Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

How I Feel About Star Citizen At This Point

1234579

Comments

  • ArglebargleArglebargle Member EpicPosts: 3,481
    Babuinix said:
    You can only fly one ship at a time and you an fly ship's that you don't own. Also Bigger ship doesn't mean better ship or advantage. Anyone who plays in the current alpha knows this.


    More expensive shps do typically mean better within their class though. We saw this with Arena Commander where the more expensive ship options would dominate, we also saw how the cash weapons from the VD store would give a huge advantage.

    A more recent test against a 600i
    • $35 - Aurora LN - 11.5s
    • $85 - Avenger Warlock (No emp) - 10.2s
    • $170 - Sabre - 6.4s
    • $180 - Superhornet - 5.0s
    Pretty damning if you ask me, pay more for better dps.
    The idea that ships that cost hundreds of dollars won't be superior to their cheaper counterparts shouldn't even have been questioned.  Again, this goes back to my posting SotA as an example: whales aren't doing this out of the goodness of their hearts.  They're paying the money for advantages, plain and simple.
    While it may be swimming against the tide, if someone buys thousands of dollars worth of game specialty stuff, I gotta feel they should get some advantage.   The cult marketing of the whole thing is a bit creepy though, especially for those folks who can't parse the very real risks.

    If you are holding out for the perfect game, the only game you play will be the waiting one.

  • ArglebargleArglebargle Member EpicPosts: 3,481
    Eldurian said:
    ....

    There is room for a reasonable person to believe CIG may fold and have to sell what they have to another publisher.

    .....
    This is the best case scenario, imo.   

    CIG will otherwise never be able to put everything promised into the game, because there's no end to Roberts ego.

    If you are holding out for the perfect game, the only game you play will be the waiting one.

  • EldurianEldurian Member EpicPosts: 2,736
    edited July 2018
    I don't really care if it all ends up in there to be honest. All that needs to happen for this game to be one of the best ever made is to finish the content on the roadmap for this year. (Primarily just territory claiming and female avatars) polish up it and all the existing content, expand the map, and launch it.

    You have trading, missions, planetary mining, character customization, ground combat, atmospheric flight, racing, ground to air combat etc.

    If you have been following space sims at all really, you would know that is one of the most robust packages ever included in any such game. And we aren't even talking about "what is promised" or "what is coming soon". That entire list is what you can go do in the PTU and Arena Commander right now.

    So most likely CR will scale back his ambitions the moment he realizes the money is running low. And if not someone will purchase what's been done for millions upon millions when CIG folds. 
  • MadFrenchieMadFrenchie Member LegendaryPosts: 8,505
    edited July 2018
    Eldurian said:
    Eldurian said:
    I keep seeing all these pics with incredible detail and resolution.  Does anyone believe that this will be how things actually look in-game?  That a modern desktop is capable of running something like this in-motion with dozens of other players on the screen?  It doesn't make sense.
    This comment in a nutshell capsulizes how ignorant the SC anti-fanboys. I didn't even need to read his response to know that many of these pictures are taken by people in-game. They have delivered substantially more than most anti-fanboys seem to be aware of.
    And somewhere between fanboy and anti-fanboy lies a lot of healthy skepticism about the management of the project.  Land ownership wasn't a stretch goal, it was feature creep introduced to sell more stuff to backers.  There's no way you can read that stretch goal I posted and think it implies a land deed system.  That was added by CIG to monetize.

    For a game with over 100 stretch goals already, adding more shit like that is ludicrous.  That's not a small system to add.  In fact, it's given pretty much every MMORPG that's ever implemented it fits.  Yet, it was added here outta the blue and immediately served up for cash to backers through land deeds.
    @MadFrenchie - How is this response in any way related to what you quoted?

    MightyUnclean - "You must be some kind of idiot to believe this is what it will look like in-game."

    Me - "The many portions of the game that are playable DO look like that."

