Are Star Citizen's Backers Actually Deluded?

Kyleran

Err, not to interject, but I have regularly criticized SC without ever playing it.  

Heck, I haven't even watched more than two hours of videos in all these many years.

So a point goes to @DKLond I guess.



(Being well informed is so over rated)

  

sgel

DKLond said:

sgel said:

DKLond said:

I'm not big into preaching

But pointing out obvious falsehoods and misleading lies does happen here and there.

That said, you did admit that you couldn't know what you claimed as fact, and so that's fair enough.

OBVIOUSLY you aren't that big into preaching. Your recent rabid posts in a Star Citizen thread would never imply that. Never.

For the second time, I never claimed it was fact. I merely suggested my opinion.

And you called me a liar for stating my opinion because you assumed it was a fact.
You were hasty and wrong, obviously, but you're not going to admit it anytime soon.

You hurt my internet feelings and my tears translate into these melancholic words.

You do realize that most of the people criticizing it have actually played it right?

That was your "suggested opinion"

So, I guess you remain a liar here.

Oh well, I don't exchange with people who openly lie.

Have a nice day.

Yeah.. that was my opinion.
You said I claimed it was a fact.
Where did I say it was a fact?
Do you understand the difference?

I'll wait.

DKLond

Information is only as useful as what you do with it.

I'd say the key here is to correlate the available information about Star Citizen with the reality of how things actually work within the realm of game development - as well as the realm of human nature.

When you put those together - given the current stage of development - there's really no rational way to conclude that it's a scam.

It's not entirely impossible that it will fail to release - and that funding "dries out" before they can properly finish it, it's just increasingly unlikely.

Right now, I'm very confident that Star Citizen will launch in a reasonably playable state within, say, five years at the most.

My personal estimate is in around three years. Will it "be done" at that point in time? Yes, in the same way any MMO is done at release.

The most obvious thing it will lack upon release would be all the 100+ star systems. More than likely, it will launch with 20 systems or less.

Funding is going extremely well. So, it's highly unlikely that funding will dry out in three years.

In five years? Unlikely - but possible.

In ten years? Definitely possible.

BeansnBread

5 years at the most lol. 

Jesus Christ. I remember when you were saying mid 2018. All of your bullshit predictions are terrible. Obviously you didn't (and don't) understand game development.

DKLond

It’s not a prediction, it’s a best guess based on available information.

Core tech has taken a lot longer than I think anyone expected. But since so much of it is finally in place, “predictions” are easier to make.

That said, I could still be wrong

We will see, though. I’m flattered that what I say is remembered so specifically. I mean, I only pop up around here on rare occasions and yet I make an impression.

If the reaction is this strong now, just imagine what it will be like if I’m ever right about anything at all. You guys will explode or something!

BeansnBread

DKLond said:

It’s not a prediction, it’s a best guess based on available information.

Core tech has taken a lot longer than I think anyone expected. But since so much of it is finally in place, “predictions” are easier to make.

That said, I could still be wrong

We will see, though. I’m flattered that what I say is remembered so specifically. I mean, I only pop up around here on rare occasions and yet I make an impression.

If the reaction is this strong now, just imagine what it will be like if I’m ever right about anything at all. You guys will explode or something!

You sound flattered and not condescending at all.

DKLond

BeansnBread said:

DKLond said:

It’s not a prediction, it’s a best guess based on available information.

Core tech has taken a lot longer than I think anyone expected. But since so much of it is finally in place, “predictions” are easier to make.

That said, I could still be wrong

We will see, though. I’m flattered that what I say is remembered so specifically. I mean, I only pop up around here on rare occasions and yet I make an impression.

If the reaction is this strong now, just imagine what it will be like if I’m ever right about anything at all. You guys will explode or something!

You sound flattered and not condescending at all.

We can’t all be as genuinely constructive as you seem to strive for.

BeansnBread

DKLond said:

BeansnBread said:

DKLond said:

It’s not a prediction, it’s a best guess based on available information.

Core tech has taken a lot longer than I think anyone expected. But since so much of it is finally in place, “predictions” are easier to make.

That said, I could still be wrong

We will see, though. I’m flattered that what I say is remembered so specifically. I mean, I only pop up around here on rare occasions and yet I make an impression.

If the reaction is this strong now, just imagine what it will be like if I’m ever right about anything at all. You guys will explode or something!

