• Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
  • We have made minor adjustments to how the search bar works on ResetEra. You can read about the changes here.

Nick C

Member
Oct 25, 2017
491
MT
People dont pay 160+ millon to play SC, people can pay basic gamepack more cheap than RDR2 or Cyberpunk when they launch, nobody is forcing to pay more than the minimun, i wanna pay now 45$ for Cyberpunk.

You are wrong speaking of "their original goal", because the scope change drasticaly the last years, in the original goal we cant go to a planet/moon and land whenever i want, now i can do it, this is a masssive change in the gameplay base and need to be done in the skeleton of the game before launch, you can see how games like Elite Dangerous cant do anything now like FPS without years of rework because they cant introduce this gameplay before.

One thing you need to know, they are gonna release 2 games, in 8 years of development we surely have Squadron 42 out and a big part of the MMO in hands of the baker testing and improving the game, if you follow the roadmap in the official web you can see how the patch is showing so much content for the game in the next months, think about 2-3 patchs more and maybe you can see how the game would have this feeling of "beta" gameplay.
ZSGmyQr.jpg


The mayority of this roadmap is getting in date, when this content is out what is the next "bullshit" of the haters?




I dont see the problem in add more gameplay base in the big universe, we are in the 6º year of development, now is the time to add all the basic mechanics, games like Cyberpunk or RDR2 do the same before launch, and you maybe think this not gonna be finish but for SQ42 the content was cut some months ago and now they are polish the base gameplay, the Universe MMO can add more content in the next 1-2 year of development easy because is the normal time for develop one of the biggest MMO ever seen in the industry.
I'm certain you're unaware of how bad this is, otherwise you wouldn't be propping it up as a sign of strength for the project. When it was announced it was closer to release than it is now. 6 years on and they barely have any work done. It looks like they've been designing ships in that time and put together the minimal acceptable product for most backers to be fine with, if this thread is anything to go by.

I wouldn't go so far as to call this a scam, it's clear they're doing their best, but I would call it mismanaged and it will either never release or release and be so scaled back as to disappoint many members of the community. Every time they add a new ship they add new mechanics, new "jobs". They then have to go back to make sure that it can fit into their core design. This increases workload and is an active hindrance to the development. I'm nearly certain they've run out of money or are close to it, at the very least. I don't see any reson to keep putting things up for sale otherwise. Those sales are effectively another round of funding. Hell, they're at 475 employees now. That's ~$24M USD annually in just basic payroll at $50k per person. That's not including the price of senior or board member salaries. That's not including studio overhead, which is 2 divisions and 4 subsidiaries, for stuff like toilet paper and rent. That's not including things like insurance for each employee. Out of $189M USD funding.

And please, stop comparing this to Red Dead 2 or Cyberpunk. It's dishonest. The devs of those games are developing those games independently of their communities. They're not using them as personal coffers. Cyberpunk could take 15 years to release but CD Projekt Red has never sold in-game items to help finance the game. They're working on a budget, whereas these devs are only limited by the amount of money their fanbase is willing to spend. Which, if history is anything to go by, is a metric fucktonne. CDPR knows what they have at all times. At this point CIG seems to have limitless funding, as long as they keep pumping out new ships and adding more development.

Every once in a while one of these threads pop up and I remember I backed this for the single player game like 3-4 years ago. Oh well.
Don't feel bad. I got in on the early rounds of Fortnite, way before Battle Royale was a thing. I have zero interest in BR.
 

Polyh3dron

Prophet of Regret
Banned
Oct 25, 2017
9,860
I backed this game with about $200 back at the initial announcement. Obama hadn't even been re-elected for his 2nd term back then I don't think.

After watching that Sunk Cost Galaxy video series it kinda has me wishing I didn't. Stopped paying attention to development a few years back but it totally seems like there has been way too much feature creep.

TBH I was only ever hoping for Squadron 42 to come out and be really really good, like the Wing Commander games I was engrossed by as a kid.
 
Last edited:

sandweed

Member
May 8, 2018
92
The main thing is, this entire thing has never been done before. No one has ever attempted to make a game of this scale at this production value, and especially not without publisher funding.

And I don't really think calling something a scam because they don't understand something is something someone on ResetEra should be proud of.