    You - *Unrelated rant about feature creep which I never mentioned here.*

    RPMcMurphy - "Derp! I'm going to agree with this because he said something negative about Star Citizen!"
    Because there is no productive discussion to be had about going back and forth with the insults and gross generalizations.  There is productive discussions to be had about some of the issues here (just as with any other crowdfunding project), as you mentioned in one of your following posts, such as including something like land deed that wasn't part of the stretch goal cited by Erillion to qualify adding it.  The point was that generalizing "anti-fanboys" by selectively choosing what posts to respond to ignores that there's legitimate reasons for skepticism and criticism, one that "fanboys" attempt to dismiss, qualify, or ignore.

    Crowdfunding itself has evolved into a beast of a thing.  This project is not unique in that aspect.

    image
  • EldurianEldurian Member EpicPosts: 2,736
    edited July 2018
    If you do not believe this game will release your position is absurd and deserves to be generalized and dismissed. If you believe this game will realease but may hit some major setback like a massive feature cut or publisher switch then it's very unlikely you're an anti-fanboy, so my post wouldn't be generalizing your position.
  • EldurianEldurian Member EpicPosts: 2,736
    edited July 2018
    Also every single point of "productive discussion" on the viability of Star Citizen was covered for the 1000th time a few years ago. There is no productive discussion happening here and never will be again until the game launches and we get to say "I told you so!"
    Erillionkikoodutroa8
  • MadFrenchieMadFrenchie Member LegendaryPosts: 8,505
    Eldurian said:
    If you do not believe this game will release your position is absurd and deserves to be generalized and dismissed. If you believe this game will realease but may hit some major setback like a massive feature cut or publisher switch then it's very unlikely you're an anti-fanboy, so my post wouldn't be generalizing your position.
    My entire reasoning for entering the thread was to point out how 100+ stretch goals is the definition of feature creep.  Erillion responded saying that every feature was requested by the majority of the community, which was challenged by Beans as erroneous and, even if it wasn't, the idea that an emotionally invested crowd can make objective decisions about such things is widely accepted as ludicrous (literally, look into wisdom of a crowd, emotionality is one of the very things that compromises any wisdom in a collective decision), resulting in less than wise choices being made by players that CR and the gang were just all too happy to oblige to the tune of over 100 features.  That makes this title the poster boy for how crowdfunding lacks one of the benefits of traditional publishers, whether folks want to admit it or not, much like how CoE is the poster boy for wildly overzealous timelines that anyone NOT invested emotionally could clearly see.

    As I said, crowdfunding has become a beast of a thing.

    What's more, the cited evidence for land deeds as a requested feature is rolling paper thin.  Nothing in the cited stretch goal even hints at land deeding or selling those to players for cash.  That was feature creep that appears to have been created merely for the opportunity to sell something else before there's anything in the way of a complete game.

    So, at this point, a massive feature cut would actually be releasing an unfinished game per the promises made and funded by the crowd.  I am very skeptical the team behind this project will successfully implement all these ideas in a workable manner.  If you don't feel that preying on an emotionally invested group of folks to garner millions in funds for a dizzying amount of features that were never part of the original plan is A-Okay, then sure, there's not really more to be discussed here.  But excuse me if I don't take your word on that or agree.

    image
  • ErillionErillion Member EpicPosts: 10,328
    You do not have to agree. 

    If the majority of  backers agree, that is all that matters. And the numbers keep climbing and the devs still get paid .... so I would say they agree. 


    Have fun
  • MadFrenchieMadFrenchie Member LegendaryPosts: 8,505
    Erillion said:
    You do not have to agree. 

    If the majority of  backers agree, that is all that matters. And the numbers keep climbing and the devs still get paid .... so I would say they agree. 


