Squadron 42: Pre-Alpha WIP Gameplay - Vertical Slice - Star Citizen Videos - MMORPG.com

System

Squadron 42: Pre-Alpha WIP Gameplay - Vertical Slice - Star Citizen Videos - MMORPG.com

Roberts Space Industries recently offered fans of Star Citizen a "vertical slice" of game play from Squadron 42. The game play is taken from a pre-alpha version of the game. This video is the pure game play, though there is a second with developer commentary overlaying it. Interestingly, devs pick up on issues with game play, probably adding things to their lists of "must get dones" before release.

Read the full story here

Mensur

I cant wait to play this game! I have used all my life savings on the ships! hopefully ill get it all back in experience and sentimental value!

Voidfarer

Cant freaking wait!!!! 8)

Aethaeryn

Part of me wishes they had just stuck with the wing commander formula. . this might be more immersive but I would imagine some people might want to hit the "skip" button to get into space etc. It might not have one of curse. Going to try the alpha once I can connect to the server again.

Talonsin

Mensur said:

I cant wait to play this game! I have used all my life savings on the ships! hopefully ill get it all back in experience and sentimental value!

Can I ask what benefit do you expect to gain by spending your savings on ships before launch? According to fans, you can earn everything by simply playing the game.

FlyByKnight

Talonsin said:

Mensur said:

I cant wait to play this game! I have used all my life savings on the ships! hopefully ill get it all back in experience and sentimental value!

Can I ask what benefit do you expect to gain by spending your savings on ships before launch? According to fans, you can earn everything by simply playing the game.

Please tell me this is sarcasm Inception and I just got stuck on the 2nd level down.

SEANMCAD

honestly I found the game play video I saw for Squadron 42 unbearable.
I like the concept of SC on the open world side but you would have to pay me to play Squadron 42

Slapshot1188

Mensur said:

I cant wait to play this game! I have used all my life savings on the ships! hopefully ill get it all back in experience and sentimental value!

You are in for disappointment.  You can't bring your bought ships into SQ42 as far as I know...

EponyxDamor

While I still think they are very far from an actual release, I don't think this demo really showed off what people are most interested in when it comes to SC/SQ42; at least, it wasn't what I was interested in. Sure, its a vertical slice, which is generally not very indicative of the actual final product and also a "pre-alpha WIP" (which still makes me giggle, since they said the game was "ready to launch" several years ago); however, the demo depicts a very on-rails experience where you go from point A to point B without any real exploration, deviation, or options. They don't show what happens if you decide to not finish the mission (or as asked) or decide to find another way to the objective. Are there invisible walls preventing you from flying off into space to explore? Are there other ways to finish the mission? Can I jump away from the mission area, only to come back at another angle to avoid certain obstacles?

It depicts an interesting mix between CoD and E:D, but doesn't seem to be as good as either one. It mostly seems to be a button-pressing simulator with all the actions needs to get in/out of the ship and open doors/airlocks; there was even a button (a literal button) that the person playing the demo had to press in order to pick up the grate towards the end of the mission.

If the final product is as on-rails as this demo was, I can't say that I'm nearly as interested as I previously was. There are just too many modern open-world RPGs/simulators with tons of options/exploration for me to want to go back to an on-rails experience like SQ42 seems to be going for.

Wellspring

For as much crap that gets thrown at this game and the dev studio behind it, the game certainly doesn't look like it's going to be vapor ware. Although I didn't buy into the preorder store, I look forward to playing it when it launches.

Tiamat64

Wellspring said:

For as much crap that gets thrown at this game and the dev studio behind it, the game certainly doesn't look like it's going to be vapor ware. Although I didn't buy into the preorder store, I look forward to playing it when it launches.

It's not vaporware in a sense that they aren't trying to produce something.  However, some people define vaporware as "It will never see the light of day", in which case, it becomes a question of whether or not SQ42 will be produced before CiG runs out of funding or worse (example of worse: The Crytek lawsuit).

We don't know how the lawsuit will turn out, nor do we know CiG's funding situation because they don't release any financial information besides total number of pledges.  However, we do know that SQ42 only has like, one mission done so far and horrible optimization issues as well as no really functional AI by their own admission, and their statement that "This stuff is still in the early stages".  So it's easy to estimate that SQ42 is at the very least one year off from completion and likely more than that (far more in some peoples' opinions, mine included).

So... we'll see if it turns out to be vaporware in terms of ever seeing the light of day, I guess.  On the bright side, we should find out either way within "only" two years or so I imagine.