I don't understand this, what are they doing that has never been done before? All I see is a big cryengine map and a 5v5 team FPS mode.
 

brandonbrb

Banned
Nov 7, 2017
115
I'm certain you're unaware of how bad this is, otherwise you wouldn't be propping it up as a sign of strength for the project. When it was announced it was closer to release than it is now. 6 years on and they barely have any work done. It looks like they've been designing ships in that time and put together the minimal acceptable product for most backers to be fine with, if this thread is anything to go by.

I wouldn't go so far as to call this a scam, it's clear they're doing their best, but I would call it mismanaged and it will either never release or release and be so scaled back as to disappoint many members of the community. Every time they add a new ship they add new mechanics, new "jobs". They then have to go back to make sure that it can fit into their core design. This increases workload and is an active hindrance to the development. I'm nearly certain they've run out of money or are close to it, at the very least. I don't see any reson to keep putting things up for sale otherwise. Those sales are effectively another round of funding. Hell, they're at 475 employees now. That's ~$24M USD annually in just basic payroll at $50k per person. That's not including the price of senior or board member salaries. That's not including studio overhead, which is 2 divisions and 4 subsidiaries, for stuff like toilet paper and rent. That's not including things like insurance for each employee. Out of $189M USD funding.

And please, stop comparing this to Red Dead 2 or Cyberpunk. It's dishonest. The devs of those games are developing those games independently of their communities. They're not using them as personal coffers. Cyberpunk could take 15 years to release but CD Projekt Red has never sold in-game items to help finance the game. They're working on a budget, whereas these devs are only limited by the amount of money their fanbase is willing to spend. Which, if history is anything to go by, is a metric fucktonne. CDPR knows what they have at all times. At this point CIG seems to have limitless funding, as long as they keep pumping out new ships and adding more development.


Don't feel bad. I got in on the early rounds of Fortnite, way before Battle Royale was a thing. I have zero interest in BR.

LOL, are you follow the development? how do you say "they barely have any work done".... we are playing with procedurals moons, items 2.0, 64 bits for larger distances, grids with different gravity in movement, Subsumpbtion(I.A management), persistence, party in servers 50 people, cargo/mining/selling......

They are doing the base of the game, this cost normally YEARS in others games, why in Star Citizen could be done in 2-3 years? we are close to other milestone like Object streaming container or server mesh in the next patchs, this is huge advance in the development of the game, you normaly dont see test with hundreds of player like SC do all the time, the game is improve so much in network or fixing bugs, you can't imagine how helpfull is this for the future game.

Is so funny how do you think they have run out of money, they have the accounts public, they have important banks in UK behind CiG because is healthy company...and you talk about run out of money...

Squadron 42 is close to finish, the content is closed and now is polishing, dont forget CiG is doing 2 games, not one.
 

LiK

Member
Oct 25, 2017
32,177
I'm sure some backers have been enjoying the demos from what I read in here but when is the full game out anyway?
 

Mechaplum

Enlightened
Member
Oct 26, 2017
18,953
JP
LOL, are you follow the development? how do you say "they barely have any work done".... we are playing with procedurals moons, items 2.0, 64 bits for larger distances, grids with different gravity in movement, Subsumpbtion(I.A management), persistence, party in servers 50 people, cargo/mining/selling......

They are doing the base of the game, this cost normally YEARS in others games, why in Star Citizen could be done in 2-3 years? we are close to other milestone like Object streaming container or server mesh in the next patchs, this is huge advance in the development of the game, you normaly dont see test with hundreds of player like SC do all the time, the game is improve so much in network or fixing bugs, you can't imagine how helpfull is this for the future game.

Is so funny how do you think they have run out of money, they have the accounts public, they have important banks in UK behind CiG because is healthy company...and you talk about run out of money...

Squadron 42 is close to finish, the content is closed and now is polishing, dont forget CiG is doing 2 games, not one.

So when is S42 slated for?
 

Manu

Banned
Oct 27, 2017
17,191
Buenos Aires, Argentina
LOL, are you follow the development? how do you say "they barely have any work done".... we are playing with procedurals moons, items 2.0, 64 bits for larger distances, grids with different gravity in movement, Subsumpbtion(I.A management), persistence, party in servers 50 people, cargo/mining/selling......