    Have fun
    And you don't have to agree with me.  But I'll continue pointing out how even asking an emotionally and financially invested crowd to give one the okay to add massive amounts of feature creep is less collaborative design and more taking advantage of said crowd.
    rpmcmurphy

    image
  • Octagon7711Octagon7711 Member LegendaryPosts: 9,004
    Eldurian said:
    I don't really care if it all ends up in there to be honest. All that needs to happen for this game to be one of the best ever made is to finish the content on the roadmap for this year. (Primarily just territory claiming and female avatars) polish up it and all the existing content, expand the map, and launch it.

    You have trading, missions, planetary mining, character customization, ground combat, atmospheric flight, racing, ground to air combat etc.

    If you have been following space sims at all really, you would know that is one of the most robust packages ever included in any such game. And we aren't even talking about "what is promised" or "what is coming soon". That entire list is what you can go do in the PTU and Arena Commander right now.

    So most likely CR will scale back his ambitions the moment he realizes the money is running low. And if not someone will purchase what's been done for millions upon millions when CIG folds. 
    Even after the game launches it still has to be balanced for open world PvP.

    "We all do the best we can based on life experience, point of view, and our ability to believe in ourselves." - Naropa      "We don't see things as they are, we see them as we are."  SR Covey

  • EldurianEldurian Member EpicPosts: 2,736
    MadFrenchie said:

    My entire reasoning for entering the thread...
    I don't care about any of that. And I have shared your skepticism this game will deliver on all it's promises since they first started announcing stretch goals. I've been pleasantly surprised in that they have already implemented numerous features I did not assume would be there upon release but I am continuing to believe many of the features not already in-game (Which is most of the important ones) may not happen.

    I really only care that you replied to my statement saying that most of the anti-fanboys of this game remain exceptionally ignorant of what the game already has to offer. I'll continue to stand by that statement.
    MadFrenchie
  • rpmcmurphyrpmcmurphy Member EpicPosts: 3,502
    edited July 2018
    Eldurian said:

    RPMcMurphy - "Derp! I'm going to agree with this because he said something negative about Star Citizen!"

    Yes that must be it. How petty can you be?

    Ignore all the whiteknights liking other whiteknight posts and single me out for the occassional post I agree with. What a baby.
  • MightyUncleanMightyUnclean Member EpicPosts: 3,531
    Eldurian said:

    RPMcMurphy - "Derp! I'm going to agree with this because he said something negative about Star Citizen!"

    Yes that must be it. How petty can you be?

    Ignore all the whiteknights liking other whiteknight posts and single me out for the occassional post I agree with. What a baby.
    I think it's like the SotA fanatics.  They have so much time and money and emotion invested into the game, they can't handle any criticism, much less the thought that the game might fail.
  • MadFrenchieMadFrenchie Member LegendaryPosts: 8,505
    Eldurian said:
    MadFrenchie said:

    My entire reasoning for entering the thread...
    I don't care about any of that. And I have shared your skepticism this game will deliver on all it's promises since they first started announcing stretch goals. I've been pleasantly surprised in that they have already implemented numerous features I did not assume would be there upon release but I am continuing to believe many of the features not already in-game (Which is most of the important ones) may not happen.

    I really only care that you replied to my statement saying that most of the anti-fanboys of this game remain exceptionally ignorant of what the game already has to offer. I'll continue to stand by that statement.
    That takes quite a "the ends justifies the means" kind of attitude.  Not sure I can agree, as they literally garnered those funds by advertising the extra features.  Without telling people they would be included, they wouldn't have received all that funding.  We all know backers aren't actually giving out of the goodness of their hearts, otherwise stretch goals and backer rewards wouldn't be needed and devs wouldn't make promises that literally increase their workload burden just to get the extra cash.

    image
  • MadFrenchieMadFrenchie Member LegendaryPosts: 8,505
    Babuinix said:
    You can only fly one ship at a time and you an fly ship's that you don't own. Also Bigger ship doesn't mean better ship or advantage. Anyone who plays in the current alpha knows this.


    More expensive shps do typically mean better within their class though. We saw this with Arena Commander where the more expensive ship options would dominate, we also saw how the cash weapons from the VD store would give a huge advantage.

