the project ends up being worthwhile in the end?
So are you saying the people who are criticizing the game are doing so out of a lack in the belief of the end result and not in the way the money has been raised or the project has been run? Can't believe think the results could be viable but not like what it took to get there?
I'm asking, not assuming. I like to believe there is more than one way of being a detractor.
I wish Star Citizen was actually a Star Trek game. The one out now I just can't get into it. If somebody made a realistic Trekkie game like these guys making Star Citizen; I would probably donate 1000$ no prob. On the other hand the management for this game seems disorganized too much.
Some of them sound quite reasonable, and I understand why many of you would want to see a finished project to actually believe in it. Especially if you're not invested in the project and you're not following it closely - which I think it necessary to make it plausible for anyone to believe in something this ambitious.
Asking for open books is pretty ludicrous. I doubt there's a single big budget project in the world where an open book would be a great idea to expose to the public. Imagine dealing with that level of ignorance - trying to justify every single expense - tiny and big - to people with absolutely no concept of what it takes to run a day-to-day business, putting out fires and making snap decisions.
I admit, I did expect a lot of unreasonable demands - but I think the majority of you have presented scepticism on a very understandable level.
However, with that said, I really do think a lot of detractors need to educate themselves about the project - or simply stop talking about it as if they had educated themselves. It's pretty obvious that a lot of the scepticism is based on simply not following the project closely - and you're replacing "blanks" with negative assumption.
This is very common reaction - and it's true for myself in many other projects. I mean, we can't spend all our time reading every little detail or reason for something being not to our liking.
It just so happens that I've followed Star Citizen very, very closely - and I've been listening to the developers giving very good reasons for a lot of the things that aren't working as they should at this point - and they're extremely upfront about their development schedules, so stuff like why Star Marine was delayed - and why some parts are being given priority while other parts are seemingly ignored in terms of exposure - is well documented, if you really care to know about.
But I understand. People would rather stick to their own fabricated version of truth than actually correct themselves and read up on the project.
For those people, I strongly advise patience - and let the finished - or near-finished - product speak for itself.
Do note that I don't expect many detractors will accept this - and I know this cycle of ignorance will continue until the game is released, and for a handful - even long after that.
Some of them sound quite reasonable, and I understand why many of you would want to see a finished project to actually believe in it. Especially if you're not invested in the project and you're not following it closely - which I think it necessary to make it plausible for anyone to believe in something this ambitious.
Asking for open books is pretty ludicrous. I doubt there's a single big budget project in the world where an open book would be a great idea to expose to the public. Imagine dealing with that level of ignorance - trying to justify every single expense - tiny and big - to people with absolutely no concept of what it takes to run a day-to-day business, putting out fires and making snap decisions.
I admit, I did expect a lot of unreasonable demands - but I think the majority of you have presented scepticism on a very understandable level.
However, with that said, I really do think a lot of detractors need to educate themselves about the project - or simply stop talking about it as if they had educated themselves. It's pretty obvious that a lot of the scepticism is based on simply not following the project closely - and you're replacing "blanks" with negative assumption.
This is very common reaction - and it's true for myself in many other projects. I mean, we can't spend all our time reading every little detail or reason for something being not to our liking.
It just so happens that I've followed Star Citizen very, very closely - and I've been listening to the developers giving very good reasons for a lot of the things that aren't working as they should at this point - and they're extremely upfront about their development schedules, so stuff like why Star Marine was delayed - and why some parts are being given priority while other parts are seemingly ignored in terms of exposure - is well documented, if you really care to know about.
But I understand. People would rather stick to their own fabricated version of truth than actually correct themselves and read up on the project.
For those people, I strongly advise patience - and let the finished - or near-finished - product speak for itself.
Do note that I don't expect many detractors will accept this - and I know this cycle of ignorance will continue until the game is released, and for a handful - even long after that.
Still, I think you all for contributing.
Dude, they sell ships for thousands of dollars. If this was a finished product and it had that type of cash shop wouldn't that bother you?
And don't tell me that this is just a donation thing... if those ships are not P2W there are going to be some very, very pissed off whales.
You seem to be saying that anyone who follows this mess closely couldn't help but love it... I beg to differ. I see something really wrong happening here. The kind of wrong that gets people up in arms in other games when they have whale item's 1/10th or 1/50th of the cost. Why should the greediest game of them all get a free pass?
