• An old favorite feature returns: Q&ERA is back! This time we'll be collecting questions for Remedy Entertainment, makers of Max Payne, Alan Wake, Quantum Break, and Control. Members can submit questions for the next 15 hours, 13 minutes, 1 second. Submissions will close on Dec 12, 2019 at 12:00 AM.

Star Citizen has now raised over 250 million dollars

marzoo

Member
Jun 1, 2018
2,881
Man what the hell... The MMO portion is what Im interested in. Does it REALLY still have no aimed release date? What is Squadron 42?


Jesus Im so glad I only put money on Camelot Unchained and passed on this one so far. I don't feel like either of them will launch in a window that I will care about.
You can play the MMO right now, they have been releasing huge content patches every 3 months for the past 2 years
 

FaceHugger

Member
Oct 27, 2017
8,844
Man what the hell... The MMO portion is what Im interested in. Does it REALLY still have no aimed release date? What is Squadron 42?


Jesus Im so glad I only put money on Camelot Unchained and passed on this one so far. I don't feel like either of them will launch in a window that I will care about.

You can play it now for $20 last I checked, on sale (it's usually $45) and that will give you access to the full game when released. It looks impressive but is still buggy, needs polish on just about everything including animation and the choice of dialog and such (it all feels very lifeless storywise), etc. It's pretty cool for what there is, though. I don't think it's worth paying $20 to alpha test for it, though. I got in way back in the original Kickstarter for cheap to get it all.
 

fanboi

The Fallen
Oct 25, 2017
4,040
Sweden
Tbf I expect server meshing v1 (announced for ~mid to end 2020) to be called beta 1.0
I'd expect release 1.0 to be when most star systems are in, server meshing and SSOCS are more or less final and the game is less buggy, which could definitely take another 2 to 3 years, maybe even a bit more.

But I'm absolutely happy to beta test for them, since it's already lots of fun!
Yeah, if they release v1.0 regarding server meshing and can promise no wipes anymore, I think you are correct. At least that would bring me in and buy into the game.
 

Kwigo

Avenger
Oct 27, 2017
3,135
Yeah, if they release v1.0 regarding server meshing and can promise no wipes anymore, I think you are correct. At least that would bring me in and buy into the game.
It'll be interesting to look at the roadmap starting around 3.9 as meshing might be coming with 4.0
Or at least I hope so :D
 
Oct 31, 2017
2,901
But I'm absolutely happy to beta test for them, since it's already lots of fun!
That's part of what confuses me.
I've been loosely following this game since their original pitch. At some point I even wrote it off as something that was "Never going to work".
Hell, I even actively disliked some of my past hand-ons with the game because it was honestly a disaster on a technical level. Even my new (back then) PC could barely get a handful of fps out of it and nothing was working yet.
Fast forward this Autumn, I finally tried it once again (I thnk the Digital Foundry video was probably what convinced me, plus a couple of friends playing it) and I was incredibly surprised about how much it improved. To the point that I jumped in for the first time and bought a basic package with a Mustang Alpha.
The game still has some evident limitations in the variety of its computer generated content but even in this primitive form is already impressive and when everything works (which is admittedly a bit of a lottery) it already feels incredible and unlike any other thing I've played before.

This video I crossed yesterday basically summarizes my own impressions:



Yet somehow exactly now that that the game is actually assuming a decent shape and you can start to see some of the major goals in sight, a lot of people are becoming increasingly dismissive of it instead of giving it a fair chance.
It's not just the mockery about it "being in development for far too long", either.
There's an ongoing avalanche of baseless assumptions like "Everyone who's enjoying this must be a whale who smoked hundred of dollars in it" or "You are playing it? Let me tell you without any first-hand experience of how the game works why it will be a pay to win even if I don't have a clue of what I'm talking about".
 

Kwigo

Avenger
Oct 27, 2017
3,135
Yet somehow exactly now that that the game is actually taking a decent shape and you can start to see some of the major goals in sight, people are becoming increasingly dismissive of it.
Yeah that's so weird. I got a starter package about 2 years ago to see what the alpha looks like, and I must say that I had a pretty pessimistic opinion on it.
The DF video hooked me and I jumped back in to see if it really got that much better, and now I'm just as excited as I was as a kid watching star wars for the first time ! And that's just it, this game is all I ever wanted, to live adventures in space. Of course it's still clunky and far from complete, but it's actually playable and you start to see how it's shaping up to become one of the best things ever.
 