    A more recent test against a 600i
    • $35 - Aurora LN - 11.5s
    • $85 - Avenger Warlock (No emp) - 10.2s
    • $170 - Sabre - 6.4s
    • $180 - Superhornet - 5.0s
    Pretty damning if you ask me, pay more for better dps.
    The idea that ships that cost hundreds of dollars won't be superior to their cheaper counterparts shouldn't even have been questioned.  Again, this goes back to my posting SotA as an example: whales aren't doing this out of the goodness of their hearts.  They're paying the money for advantages, plain and simple.
    While it may be swimming against the tide, if someone buys thousands of dollars worth of game specialty stuff, I gotta feel they should get some advantage.   The cult marketing of the whole thing is a bit creepy though, especially for those folks who can't parse the very real risks.
    This is why crowdfunding a competitive multiplayer title is a terribad idea in general.
    rpmcmurphy

    image
  • EldurianEldurian Member EpicPosts: 2,736
    edited July 2018
    Eldurian said:

    RPMcMurphy - "Derp! I'm going to agree with this because he said something negative about Star Citizen!"

    Yes that must be it. How petty can you be?

    Ignore all the whiteknights liking other whiteknight posts and single me out for the occassional post I agree with. What a baby.
    I call you out because you consistently say and do crap that needs to be called out. If you can't handle it maybe you shouldn't come troll the boards for a game you don't even want to play.

    I'll call out the "white-knights" when their presence here is as pointless as yours and their general posts as useless. So far all of them are much more productive posters though so no need.
  • rpmcmurphyrpmcmurphy Member EpicPosts: 3,502
    edited July 2018
    Eldurian said:

    RPMcMurphy - "Derp! I'm going to agree with this because he said something negative about Star Citizen!"

    Yes that must be it. How petty can you be?

    Ignore all the whiteknights liking other whiteknight posts and single me out for the occassional post I agree with. What a baby.
    I think it's like the SotA fanatics.  They have so much time and money and emotion invested into the game, they can't handle any criticism, much less the thought that the game might fail.
    They also seem to take and make things weirdly personal. 

    Eldurian would be welcome to his observation if his claims were anywhere close to the truth but liking 2 posts out of the whole page is literally the opposite of what he is claiming.
    I find it odd because he was on a bit of a crusade about exposing anti-fanboys for ridiculous claims (ie the game not coming out at all) all while making a ridiculous claim himself... why would a person set themself up like that?
  • EldurianEldurian Member EpicPosts: 2,736
    Eldurian said:
    MadFrenchie said:

    My entire reasoning for entering the thread...
    I don't care about any of that. And I have shared your skepticism this game will deliver on all it's promises since they first started announcing stretch goals. I've been pleasantly surprised in that they have already implemented numerous features I did not assume would be there upon release but I am continuing to believe many of the features not already in-game (Which is most of the important ones) may not happen.

    I really only care that you replied to my statement saying that most of the anti-fanboys of this game remain exceptionally ignorant of what the game already has to offer. I'll continue to stand by that statement.
    That takes quite a "the ends justifies the means" kind of attitude.  Not sure I can agree, as they literally garnered those funds by advertising the extra features.  Without telling people they would be included, they wouldn't have received all that funding.  We all know backers aren't actually giving out of the goodness of their hearts, otherwise stretch goals and backer rewards wouldn't be needed and devs wouldn't make promises that literally increase their workload burden just to get the extra cash.
    I don't think I've ever played a game that didn't fail to deliver or underdeliver things they talked about doing at one point. Most of the actual stretch goals have been checked off. It's mainly things like farming that I really question if they will deliver on in the forseeable future.

    But yeah I don't really care that much if they fail to deliver on some of their more pie-in-the-sky promises because I had bought in before the first stretch goal was announced so things like your avatar being able to mimic your face is a bonus I never really expected.
    MadFrenchie
  • rpmcmurphyrpmcmurphy Member EpicPosts: 3,502
    Babuinix said:
    You can only fly one ship at a time and you an fly ship's that you don't own. Also Bigger ship doesn't mean better ship or advantage. Anyone who plays in the current alpha knows this.