"Social media gives legions of idiots the right to speak when they once only spoke at a bar after a glass of wine, without harming the community ... but now they have the same right to speak as a Nobel Prize winner. It's the invasion of the idiots”
― Umberto Eco
“Microtransactions? In a single player role-playing game? Are you nuts?” ― CD PROJEKT RED
Some of them sound quite reasonable, and I understand why many of you would want to see a finished project to actually believe in it. Especially if you're not invested in the project and you're not following it closely - which I think it necessary to make it plausible for anyone to believe in something this ambitious.
Asking for open books is pretty ludicrous. I doubt there's a single big budget project in the world where an open book would be a great idea to expose to the public. Imagine dealing with that level of ignorance - trying to justify every single expense - tiny and big - to people with absolutely no concept of what it takes to run a day-to-day business, putting out fires and making snap decisions.
I admit, I did expect a lot of unreasonable demands - but I think the majority of you have presented scepticism on a very understandable level.
However, with that said, I really do think a lot of detractors need to educate themselves about the project - or simply stop talking about it as if they had educated themselves. It's pretty obvious that a lot of the scepticism is based on simply not following the project closely - and you're replacing "blanks" with negative assumption.
This is very common reaction - and it's true for myself in many other projects. I mean, we can't spend all our time reading every little detail or reason for something being not to our liking.
It just so happens that I've followed Star Citizen very, very closely - and I've been listening to the developers giving very good reasons for a lot of the things that aren't working as they should at this point - and they're extremely upfront about their development schedules, so stuff like why Star Marine was delayed - and why some parts are being given priority while other parts are seemingly ignored in terms of exposure - is well documented, if you really care to know about.
But I understand. People would rather stick to their own fabricated version of truth than actually correct themselves and read up on the project.
For those people, I strongly advise patience - and let the finished - or near-finished - product speak for itself.
Do note that I don't expect many detractors will accept this - and I know this cycle of ignorance will continue until the game is released, and for a handful - even long after that.
Still, I think you all for contributing.
Dude, they sell ships for thousands of dollars. If this was a finished product and it had that type of cash shop wouldn't that bother you?
And don't tell me that this is just a donation thing... if those ships are not P2W there are going to be some very, very pissed off whales.
You seem to be saying that anyone who follows this mess closely couldn't help but love it... I beg to differ. I see something really wrong happening here. The kind of wrong that gets people up in arms in other games when they have whale item's 1/10th or 1/50th of the cost. Why should the greediest game of them all get a free pass?
I'm not talking about business models. I'm talking about the game.
People fretting about P2W is a thing that will never go away.
You take any game in the world - even the best of the best - and add a cash shop, and people would start bitching about how it's a horrible P2W game all of a sudden. There's no arguing against people who fret on principle.
In my experience, aside from asian designs, the amount of actual P2W games out there is pretty limited.
Asian designs stand apart, because the asian work ethic is fundamentally different from the western work ethic. I'm talking about cultural norms - and there will always be exceptions.
As for what business model they're going with for Star Citizen, you would know if you'd educated yourself. You clearly haven't.
That said, it might change - but then again, that's true for all MMOs and certainly also released games.
I can certainly agree with that part if the history of its development is any indication.
And I'm not sure there is any amount of kool-aid I could drink that would ever make me see the cost of the Javelin as anything other than an obscenity.
"Social media gives legions of idiots the right to speak when they once only spoke at a bar after a glass of wine, without harming the community ... but now they have the same right to speak as a Nobel Prize winner. It's the invasion of the idiots”
― Umberto Eco
“Microtransactions? In a single player role-playing game? Are you nuts?” ― CD PROJEKT RED
I can certainly agree with that part if the history of its development is any indication.
And I'm not sure there is any amount of kool-aid I could drink that would ever make me see the cost of the Javelin as anything other than an obscenity.
I'll be getting mine for free just by having fun in the game.
Is that really obscene to you?
Ah, I get it - you still don't understand the concept of a pledge package with a token reward ship
You do understand that anything beyond the price of entry - which varies between 30 and 45 dollars - is a completely optional pledge package in place to SUPPORT development of the game, right?
The ship is a token reward, nothing more. Every single ship is going to be available in-game through normal play - and the intention is that no grind will be necessary.
I thought I'd ask a serious question that I'm genuinely curious about:
Aside from the game actually being released - what would it take to make you believe the project ends up being worthwhile in the end?
