195 replies to this topic

[Rogue Jedi]

Kaspirikay, on 24 December 2016 - 01:52 AM, said:

star citizen is gonna be a massive failure mark these words

from a financial standpoint it is already a huge sucess but I am not investing into it until it is playable, I baught the MWO founders pack because I could buy that then start playing a few hours later, if I had discovered Star Citizen in the kickstarter stage I may well have backed it but I did not so I will not be buying it until it is released (probably around the time PGI release Mechwarrior six)

[C E Dwyer]

Sounds like an excuse used by a company to not try completing the game, if they ever intended to, while still holding out a carrot, and your money.

Star Citizen is looking like the greatest crowd funding scam ever.

So, so, very glad the rabid fanboism, how SC was going to make any other game not worth playing, put me off investing even a single penny into the game.

Thank you and Merry Christmas

[Bishop Steiner]

Cathy, on 24 December 2016 - 07:54 AM, said:

Star Citizen is looking like the greatest crowd funding scam ever.

So, so, very glad the rabid fanboism, how SC was going to make any other game not worth playing, put me off investing even a single penny into the game.

Yeah... they act like Ohio State University fans.... highly delusional, and rabidly combative when one quotes any facts that aren't gushing sunshine for their little cult.

As for CryEngine, itself?

[Acehilator]

Bombast, on 24 December 2016 - 07:26 AM, said:

Actually, someone did. His name was Chris Roberts, and the game was Freelancer.

Yeah well, on a theoretical, concept level maybe. But the details... of course, the tech wasn't ready for it back in the day.

Kaspirikay, on 24 December 2016 - 01:52 AM, said:

star citizen is gonna be a massive failure mark these words

I mark them, don't worry

[MaximusPayne]

Bishop Steiner, on 24 December 2016 - 07:57 AM, said:

Yeah... they act like Ohio State University fans.... highly delusional, and rabidly combative when one quotes any facts that aren't gushing sunshine for their little cult.

Easy with the Buckeye salt. Must be a wolverine, eh?

[Wintersdark]

Kaspirikay, on 24 December 2016 - 01:52 AM, said:

star citizen is gonna be a massive failure mark these words

it has to be now.

I want SC to succeed, because it would totally be my sort of game.

But it's got years of delays in, people have "invested" thousands, the game has been hyped nonstop throughout the majority of this decade.

Now, no matter how good a game it is objectively, it's not going to meet the hype. Games never do at the best of times! And this has had years of tech demos, promises, long posts of how awesome it was going to be...

Worse, in many ways it'll be unfair. They'll launch with a good game, and people will hate it because it's not The One True Game, then all their fanboy love will turn to white hot rage at having been milked for years.

You saw it in MWO on a vastly smaller level. People who bought hundred dollar founders packs and where disappointed, then the rage at things not being what was promised, shared by those who didn't spend a dime.

It will be so much worse given the money invested and the time - MWO's founder program was pretty quick and not endlessly delayed.

SC is going to explode.

[Felicitatem Parco]

*Dons fireproof suit*

*Coats self in water-gel*



So, if MWO is a minimally-viable product, and SC's engine is going up in smoke, then would that make Star Citizen technically VaporWare compered to MWO?

[Bishop Steiner]

MaximusPayne, on 24 December 2016 - 08:25 AM, said:

Easy with the Buckeye salt. Must be a wolverine, eh?

Nope, I come from a sane part of the country, where we tend to have better things to do that salivate over a bunch of kids playing football. Of course, having lived a decade in Ohio, I can see the need over those long gray winters to have something somewhat successful to distract oneself with.

But if I have to choose between the Suckeyes or the Fighting Harbaughs? I'll root for the team up north, every time, as I find their fans overall less obnoxious. SEC is just as bad, but at least Bama has the hardware to back to the arrogance.

But if I had to pick a Big10 school, I'll root Wisconsin. That stadium is a heck of a lot more fun to watch a game in.

[Ratpoison]

Star Citizen is just the latest easy target for edgy cynical kids to try and look cool. Any reasonable person who looked over the project when it first started could see that it was clear from the start that it wasn't going to take a normal development route, and was probably going to take until around 2020 to complete. If you hyped yourself into believing it should have shown up sooner and loaded up on expensive digital toys, or cynically compare it to normal development cycles in order to pretend you know something, then your blatant stupidity is your own fault. CryTek's death has been obvious to those who have been watching for a while now, and honestly any company leaving behind their engine tech is going to be better for it. It's only going to be a sign of failure for projects that try to stick with it.

[Johnny Z]

Bombast, on 24 December 2016 - 07:49 AM, said:

Oh, well, if Chris Roberts said it was ok, then surely it will be.