    More expensive shps do typically mean better within their class though. We saw this with Arena Commander where the more expensive ship options would dominate, we also saw how the cash weapons from the VD store would give a huge advantage.

    A more recent test against a 600i
    • $35 - Aurora LN - 11.5s
    • $85 - Avenger Warlock (No emp) - 10.2s
    • $170 - Sabre - 6.4s
    • $180 - Superhornet - 5.0s
    Pretty damning if you ask me, pay more for better dps.
    The idea that ships that cost hundreds of dollars won't be superior to their cheaper counterparts shouldn't even have been questioned.  Again, this goes back to my posting SotA as an example: whales aren't doing this out of the goodness of their hearts.  They're paying the money for advantages, plain and simple.
    While it may be swimming against the tide, if someone buys thousands of dollars worth of game specialty stuff, I gotta feel they should get some advantage.   The cult marketing of the whole thing is a bit creepy though, especially for those folks who can't parse the very real risks.
    This is why crowdfunding a competitive multiplayer title is a terribad idea in general.
    And Chris did flat out say that this game would not be pay to win. That was one of the key tenets of the game. it's that which bothers me more than the actual paid-for advantages.
    If the CEO emphatically states something and then tramples all over it in their desire for more green, what are they but a sell out. Everything is up for being shat on if they have so little conviction in what they say.
  • EldurianEldurian Member EpicPosts: 2,736
    edited July 2018
    You will never understand the issue so long as your perspective is mired in the idea of traditional MMOs and not aim-based space sims. 

    Here is where people thinking "bigger ship = win" is entirely wrong.

    What is the point if an aircraft carrier? The real life prominence of them came about because fighters are more effective at sea than battleships per man, and per $$$. So why not just use nothing but fighters? Well because fighters have a much more limited range than an aircraft carrier or a battleship.

    So why is it that you would want a big ship when man for man and $ for $ smaller ships are better in every way in the SC universe as per existing content?

    Because larger ships can range deeper into space. That's why some of these ships come with fighter bays.

    So if you think you're going to "pay to win" by buying the biggest ship, and going up head to head against as many fighters as you have crew members, prepare to die unless you have an excellent crew, and those fighters have crap pilots. You are paying for something. Just not what you seem to think.
  • CazrielCazriel Member RarePosts: 419
    The only people happy with the state of SC are the popcorn dealers.  This game has provided more entertainment for more non-players than any game in recent memory.  It is literally the Godzilla of games, great to watch from afar. 
    kikoodutroa8Kyleran
  • rpmcmurphyrpmcmurphy Member EpicPosts: 3,502
    Eldurian said:
    You will never understand the issue so long as your perspective is mired in the idea of traditional MMOs and not aim-based space sims. 

    Here is where people thinking "bigger ship = win" is entirely wrong.

    What is the point if an aircraft carrier? The real life prominence of them came about because fighters are more effective at sea than battleships per man, and per $$$. So why not just use nothing but fighters? Well because fighters have a much more limited range than an aircraft carrier or a battleship.

    So why is it that you would want a big ship when man for man and $ for $ smaller ships are better in every way in the SC universe as per existing content?

    Because larger ships can range deeper into space. That's why some of these ships come with fighter bays.

    So if you think you're going to "pay to win" by buying the biggest ship, and going up head to head against as many fighters as you have crew members, prepare to die unless you have an excellent crew, and those fighters have crap pilots. You are paying for something. Just not what you seem to think.
    Well then, it's a good thing that I am not coming at this solely from a perspective mired in the idea of traditional MMOs and not aim based sims....
    SC is going to have traditional MMO stat features, the ship modules range in grades with stat increases per grade which is no different than traditional MMO stat increases, overclocking is akin to enchanting or gemming etc, the game is an amalgamation of traditional MMO design and aim based combat.