1. Finalize the feature list 2. commit to that feature list. 3. Hire professional talent to conduct proper project management. 4. Set reasonable milestones timeframes and keep them. 5. Stop selling $15K ships and finish the game. 6. Stop refactoring every month and just complete a feature as designed. 7. Stop hiring/sack hack software analysts that cant judge software feature requirements.
in a nutshell, "Just have a good plan, dont change that plan and finish the game"
TSW - AoC - Aion - WOW - EVE - Fallen Earth - Co - Rift - || XNA C# Java Development
I thought I'd ask a serious question that I'm genuinely curious about:
Aside from the game actually being released - what would it take to make you believe the project ends up being worthwhile in the end?
1. Finalize the feature list 2. commit to that feature list. 3. Hire professional talent to conduct proper project management. 4. Set reasonable milestones timeframes and keep them. 5. Stop selling $15K ships and finish the game. 6. Stop refactoring every month and just complete a feature as designed. 7. Stop hiring/sack hack software analysts that cant judge software feature requirements.
in a nutshell, "Just have a good plan, dont change that plan and finish the game"
Ah, in short - do something no other big-budget ambitious game in the world has ever managed to do at this stage in development. 1, 2 and 4 are particularly delightful in terms of your ignorance when it comes to developing games of this scope.
I can certainly agree with that part if the history of its development is any indication.
And I'm not sure there is any amount of kool-aid I could drink that would ever make me see the cost of the Javelin as anything other than an obscenity.
I'll be getting mine for free just by having fun in the game.
Is that really obscene to you?
Ah, I get it - you still don't understand the concept of a pledge package with a token reward ship
You do understand that anything beyond the price of entry - which varies between 30 and 45 dollars - is a completely optional pledge package in place to SUPPORT development of the game, right?
The ship is a token reward, nothing more. Every single ship is going to be available in-game through normal play - and the intention is that no grind will be necessary.
Yeah. Keep telling yourself that is not subject to change.
"Social media gives legions of idiots the right to speak when they once only spoke at a bar after a glass of wine, without harming the community ... but now they have the same right to speak as a Nobel Prize winner. It's the invasion of the idiots”
― Umberto Eco
“Microtransactions? In a single player role-playing game? Are you nuts?” ― CD PROJEKT RED
I can certainly agree with that part if the history of its development is any indication.
And I'm not sure there is any amount of kool-aid I could drink that would ever make me see the cost of the Javelin as anything other than an obscenity.
I'll be getting mine for free just by having fun in the game.
Is that really obscene to you?
Ah, I get it - you still don't understand the concept of a pledge package with a token reward ship
You do understand that anything beyond the price of entry - which varies between 30 and 45 dollars - is a completely optional pledge package in place to SUPPORT development of the game, right?
The ship is a token reward, nothing more. Every single ship is going to be available in-game through normal play - and the intention is that no grind will be necessary.
Yeah. Keep telling yourself that is not subject to change.
What are you talking about now? What did I claim is not subject to change?
I can certainly agree with that part if the history of its development is any indication.
And I'm not sure there is any amount of kool-aid I could drink that would ever make me see the cost of the Javelin as anything other than an obscenity.
I'll be getting mine for free just by having fun in the game.
Is that really obscene to you?
Ah, I get it - you still don't understand the concept of a pledge package with a token reward ship
You do understand that anything beyond the price of entry - which varies between 30 and 45 dollars - is a completely optional pledge package in place to SUPPORT development of the game, right?
The ship is a token reward, nothing more. Every single ship is going to be available in-game through normal play - and the intention is that no grind will be necessary.
Yeah. Keep telling yourself that is not subject to change.
What are you talking about now? What did I claim is not subject to change?
IDK... could it be this part? "Every single ship is going to be available in-game through normal play - and the intention is that no grind will be necessary."
And BTW... in your dreams, does the Javelin you get through normal play come with or without lifetime insurance?
"Social media gives legions of idiots the right to speak when they once only spoke at a bar after a glass of wine, without harming the community ... but now they have the same right to speak as a Nobel Prize winner. It's the invasion of the idiots”
― Umberto Eco
“Microtransactions? In a single player role-playing game? Are you nuts?” ― CD PROJEKT RED
I can certainly agree with that part if the history of its development is any indication.
And I'm not sure there is any amount of kool-aid I could drink that would ever make me see the cost of the Javelin as anything other than an obscenity.
I'll be getting mine for free just by having fun in the game.
