Jump to content

Death Of Cry Engine


195 replies to this topic

#101 MadcatX

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Big Brother
  • Big Brother
  • 1,026 posts

Posted 24 December 2016 - 10:33 AM

View PostRatpoison, on 24 December 2016 - 10:04 AM, said:

Of course it's a thing, and what does NOT mean is: "Anyone who buys thing can't ever accept any criticism of thing", like how it was used.


Ah ok, I can see where your coming from then, didn't mean to generalize. I guess it's more of an Internet thing and I've received worse from Blizzard fans: most don't care but holy cow you'll still have dozens of hardcore fans coming down hard on you and it does get easy to generalize an entire community based on it's negative vocal minority.

Also I agree 100% with what you mentioned about that third group of people being the worst in the other post. We have a far too rampant hype culture in video games as is even with AAA games who pull pre-order and season pass BS (looking at you Evolve 1.0 and Deus Ex: Mankind Divided). At least with crowd-funding you're putting down money because you want to see a concept realized and not just pre-ordering a digital copy of a game even if they offer pre-order bonuses.

#102 Wintersdark

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 13,375 posts
  • Google+: Link
  • Twitter: Link
  • LocationCalgary, AB

Posted 24 December 2016 - 11:01 AM

View PostxEdSteelex, on 23 December 2016 - 09:12 PM, said:

Actually, some of Star Citizen is completed and playable, in fact there is almost as much to do in SC now as there is in MWO. However, SC is far from having all of the promised features done, so it is far from done.


So I can play any ship I buy on the website in Arena Commander (or they have fixed release dates that are actually met?)

Or is there just a small list of ships you can play in Arena Commander?


But that's the thing. MWO's combat is the game; MWO has a much smaller scope. Arena Commander != Star Citizen.

Star Citizen's over-reaching scope is what's screwing it right now. Arena Commander may be a fun module, but it's not Star Citizen. A small playable PvP game isn't what Star Citizen is; it's only just arguably a tiny fractional part. Now, that may be good for some - if you CAN play the ships you buy in Arena Commander, then sure, buy those ships and have fun, if that's your thing. I certainly have no objections there.

I do think, though, buying ships for Star Citizen(vs Arena Commander) at this point is outrageously stupid.

Edited by Wintersdark, 24 December 2016 - 11:07 AM.


#103 Unnatural Growth

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Bridesmaid
  • 1,055 posts

Posted 24 December 2016 - 11:41 AM

They just released Alpha 2.6, which has added Star Marine, which is a fps module. There are now 46 ships (I think) that you can fly.

Here's the official link:

https://robertsspace...arine-Available

It's pretty funny all the guys bagging on SC from a forum hosted by MWO. Just amazing amounts of irony there. The buggy, early alpha SC already has more content and more to do in it's early alpha version than MWO has available as a "finished" (yeah right) game. Episodically ironic.

I want both games to succeed. This one, and SC. As it sits now, I think SC will be fully finished in all it's uber hyped glory before we ever see MWO become HALF the game it was originally hyped to the founders, or what was hyped to us (again) during the FW "reveal".

At least you can find out/read about what SC development is up to, with minimal effort if you only look on the website. Here, it's all a big secret. "Soon ®" or "Wait for Mechcon ®" is about all you get. Unless you're a twitter twit, and wait with baited breath for Russ to deign you worth of dribbling some crumbs of information at you.

As I said, I want both games to succeed, but there's no comparison between how Chris Roberts/CIG and how Russ Bullock/PGI develops their games and keeps their customers informed/updated on what's happening. Look at this letter CR put out:

Star Citizen Newsletter - Letter from The Chairman
November 18th, 2016 Greetings Citizens,
Four years ago today the initial Crowd Funding Campaign for Star Citizen came to a close with equal amounts of exhilaration and exhaustion.

I am always humbled by the incredible response that Star Citizen received from space sim fans and PC gamers. The groundswell that swept up the project from its announcement and carried it forward ever since has been something the team and I have never taken for granted.

Thanks to all of your support, we’ve been able to expand the scope of Star Citizen to create a living, breathing universe. No other game tries to deliver the scale and fidelity that Star Citizen does with its detailed worlds that can have you walking through a dense jungle, wandering the dark alleyways of a futuristic city, landing on a space station orbiting a moon, or piloting a space ship across vast star systems teeming with activity, all from a seamless first person viewpoint.

"%20style=

Your contributions have enabled us to hire some of the best and brightest in the video game business. The planetary tech we showed at Gamescom and CitizenCon is a prime example of something that only became possible with your continued support. We now stand at four internal studios and 377 employees all dedicated to building the best game we can. We are not building something to be played for a week and then discarded, we are building Star Citizen to be an online destination that can grow and flourish for years to come.