You sound flattered and not condescending at all.

We can’t all be as genuinely constructive as you seem to strive for.

Good one.

NorseGod

BeansnBread said:

DKLond said:

You sound flattered and not condescending at all.

Makes you want to spend hundreds of dollars to play a game with them, doesn't it?

iNeoki

I really like the linked video, not the extremist troll video I was expecting. Glad it shows that most of us backers are really just down to earth people wanting something not currently available. And I personally still have my doubts, but my backing is something I considered an investment towards making something like this a reality, and so far I think it hasn't failed yet.

And honestly with the group I play with, I'm having quite a lot of fun. I play the game on and off, but have been more active since the ground missions and bounty additions. But I love the FPS/FlightSim atmosphere of the game, it's something I've craved since Freelancer and Earth & Beyond. So maybe it's just my nostalgia, who knows. Either way, deluded or not, I'm getting entertainment out of it, even though it's still "nothing to show for" according to some.

It all comes down to taste, and the features this game is currently offering and is expanding to offer. No other game is out there like it, or is being developed, that I'm aware of anyway. And the game even after Full Release, may not appeal to the the same folks who are negative about it now.

I backed it in the beginning, and considered it a lost cause after 3 years or so, like many. But I've been pleasantly surprised with the change in progress over the past year, specifically actual consumable content finally being available. Either way, I never bothered to get a refund, I considered it a lost investment when I did lose hope many years back, it happens. But in hindsight today, glad I never pressed the issue, as I'm happy with the progress they are finally making, albeit taking quite long and way behind schedule.

Gutlard

I would, and probably will again at some point, make fun of SC fans like I do any other fans, but I use all videogames as my main form of delusion....ha

Gut Out!

Kefo

Babuinix said:

someforumguy said:

I find the SC project fascinating from a social pov. I am really curious how this will develop the coming years and how CR will react to losing momentum financially. Because I am convinced that the backing will slow down at this pace of delivering. At some point even the most fanatical of backers will lose excitement over a game that is still far from release.

This game is already at the budget of GTA V (with GTA V spending loads of it on marketing btw), but GTA V was finished by now. While SC is still suffering from feature creep with no end in sight (8 years!).

It is fascinating how the backers respond to people who have doubts about this project. I also am curious how many will vanish from the forums the coming years while SC development still goes on.

I don't see SC being ready with all the feature creep before 2025 (a wild guess on the early side based on their pace of hitting milestones). And this is if they can keep the money coming in. But tbh I can't really see that happening. It will be too many delays by then. And many articles will be written about the ongoing development preventing new fresh backers. So I am very curious about the community of backers and how they will react the coming years.

Are they delusional? Well, everyone is in some extent. It is a built in filter in our nature. It prevents us from suffering from seeing all the bad things around us all the time in the world. But some are more delusional then others maybe. Pragmatism and reasoning should normally be able to break through that filter.

People have been claiming that funding would dry up since 2015 lol...

We've had many cynics and plain haters guarantee us that it would all collapse many many times, while the ones who actually followed the game would laugh at dismiss their nonsense with facts and data of engagement showcasing constant growth. I've personally  written years ago many, many times in this forum that "Star Citizen will just keep on growing, getting better and better, with more players joining and making millions in the process, Rinse & Repeat. And it's really only the beginning".

Guess what, last year was Star Citizen best funding since the kickstarted launched and this is year is on course to surpass it.

The game is now more playable than ever, the engagement and player count has skyrocketed and updates are constant and juicy. 

If there's anyone vanishing are the ones who once claimed the project was financially doomed or that X technical feat would be impossible to accomplish like "seamlessly landing on planets" or that "they will never introduce ingame ship buying/renting because it would crash their funding" lol

Whille the funding is comparable with GTAV the circumstances aren't, one is sequel made from a established company, budget and technology while other is made from scratch with everything made along the way.

Year by year and as reality set's in it clearer and clearer that it's not the supporters of this game who are deluded but the ones who keep ignoring it's continuous progress and groundbreaking technical achievements. 

Answer the call 2015

MaxBacon

DKLond said:

MaxBacon said:

DKLond said:

Hehe, thanks.

That said, you can argue that what a car is doing isn't terribly complicated either, but you kinda need to put things into context.

What Star Citizen is doing isn't necessarily a "technical marvel" - because each advanced feature is based on relatively straight-forward principles.