Listen, Star Citizen may turn out to be fine. I hope it does - I've got a copy of Squadron 42 I'm waiting on. But all this ******** about how everything's on track and looking fine is delusional. Star Citizen continues to trip over ever single development hurdle and blunder's it way through every typical 'warning sign' for a badly overrated release imaginable. It's being run by a man who has a history of over promising and left the industry for a decade. The studio has, either accidentally or on purpose, maneuvered it's way into a position where it's more profitable not to release then to do so.

But sure, ambition equals success. Worked out gloriously for those guys who bought Spore 2.0, right?

Yep for Star Citizen it is more profitable not to release or even have a playable version.

They could have had a basic persistent universe by now with players in awesome multi player fighters and giant capital ships, but that would be delivering on what players are paying for, then they could have built the ground side experience and squadron 42 and space trade and the rest.

On the bright side at least it will be complete game in theory where as games like Space Engineers and another 20 similar games cant seem to make a single NPC or plot line or characters or story or theme or anything involved in a complete game.

[C E Dwyer]

Bombast, on 24 December 2016 - 05:39 AM, said:

EVE Online.

What do I win?

A like from me

[Johnny Z]

Acehilator, on 24 December 2016 - 07:20 AM, said:

Wow... impressive amount of salt towards SC. I thought this crowd would have more tech freaks and SciFi/space fans.

And even more impressive amounts of uninformed drivel. Didn't really see that coming.


Just a few bullet points:

- Crytek closing studios is actually a good thing for SC, they will hire even more programmers with godlike Cryengine skills
- the switch to Lumberyard is already pretty much done
- Star Citizen went public for crowdfunding in October 2012, so the 4,5 years average development time for AAA games will only be reached Spring 2017. Very little work was done prior to the announcement, just some models, done by a mexican contractor.
- nobody has even tried making a game of this complexity, so 5,5 or 6 years of development time would be perfectly acceptable
- CryEngine may be difficult to handle (nobody posting here knows for sure), but the results the code wizards at CIG achieve speak for themselves (I wish the same could be said about the codeslingers at PGI *sigh*)

There have been quite a few games made like this.

Entropia Universe was basically a complete scam where players took out loans and got scammed. Total fail of a game almost identical to SC in every way except they refused to add any NPC or story line and was a "true sandbox" and "true player driven economy".

X:Rebirth was also a single player space sim almost identical to Star Citizen as well in concept except way more advanced in many ways, but arbitrarily limited the player to a single ship and the npcs looked like they were from the early 90's. Another scam that players are still freaking out about.

This entire topic is about market sharing, market fixing and market exploitation. To date.

Maybe the scene will improve? Either way nothing to get to excited about as players. But something serious to worry about for others because it is a sign of other problems. Those are more serious problems but not so public and painfully obvious.

Edited by Johnny Z, 24 December 2016 - 08:56 AM.

[MadcatX]

Johnny Z, on 24 December 2016 - 08:40 AM, said:

On the bright side at least it will be "complete" game in theory where as games like Space Engineers and another 20 similar games cant seem to make a single NPC or plot line or characters or story or theme or anything involved in a complete game.

I'm just throwing complete in brackets there since it was announced earlier this year that the game was going to launch as a minimal viable product. You've only got one shot at a first impression. Don't mess it up by being too "minimum".

[Ratpoison]

Johnny Z, on 24 December 2016 - 08:40 AM, said:

Yep for Star Citizen it is more profitable not to release or even have a playable version.

They could have had a basic persistent universe by now with players in awesome multi player fighters and giant capital ships, but that would be delivering on what players are paying for, then they could have built the ground side experience and squadron 42 and space trade and the rest.

On the bright side at least it will be complete game in theory where as games like Space Engineers and another 20 similar games cant seem to make a single NPC or plot line or characters or story or theme or anything involved in a complete game.

Based on what, exactly? This isn't the 90's, the release of a game doesn't mark the end of its development. When Star Citizen eventually releases, it will enjoy a big publicity windfall, and continuous post launch development will begin, likely alredady planned for several years at least. The only difference will be that they have a complete product to market at that point; it would be foolish to think that their profits wont increase.

It's also very ignorant to assume that they could have that much content complete this quickly. I don't think you at all understand how complicated the features you mention are; you can't just "finish" it and set it aside to develop the rest of the game, it's core to all of it. Making these kinds of assumptions only conflates the issue and confuses more people.