Is that really obscene to you?
Ah, I get it - you still don't understand the concept of a pledge package with a token reward ship
You do understand that anything beyond the price of entry - which varies between 30 and 45 dollars - is a completely optional pledge package in place to SUPPORT development of the game, right?
The ship is a token reward, nothing more. Every single ship is going to be available in-game through normal play - and the intention is that no grind will be necessary.
Yeah. Keep telling yourself that is not subject to change.
What are you talking about now? What did I claim is not subject to change?
IDK... could it be this part? "Every single ship is going to be available in-game through normal play - and the intention is that no grind will be necessary."
And BTW... in your dreams, does the Javelin you get through normal play come with or without lifetime insurance?
I'm talking about the design and their clearly laid out intention for the game.
Will I have a different opinion if they suddenly change the entire core of the progression design? Sure.
But why would I just assume, out of the blue, that they're going to do that?
As for lifetime insurance, that's pretty trivial in a game that's going to have wealth as a completely viable avenue of progression. I don't know how many space games like this you've played, but I've yet to play a single MMO where getting rich is out of reach of even casual players.
Again, a token reward that's being blown completely out of proportion.
To be fair, there are many big and ambitious games out there that do manage to deliver as a project. It's very important to delegate well in a big team and for everyone to have solid creative input - as well as to be able to disagree and propose radical solutions.
My feeling is that they should have changed engines after the concept stage, and bought something more suitable. Not having an engine that supports the vision and ambition is their biggest problem. Why did nobody manage to get that point across to the management.
CryEngine looks great and does small scale FPS very well because that's what it was designed for. It's not suitable for a massive space game, it has too many limitations that aren't apparent in a small/medium multiplayer map but are huge problems at massive scale.
I actually believe it IS possible to make a game like SC but you need amazing back end architecture and an engine that can run on it.
Look at Eve - it cleverly uses 'rooms' to hold areas of space but it's a very simple space flight game - and has an incredible network to underpin it.
Elite can hold at max about 100 players in a close region and has a custom built engine designed to do space. 100 isn't great but it's at the limits of what the experts can currently do.
SC has the engine that was built for games like Crysis - story driven, zoned, instanced gameplay in tightly designed maps. I'm pretty sure it's not the right engine for the job no matter how much they tweak and develop it. A tractor will never become a Ferrari.
To be fair, there are many big and ambitious games out there that do manage to deliver as a project. It's very important to delegate well in a big team and for everyone to have solid creative input - as well as to be able to disagree and propose radical solutions.
My feeling is that they should have changed engines after the concept stage, and bought something more suitable. Not having an engine that supports the vision and ambition is their biggest problem. Why did nobody manage to get that point across to the management.
CryEngine looks great and does small scale FPS very well because that's what it was designed for. It's not suitable for a massive space game, it has too many limitations that aren't apparent in a small/medium multiplayer map but are huge problems at massive scale.
I actually believe it IS possible to make a game like SC but you need amazing back end architecture and an engine that can run on it.
Look at Eve - it cleverly uses 'rooms' to hold areas of space but it's a very simple space flight game - and has an incredible network to underpin it.
Elite can hold at max about 100 players in a close region and has a custom built engine designed to do space. 100 isn't great but it's at the limits of what the experts can currently do.
SC has the engine that was built for games like Crysis - story driven, zoned, instanced gameplay in tightly designed maps. I'm pretty sure it's not the right engine for the job no matter how much they tweak and develop it. A tractor will never become a Ferrari.
Again, it's all about educating yourself.
The engine choice in particular, has been explained in painstaking detail by Roberts and others time and time again.
He's been extremely upfront about why he picked CryEngine over all the other engines (several of which they tried while developing the prototype) - and how they're completely aware of the compromises - and they've been aware from the beginning.
The greatest challenge has been the netcode - and, again, they've explained in detail exactly how they're solving that issue - and how it's on target for the 2.7 update.
Also, I won't get into your level of ignorance when it comes to the differences between Eve and Star Citizen when it comes to asset fidelity and stuff like multiple physics layers - and I will also not shatter your illusion of how many players Elite can handle in close proximity.
Suffice to say you have absolutely no idea what you're talking about.
I thought I'd ask a serious question that I'm genuinely curious about:
Aside from the game actually being released - what would it take to make you believe the project ends up being worthwhile in the end?