They are doing the base of the game, this cost normally YEARS in others games, why in Star Citizen could be done in 2-3 years? we are close to other milestone like Object streaming container or server mesh in the next patchs, this is huge advance in the development of the game, you normaly dont see test with hundreds of player like SC do all the time, the game is improve so much in network or fixing bugs, you can't imagine how helpfull is this for the future game.

Is so funny how do you think they have run out of money, they have the accounts public, they have important banks in UK behind CiG because is healthy company...and you talk about run out of money...

Squadron 42 is close to finish, the content is closed and now is polishing, dont forget CiG is doing 2 games, not one.
lol, you're getting breadcrumbs of a game and think things are going fine.

Read what you posted again. How far along into production would you say the game is? 5% complete seems generous.
 

Parsnip

Member
Oct 25, 2017
3,921
Finland
Games take a long time to make even under the best of conditions, 6 years is not really all that long.
I hope they pull through in the end.


Also any article sourcing Derek Smart in anything ever is a god damn joke.
 

Nick C

Member
Oct 25, 2017
491
MT
LOL, are you follow the development? how do you say "they barely have any work done".... we are playing with procedurals moons, items 2.0, 64 bits for larger distances, grids with different gravity in movement, Subsumpbtion(I.A management), persistence, party in servers 50 people, cargo/mining/selling......

They are doing the base of the game, this cost normally YEARS in others games, why in Star Citizen could be done in 2-3 years? we are close to other milestone like Object streaming container or server mesh in the next patchs, this is huge advance in the development of the game, you normaly dont see test with hundreds of player like SC do all the time, the game is improve so much in network or fixing bugs, you can't imagine how helpfull is this for the future game.

Is so funny how do you think they have run out of money, they have the accounts public, they have important banks in UK behind CiG because is healthy company...and you talk about run out of money...

Squadron 42 is close to finish, the content is closed and now is polishing, dont forget CiG is doing 2 games, not one.
Your replies make it clear you are beyond reason. I also suspect that you are willfully looking over arguments or arguing around them because you'd rather argue in bad faith than admit that CIG are in the wrong.

They may have a lot of work done but do you see the percentage of work done on that roadmap you supplied? It's nothing complared to the scope of the game they want to make. Turnover time for a lot of games today is in the 2-3 year ballpark. CIG have had 6 years to get these games out the door. Squadron 42 is the less ambitious of the two and it still hasn't seen a release.

Banks are backing this game beacause it has had just under $200M USD given to it with barely anything to show for it. You think any financial institutions are going to stick around when the well of the playerbase is so poisoned that they decide that enough is enough? Those banks will be coming for that money. It's a debt that needs to be paid back. That's another bill on top of what I mentioned in my previous post. They wouldn't have gone to the banks in the first place if they didn't need the money.

I don't understand how you see the arguments you're making in favor of these studios as helping you in any way.
What are they pulling through? What is the goal? It will never end.
This is excatly what I'm trying to say. Every time they add a new ship and ask for more money they move the goalpost that much further back.

CIG and their backers are toxic to each other. The more the backers give, the more CIG ask for. The more CIG ask for, the more the backers give. This is a toxic relationship. They are each others' worst enemy.
 

Parsnip

Member
Oct 25, 2017
3,921
Finland
What are they pulling through? What is the goal? It will never end.
No idea, I barely follow it. Squadron 42 looks cool and it seems like its scope is much more manageable.
With Star Citizen it just feels like they need to have a full feature freeze at some point, release a thing and then keep adding more stuff after the fact. It's like the perfect candidate for the GaaS model if they can just get it out of the door at some point.


Calling it a scam is a bit much.
 

Deleted member 4452

User requested account closure
Banned
Oct 25, 2017
2,377
I feel like this could be phrased better.
What are we defining as missed goals? For example Squadron 42 was originally supposed to support co-op gameplay, but now isn't. Is that a missed goal?

Most ambitious game of all time can't even deliver on a basic feature that was promised from day 1. But here are all these endless features we promise to make if you just send us more money!
 

