Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Quick Links
[Column] Star Citizen: The Future Persistent Universe
SBFord
Former Associate EditorMember LegendaryPosts: 33,129
It’s no secret that studios tend to use writers as a sort of advertising. It’s nothing malicious, just a subtle focus on the new stuff they would like to get promoted. The relationship is certainly symbiotic because where they get to manage the publicity of their games to some degree, we get to see things a little earlier than most, which allows us to produce articles while the information is relevant.
Read more of Red Thomas's Star Citizen: The Future Persistent Universe.
)
With enough lever, you can still move the world. Star Citizen will play with the fulcrum a bit on you, though.
Comments
-a very realistic grasp on what’s possible in a given timeframe
-these systems and the experience should get better over time
-get components out the door to players more quickly and not wait for things to be completely finished first
-continue getting things in a slightly less-than-polished state
-pointed out that it wouldn’t be a free-for-all
-I still can’t say it’ll be the Star Citizen I expected when I backed, but I do think it’ll be a pretty bang up version of it.
There are some nice ships you can spend $$ on.
"It’s completely fair, and absolutely appropriate, to consider the less hardcore players in the equation and ensure you build a game they’ll enjoy playing, as well. More players, makes for a much healthier game in the long run, and that a win for everyone. Plus, the economic system is hugely important in the developing Star Citizen universe."
If only more game developers out there actually did that then we would not have so many problems we're seeing especially with the AAA titles.
It's interesting the difference in approach makes: You took at these things and wrote a piece that says, 'Isn't this cool!'.
I look at parts like, 'Development is in such a state of Flux.....so many details left to iron out.....so many things that can dramatically affect how we can push things out....' etc, and what I see is a self admitted mess that likely doesn't hang together too well. One that will have unfinished parts pushed out early, to make deadlines. After which they can see about actually making them work.
The part about Chris Roberts being an experienced developer with a realistic grasp of what's possible in a given timeframe is pretty laughable. Certainly not what I've heard from ex-Origin co-workers. Especially with the contrast to others overpromising. Overpromising is Roberts' stock in trade. Look at his history, he's had numerous games that came out years late, missing hyped features. You are acting far more like a starry eyed fan, accepting the PR and the surface story.
The fellow in question was talking about working things up in two to three years, which does seem reasonable. A fully working game in 2018 seems possible. If the feature creep doesn't go on and on.
If you are holding out for the perfect game, the only game you play will be the waiting one.
I own all of the Wing Commanders, Privateer, and more....
In Chris R. I trust.
@Arglebargle ... >>>>He’s also an experienced developer with a very realistic grasp on what’s possible in a given timeframe, and that’s a really refreshing perspective in the modern era of hype-based over-promising.>>> --> " ...is pretty laughable .." --> I think you misunderstood. The article author was speaking about Tony Zurovec.
I liked something that Ben Lesnick said recently. That CIG spent the last 1-1.5 years building a framework. Which has the disadvantage that you wont see as much things as you hoped for. But it makes everything easier in the long run and now everyone started to work more on content and less on the engine/framework/infrastructure. So the amount of new stuff which can be shown to backers is about to increase significantly - and we see that trend already.
>> If the feature creep doesn't go on and on. >>
The last true new feature was added 9 months ago (The recent pet system is an existing feature of the CryEngine). It was also more than half a year ago that CR wanted to stop adding stretch goals ... but the backers voted against it and wanted more stretch goals. So he continued announcing them. But recently - after 66 M$ have been reached - CR announced that stretch goals are gone for good. Yes, there will still be some decorative goodies and some in game cash, but no big new stretch goals anymore. Instead of the stretch goals there will be in-depth behind-the-scenes looks at game concepts like multi-player-ships.
Have fun
I don't think I've ever accused Chris Roberts of having a realistic grasp of the possible... I was referring to Tony there. Sorry if that wasn't clear.