1. Finalize the feature list 2. commit to that feature list. 3. Hire professional talent to conduct proper project management. 4. Set reasonable milestones timeframes and keep them. 5. Stop selling $15K ships and finish the game. 6. Stop refactoring every month and just complete a feature as designed. 7. Stop hiring/sack hack software analysts that cant judge software feature requirements.
in a nutshell, "Just have a good plan, dont change that plan and finish the game"
Ah, in short - do something no other big-budget ambitious game in the world has ever managed to do at this stage in development. 1, 2 and 4 are particularly delightful in terms of your ignorance when it comes to developing games of this scope.
Ok, I get it
1, 2 and 4 are pretty much the essence of good project management. They are usually stated as sub-points under the number one task of a Project Manager, protect the plan. So if you do 3 you will have to expect your professional project manager to demand them.
But why would I just assume, out of the blue, that they're going to do that?
Because I don't trust a single word that comes out of their mouth and because they have become accustomed to having crazy money thrown at them and will have a hard time saying "no more money please" after release?
Is that out of the blue enough for you?
"Social media gives legions of idiots the right to speak when they once only spoke at a bar after a glass of wine, without harming the community ... but now they have the same right to speak as a Nobel Prize winner. It's the invasion of the idiots”
― Umberto Eco
“Microtransactions? In a single player role-playing game? Are you nuts?” ― CD PROJEKT RED
But why would I just assume, out of the blue, that they're going to do that?
Because I don't trust a single word that comes out of their mouth and because they have become accustomed to having crazy money thrown at them and will have a hard time saying "no more money please" after release?
Is that out of the blue enough for you?
Ok, it's all about your fabricated fantasy of them being scam artists.
I thought I'd ask a serious question that I'm genuinely curious about:
Aside from the game actually being released - what would it take to make you believe the project ends up being worthwhile in the end?
1. Finalize the feature list 2. commit to that feature list. 3. Hire professional talent to conduct proper project management. 4. Set reasonable milestones timeframes and keep them. 5. Stop selling $15K ships and finish the game. 6. Stop refactoring every month and just complete a feature as designed. 7. Stop hiring/sack hack software analysts that cant judge software feature requirements.
in a nutshell, "Just have a good plan, dont change that plan and finish the game"
Ah, in short - do something no other big-budget ambitious game in the world has ever managed to do at this stage in development. 1, 2 and 4 are particularly delightful in terms of your ignorance when it comes to developing games of this scope.
Ok, I get it
Scope should be defined at the early stages of development initially or are you avocating they should just ask people for money with no idea if or when the product will come to fruition?
No, i don't have a problem with projects of a ambitious scope. but at the analytics stage of evaluating the software requirements they should of not set a target of 2 years, they should of set a generous time frame of 6 years or not released a public schedule.(1,2,4)
Hey, i understand that the software requirements change of the course of a software development cycle. that's normal. but the amount of features added to the game isnt represented in the project management timeline.(3,4,6,7)
They have re-evaulated the software requirements to the point that they are "re-doing" multiple areas of development that should of had a firm design plan for the beginning. (im looking at you instancing caps and load balancing) if the requirement was that large amounts of entities need to synchronize with the server mechanisms should of been analysed from the start to keep groups of entities encapsulated. not just build and we fix it later(3,5,6)
In regards to the out sourcing of the fps module, how can you let the delta get so out of sync with the trunk that you only realize you have a problem when your on on release merge?(3).
These arnt un-realistic things to ask for even for a project of this size. Just Tell us your feature list, try to keep to this list and set a reasonable expected delivery date.
but what we got is feature creap, poor project management, poor requirement analysis, And ever changing goal posts when it comes to chris roberts quality control mentality?
TSW - AoC - Aion - WOW - EVE - Fallen Earth - Co - Rift - || XNA C# Java Development
Comments
Faith is not a viable currency for a lot of people when it comes to PC gmes. In this day and age you can't really blame folks for being HIGHLY skeptical especially for a record setting kickstarter game that has Hale Bopp level cult members.
¯\_(ツ)_/¯
True, but the SC community isn't an anomaly, it's just bigger. Go onto the Pantheon forums, CU forums, DAoC forums, you'll get the same type of feedback when you start spouting hate.