SymbiantXenos

Avenger
Oct 25, 2017
2,742
6 years millions of dollars and almost nothing to show for it.

This wont release as anything near a full experience before 2020 if ever.
 

brandonbrb

Banned
Nov 7, 2017
115
So when is S42 slated for?

Maybe next year, but the content of SQ42 is oficially closed and CiG is only polish/finish the game right now, the "evocattis"(selected testers) is talking about beta versión maybe in the first month of 2019 for them to test, Chris Roberts talked about some aspect of the game like IA FPS or Stream Object Container and he said in the next patch they will need implement because they need focus test for SQ42.

No matter how many ships CiG do for Persistent Universe, the ships in SQ42 are finish, they dont need professions like mining/salvage in SQ42, i think a good date for SQ42 could be November 2019.

Nowadays the number of people who work in ships in CiG is around 15-20 people(confirmed for CiG), the people think all the time that is a big problem for SC selling only ships, but the rest of the game is developing no matter how many ships have the game, this patchs each 3 months is the proof of the work in the last 4 years, now they can add professions, ships, locations and mechanics easily, look at the Roadmap, when this year finish the game could have more content than games like Elite Dangerous.
 

CopperPuppy

Member
Oct 25, 2017
7,636
Can you still pay money to preorder a hypothetical plot of land in some release in the indefinite future
 
Oct 27, 2017
3,901
ATL
Man, threads like this are interesting. It makes me more scared to think, "what if SC and SQ42 come out...and they're actually good???" Not sure how the internet at large will respond at that point. The weird thing about many detractors, who definitely have legitimate concerns, also want, and campaign for, the game's production to be shutdown, which is somewhat concerning since they are actively wanting to force a conclusion that validates their original accusations.

As of right now, CIG has been more open about their development than most, and I dare say any, other devs. They provide weekly progress reports, have a published official roadmap, and have hit their promised milestones. Does this game still have the potential to never see a true release? Yes, and that potential is still very high. But, It's hard for me to see this game as a dead-end project yet as they are producing quantifiable results with each milestone (and those results are by no means small).

Regardless, at this point, people should know where they are at with this project and just wait and see how things play out. That's pretty much all that can be done at this point.
 
Feb 19, 2018
1,654
Is the cocktail mixing mini-game that they threw on top of the feature creep pile a year or two ago already in the closed WIP version?
 
Last edited:

PandaShake

The Fallen
Oct 25, 2017
2,478
What exactly happened with this game? I remember seeing very early footage years ago and it looked promising

It's quite impressive if you can find a stable server. Planetary landings, simple cargo runs, very detailed stations. They're going into the direction of more planetary involvement which I'm not fond of due to feature creep, but what you can "play" now is quite impressive.
 

take_marsh

Member
Oct 27, 2017
7,347
A game seemingly too big to succeed. I knew not to invest more than my initial $35. I at least got a ticket to the show. I feel a little bad for all those people who invested hundreds or even thousands into pre-ordering ships.
 

Kaako

Member
Oct 25, 2017
5,736
Well that's nice of Roberts & crew...
There will be case studies done when the dust settles.
 

HyGogg

Banned
Oct 27, 2017
2,495
I think the worst thing about this scam is the people who are trying very hard to convince others it isn't a scam.
It's not a scam, in the sense that I do believe they are using the funds to develop a game in good faith. I just think the game they are trying to develop is an utter fantasy.

They're gonna Peter Molyneaux this thing at some point, and scale it down to something that has little resemblance to the original promises. That might even turn out to be a good game, of course, but if you paid $500 for a DLC ship in what turns out to be a narrative single player game, you're going to feel like a knob.
 

Effect

Member
Oct 25, 2017
4,945
Games take a long time to make even under the best of conditions, 6 years is not really all that long.
I hope they pull through in the end.


Also any article sourcing Derek Smart in anything ever is a god damn joke.
It is a long time when the actual foundation of the game barely works though and actually got/gets worse over time. That is in no way shape or form acceptable. They should have nailed down the basic skeletal structure of this beast a very long time ago and they haven't. Didn't even attempt to. Actual space combat doesn't even work when you are online. I say that from experience, from watching videos, and from listening to actual streamers (that love star citizen) as they try to do it. Even they know what is being presented to them is not good and not working (they say so) yet they can't bring themselves to go the next step of walking away cause they're already to invested to do so.