[Johnny Z]

Ratpoison, on 24 December 2016 - 09:04 AM, said:

Based on what, exactly? This isn't the 90's, the release of a game doesn't mark the end of its development. When Star Citizen eventually releases, it will enjoy a big publicity windfall, and continuous post launch development will begin, likely alredady planned for several years at least. The only difference will be that they have a complete product to market at that point; it would be foolish to think that their profits wont increase.

It's also very ignorant to assume that they could have that much content complete this quickly. I don't think you at all understand how complicated the features you mention are; you can't just "finish" it and set it aside to develop the rest of the game, it's core to all of it. Making these kinds of assumptions only conflates the issue and confuses more people.

What? Battlefield 1942 is how old of a game? Nearly ancient by todays standards. Yet that's all Star Citizen sells itself to be really, a Battlefield 1942 in space, in a persistent universe with updated graphics and more players in theory and a Star Wars/Privateer(the game) setting.

How is this complicated? Sure the models and textures take more time and effort now, but 4 years with that budget? And so on.

MMO's and similar games are nothing new and are being cloned none stop, for again, market exploitation purposes. I say those harsh words because they are not producing and making money from delivering quality products but rather not delivering them.

(the above is very abbreviated but points made)

Why is Star Citizen not a part of all this or ignoring all this?

Edited by Johnny Z, 24 December 2016 - 09:15 AM.

[Ratpoison]

Johnny Z, on 24 December 2016 - 09:10 AM, said:

What? Battlefield 1942 is how old of a game? Nearly ancient by todays standards. Yet that's all Star Citizen sells itself to be really, a Battlefield 1942 in space, in a persistent universe with updated graphics and more players in theory and a Star Wars/Privateer(the game) setting.

How is this complicated? Sure the models and textures take more time and effort now, but 4 years with that budget? And so on.

MMO's are nothing new and are being cloned none stop, for again, market exploitation purposes. I say those harsh words because they are not producing and making money from delivering products but rather not delivering them.

Why is Star Citizen not a part of all this or ignoring all this?

Conflating the argument with wildly unfitting comparisons to completely different games is not helpful to anyone. Game development is WAY more complicated than you are trying to make it. Some other game doing a slightly similar thing once doesn't magically negate the cost to develop similar features on a completely different engine in a completely different way. You have a severe misunderstanding with the process of game development.

[XxXAbsolutZeroXxX]

If I remember right.

CryEngine 2 and Lumberyard are almost the same thing.

They're both built and maintained by crytek. Lumberyard is a knock off version of CryEngine 2.

The change may not be as drastic as some are making it out to be.

[Johnny Z]

Ratpoison, on 24 December 2016 - 09:19 AM, said:

Conflating the argument with wildly unfitting comparisons to completely different games is not helpful to anyone. Game development is WAY more complicated than you are trying to make it. Some other game doing a slightly similar thing once doesn't magically negate the cost to develop similar features on a completely different engine in a completely different way. You have a severe misunderstanding with the process of game development.

Oh really?

How is getting in a plane(space ship) in Battlefield 1942, or tank or running around with a gun, in a "zone" different than what Star Citizen is selling? The MMO part is different? The setting?

How does all of this equal 4+ years and no playable game with the banked budget Star Citizen has.

Engines? Was Star Citizen sold to players on a completely new engine? No. Is it a completely new engine? No. Engine swapping is buying time, nothing else, for what amounts to a MODIFICATION.

Even MechWarrior Online which actually has new features and coding is in some ways a mod. Which isn't fair and is simplified but point made. Star Citizen cant even claim to be a mod yet until it manages to deliver on game play, which it wont, for reasons stated and then some.

Edited by Johnny Z, 24 December 2016 - 09:32 AM.

[Acehilator]

Johnny Z, on 24 December 2016 - 09:10 AM, said:

What? Battlefield 1942 is how old of a game? Nearly ancient by todays standards. Yet that's all Star Citizen sells itself to be really, a Battlefield 1942 in space, in a persistent universe with updated graphics and more players in theory and a Star Wars/Privateer(the game) setting.

Wow... the pure amount of not having a clue is staggering. Nice hyberbole, and a contradiction on top. Well done.

Time for Nathan again... I guess I should use him in my signature, he is in high demand recently.

[MadcatX]

The issue with Star Citizen, and it was for MWO as well as countless other games that were crowd-funded is as soon as you make that initial investment, your opinion on the game becomes automatically biased. You have invested money thus you won't objectively analyse any VALID critique.

I view the countless release announcements followed by delayed until 6 months down and then delayed another 6 months as a valid critique. When I say this to people who've pre-ordered, the SC community automatically believe that I'm attacking the game, which is not the case. The thing that annoys me the most about Star Citizen is the inability to have an open and impartial discussion regarding it's progress.