With this ambition comes a price. Not just in the salaries of the hundreds of people pouring their hearts into the project, but in the unpredictability of the groundbreaking technology that we need to develop to achieve a game of this scale and detail. We have taken a lot of flak over the last couple of years for the extending timeline of Star Citizen, but the simple fact is that game development, especially game development on the scale of Star Citizen, is complicated. If you talk to any developer that works on large titles they will tell you that schedules, especially early in the development cycle, move all the time. Most people never see this because a publisher won’t announce a project publicly until it is very far along; normally at least in Alpha, with all the technology and gameplay R&D completed. Even then, the timelines can be unpredictable as can be seen in the delays on big name titles from publishers.

With Star Citizen, we never had the luxury of developing behind closed doors until all the technology has been built. We’ve been public since before we opened the doors of our first office in early 2013.

Having the participation and feedback from all of you as we build Star Citizen block by block is vital to making a game that will stand the test of time. Polish and iteration help make good games great and we have the opportunity to do this with the participation of an engaged and active user base. That’s a luxury that most other games don’t have.

Open Development does have its drawbacks. Not everyone understands the process or how difficult it can be. We have always tried to be open and share our progress. We refactored Around the Verse to focus more on developers showing and talking about their work to help give insight into the process. Our monthly reports have more information than any monthly report I had to do for Electronic Arts or Microsoft when at Origin or Digital Anvil.

The only thing we currently don’t share is internal estimates on completion and dates.

As you know we’ve not been keen to give hard dates on the project after the initial set of dates which we had estimated when the project was a lot smaller in scope. When I’ve talked about releases, I’ve always qualified any discussion of timing with “we’re hoping to” or “the goal is” to give a rough timeline for people, but unfortunately some people often tend to forget the qualifiers and treated my comments nonetheless as a promise.

Because of this we have been reticent to share our internal timelines, even with caveats, as it always seems to cause trouble; one section of the community gets annoyed because things are perceived as late while another gets annoyed wondering why we shared dates at all if they aren’t solid. Of course even when we don’t give dates we have yet another part of the community getting annoyed because they feel left in the dark and have no idea when the next build will drop.

Basically it is a Kobayashi Maru.

I’ve reflected long and hard on this dilemma and have concluded, to quote another Eighties film, “the only winning move is not to play.”

What if we didn't give you just an estimated date, but instead shared our internal schedule? No filter, no hedging. You see what we see.

Whether or not to share this kind of information has been a long running debate among the team here at Cloud Imperium Games. Target dates are not release dates, and everything you see will shift at some point, sometimes slightly and sometimes wildly. The danger in doing this has always been that casual observers will not understand this, that there will be an outcry about delays every time we update the page.

We’ve taken stock, thought through everything and decided that, while that is a risk, above all we trust the community that has given us so much support. The community that has let us focus our passions on this incredible project. You have allowed us to take this journey, you have tracked and followed so much of how game development works… and now we think it is right to further part the curtain and share with you our production process.

So for Star Citizen Alpha 2.6 we’re going to share our internal schedule and its breakouts on a weekly basis. These are the very same schedules we update daily and are circulated internally on our intra-studio hand-offs with a few exceptions: the individual developer names assigned to the tasks will be omitted (for obvious reasons), we’ll remove the JIRA details and we’ll modify the technical wording to make it readable for a wider audience, but otherwise, when something changes, slips or is completed, you will know.

"%20style=

This schedule will always be available on the RSI Website and we will be updating this page weekly with a snap shot of our internal schedule.

We take the process of production very seriously and spend a lot of time on improving our ability in this area. Our worldwide Production Team is twenty-five strong and they are the backbone that drives our development forward. They work closely with developers to break down and create tasks, chase up task completion daily, update their respective team’s schedules, encourage and strengthen open communication by organizing meetings, agendas, and creating action items to help push the project forward day by day. The Production Team has many collective years with some of the biggest developers, publishers and games. They are like the rest of the CIG team, World Class.

Game development is, at its very heart, a process of constant improvement. We view our communications as part of this process, whether that means improving the quality of our videos or finding new ways to share information with our community. I hope you enjoy this new, even more detailed look at Star Citizen’s development.

If this initiative is well received, then we will continue this process as we move onto the next milestone.

The Anniversary Livestream

This afternoon, at 1 PM Pacific, we are kicking off the fourth Star Citizen Anniversary Livestream. If you’ve discovered Star Citizen more recently, the anniversary livestream celebrates the last day of Star Citizen’s original crowd funding campaign. Back in 2012, we celebrated the incredible support we received with a 24-hour livestream. Today, we have too much work to do to break from it for a full day, but we want to honor the spirit of the campaign by appearing live and celebrating our passion for what we’re doing.