That's the biggest WTF to me. I backed the game back when it was just the hanger module, arena commander, and then they added ArcCorp. All three at the time largely ran fine. Surprisingly so at the time I felt but then again those were just individual mods made from Cryengine. The interface actually at that time was good too. I enjoyed just running around my hanger looking at my Aurora LN and even flying it in free flight (oh that's another big WTF. Flying has actually gotten worse). As they've added more and more to the builds, especially with 2.0 and beyond performance got worse and worse, interface got worse and worse. I accepted that 2.0 would be bad as they were working toward creating what would be the game ultimately. Then it just got worse and worse on top of huge delays, lies, etc.

What ultimately killed any belief I had in Squadron 42 be a thing for me was the god awful tutorial they made. If they couldn't even do that extremely small thing well or just decently I had no hope for S42 on top of the issues the online build was having. All of that was what pushed me to get a refund the first time, even the small amount I had. There was just no faith at all with this project from me.

I put money down again when 3.0 launched (prepared to maybe lose money if I couldn't get a refund cause I had to see with my own eyes how things had changed0 and requested a refund a day or two later. Thankfully I was grated it. That was it for me. The experience was exponentially worse then back when I first got out. I couldn't believe that. I expected some improvement in regard to how I moved my character and interacted with things. I did not expect things to be worse off and that's with me having a significantly better computer as well, from a newer CPU to significantly more ram. There is more "to do" but its a matter of why bothering when it barely or just doesn't work. Stuff seems to be pushed out just to keep current backers happy by showing "progress" when all it does is make people question why it was released and what was being done if it was released in the state it was.

There are things on a basic design level, tech demo status that just don't work, or did work and now simply don't and shouldn't be accepted.
 
Last edited:

Nick C

Member
Oct 25, 2017
491
MT
Man, threads like this are interesting. It makes me more scared to think, "what if SC and SQ42 come out...and they're actually good???" Not sure how the internet at large will respond at that point. The weird thing about many detractors, who definitely have legitimate concerns, also want, and campaign for, the game's production to be shutdown, which is somewhat concerning since they are actively wanting to force a conclusion that validates their original accusations.

As of right now, CIG has been more open about their development than most, and I dare say any, other devs. They provide weekly progress reports, have a published official roadmap, and have hit their promised milestones. Does this game still have the potential to never see a true release? Yes, and that potential is still very high. But, It's hard for me to see this game as a dead-end project yet as they are producing quantifiable results with each milestone (and those results are by no means small).

Regardless, at this point, people should know where they are at with this project and just wait and see how things play out. That's pretty much all that can be done at this point.

I'm not actively rooting for this game or set of studios to fail. In a perfect world everyone would get what they want. It's at the point where the odds of it coming out any time soon and being all that it's promised to be are incredibly slim.
I think this games has surpassed the level of too big to fail and has hit the territory of too massive to succeed. This is the Half-Life 3 of a new generation. Hell, the same could probably be said for the FFVII remake. The same remake that Square was afraid to work on for a decade due to the fear of failure hanging over even the thought of it. The level of expectation is so high that if they don't put out a perfect game then it will be considered a failure by many.

Same shit with No Man's Sky. Same as anything Peter Molyneux touches. Those games became something bigger than their creators are capable of delivering on.

EDIT: Well fuck. People responded with what I was putting together here.
 

Outrun

Member
Oct 30, 2017
5,784
I'm sure some backers have been enjoying the demos from what I read in here but when is the full game out anyway?

This is the thing that puzzles me.

Certain backers of this game are saying that they are having a wonderful time with this game.

However, when I look at the videos of this project, in its current state, I don't see a game.

What am I missing here?
 
Oct 27, 2017
3,901
ATL
Can you still pay money to preorder a hypothetical plot of land in some release in the indefinite future

I don't think you can still buy landclaims, but that particular gameplay aspect should be coming in 3.4, which releases in December (correct me if I'm wrong as it could be 3.5). CIG's online roadmap has the milestone release information.