    More DPS is absolutely better regardless of whether this is an aim-based game or not, and as those stats showed the more you pay the better the dps you achieve within a certain class.

    With the absence of so many features might it not be rash to say that bigger is not better. We honestly don't know how these ships will perform once they get their full feature set, ie crew functionalities etc. All we know is what CIG have said they intend.
  • EldurianEldurian Member EpicPosts: 2,736
    edited July 2018
    And it has been said over and over that the stock equipment on all the ships in the cash store is not the high class stuff. That the need to replace equipment is a major balancing feature for those ships. It has also been said over and over that the different ships excel in certain areas and different ships bring different experiences.

    So acting like the bigger ships are going to be pay-to-win is absolutely inane when:

    A. That is not currently the case.
    B. Fighter bays, carriers and the need to refuel are all confirmed features.

    These is no reason to assume they will go back on what they said and make the game less realistic, and less balanced in the process other than an outright desire to see everything in this game turn out as bad as possible.

    Sorry boys, if you bought an Idriss to own the skies it's probably not going to happen, at least until you get out of fuel range of ships like the hornet and avenger.

  • MadFrenchieMadFrenchie Member LegendaryPosts: 8,505
    edited July 2018
    Eldurian said:
    And it has been said over and over that the stock equipment on all the ships in the cash store is not the high class stuff. That the need to replace equipment is a major balancing feature or those ships. It has also been said over and over that the different ships excel in certain areas and different ships bring different experiences.

    So acting like the bigger ships are going to be pay-to-win is absolutely inane when:

    A. That is not currently the case.
    B. Fighter bays, carriers and the need to refuel are all confirmed features.

    These is no reason to assume they will go back on what they said and make the game less realistic, and less balanced in the process other than an outright desire to see everything in this game turn out as bad as possible.

    Sorry boys, if you bought an Idriss to own the skies it's probably not going to happen, at least until you get out of fuel range of ships like the hornet and avenger.

    As Bacon and I discussed, not having one end-all be-all ship doesn't absolve them of selling more effective role ships for more cash.

    He didn't even argue against the case that more expensive fighters had better stats than cheaper ones for the role.  And in a skill-based game, the idea that you can pay for ships with better ratings is no better than traditional tab-target MMORPG.  Battlefront 2 should be ample evidence to support that notion.

    As I mentioned, trying to completely ignore the fact that tiered ship purchases absolutely do follow "more expensive --> better" for each individual role is akin to saying water won't burn you because it's not boiling.  It's not the most egregious situation, but it isn't absolved just because it could be worse.

    image
  • EldurianEldurian Member EpicPosts: 2,736
    edited July 2018
    The thing is better stats does not = better ship in an aim based fighter sim.

    I'll give you an example. Per stats the best ship in Freelancer was the titan. Most hitpoints etc. It was statistically superior to every other ship.

    Only newbs flew titans. On vanilla servers nearly every single veteran pilot flew the Eagle despite it being only the 3rd best ship in the game both in price and statistically. Why?

    Smaller hitbox, tighter turning radius. Something the eagle shares in common to some of the cheaper fighters in Star Citizen like the aurora and avenger compared to pricier ones like the hornet.

    I should know. I own the super hornet which I believe is the heaviest fighter and is for sure one of the priciest fully-combat focused fighters, and it certainly does not let me just plow through everything effortlessly. I stand no chance against the people who have been playing this game hardcore the whole time. I don't care what they choose fly. Until I invest the time to develop my aiming and dodging techniques in Star Citizen to a level I am veteran status myself, they are going to beat me. Period. I'm actually a bit afraid I will have to downgrade to a ship like an avenger to really master dogfighting in SC.

    Really this game revolves around skill and tactics. There is absolutely no room to win against a good pilot as a swiper who isn't skilled. There is absolutely no room to win against a good pilot as a no-lifer who isn't skilled. The better player is generally going to win. Just like in Freelancer.
This discussion has been closed.