Even so - and regardless of how "trivial" all these features are - there's not a single other game in existence right now - or in the immediate future - that combines this level of fidelity and sophistication in a single game.

That's enough for me

To me it's really all the technology they merge together to achieve entirely different types of gameplay seamlessly, but pushing the quality of all aspects of it not just the visuals and animations but the simulation involved, over that they put an MMO setup on a game of this complexity what makes it even harder to achieve, but at the end the experience is unique. And hell there are people who want just that, it's annoying that the prospects of something like this still fall on SC even after half a decade.

Oh, I agree that pushing it all to this level is a big part of what's so cool about it.

As for prospects, I'm not sure what you mean?

I mean games in dev, SC is still just SC as far what it's doing goes, and pretty much is explained on this video as well on the discussions he refers having with backers.

Sabrac

Arterius said:

MaxBacon said:

Utinni said:

Gdemami said:

rpmcmurphy said:

If you're spending hundreds or thousands of dollars on in game pixels what else can you call it?

...wealthy.

Most whales in video games aren't wealthy. That's why its a problem. It's predatory towards lower incomes just like gambling, nicotine, drugs.

This is mostly on mobile games, because mobile games target a really extensive demographic and cash in hugely on gambling & addiction (even causing stress on a player increases sales) by players on levels really unseen on the standard PC game monetization.

PC devs do try to kick in the aggressive monetization methods mobile standardized but there is a large amount of resistance fighting those corps off.

I think you should watch the Jimquistion episode on MTX and the people who spend money on them. A lot of research is done on his end. He even went so far as to contact people or they contacted him. He did such good research the UK asked his opinion on lootboxes. 

His research shows that it is in fact predatory to people who can't afford it and that AAA buisnesses do that for a reason

Let’s go whaling!

An old video, but the tactics and tricks are still used and even improved upon.

(Oh yeah sorry for the off-topic just a bit of a breather in between all the usual SC thread )

Tiller

Prime_Directive said:

lock thread please.

As usual anything that sheds negativity on Star Citizen you guys always fall back on the tactic of getting thread locked with baiting and causing arguments or asking for a lock. Seems pretty weak to me. You guys want to defend your game, stand your ground and defend or just walk away.

Babuinix

Kefo said:

Answer the call 2015

I answered back in 2013 and still regret haven't backed earlier but you're right, it's from 2015 and the FUD campaign that funding really picked up

Thanks I guess

Hariken

Gdemami said:

rpmcmurphy said:

If you're spending hundreds or thousands of dollars on in game pixels what else can you call it?

...wealthy.

This 100%
This game will be one for people with disposable income and not your average gamer. Think of it as a modern version of the Entropia universe games. People spent crazy money buying planets in that game.

Kefo

Babuinix said:

Kefo said:

Answer the call 2015

I answered back in 2013 and still regret haven't backed earlier but you're right, it's from 2015 and the FUD campaign that funding really picked up

Thanks I guess

That’s not what I meant and you know it.

You only bring up the evil haters and how we have been saying the project will fail for years meanwhile CR has been lying about milestones and releases for years. How’s Squadron 42 been so far since it was supposed to release in 2015.

mbrodie

DKLond said:

sgel said:

DKLond said:

I fully expect most gamers to be smart enough to enjoy a great game more than remaining ignorant about it.

I like how the options are ignorance or enjoyment. As if you can't possibly have played the game and not like it.

You do realize that most of the people criticizing it have actually played it right?
I backed it years ago but I find the gameplay incredibly uninspiring and boring... and I've spent hundreds of hours in ED, Factorio, camping gates in EvE and other "boring" gaming endeavors.

I don't give a damn about their pompous talk about "new" technology and groundbreaking marketing gimmicks when the gameplay is utterly banal.

Maybe one day they'll realize that they need to add interesting gameplay and then maybe more than a fraction of their playerbase will actually want to play it.
I'd love to actually take advantage of my purchase and have an enjoyable experience... instead of just sitting it out and warming my hands on this crowdfunded dumpster fire.

No, I don't realise that "most people" who criticize the game have actually played it.

Probably because I don't know all of them - and have no way of knowing for sure.

Anyone claiming to know this for a fact can only be a liar, and liars aren't reliable for useful information, in my experience.

As for "interesting gameplay" - I agree that only people into this kind of game need apply.

