If the usual pattern follows. 3.0 will be unfinished and people will have to start looking forward to the patches and further updates. Just like 2.6 was. It will have some bugs that need to be worked out. It will be the start of laying out a foundation for the game. Hopefully with not a lot of reworks.
It's obvious, one major patch will not hit the game without needing stabilization, optimization, and bug-fixing on the next patch, say 3.1 or 3.0.1. The PTU phase only ensures the worse is dealt with before it goes live.
Kinda crazy that Chris is signing off even on early stages of ship design. Doesn't he have anyone he trusts to do that? Surely there has to be other things that only he can do that warrant his attention.
He's the game director, signing off on design (any design) is part of his job. There is nothing crazy about it.
Just think if they fail hard,bringing out a poor launch and everyone goes nuts, would make for a great popcorn day.
The "launch" will be easy. The alpha will become a beta which increasing numbers will be invited to stress test the game. And only when things are running will it be declared "live".
The alpha is out there. The basis of many supporters expectations. What many people have used for deciding whether SC has "a chance". It cuts through hype; cuts through negativity.
the thing is for so many people 'backing' this game. Their fantasy 2 million or whatever it is number no one plays the tech demo. They get SMALL spikes when they release (what they call) major updates, but I think theyre scared that when they do announce something the reception is going to be a joke.
This whole project is all about optics and what people see or perceive not what is actually happening.
Remember when GW2 and ESO and other actually popular franchises and releases had people all over the internet begging for invites and crying when they didnt get them?
So if SC and its 2 million (or whatever they claim) 'citizens' announces some 'special' closed testing (oh wait they already did that) and people dont get invited will their be tears?
Like I have said for the past couple years this is the game with the most hype, most money (allegedly) and most people waiting for it in history. Yet it has almost zero anticipation. If the meter doesnt tick up with 3.0 (and it probably wont if they deliver what I think theyre going to deliver) then I think people can stick a nail in this one. Despite the nonsense people want to sell about it.
It's not often I agree with you on anything. What I will agree on with you here is that SC is built on hype (and controversy). The biggest challenge facing ANY product is the hype curve. This is especially true with crowdfunded games. They need to create hype during their campaign, which will inevitably fall off afterwards. HOWEVER! They also need to re-create that hype at launch or, basically, nobody cares. Star Citizen is anomalous in that it continues to generate income on a monthly basis that can sustain a staff of developers that most companies couldn't afford. So, as of right now, SC is defying the hype curve and maintaining a high level of interest throughout it's development cycle. OR! At their plateau are they just making more money than most? It's tough to say.
Either way, people pointing at things like Twitch numbers or people actually playing a game that is in an incomplete state are silly. Personally, I haven't played it in nearly 6 months, and I probably won't until 3.0 launches. Why? I don't do wipes. I'm older now and my time is more valuable to me than ever. So I'm not going to waste time in a game that will inevitably wipe my progress at launch. I just did the same with Marvel Heroes Omega, played CBT for like 2 hours, have about 6 hours in already following launch of OBT.
I think that it will be more telling when it reaches open beta and is feature complete.
There are a lot of crappy unfinished games no one ever heard of that have more people playing them than SC does. So thats (still) a pretty weak argument.
Also why I say if the numbers dont spike to something extreme with the release of 3.0 (no matter what it actually turns out to be). Then it 'should' be over. Even if its crap no one can know that and to know that they have to log in and try it. If they dont even log in then I dont know what else to say. Especially considering this has been the focus since the conventions last summer and its been nearly a year in the making and hyping..........
Lol, are you so interested in arguing that even when someone is agreeing with you, you feel the need to tell them that they're wrong? Do you understand that by doing so, you're effectively saying that you're also wrong? Lol, you're hilarious sometimes.
I didnt disagree with the comment just the premise/reason. I think there are more factors than its 'in alpha' or techdemo or whatever you want to call it as to why people arent utilizing what is there. For one there just isnt that much there.
If the usual pattern follows. 3.0 will be unfinished and people will have to start looking forward to the patches and further updates. Just like 2.6 was. It will have some bugs that need to be worked out. It will be the start of laying out a foundation for the game. Hopefully with not a lot of reworks.
It's obvious, one major patch will not hit the game without needing stabilization, optimization, and bug-fixing on the next patch, say 3.1 or 3.0.1. The PTU phase only ensures the worse is dealt with before it goes live.
so what are you all going ot say in 5 more years when its 6.0 no alpha in sight let alone actual retail release and no CORE MMO functionality whatsoever in the test bed?