Exede

Member
Feb 8, 2019
448
I really wanna get into this game. Loved Wing Commander, Freespace, Elite etc. But all i read about the possibilitys of the game sounds so overwhelming. This starts with buying the game alone, whats the best bundle, is the 48€ ship bundle enough, why is it 48€ but 45$. So many questions.
 

FaceHugger

Member
Oct 27, 2017
8,844
I really wanna get into this game. Loved Wing Commander, Freespace, Elite etc. But all i read about the possibilitys of the game sounds so overwhelming. This starts with buying the game alone, whats the best bundle, is the 48€ ship bundle enough, why is it 48€ but 45$. So many questions.
If you're getting it for the first time the more expensive bundle is on sale last I checked, so it's only about $10 more and nets you in-game currency and other things. As far as the ships compare I don't know, I just check in once a month or so and test updates and new places, things like that. I've barely delved into the guts of the game. And it being so early in alpha things will probably change in that regard anyway.
 
Oct 31, 2017
2,901
I really wanna get into this game. Loved Wing Commander, Freespace, Elite etc. But all i read about the possibilitys of the game sounds so overwhelming. This starts with buying the game alone, whats the best bundle, is the 48€ ship bundle enough, why is it 48€ but 45$. So many questions.
If you are so unsure about liking what it offers, the best thing would be to just try it for free during one of their free events.
Like the one currently going on, except it's a bit late since it started 10 days ago and it's now ending (December 5th).
 
Last edited:

jman2050

Avenger
Oct 25, 2017
2,397
I disagree with the idea that what they currently have cannot be considered substantial because of their pitch to have 100 systems. The only other game that even sorta kind of comes close is Elite Dangerous, and even then it doesn’t really feel like it.

I’m not a fan of their pricing model, I’m not a fan of how they communicated their development, and it’s perfectly valid for people to have complaints about the game.


I take issue with is this prevailing sentiment that Star Citizen has now made $250 million in backing and has done fuck all with it. The technology behind this game is not anywhere else. It (from what I’ve read and understand) is the first of its kind on a such a massive scale. Yet somehow the idea that it is a scam just keeps being pushed. I remember when people said this game would be cancelled and the money never refunded EVERY SINGLE YEAR after it was first announced.

And yet. Here we are. Multiple worlds. A Blade Runner Star Wars inspired city world. Multiple Star Ports. Fully fleshed our ships with individual mechanics. And it keeps going.

If that’s not substantial, then clearly I need to recalibrate myself.
There's still no game here.

There's a word for what they've done so far: it's a tech demo. A very expensive and highly publicized tech demo, but still a tech demo nonetheless.

They have nothing even remotely approaching what could be considered even the skeleton of a complete product.
 

Hobbes

Incident Manager
Verified
Oct 27, 2017
4,274
United States
There's still no game here.

There's a word for what they've done so far: it's a tech demo. A very expensive and highly publicized tech demo, but still a tech demo nonetheless.

They have nothing even remotely approaching what could be considered even the skeleton of a complete product.
Another tired, ignorant take.
 

Kwigo

Avenger
Oct 27, 2017
3,135
Oh, thats nice. Will try it out when the next free event hits. Thanks
You still have 2 days to try it out :) That should be quite enough to see if it's something you might like and want to get a starter pack right now.
Maybe ask in the community thread for someone to show you around a bit, since it's quite overwhelming when you start. People there can also show you some bigger ships, some missions, talk about what's coming with the next patch, and so on. Also, they're very nice when you're not trolling :)
 

Exede

Member
Feb 8, 2019
448
You still have 2 days to try it out :) That should be quite enough to see if it's something you might like and want to get a starter pack right now.
Maybe ask in the community thread for someone to show you around a bit, since it's quite overwhelming when you start. People there can also show you some bigger ships, some missions, talk about what's coming with the next patch, and so on. Also, they're very nice when you're not trolling :)
Will do, thanks for pointing me to the right direction.
 