But yes, the whole land claim thing wasn't a good idea at all. Trying to keep a game primarily crowd-funded means that they have to generate new content that people would be interested in for them to put in more money. Instead of new content that is buildable in a time-efficient manner within an existing system, features like land claims require entirely new functionality that impacts development in a non-insignificant manner. This is the type of feature creep that's untenable.
 

Outrun

Member
Oct 30, 2017
5,784
Man, threads like this are interesting. It makes me more scared to think, "what if SC and SQ42 come out...and they're actually good???" Not sure how the internet at large will respond at that point. The weird thing about many detractors, who definitely have legitimate concerns, also want, and campaign for, the game's production to be shutdown, which is somewhat concerning since they are actively wanting to force a conclusion that validates their original accusations.

As of right now, CIG has been more open about their development than most, and I dare say any, other devs. They provide weekly progress reports, have a published official roadmap, and have hit their promised milestones. Does this game still have the potential to never see a true release? Yes, and that potential is still very high. But, It's hard for me to see this game as a dead-end project yet as they are producing quantifiable results with each milestone (and those results are by no means small).

Regardless, at this point, people should know where they are at with this project and just wait and see how things play out. That's pretty much all that can be done at this point.

CIG has failed to meet the milestones that they themselves have set multiple times. Case in point was the 3.0 update which was one year late, and pared back from their original vision of 3.0.

Also, their progress tracker is a sham, with work packet descriptors so vague that they are useless from a project management perspective.

I would love to be wrong. I want to play SQ42 sp. I want to land on a Bengal Carrier.

I just don't think that CIG have the competence to deliver on their vision.
 

Effect

Member
Oct 25, 2017
4,945
This is the thing that puzzles me.

Certain backers of this game are saying that they are having a wonderful time with this game.

However, when I look at the videos of this project, in its current state, I don't see a game.

What am I missing here?
Denial and emotional/finicial investment. Even those that say they're having a wonderful time I don't believe that based on what they say while they're playing, the expressions on their faces and the frustrations. Many really do not want to bad mouth the game cause they're so invested (emotionally and super finically in the sums of thousands of dollars) or they don't want to lose access they might have. There might even be some employment taking place as CIG does fly people out to some events, give computers, etc. Or at least they did that.

I'm not saying there might not be some enjoyment walking around the ships or on the planet, etc. I get that and felt that too but those are just moments after having to deal with all the other nonsense that exist and stops you from doing that stuff.

You're not wrong in your impression of things when you see videos of this project. Your eyes aren't lying to you.
 

saenima

Banned
Oct 25, 2017
11,892
I wanted to make a .99 game called Scam Citizen, but it was shot down by the rest of the company.

That's a shame. Imagine the monetization possibilities.

.99 gets you in the hangar, but for the low, low price of 5000 dollars, you get a helmet.

For the sweet bargain price of 30000 dollars, you get to name the janitor in your million dollar ship.

And for your house and any firstborn you can find, you get a sweet 5x5 plot of land in an asteroid that is in a collision course with the sun. Insurance fees apply.
 

Nightfall

Member
Oct 27, 2017
3,986
Germany
I was one of the initial backers on kickstarter and tried to get a refund about 2 years ago, but they never agreed to anything. After about 2 months of emailing back and forth I eventually gave up and kissed my $100 goodbye...
 

sandweed

Member
May 8, 2018
92
This is the thing that puzzles me.

Certain backers of this game are saying that they are having a wonderful time with this game.

However, when I look at the videos of this project, in its current state, I don't see a game.

What am I missing here?

Did you pledge over 5000$ to the game?
 
Oct 27, 2017
6,467
So what was promised out of this game, and what has been released so far? And to get to 100% of the promise, how far would they have to go?

I could promise you and Apple phone and then give you a phone taped to an apple. That doesn't mean the original plan was fulfilled.
 
Oct 27, 2017
3,901
ATL
CIG has failed to meet the milestones that they themselves have set multiple times. Case in point was the 3.0 update which was one year late, and pared back from their original vision of 3.0.

Also, their progress tracker is a sham, with work packet descriptors so vague that they are useless from a project management perspective.

I would love to be wrong. I want to play SQ42 sp. I want to land on a Bengal Carrier.