They dont have full persistence, they dont have any 'skills', they dont have any economy (beyond real world money testing), they dont have anything associated with the BASE of an MMO. Theyre going backwards, and like I said quite some time ago when you release mods and 'shiny' stuff without any core functionality its a sale pitch. At best its something you can play for as long as you want but if you log out and go back pretty much nothing you did was saved. I havent seen 3.0 directly address that beyond 'working on persistence'.
They dont have full persistence, they dont have any 'skills', they dont have any economy (beyond real world money testing), they dont have anything associated with the BASE of an MMO. Theyre going backwards, and like I said quite some time ago when you release mods and 'shiny' stuff without any core functionality its a sale pitch. At best its something you can play for as long as you want but if you log out and go back pretty much nothing you did was saved. I havent seen 3.0 directly address that beyond 'working on persistence'.
The core MMO starts with making the gameplay persistent and have the backend systems to support it, something they started doing last year and 3.0 iterates upon and will continue after 3.0. The proper Game Persistence task is scheduled for 3.1. When it comes to logging out and logging in I think 3.0 will have multiple spawn points at first.
Just think if they fail hard,bringing out a poor launch and everyone goes nuts, would make for a great popcorn day.
The "launch" will be easy. The alpha will become a beta which increasing numbers will be invited to stress test the game. And only when things are running will it be declared "live".
The alpha is out there. The basis of many supporters expectations. What many people have used for deciding whether SC has "a chance". It cuts through hype; cuts through negativity.
the thing is for so many people 'backing' this game. Their fantasy 2 million or whatever it is number no one plays the tech demo. They get SMALL spikes when they release (what they call) major updates, but I think theyre scared that when they do announce something the reception is going to be a joke.
This whole project is all about optics and what people see or perceive not what is actually happening.
Remember when GW2 and ESO and other actually popular franchises and releases had people all over the internet begging for invites and crying when they didnt get them?
So if SC and its 2 million (or whatever they claim) 'citizens' announces some 'special' closed testing (oh wait they already did that) and people dont get invited will their be tears?
Like I have said for the past couple years this is the game with the most hype, most money (allegedly) and most people waiting for it in history. Yet it has almost zero anticipation. If the meter doesnt tick up with 3.0 (and it probably wont if they deliver what I think theyre going to deliver) then I think people can stick a nail in this one. Despite the nonsense people want to sell about it.
It's not often I agree with you on anything. What I will agree on with you here is that SC is built on hype (and controversy). The biggest challenge facing ANY product is the hype curve. This is especially true with crowdfunded games. They need to create hype during their campaign, which will inevitably fall off afterwards. HOWEVER! They also need to re-create that hype at launch or, basically, nobody cares. Star Citizen is anomalous in that it continues to generate income on a monthly basis that can sustain a staff of developers that most companies couldn't afford. So, as of right now, SC is defying the hype curve and maintaining a high level of interest throughout it's development cycle. OR! At their plateau are they just making more money than most? It's tough to say.
Either way, people pointing at things like Twitch numbers or people actually playing a game that is in an incomplete state are silly. Personally, I haven't played it in nearly 6 months, and I probably won't until 3.0 launches. Why? I don't do wipes. I'm older now and my time is more valuable to me than ever. So I'm not going to waste time in a game that will inevitably wipe my progress at launch. I just did the same with Marvel Heroes Omega, played CBT for like 2 hours, have about 6 hours in already following launch of OBT.
I think that it will be more telling when it reaches open beta and is feature complete.
There are a lot of crappy unfinished games no one ever heard of that have more people playing them than SC does. So thats (still) a pretty weak argument.
Also why I say if the numbers dont spike to something extreme with the release of 3.0 (no matter what it actually turns out to be). Then it 'should' be over. Even if its crap no one can know that and to know that they have to log in and try it. If they dont even log in then I dont know what else to say. Especially considering this has been the focus since the conventions last summer and its been nearly a year in the making and hyping..........
Lol, are you so interested in arguing that even when someone is agreeing with you, you feel the need to tell them that they're wrong? Do you understand that by doing so, you're effectively saying that you're also wrong? Lol, you're hilarious sometimes.
I didnt disagree with the comment just the premise/reason. I think there are more factors than its 'in alpha' or techdemo or whatever you want to call it as to why people arent utilizing what is there. For one there just isnt that much there.
I'm sure there are other reasons. However, assuming that it's because nobody wants it is equally as short-sighted. Remember that these guys are maintaining a staff of 300+ people which is probably bigger than the vast majority of projects being worked on today. That money is, apparently, coming from backers, so it stands to reason that there is at least a passing interest in the game itself. Otherwise, we'd see a more dramatic fall-off in funding.
I'm sure there are other reasons. However, assuming that it's because nobody wants it is equally as short-sighted. Remember that these guys are maintaining a staff of 300+ people which is probably bigger than the vast majority of projects being worked on today. That money is, apparently, coming from backers, so it stands to reason that there is at least a passing interest in the game itself. Otherwise, we'd see a more dramatic fall-off in funding.