Flutter

Member
Oct 25, 2017
6,435
Look, I'm not going to disregard people having fun in Star Citizen, but jman2050 is right.

It's still in Alpha, and they haven't added any notable missions.

As it stands at the moment, I wont disregard at people looking at it as a tech demo.

edit: Fucking hell, googling about the features and missions in Star Citizen led me to this piece of gem in 2015;



"I don't want to give you dates," Roberts said while standing on a stage erected beneath a retired Concorde supersonic jetliner at the Manchester Airport. "Everyone gives me shit for giving you dates, but let me say it's in the near future.

"We're not very far away from being content and functionality complete," he said. "That will be in the near future, by which I mean inside... soon."
 
Last edited:

Ravio-li

Member
Dec 24, 2018
208
There's still no game here.

There's a word for what they've done so far: it's a tech demo. A very expensive and highly publicized tech demo, but still a tech demo nonetheless.

They have nothing even remotely approaching what could be considered even the skeleton of a complete product.
Oh, there IS a skeleton of a game. The issue is just that the game has zero enjoyable content and what little there only works sometimes. The game kinda works as a toy instead of a game. Here are some pretty, expensive spaceships with vast, good looking enviroments. If you can let your imagination run wild with that (ideally with other people) then, yeah, you can have a good time with that.

But actually PLAYING that thing, in the state that it is now... no, nope. Don't. Tbf, some issues will disappear in the near future, like having to do the 15 minute trip without anything to do to arccorp MULTIPLE times. There will be respawnpoints around every planet (&moon?) soon. SSOCS has the potential to fix a lot of wierd NPC behaviour, that makes the game currently a bit laughable and i'm sure they will eventually manage to not let players clip into planets or level geometry.

Still not sure if the game is actually enjoyable then. Some basic stuff like... interacting with things feels arkward and sluggish. And soo much of this game consists of waiting, with alot of it done by design. Like, maybe Squadron won't have that and be actually enjoyable, hard to tell.
 

xyla

Member
Oct 27, 2017
2,284
Germany
It's supposed to be a virtual world of unparalleled depth. In actual fact it's a really buggy tech demo with a few hours of placeholder content.

The list of features the full game is supposed to have is orders of magnitude larger than what exists. Thus simple maths show that if it took ~$300 million and 7 years to get the tech demo, a full game would cost several billion and several decades.
I bet this has been adressed in this thread a few times already:

  • It took years to settle on the scope of the project (original kickstarter is =/= Star Citizen when it comes to planning, budget and scope)
  • It took years to build a steady team of people to work on the project (one bigger team even split a few years ago)
  • It took years to build the engine
  • It took years to develop an interconnected web of systems that can be used from now on for all of the development of both Star Citizen and Squadron 42
The game development was very unusual up to this point and pretty hard to figure out. At the same time it was extremely public and open.
They teams and their head figure didn't always pick the right way to present something or even the right path at all, but it's so fascinating to follow this project over the year.

I'm pretty sure, two games will come out of this project and they might even be good, but if even one of them manages to live up to 50% of the concept, we are in for an absolute treat.
And next year is an important one. Potentially the launch of Squadron 42 (we'll see) and 4.0 for the online part where most of the server and game technology should be in place.
 
Oct 25, 2017
1,874
Is this game done yet?🙄

I feel like I've been hearing about it forever but it's not completed and I just want to spend money on the full game. I'm not with the buying in parts...
 

fanboi

The Fallen
Oct 25, 2017
4,040
Sweden
That's part of what confuses me.
I've been loosely following this game since their original pitch. At some point I even wrote it off as something that was "Never going to work".
Hell, I even actively disliked some of my past hand-ons with the game because it was honestly a disaster on a technical level. Even my new (back then) PC could barely get a handful of fps out of it and nothing was working yet.
Fast forward this Autumn, I finally tried it once again (I thnk the Digital Foundry video was probably what convinced me, plus a couple of friends playing it) and I was incredibly surprised about how much it improved. To the point that I jumped in for the first time and bought a basic package with a Mustang Alpha.
The game still has some evident limitations in the variety of its computer generated content but even in this primitive form is already impressive and when everything works (which is admittedly a bit of a lottery) it already feels incredible and unlike any other thing I've played before.