GrindcoreTHRALL

The term vaporware is very broad and is not only being applied to software now. Most of the future videogame market can be coined vaporware. All the kickstarters, greenlit games on steam, and multiple other crowdfunding platforms. When customers are investing into the very beginning development of a game, its easy for naysayers to dub it vaporware. SC has more ambitions than any game out or in development. To call it vaporware isnt fair imo. Even at 3-5 years of development for a game of this magnitude, 2 more years of development is reasonable. Diablo 3 took 10 years and was no where even close to the scope of SC.

There is playable versions, not complete, and a ptu for sc. CIG are some of the most open developers around. Not saying they reveal everything, but they do reveal more than any game company I have payed attention to. CIG has developed some really powerful adaptations to the crytek engine and lumberyard engine. They are already working on Technology leasing to other companies, which should fetch them a pretty penny. I am not worried in the slightest. I play other games and read about SC often, I am content.

At this point the game has to be pretty close to flawless or all the anti fan boys will troll the shit outta CIG about bugs and other BS. I think most of the people against SC are people who want to see it crash and burn because its not their style of game and they are jealous that the games they prefer will never reach the funding point that CIG has climbed to.

skakruk

1 fps for every year in development? Looks pretty though.

GrindcoreTHRALL

skakruk said:

1 fps for every year in development? Looks pretty though. 

You need a new computer then XD

EponyxDamor

postofficetcup said:

skakruk said:

1 fps for every year in development? Looks pretty though. 

You need a new computer then XD

Even this pre-recorded demo video, done in a single-player setting with no other players, had many points where the frames stuttered significantly or paused for a second or two. Heck, they were even careful to not turn quickly during the demo so the frames wouldn't tank. Guess CIG needs new computers, too, then?

Honestly, I'm impressed by the fact that they were even able to complete the mission in the demo, because its a running joke even within the SC community that completing missions (in SC, at least) is just not possible at this point (due to bugs, crashes, etc).

Its an "early pre-alpha WIP" though, so some issues are obviously expected. FPS optimization (even in single player settings), however, seems to be a rather large one still.

cheyane

No third person view ?

SEANMCAD

cheyane said:

No third person view ?

it does.

a different video I saw had both

cheyane

ahh good thanks

Tiamat64

EponyxDamor said:

postofficetcup said:

skakruk said:

1 fps for every year in development? Looks pretty though. 

You need a new computer then XD

Even this pre-recorded demo video, done in a single-player setting with no other players, had many points where the frames stuttered significantly or paused for a second or two. Guess CIG needs new computers, too, then?

Honestly, I'm impressed by the fact that they were even able to complete the mission in the demo, because its a running joke even within the SC community that completing missions (in SC, at least) is just not possible at this point (due to bugs, crashes, etc).

They weren't able to complete it in one run, apparently.  There are quite a few parts in the video where it looks like they had to cut it out and tape in a different play session.

That's the benefit of showing a "demo" using a pre-recorded video.  What's really scary is that's probably the best they could come up with after throwing out the bad parts and replacing them with functional playthrough moments and it STILL had lots of issues anyways.

nameuser

Looks meh. As long as they get Star Citizen right, i don't care about Squadron 42.

MaxBacon

cheyane said:

ahh good thanks

Not properly played in 3rd person though, it's just one option but perhaps they'll work more on the 3rd person for dogfighting / FPS.

EponyxDamor said:

Its an "early pre-alpha WIP" though, so some issues are obviously expected. FPS optimization (even in single player settings), however, seems to be a rather large one still.

The game is not as intensive hardware-wise as people seem to think. When people load in with the "offline mode" trick, the performance has one huge increase.

Tho in demos when the footage is more raw, optimization done on it usually is just for the demo and not the final thing, raw assets without usual optimizations such as LODs would be a killer of any hardware gg

beebop500

postofficetcup said:

At this point the game has to be pretty close to flawless or all the anti fan boys will troll the shit outta CIG about bugs and other BS. I think most of the people against SC are people who want to see it crash and burn because its not their style of game and they are jealous that the games they prefer will never reach the funding point that CIG has climbed to.

Sorry but I had to laugh at this.  Are you serious?  I play games that are fully released.  I don't have to justify to myself why I would even be remotely interested in some cobbled-together demo video masquerading as gameplay.  Please.

Those of us who don't donate money to CIG instead prefer to play games that have officially launched, so that we can actually determine whether we enjoy them or not.  Why would any of us be "jealous" that your crowdfunded pie in the sky is raking in more money?  These shamelessly premade videos should easily tell the tale of money being wasted....unless you think others are "jealous" of your waiting, what, over five years now for a game that still has no real functionality?

Yeah, I guess we're all idiots for buying games we can log onto and play.  Gosh, let me delete all of my existing games and go back SC, cause gosh, they are making so much money! Plus, that way I won't have to be "jealous" any longer of folks who have handed their kids' college funds over to Roberts.  LOL

EponyxDamor

Tiamat64 said:

EponyxDamor said:

postofficetcup said:

skakruk said:

1 fps for every year in development? Looks pretty though. 