Not sure I like the idea of a "managed economy" very much. Are they expecting fewer players than EVE has ? The economy in EVE is almost entirely player-driven, with CCP rarely having to interfere.
Is SC leaning towards a more themepark design, where the developers control everything and provide all the entertainment, and make sure nobody hurts themselves on the rides ?
No, I actually asked a little about that. The gist is that it's not impossible, it just gets harder the farther you push the market away from a band of nominal. At least, that's the way I understand it.
Believe me, I'm not a fan of the idea myself. I think that what EVE's built is absolutely incredible and would love to see someone improve on it in a space sim type game.
But, the fact that it's unrealistic is a damn good point. In the real world, even Bill Gates (who has more liquid capital than most small nations) would find it hard to push the global market that far. If you consider that space is so large that you couldn't really ever completely blockade a planet, and that a single organization would be so insignificant in a galactic market, then it starts making a lot more sense. Just as Gates could have a significant impact though, you'll still be able to have your presence felt. You just won't be able to run a market from bear to bull without sinking more into the project than it's probably worth.
All that said, I interviewed Chris about his economy ideas back early in the original campaign (yes, I WAS one of the very first folks to report on SC like it mattered), and this is kind of counter to what he originally described. The initial concept, as explained to me, was that the economy would be fully populated with AI that would be replaced by humans. For example, if player were transporting enough goods from one planet to the next, the AI running that route would be scaled back over time. The idea was to allow players to control everything, but to ensure a stable market in areas they hadn't moved into, or didn't care enough about, to maintain. Obviously, that's changed like a lot of other stuff, but then the universe is a whole hell of a lot bigger than originally envisioned, as well.
I will believe it when I see it. Until then it's just typical 'developer has grandiose ideas' that we have no shortage of already.
lol wut?
I can't name one AAA MMO other than Wildstar in the last 8 years that hasn't heavily catered to the less than hardcore crowd.
I have only one question the next time any writer talks to the SC crew: after having already "collected" $63 mil, why are you continuing to devote more development time to sell even MORE (arguably overpriced) ships, when the game is not even close to being completed, and the scope of the game continues to increase?
Get a good answer to that, and this game might be worth some attention.
Point taken, both you and Eriilion. And I hope that Tony can run with that. Star Citizen, as described, sounds like a great game. Just one that is less likely to turn out as promised, on time.
If you are holding out for the perfect game, the only game you play will be the waiting one.
im with this guy ^
I have heard it all before, talk is cheap at this point. infact when i see major hype anymore it just throws up red flags that its probably going to suck and they are just trying to get my money before i find out its nothing like they are promising.
I find this game laughable and I will tell you why.. People say they are not about graphics but that's all this game was about, and people donated millions of dollars , and they hardly showed anything but pretty ships.. People still donate. This is a hype nothing more, you will see. I always help companys but I know better with this one.
Watch and see how many people complain this is nothing more than a cash grab, looks how expensive some of these ships are, are you kidding me??
Being in the gaming industry as a Dev, you should never ever, ever, and did I say ever? Keep adding stuff to a game, when your behide? Somethings can be added later... I can see by this comment, they are trying to milk you guys, I have backed and been apart of companys and I hardly see devs open there mouth and some hate me for it, but I got into making games before I did get sick of companys like this trying to screw people. Not all companys do this, but I dislike this one. and I do not trust them either.. Good luck to those that did back, your going to need it.
you really don´t get the concept of crowdfunding and pledge rewards, don´t you
you really don´t get that all you need to spend to get into alpha beta and release game is 40 $
If you want to support say a charity project, and you donate 100 000 $ you would complain that the charity is "expensive".. -.-
why? because 66 million $ is still no where near the budget of titles such as Destiny, SWTOR, GTA V etc.?
for once I wish you suspicious crowdfunding haters would take a calculator in your hand and calculate the cost of running a 300 man development team?
so what should they do when the money is gone, fire every one? just because some simpletons suggest to stop accepting money from the supporters? This game will run for many years and likely burn through hundreds of millions of $ until 2020
There is a vast difference between "it will be extremely difficult to monopolize an area of the market" and "it will be impossible by design".