This video I crossed yesterday basically summarizes my own impressions:



Yet somehow exactly now that that the game is actually assuming a decent shape and you can start to see some of the major goals in sight, a lot of people are becoming increasingly dismissive of it instead of giving it a fair chance.
It's not just the mockery about it "being in development for far too long", either.
There's an ongoing avalanche of baseless assumptions like "Everyone who's enjoying this must be a whale who smoked hundred of dollars in it" or "You are playing it? Let me tell you without any first-hand experience of how the game works why it will be a pay to win even if I don't have a clue of what I'm talking about".
This is a great video now that I am done with it.

The quote (something like it atleast): "A buggy mess that is incredible" is an apt comment.
 
Oct 31, 2017
2,901
Is this game done yet?🙄

I feel like I've been hearing about it forever but it's not completed and I just want to spend money on the full game. I'm not with the buying in parts...
If you actually cared to any degree about getting an answer you would pay attention to what was already posted in this very thread, at very least.
But let's be honest. You just didn't want to miss your chance for a smug drive-by.
 

MechaBreaker

Member
Jun 26, 2018
2,342
So I'm looking at the options for getting into star citizen and the cheaper $45 option has a bullet point that says "3 month's insurance", could someone explain what that means to me? The site doesn't seem to explain it.
 

Dussck

Member
Oct 27, 2017
1,450
The Netherlands
I saw on the development roadmap that 'ship docking into spacestations' is scheduled to release in Q2 2020.

Seems like a rather basic element for a space sim to me, but okay, in that rate I'll check back in somewhere around Q4 2023 then..
 

Kwigo

Avenger
Oct 27, 2017
3,135
So I'm looking at the options for getting into star citizen and the cheaper $45 option has a bullet point that says "3 month's insurance", could someone explain what that means to me? The site doesn't seem to explain it.
Only true for release 1.0 : if someone blows up your ship, you get a new one. This insurance lasts 3 months (real life time) and can be extended with money you earn in the game.
Right now, insurance isn't in the game since it's still in alpha and it would be unfair if your ship gets destroyed because of a glitch.

Also, until the 5th of december, you get 10 year insurance since there's a big event going on.

Seems like a rather basic element for a space sim to me
It really isn't.
 
Oct 31, 2017
2,901
I saw on the development roadmap that 'ship docking into spacestations' is scheduled to release in Q2 2020.

Seems like a rather basic element for a space sim to me, but okay, in that rate I'll check back in somewhere around Q4 2023 then..
I'ts probably because you don't understand what they mean with it.
If we are talking about just "landing on space stations" (and planets) that's already been in the game for some time.
Docking is a far more complex thing related to capital ships physically locking to space stations in some specific ways (frankly something most players won't even need to bother with).

Insurance means that every time your ship gets destroyer you'll be able to ask for a new one for free. Supposedly when your insurance will run out you'll need to pay in-game currency (it's assumed to be a percentage of the ship's cost itself) to renew it or be at risk of PERMANENTLY losing a ship.
We don't know the details about the fine tuning of this at release, but as a general principle it's basically supposed to be a small but constant money sink in the background for active players.
 

Kwigo

Avenger
Oct 27, 2017
3,135
I'ts probably because you don't understand what they mean with it.
If we are talking about just "landing on space stations" (and planets) that's already been in the game for some time.
Docking is a far more complex thing related to capital ships physically locking to space stations in some specific ways (frankly something most players won't even need to bother with).
The big issue with docking is actually related to the server meshing technology. Basically every server will be allocated to specific XYZ coordinates in the game universe. When you dock a ship to another ship, it's already really complex since you need to take care of differences in atmosphere between the two and other physical properties as well as simply not ruining the hitboxes. But what happens when the two ships go from server 1 to server 2? You need to transfer all the data seamlessly without losing performance and such.

I'd like to see anyone on this board come up with an easy solution to problems like those, which are omnipresent in a game as complex as SC.

Once this game is "complete" (which it never really will be since it's a live game), RSI will have accomplished a huge feat of software engineering.
 