But, I have no problem believing that if you are, indeed, into space games like Privateer or Freelancer - then you're very, very likely to enjoy Star Citizen when it's finished.

Will there be exceptions? Sure.

Right now, the game is far, far from finished - and commenting on the gameplay as if it's anything even remotely like it will be - is useless, and is just another sign of ignorance.

yeah...

it's pre alpha guys it'll get better.....
it's alpha guys it's not finished yet, it'll get better....
it's beta guys there is still time for changes...

gameplay should be the foundation a game is built on, if it's not fun and they aren't developing it with that in mind why would you expect it to get better by launch.

You make it sound like it's hard for anyone with an opinion to have previously played the game also, when with all the free fly events that have happened anyone at this point could have in fact played it and it's more reasonable to assume that more people have tried it than not.

but thats ok, i hope the game is everything you hope it will be if it ever releases.

MaxBacon

mbrodie said:

gameplay should be the foundation a game is built on, if it's not fun and they aren't developing it with that in mind why would you expect it to get better by launch.

The foundation of gameplay is the technology of the game engine it uses.

The majority of the cases games in dev do not face any major improvement by launch and are still haunted by good old issues (say Ark Survival Evolved with the Atlas follow up as an eg) is because they built final gameplay mechanic over a flawed engine and got limited by the technology & its issues.

SC has that freedom because they are not restricted by a set timeline/budget so no need to do the common "bandage fix" type of implementations, ofc on the other hand that comes with the cost of the time it does take to work it out

Babuinix

Kefo said:

You only bring up the evil haters and how we have been saying the project will fail for years meanwhile CR has been lying about milestones and releases for years. How’s Squadron 42 been so far since it was supposed to release in 2015.

So haven't you been saying the project will fail for years? What's wrong in pointing out how haters have been consecutively so spectacularly wrong about lol

And don't be daft calling people liars just because they got estimates wrong, specially in video-game development where companies and dev's miss their release dates all the time. It not only makes you look childish but naive. Wrong estimates are as part of general life and businesses around the world. From Bill Gates to Elon Musk or your loved David Braben, every single brilliant minds from every field, being scientists or business man, around the world have gotten dates wrong and that doesn't make them liars lol

You know what Liars are? The people who fabricate fake refunds stories and push them to the press to attack CIG, people who faked Glassdoor reviews to attack a company and it's developers, people who fake "concerns" to create drama lol...

That's the liars you should care about

mbrodie

MaxBacon said:

mbrodie said:

gameplay should be the foundation a game is built on, if it's not fun and they aren't developing it with that in mind why would you expect it to get better by launch.

The foundation of gameplay is the technology of the game engine it uses.

The majority of the cases games in dev do not face any major improvement by launch and are still haunted by good old issues (say Ark Survival Evolved with the Atlas follow up as an eg) is because they built final gameplay mechanic over a flawed engine and got limited by the technology & its issues.

SC has that freedom because they are not restricted by a set timeline/budget so no need to do the common "bandage fix" type of implementations, ofc on the other hand that comes with the cost of the time it does take to work it out

That's your opinion they are are not limited by timeline budget... but i mean they are realistically, just like anyone else... just because the game is making money now doesn't mean it will forever and until these things are actually shown not just concepts or spin you won't actually know how advanced anything they are doing actually is.

by the time they finish, the engine they have been modifying so heavily might run so poorly that the game is unplayable for 95% of people, we have no idea what the future will hold or if they can actually achieve what they need to.

MaxBacon

mbrodie said:

MaxBacon said:

mbrodie said:

gameplay should be the foundation a game is built on, if it's not fun and they aren't developing it with that in mind why would you expect it to get better by launch.

The foundation of gameplay is the technology of the game engine it uses.

The majority of the cases games in dev do not face any major improvement by launch and are still haunted by good old issues (say Ark Survival Evolved with the Atlas follow up as an eg) is because they built final gameplay mechanic over a flawed engine and got limited by the technology & its issues.

SC has that freedom because they are not restricted by a set timeline/budget so no need to do the common "bandage fix" type of implementations, ofc on the other hand that comes with the cost of the time it does take to work it out

That's your opinion they are are not limited by timeline budget... but i mean they are realistically, just like anyone else... just because the game is making money now doesn't mean it will forever and until these things are actually shown not just concepts or spin you won't actually know how advanced anything they are doing actually is.

by the time they finish, the engine they have been modifying so heavily might run so poorly that the game is unplayable for 95% of people, we have no idea what the future will hold or if they can actually achieve what they need to.