It sounds like SC will balance out player actions with auto-generated AI actions (regardless of how plausible those AI actions will be). So, if there's a scarcity of some item or material in a specific area, the game will just generate supply out of thin air and say: "NPC-Corp stepped in and supplied the goods at a very reasonable price".
Players will never be able to make high profits from smart decisions and planning when trading, because the developer is essentially "capping" prices by generating infinite supply when needed. Players are still free to make huge losses from bad decisions though.
So what is the economic simulation in SC all about then ? Is it just a fake backstory to justify the existence of trading missions (aka courier quests) so that players have a means to "earn money" by delivering fake goods from one NPC to another ?
It sounds like EVE will be safe for another decade...
That's not my understanding of how it works... in order for an npc to deliver x supplies to y planet, those x supplies must be available on z planet and it will still take the npc merchant time to transfer x to y via z, the shipment of which could still be intercepted by a good enough blockade/pirate to keep the supply limited. The only thing that is going to really make this hard on players is that we're expecting a 9:1 ratio of npc ships (including merchants) compared to pc ships in any given system. So if you can devote the resources to a system to blockade not only all the player ships that try to get past you, plus 9 times as many npcs then by all means, you have your monopoly.
Why should they explain this in every article?
It doesn't take much effort to knock up concept art of ships then sell them... and its a very small fraction of the team doing that job.
Infact, all the new ships/pledges etc. are "future ships" that were being developed and sort of known about anyway. it gives the devs a chance to see which ones the community wants done first..... and the community who pledge get to walk around and play them far before the game launches.
They are not "continuing to waste development time" ... and the scope while was effected at some point (due to major modules from very early goals) ... there is a clear plan of what is happening now.
Graphics in a SIMULATION GAME? well ofcourse its a massive lure... this isn't your typical fantasy MMO where all that matters is how much they can look like World of Warcraft or random asian anime.... graphics/animation/physics matter.<br>
Bare in mind this is a Space Sim first and foremost... its just this s*tty website has to branch out and include other types of games... that have multiplayer (lol League of Legends being on here is a joke).<br>
But no... people backed it because the man behind it made some of the best space sims out... this is no exception...<br>
People are backing it because it combines multiple genres (Space Sim, FPS , MMO) <br>
People are backing it because it will be the first proper space flight game that feels like the Sci Fi shows where you can work together on one proper ship, board others and shoot them up.<br>
You say "shiny ships" well congratulations ... you identified a big selling point well done. we have seen the FPS module, the planetside module ... its all very real....
Fixed that for you!
It is a good point though. IF they've really got around 300 people working on this, rule of thumb mmo-style says they are spending about 3 million a month. So a year of development will run $36 million dollars. Not including earlier sunk costs, or specific expenditures or excess. At this point, they barely have the money for 2 years of development at the present scale, again, not counting earlier expenditures.
I, of course, think they will have trouble delivering, mostly because Roberts is a pretentious PTBarnum blowhard who's working the Hollywood PR gig to perfection. You are a True Believer, though, so that won't even hit your radar. I still predict a long and bumpy road for you folks.
If you are holding out for the perfect game, the only game you play will be the waiting one.
>>>I still predict a long and bumpy road for you folks.>>>
Knew that 2 years ago and I still backed the project. Still know it today and it does not trouble me. This is crowdfunding ... CIG should work on it til is done to the standards they and the backers expect. NOT until some publisher pulls the plug and says "Launch it, no matter if its ready or not ..."
And if its 36 M$ per year as you suggest and the backer money runs out ? IMHO banks would fall over themselves to supply some more funds to finish it. This is not an obscure indie project anymore.
Have fun
I would probably be a potential buyer of this game were it not for the 'interesting' ships for sale thing that is going on. It looks like daylight robbery to me. And people are buying them! A fool and his money...