Oct 25, 2017
1,874
If you actually cared to any degree about getting an answer you would pay attention to what was already posted in this very thread, at very least.
But let's be honest. You just didn't want to miss your chance for a smug drive-by.
Wait....am I supposed to pay attention to the thread or comment on the article of the OP? Pick one sir. You seem oddly defensive and commented like a shit stain to a genuine question about a game that I have yet to get a complete article saying it's done.
 

Kwigo

Avenger
Oct 27, 2017
3,135
Well, I mean, they are already basically building up Lumberyard for Amazon along the way.
Oh it already is quite impressive, seeing how they've been basically building a whole universe with physical properties and such. I'm just saying that once all the pieces fall into place, it's something that software engineers/game devs might wanna study because of how impressive and complex it is.
 
Oct 26, 2017
1,047
250million? Nice, hell I hope the whales are good for another 250. If I had "fuck you" money I'd be in the monocle club, not so much for the actual ships, just to pitch in. Is their funding model predatory? I'm not sure I buy it. It seems a far cry from phone games designed to get kids to buy stuff on mom's credit card without even knowing it.

Is it pay to win? Not sure I buy that either. Compared to COD RNG loot boxes with overpowered weapons hidden among them? Having one percenters on day one really isn't going to bother me. Griefing them or getting griefed by them is part of the fun of this kind of game. It's not round based competitive multiplayer. Besides half the fun of this game should be the grind from your starter package all the way up to your own small fleet or whatever. I kind of think the whales are robbing themselves a little.

The ambition is the appeal. The Quanta stuff was pretty cool. Compare that to whatever the hell is going on with Elite Dangerous's background simulation. Speaking of Elite, despite the billions of planets, by the time you land on your third one you realize that yeah they're basically all the same. SC's procedural tech combined with the handcrafted stuff is actually really shaping up from what I've seen.

I was never on board with Star Citizen for a 100% guarantee of a pretty decent game. If it's a 10% chance at the game I dreamed I would eventually be playing back in my Wing Commander Privateer days, I'd say it's more than worth it. I have no idea what the "think of how many AAA games this could have funded" crowd is on about. Don't worry there will still be plenty of the same old shit but with slightly better graphics in the AAA space no matter what happens with Chris Roberts - Most Incompetent Project Manager (Sol System)
 

noyram23

The Fallen
Oct 25, 2017
6,969
At least they didn't sell jpeg ships again last CitizenCon ...

I kid, I hope they release the full game eventually since that's a lot of money from fans.
 

aevanhoe

Member
Aug 28, 2018
1,362
  • It took years to build the engine
  • It took years to develop an interconnected web of systems that can be used from now on for all of the development of both Star Citizen and Squadron 42
Didn’t they use Cryengine, later Lumberyard? Also, many games take years to develop interconnected web of systems, so I don’t see how SC is different in this regard.
 

fanboi

The Fallen
Oct 25, 2017
4,040
Sweden
Didn’t they use Cryengine, later Lumberyard? Also, many games take years to develop interconnected web of systems, so I don’t see how SC is different in this regard.
Yeah they used Cryengine, which now is something totally different.

While true, the interconnected system in SC is normally much more advance, making it harder to connect em.
 

Dussck

Member
Oct 27, 2017
1,450
The Netherlands
I'ts probably because you don't understand what they mean with it.
If we are talking about just "landing on space stations" (and planets) that's already been in the game for some time.
Docking is a far more complex thing related to capital ships physically locking to space stations in some specific ways (frankly something most players won't even need to bother with).
True. And I must admit it's still pretty incredible what they've built so far. Especially in terms of assets and the details of them.
 

Kwigo

Avenger
Oct 27, 2017
3,135
Didn’t they use Cryengine, later Lumberyard? Also, many games take years to develop interconnected web of systems, so I don’t see how SC is different in this regard.
How many games are using different types of atmosphere, physics, and so on?
There a difference in hardcoding a Y position modifier for jumping and having it depending on the physical properties of your current position.
 

Watership

Member
Oct 27, 2017
835
It's starting to shape up pretty good too, looks like it's actually going to deliver what the fans wanted(myself included).
I'm sure there are some that are getting what they wanted, but I think most people excited for the original announcement back in 2012 would have liked a completed Squadron 42 campaign by now.
 