I just don't think that CIG have the competence to deliver on their vision.

Their recent quarterly milestones have been pretty close to their projected roadmap so far. 3.0 was a kitchen sink super release that was way way over specced. All of their biggest architectural changes that were necessary to build the actual game they are envisioning were packed into 3.0. Hopefully, they've learned from their mistake, but the one positive from that is that they were able to complete a lot of the work necessary that was preventing actual content from being produced.

I completely understand though, their project management hasn't been great in the past. I do think their quarterly release method and new team layouts have shown to move development in a more positive direction. I completely understand you not having faith though. I'm personally not at the doom and gloom state on this project.
 

Absoludacrous

One Winged Slayer
The Fallen
Oct 26, 2017
3,200
I wonder how much Star Citizen message board threads mirror Freelancer publisher meetings circa 2001.
 

jett

Community Resettler
Member
Oct 25, 2017
44,696
Good lord that Squadron 42 trailer with Gary Oldman is from 2015.

This is the thing that puzzles me.

Certain backers of this game are saying that they are having a wonderful time with this game.

However, when I look at the videos of this project, in its current state, I don't see a game.

What am I missing here?
It looks like a collection of tech demos at best. I just searched for Star Citizen on youtube and apparently now it has No Man's Sky-like mining and shit? People asked for this? I'm pretty sure they have no idea what they're doing and that there's not end point to this game's development.

I don't think SC is a scam, it just looks like it is horrendously mismanaged, and the fact that they answer to nobody probably doesn't help. Eventually they are going to run out of all that money though. It'll be interesting to see what happens when they do.
 
Oct 27, 2017
3,901
ATL
Eventually they are going to run out of all that money though. It'll be interesting to see what happens when they do.


Now this is where the rubber meets the road. I'm just as curious as you. Hopefully they'll release SQ42 before that happens, and it'll sell well enough to continue to fund development of SC, but only time will tell.
 

Deleted member 5596

User requested account closure
Banned
Oct 25, 2017
7,747
I mean is a 360+ dev studio focusing on one game. Not even accounting all that outsourced contracted work that had to be repurposed as far as I'm aware.

That's a lot of money each year.
 

WhatsintheBox

Member
Oct 27, 2017
46
Not sure if anyone answered this, but can someone explain why this game is a scam? The only thing i know about this game is how much money its made from crowdfunding.
 

Fularu

Member
Oct 25, 2017
10,609
Yeah, because selling ships takes the full attention of all ~400 of their employees, right? They couldn't possibly be building a very large and very complicated game at the same time.
Making over a 1000 videos about technical demos vertical slices definitely does

The stockholme syndrome is strong with Star Citizen « backers »
 
Jun 22, 2018
2,154
Making over a 1000 videos about technical demos vertical slices definitely does

The stockholme syndrome is strong with Star Citizen « backers »
You realize that they can't make tech demo videos without building the tech that's being demoed, right?

They have to build the tech being shown off for the game, too. So, regardless of them showing it off, they still had to build it for the game, which means progress is being made on the game.
 

MisterR

Banned
Oct 27, 2017
2,463
I don't think it's really a scam per say. I think they are actively trying to develop the games. I think they'll run out of money long before they ever deliver a finished product. I think that them selling the ships and stuff for thousands of dollars in a game that really doesn't exist is pretty scummy, but people can spend their money on what they want. I do think this will be an epic failure in the end and make for a great book.
 

KKRT

Member
Oct 27, 2017
1,544
I mean is a 360+ dev studio focusing on one game. Not even accounting all that outsourced contracted work that had to be repurposed as far as I'm aware.

That's a lot of money each year.
Right now over 500 actually.

---
Also, their progress tracker is a sham, with work packet descriptors so vague that they are useless from a project management perspective.
Whats on the roadmap its not what they do have in Jira. Epic counters on roadmap are basically parsed Jira tickets via Shotgun.

---
Making over a 1000 videos about technical demos vertical slices definitely does

The stockholme syndrome is strong with Star Citizen « backers »
Love comments like that, because exactly the same comments appeared when they showed 2.5 demo and then 3.0 demo and guess what? Both were delivered to the players, are playable right and also expanded a lot over the years/months.