Crazkanuk
----------------
Azarelos - 90 Hunter - Emerald
Durnzig - 90 Paladin - Emerald
Demonicron - 90 Death Knight - Emerald Dream - US
Tankinpain - 90 Monk - Azjol-Nerub - US
Brindell - 90 Warrior - Emerald Dream - US
----------------
So are you saying the people who are criticizing the game are doing so out of a lack in the belief of the end result and not in the way the money has been raised or the project has been run? Can't believe think the results could be viable but not like what it took to get there?
Epic Music: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vAigCvelkhQ&list=PLo9FRw1AkDuQLEz7Gvvaz3ideB2NpFtT1
https://archive.org/details/softwarelibrary_msdos?&sort=-downloads&page=1
Kyleran: "Now there's the real trick, learning to accept and enjoy a game for what it offers rather than pass on what might be a great playing experience because it lacks a few features you prefer."
John Henry Newman: "A man would do nothing if he waited until he could do it so well that no one could find fault."
FreddyNoNose: "A good game needs no defense; a bad game has no defense." "Easily digested content is just as easily forgotten."
LacedOpium: "So the question that begs to be asked is, if you are not interested in the game mechanics that define the MMORPG genre, then why are you playing an MMORPG?"
Live long and prosper...
Some of them sound quite reasonable, and I understand why many of you would want to see a finished project to actually believe in it. Especially if you're not invested in the project and you're not following it closely - which I think it necessary to make it plausible for anyone to believe in something this ambitious.
Asking for open books is pretty ludicrous. I doubt there's a single big budget project in the world where an open book would be a great idea to expose to the public. Imagine dealing with that level of ignorance - trying to justify every single expense - tiny and big - to people with absolutely no concept of what it takes to run a day-to-day business, putting out fires and making snap decisions.
I admit, I did expect a lot of unreasonable demands - but I think the majority of you have presented scepticism on a very understandable level.
However, with that said, I really do think a lot of detractors need to educate themselves about the project - or simply stop talking about it as if they had educated themselves. It's pretty obvious that a lot of the scepticism is based on simply not following the project closely - and you're replacing "blanks" with negative assumption.
This is very common reaction - and it's true for myself in many other projects. I mean, we can't spend all our time reading every little detail or reason for something being not to our liking.
It just so happens that I've followed Star Citizen very, very closely - and I've been listening to the developers giving very good reasons for a lot of the things that aren't working as they should at this point - and they're extremely upfront about their development schedules, so stuff like why Star Marine was delayed - and why some parts are being given priority while other parts are seemingly ignored in terms of exposure - is well documented, if you really care to know about.
But I understand. People would rather stick to their own fabricated version of truth than actually correct themselves and read up on the project.
For those people, I strongly advise patience - and let the finished - or near-finished - product speak for itself.
Do note that I don't expect many detractors will accept this - and I know this cycle of ignorance will continue until the game is released, and for a handful - even long after that.
Still, I think you all for contributing.
David Braben the creator of the first legendary Elite and Elite: Dangerous talks about SC.
If anyone is qualified to talk then it's him.
And don't tell me that this is just a donation thing... if those ships are not P2W there are going to be some very, very pissed off whales.
You seem to be saying that anyone who follows this mess closely couldn't help but love it... I beg to differ. I see something really wrong happening here. The kind of wrong that gets people up in arms in other games when they have whale item's 1/10th or 1/50th of the cost. Why should the greediest game of them all get a free pass?
“Microtransactions? In a single player role-playing game? Are you nuts?”
― CD PROJEKT RED
People fretting about P2W is a thing that will never go away.
You take any game in the world - even the best of the best - and add a cash shop, and people would start bitching about how it's a horrible P2W game all of a sudden. There's no arguing against people who fret on principle.
In my experience, aside from asian designs, the amount of actual P2W games out there is pretty limited.
Asian designs stand apart, because the asian work ethic is fundamentally different from the western work ethic. I'm talking about cultural norms - and there will always be exceptions.
As for what business model they're going with for Star Citizen, you would know if you'd educated yourself. You clearly haven't.
That said, it might change - but then again, that's true for all MMOs and certainly also released games.
And I'm not sure there is any amount of kool-aid I could drink that would ever make me see the cost of the Javelin as anything other than an obscenity.
“Microtransactions? In a single player role-playing game? Are you nuts?”
― CD PROJEKT RED
Is that really obscene to you?
Ah, I get it - you still don't understand the concept of a pledge package with a token reward ship
You do understand that anything beyond the price of entry - which varies between 30 and 45 dollars - is a completely optional pledge package in place to SUPPORT development of the game, right?