Darkstorne

Member
Oct 26, 2017
2,088
England
That's part of what confuses me.
I've been loosely following this game since their original pitch. At some point I even wrote it off as something that was "Never going to work".
Hell, I even actively disliked some of my past hand-ons with the game because it was honestly a disaster on a technical level. Even my new (back then) PC could barely get a handful of fps out of it and nothing was working yet.
Fast forward this Autumn, I finally tried it once again (I thnk the Digital Foundry video was probably what convinced me, plus a couple of friends playing it) and I was incredibly surprised about how much it improved. To the point that I jumped in for the first time and bought a basic package with a Mustang Alpha.
The game still has some evident limitations in the variety of its computer generated content but even in this primitive form is already impressive and when everything works (which is admittedly a bit of a lottery) it already feels incredible and unlike any other thing I've played before.

This video I crossed yesterday basically summarizes my own impressions:



Yet somehow exactly now that that the game is actually assuming a decent shape and you can start to see some of the major goals in sight, a lot of people are becoming increasingly dismissive of it instead of giving it a fair chance.
It's not just the mockery about it "being in development for far too long", either.
There's an ongoing avalanche of baseless assumptions like "Everyone who's enjoying this must be a whale who smoked hundred of dollars in it" or "You are playing it? Let me tell you without any first-hand experience of how the game works why it will be a pay to win even if I don't have a clue of what I'm talking about".
This is a great video. It's a really fair analysis of the current state of the game, and hard to disagree with him on most points. Especially when he says they get their priorities a bit messed up (FOIP as a ground-breaking social system, but grouping mechanics to play with friends are so archaic).

Hopefully the entire UI/UX is due a complete overhaul though. I've always hated the "hold F to enter interaction mode" thing with a passion. It's so awful. I'm not sure why they're trying to reinvent the wheel on this one when object and NPC interaction has been pretty much standardised to a fine sheen in video games these days. Holding F while hovering over an object/NPC provides a floating list of options in a giant hideous font, and you then have to "look" at the list option you want to select, which frequently means looking away from the object the list is attached to in order to reach it, which makes the entire list disappear before you can select your action. And weird things like trying to choose where to place a box you're carrying, but your character is bizarrely holding the box up in front of their face so you can't see anything. And even with smaller items like a mug, if you want to put it down you can't just press a button you have to hold F, look down to your mug, waggle your head to the "place" list option when it pops up and hope it's close enough to the mug not to vanish, then release F, waggle your head to the place you want to put it, then press F again. Uuuugggghhhh! Makes you wonder if they hired Bioware's UI team and set them the challenge of designing something even more awful than they usually do =P

Their interactive terminals are amazing though (requesting ships brought to docking bays, shopping terminals etc) so I have faith that someone on the team will eventually take this "hold F" system out back and put it out of its misery. In which case we'll return to only using it to pay respects.
 
Oct 31, 2017
2,901
The UI *is* confirmed to be under heavy rework already.
The issue is that we have no guarantee the new one replacing this will be significantly better until they'll be a bit more clear on what they are planning to do, instead of just dismissing the topic with a handwave and a "Oh yeah, sure. Working on it".
 

Darkstorne

Member
Oct 26, 2017
2,088
England
The UI *is* confirmed to be under heavy rework already.
The issue is that we have no guarantee the new one replacing this will be significantly better until they'll be a bit more clear on what they are planning to do, instead of just dismissing the topic with a handwave and a "Oh yeah, sure. Working on it".
Phew. Even their latest CitizenCon demo couldn't hide how bad it is. This part was awkward as hell (55m08s). I'll never understand how this sort of interaction mode made it beyond the whiteboard, let alone getting into the game as a default system for years:

 
Oct 31, 2017
2,901
We already established that few games did but they don't count for reasons.

Not to mention that we still don't know how much Star Citizen actually COSTED so far, only how much it made.
Sure, both will turn out to be the same thing IF they run out of money in the next three-to-six months I guess.

Phew. Even their latest CitizenCon demo couldn't hide how bad it is. This part was awkward as hell (55m08s).
Almost as awkward as the faked "stealth" session with the devs pretending to be careful while NPCs weren't actually reacting to shit.