Star Citizen is maintaining the same levels of interest as past years.
Its peak was last year, obviously because the 3.0 announcement and demo on the conferences, followed by the release of Alpha 2.0 in Dec 2015. So we will see how 3.0 is going to peak and how will this stat evolve past its release.
Just think if they fail hard,bringing out a poor launch and everyone goes nuts, would make for a great popcorn day.
The "launch" will be easy. The alpha will become a beta which increasing numbers will be invited to stress test the game. And only when things are running will it be declared "live".
The alpha is out there. The basis of many supporters expectations. What many people have used for deciding whether SC has "a chance". It cuts through hype; cuts through negativity.
the thing is for so many people 'backing' this game. Their fantasy 2 million or whatever it is number no one plays the tech demo. They get SMALL spikes when they release (what they call) major updates, but I think theyre scared that when they do announce something the reception is going to be a joke.
This whole project is all about optics and what people see or perceive not what is actually happening.
Remember when GW2 and ESO and other actually popular franchises and releases had people all over the internet begging for invites and crying when they didnt get them?
So if SC and its 2 million (or whatever they claim) 'citizens' announces some 'special' closed testing (oh wait they already did that) and people dont get invited will their be tears?
(snip)
If SC was going to be an open beta to "people all over the internet" then sure. The number of backers however is "defined".
Could backers be upset if they don't get an invite right away? Sure. Assuming they are keen to play (your small spikes reference) and leaving aside the fact that there will probably be waves of testers they should be happy that things are moving along. So upset - maybe but happy as well - maybe.
As for the uninvited all over the 'net non-backers - they will have to wait for whatever post-launch free-fly events there might be.
There's no reason however that the launch - from a technical perspective - shouldn't be a "success". Whether its a good game, what the optics are and all the other stuff - different questions.
Hmm, sure seems like lots of wasted money going on, annual trips to other countries for meetings wow. Just don't understand there just making a game but seems to be there making a Full on Pyramid tree of companies, how many offices do they have for a first time company, you would think they would get this game out asap for the fans that put in huge amounts of money to buy the ships and play a game that most people thought would be out already.
Just IMO but common sense feels right.
I agree. I'm a backer since way back in the early days, but I haven't logged into the "demo" in years. To me it seems like Chris is more interested in playing some kind of Mark Zuckerberg emulator than actually producing a game. The focus isn't on the game anymore. The focus is on talking about focus and appearing organized. How much time are the developers spending on these weekly update reports? It feels like they spend far too much time talking about getting things done and goals, than actually doing anything productive to reach those goals.
Comments
He's the game director, signing off on design (any design) is part of his job. There is nothing crazy about it.
They dont have full persistence, they dont have any 'skills', they dont have any economy (beyond real world money testing), they dont have anything associated with the BASE of an MMO. Theyre going backwards, and like I said quite some time ago when you release mods and 'shiny' stuff without any core functionality its a sale pitch. At best its something you can play for as long as you want but if you log out and go back pretty much nothing you did was saved. I havent seen 3.0 directly address that beyond 'working on persistence'.
I will most probably say :
Squadron 42 was one of the best games I have played so far and I am looking forward to the "Extended Missions" a la Wing Commander.
Furthermore i will most probably say:
Star Citizen was well worth the wait and I have enjoyed playing it for years now.
Have fun
I'm sure there are other reasons. However, assuming that it's because nobody wants it is equally as short-sighted. Remember that these guys are maintaining a staff of 300+ people which is probably bigger than the vast majority of projects being worked on today. That money is, apparently, coming from backers, so it stands to reason that there is at least a passing interest in the game itself. Otherwise, we'd see a more dramatic fall-off in funding.
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
----------------
Its peak was last year, obviously because the 3.0 announcement and demo on the conferences, followed by the release of Alpha 2.0 in Dec 2015. So we will see how 3.0 is going to peak and how will this stat evolve past its release.
https://trends.google.com/trends/explore?q=star citizen
If SC was going to be an open beta to "people all over the internet" then sure. The number of backers however is "defined".
Could backers be upset if they don't get an invite right away? Sure. Assuming they are keen to play (your small spikes reference) and leaving aside the fact that there will probably be waves of testers they should be happy that things are moving along. So upset - maybe but happy as well - maybe.
As for the uninvited all over the 'net non-backers - they will have to wait for whatever post-launch free-fly events there might be.
There's no reason however that the launch - from a technical perspective - shouldn't be a "success". Whether its a good game, what the optics are and all the other stuff - different questions.
You are a silly person...