The ship is a token reward, nothing more. Every single ship is going to be available in-game through normal play - and the intention is that no grind will be necessary.
2. commit to that feature list.
3. Hire professional talent to conduct proper project management.
4. Set reasonable milestones timeframes and keep them.
5. Stop selling $15K ships and finish the game.
6. Stop refactoring every month and just complete a feature as designed.
7. Stop hiring/sack hack software analysts that cant judge software feature requirements.
in a nutshell, "Just have a good plan, dont change that plan and finish the game"
TSW - AoC - Aion - WOW - EVE - Fallen Earth - Co - Rift - || XNA C# Java Development
Ok, I get it
“Microtransactions? In a single player role-playing game? Are you nuts?”
― CD PROJEKT RED
And BTW... in your dreams, does the Javelin you get through normal play come with or without lifetime insurance?
“Microtransactions? In a single player role-playing game? Are you nuts?”
― CD PROJEKT RED
Will I have a different opinion if they suddenly change the entire core of the progression design? Sure.
But why would I just assume, out of the blue, that they're going to do that?
As for lifetime insurance, that's pretty trivial in a game that's going to have wealth as a completely viable avenue of progression. I don't know how many space games like this you've played, but I've yet to play a single MMO where getting rich is out of reach of even casual players.
Again, a token reward that's being blown completely out of proportion.
My feeling is that they should have changed engines after the concept stage, and bought something more suitable. Not having an engine that supports the vision and ambition is their biggest problem. Why did nobody manage to get that point across to the management.
CryEngine looks great and does small scale FPS very well because that's what it was designed for. It's not suitable for a massive space game, it has too many limitations that aren't apparent in a small/medium multiplayer map but are huge problems at massive scale.
I actually believe it IS possible to make a game like SC but you need amazing back end architecture and an engine that can run on it.
Look at Eve - it cleverly uses 'rooms' to hold areas of space but it's a very simple space flight game - and has an incredible network to underpin it.
Elite can hold at max about 100 players in a close region and has a custom built engine designed to do space. 100 isn't great but it's at the limits of what the experts can currently do.
SC has the engine that was built for games like Crysis - story driven, zoned, instanced gameplay in tightly designed maps. I'm pretty sure it's not the right engine for the job no matter how much they tweak and develop it. A tractor will never become a Ferrari.
The engine choice in particular, has been explained in painstaking detail by Roberts and others time and time again.
He's been extremely upfront about why he picked CryEngine over all the other engines (several of which they tried while developing the prototype) - and how they're completely aware of the compromises - and they've been aware from the beginning.
The greatest challenge has been the netcode - and, again, they've explained in detail exactly how they're solving that issue - and how it's on target for the 2.7 update.
Also, I won't get into your level of ignorance when it comes to the differences between Eve and Star Citizen when it comes to asset fidelity and stuff like multiple physics layers - and I will also not shatter your illusion of how many players Elite can handle in close proximity.
Suffice to say you have absolutely no idea what you're talking about.
Is that out of the blue enough for you?
“Microtransactions? In a single player role-playing game? Are you nuts?”
― CD PROJEKT RED
I kinda had that feeling.
Thanks for being honest
No, i don't have a problem with projects of a ambitious scope. but at the analytics stage of evaluating the software requirements they should of not set a target of 2 years, they should of set a generous time frame of 6 years or not released a public schedule.(1,2,4)
Hey, i understand that the software requirements change of the course of a software development cycle. that's normal. but the amount of features added to the game isnt represented in the project management timeline.(3,4,6,7)
They have re-evaulated the software requirements to the point that they are "re-doing" multiple areas of development that should of had a firm design plan for the beginning. (im looking at you instancing caps and load balancing) if the requirement was that large amounts of entities need to synchronize with the server mechanisms should of been analysed from the start to keep groups of entities encapsulated. not just build and we fix it later(3,5,6)
In regards to the out sourcing of the fps module, how can you let the delta get so out of sync with the trunk that you only realize you have a problem when your on on release merge?(3).
These arnt un-realistic things to ask for even for a project of this size. Just Tell us your feature list, try to keep to this list and set a reasonable expected delivery date.
but what we got is feature creap, poor project management, poor requirement analysis,
And ever changing goal posts when it comes to chris roberts quality control mentality?
TSW - AoC - Aion - WOW - EVE - Fallen Earth - Co - Rift - || XNA C# Java Development