You need a new computer then XD

Even this pre-recorded demo video, done in a single-player setting with no other players, had many points where the frames stuttered significantly or paused for a second or two. Guess CIG needs new computers, too, then?

Honestly, I'm impressed by the fact that they were even able to complete the mission in the demo, because its a running joke even within the SC community that completing missions (in SC, at least) is just not possible at this point (due to bugs, crashes, etc).

They weren't able to complete it in one run, apparently.  There are quite a few parts in the video where it looks like they had to cut it out and tape in a different play session.

That's the benefit of showing a "demo" using a pre-recorded video.  What's really scary is that's probably the best they could come up with after throwing out the bad parts and replacing them with functional playthrough moments and it STILL had lots of issues anyways.

I don't think the video is all that bad, but I do think that calling it a "early pre-alpha WIP" after 5-6 years of development is kind of worrying. SQ42 is a much more realistic goal and game for CIG to complete compared to SC; the scope is much smaller and the game play more linear. If after 5-6 years, and after saying the product was "nearly complete and ready for launch" just a few years ago, they are now back to saying "early pre-alpha" is kind of concerning.

As I've said in other threads in discussing SQ42/SC, I firmly sit in the "release when ready" camp, but the goalposts for SQ42 haven't moved like they have for SC. So, I don't really understand why they haven't made more progress on SQ42. "Early pre-alpha WIP" implies there is still a significant way to go, especially since optimization still seems to be rocky at best.

After 5-6 years and tons of hype (especially for this particular game play demo), I just wasn't super impressed, especially considering it is prerecorded and they had every chance possible to make it truly remarkable. It isn't like they were actually sitting there *live* playing through a mission; they could have at least made the game play seem more interesting than "how many buttons does it take to get into the ship's cockpit and launch".

SEANMCAD

beebop500 said:

postofficetcup said:

At this point the game has to be pretty close to flawless or all the anti fan boys will troll the shit outta CIG about bugs and other BS. I think most of the people against SC are people who want to see it crash and burn because its not their style of game and they are jealous that the games they prefer will never reach the funding point that CIG has climbed to.

Sorry but I had to laugh at this.  Are you serious?  I play games that are fully released.  I don't have to justify to myself why I would even be remotely interested in some cobbled-together demo video masquerading as gameplay.  Please.

Those of us who don't donate money to CIG instead prefer to play games that have officially launched, so that we can actually determine whether we enjoy them or not.  Why would any of us be "jealous" that your crowdfunded pie in the sky is raking in more money?  These shamelessly premade videos should easily tell the tale of money being wasted....unless you think others are "jealous" of your waiting, what, over five years now for a game that still has no real functionality?

Yeah, I guess we're all idiots for buying games we can log onto and play.  Gosh, let me delete all of my existing games and go back SC, cause gosh, they are making so much money! Plus, that way I won't have to be "jealous" any longer of folks who have handed their kids' college funds over to Roberts.  LOL

I can completely understanding wanting to play code that you can actually download, actually play and actually have fun.
but I dont agree that it has to be 'finished'. 
My best gaming experiences EVER have been mostly by playing unfinished code.

and I am not saying 'ever' to be colorful or dramatic, nor do I speak from a position of inexperience. I mean very seriously exactly what I said

beebop500

SEANMCAD said:

beebop500 said:

I can completely understanding wanting to play code that you can actually download, actually play and actually have fun.
but I dont agree that it has to be 'finished'. 
My best gaming experiences EVER have been mostly by playing unfinished code.

and I am not saying 'ever' to be colorful or dramatic, nor do I speak from a position of inexperience. I mean very seriously exactly what I said

Well as with anything else in gaming, YMMV of course.  Oh I've toyed around with unfinished games/projects myself, so I can understand your enjoyment of that also.  It's all a matter of perspective there, I suppose. 

Most games are never "finished", especially not now, in the era of day-one patches and constant updates, and so on.  I don't mean that a game need be "perfect" or anything of the sort.  Heck, I have bought into a few early-access titles, and one in particular I have been playing since it hit early access in around 2015 (?).  Point being, the game was in a released state (even if unfinished) and myself and others were able to experience the real thing for ourselves.

I just think it's honestly hilarious that someone would think people are "jealous" of SC because it's (theoretically) making money.  I mean I can somewhat understand being a fanboi, but for God's sake that idea is just idiotic.  People have been handing their money to charlatans and schemes for thousands of years.

Arglebargle

Lord only knows how many times the poor Squadron 42 designers have had to throw out or redo their code and art.  It's the Roberts Way!   Also expect cinematics to rule over gameplay.  Ditto the reason.