The biggest modifications to the engine technology are actually the pieces of tech allowing major performance on different areas while expanding the capabilities of the tech, OCS being the most relevant one as streaming tech allowing the scale and detail of the game actually co-exist with client & server performance.

As is they already have gotten that freedom it's not unlimited but they took the choices to take the time and refactor what needed it, if they didn't the game forcefully had to adapt to available technology / tools and its issues.

There is still more to do on this ofc, but now we see many systems already settled on their final base just being expanded upon, other stuff is being converted currently and there are still placeholders waiting for the final solutions.

mbrodie

MaxBacon said:

mbrodie said:

MaxBacon said:

mbrodie said:

gameplay should be the foundation a game is built on, if it's not fun and they aren't developing it with that in mind why would you expect it to get better by launch.

The foundation of gameplay is the technology of the game engine it uses.

The majority of the cases games in dev do not face any major improvement by launch and are still haunted by good old issues (say Ark Survival Evolved with the Atlas follow up as an eg) is because they built final gameplay mechanic over a flawed engine and got limited by the technology & its issues.

SC has that freedom because they are not restricted by a set timeline/budget so no need to do the common "bandage fix" type of implementations, ofc on the other hand that comes with the cost of the time it does take to work it out

That's your opinion they are are not limited by timeline budget... but i mean they are realistically, just like anyone else... just because the game is making money now doesn't mean it will forever and until these things are actually shown not just concepts or spin you won't actually know how advanced anything they are doing actually is.

by the time they finish, the engine they have been modifying so heavily might run so poorly that the game is unplayable for 95% of people, we have no idea what the future will hold or if they can actually achieve what they need to.

The biggest modifications to the engine technology are actually the pieces of tech allowing major performance on different areas while expanding the capabilities of the tech, OCS being the most relevant one as streaming tech allowing the scale and detail of the game actually co-exist with client & server performance.

As is they already have gotten that freedom it's not unlimited but they took the choices to take the time and refactor what needed it, if they didn't the game forcefully had to adapt to available technology / tools and its issues.

There is still more to do on this ofc, but now we see many systems already settled on their final base just being expanded upon, other stuff is being converted currently and there are still placeholders waiting for the final solutions.

Oh, so the game is open source?

Or you are just taking their word for it?

Edit - Sorry, i know this is a late addition but i wanted to elaborate.

My point is, you don't know any of this as fact, you know it as what they have told you and it's your choice to believe them or not. Time and time again developers have told us this this and this is happening and it never happened. There is no reason to believe this is any different just because they said it is.

But again, your choice

Kefo

Babuinix said:

Kefo said:

You only bring up the evil haters and how we have been saying the project will fail for years meanwhile CR has been lying about milestones and releases for years. How’s Squadron 42 been so far since it was supposed to release in 2015.

So haven't you been saying the project will fail for years? What's wrong in pointing out how haters have been consecutively so spectacularly wrong about lol

And don't be daft calling people liars just because they got estimates wrong, specially in video-game development where companies and dev's miss their release dates all the time. It not only makes you look childish but naive. Wrong estimates are as part of general life and businesses around the world. From Bill Gates to Elon Musk or your loved David Braben, every single brilliant minds from every field, being scientists or business man, around the world have gotten dates wrong and that doesn't make them liars lol

You know what Liars are? The people who fabricate fake refunds stories and push them to the press to attack CIG, people who faked Glassdoor reviews to attack a company and it's developers, people who fake "concerns" to create drama lol...

That's the liars you should care about

I’ve been calling the project out for what it is for years. Do I want it to fail? No since it would probably set back crowd funding and the space genre but do I think it will fail? Yes simply because Chris Roberts is behind the wheel and he has never successfully delivered a video game while he has been the man on top.

I call people liars when they say it’s right around the corner 4 years ago or things like they’ve just completed a play through of all the missions and it just needs polish and then it comes out a few months later most of the missions still don’t exist. 

People can be wrong but to defend CI when there is so much evidence pointing to either the company being full of liars or incompetent devs is laughable. 

Also please don’t compare scientists to CI as that is an insult to science. Please point out where I have ever said I love Braben? I can hear your joints cracking cause you’re reaching so hard with that one.