"%20style=


The livestream will be followed by a weeklong sale. This year, we are patterning the event after an in-universe ‘air show’ called the Intergalactic Aerospace Expo. All of our companies, from Esperia to Aegis, will present their ship lineups with a different company’s spacecraft showcased each day (along with some special surprises you’ll learn more about during the stream). If you’ve missed out on a ship in the past that you’ve been itching to pick up, this is your chance; if you’re happy with your current fleet, I hope you enjoy some of the additional materials and content we have put together for the event.

With that in mind, I wanted to take a moment to address a common question: why we do ship sales.

First and foremost, I want to stress that the universe will always be open to anyone with a starter package. No backer is being asked to pay more to enter the game world or to unlock some otherwise unavailable endgame content. Your initial Aurora or Mustang is your ticket to a bigger universe where you can earn your fortune and make your name.

If you chose to buy an additional or bigger ship, you are doing this primarily to support the project. The backers that choose to purchase concept ships are helping us add top tier talent to the game, expand our development tools and facilities and give us the time and bandwidth to pursue the kind of pure creativity that continues to make this project so exciting.

The additional ships are rewards for helping expand our dream, to make sure we continue to go above and beyond what we set out to create. Every ship you can buy now will be available in the finished game, for purchase with in game currency. But early supporters receive some convenient rewards (such as LTI) and the option of having a different starting experience with larger or role-specific ship designs. We feel this is the least we can do for the portion of the community that continues to support us well past what they need to contribute to play Star Citizen. We feel comfortable with this exchange as Star Citizen is not a stats based MMO with typical end game content. Just like real life there is no real end game in Star Citizen. It is more about what you want to do. Do you want to be a fighter? A trader? An explorer? A miner? A pirate? Player skill counts heavily as well as the role the ship was designed for. There is no ship that will sweep all before it. Different ships are needed for different situations. Having an Idris does not mean you will crush all before you, but an Idris manned by a group of friends that work together will be formidable. However, it’s a pretty bad bulk cargo carrier or mining ship, and if you’re chasing nimble outlaws through a dense asteroid field, you’re likely to take quite a bit of collateral damage and be left in the dust.

The desire to continue to improve Star Citizen is also why we have begun offering an incentive to purchase a new concept with fresh money rather than melting a ship and using store credit. We offer backers a more comprehensive system for melting and refactoring their pledges than we had ever dreamed possible back in 2012, which is a system I believe no other game offers, and as a result you can often swap to a more favored ship without impacting funding at all. We built this to allow you all to be able to purchase a ship with confidence, knowing that if something you like better comes along you can switch out to it with minimal hassle and no loss. We do not intend to change this system, but maintaining it means that we need to find other ways to encourage new contributions rather than just recycling old ones as the continued funding means we can continue to make the game as good as it possibly can be. Going forward, these cash sales will focus on newly introduced concept ships and top tier limited capital ships.

Having said all this I want to reinforce that you should only participate in the anniversary sale as a way of supporting the project. There is no need to own anything other than basic starter ship if you just want to have some fun. You will be able to earn all the ships we offer in these sales once Star Citizen goes live.

With that, I would like to wish every backer a happy fourth anniversary and thank our subscribers whose additional support allows us to put on events like this. To all of you, Star Citizen is what you are making it… and you are making it something that I believe will provide an incredible escape to people around the world. Every day, we get closer to our shared dream of a living, breathing science fiction universe where we can immerse ourselves like never before. That’s the dream that keeps us working as hard as we can on this project and it’s something I hope you will continue to support and celebrate. There’s more work to do, but with every production milestone, with every community event, with every bright idea made code I know we are getting closer to that most important promise: we’ll see you in the ‘Verse. -- Chris Roberts



I can't see Russ Bullock EVER sending such a letter, OR EVER opening up the development process to full transparency in such a manner. Hell, most of the time we can't even get him to come to the forums AT ALL. Let alone actually communicate with us.

I still want MWO to become something great. I really do.

#104 Wintersdark

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 13,375 posts
  • Google+: Link
  • Twitter: Link
  • LocationCalgary, AB

Posted 24 December 2016 - 11:59 AM

View PostOldOrgandonor, on 24 December 2016 - 11:41 AM, said:

They just released Alpha 2.6, which has added Star Marine, which is a fps module. There are now 46 ships (I think) that you can fly.

Here's the official link:

https://robertsspace...arine-Available

It's pretty funny all the guys bagging on SC from a forum hosted by MWO. Just amazing amounts of irony there. The buggy, early alpha SC already has more content and more to do in it's early alpha version than MWO has available as a "finished" (yeah right) game. Episodically ironic.

I want both games to succeed. This one, and SC. As it sits now, I think SC will be fully finished in all it's uber hyped glory before we ever see MWO become HALF the game it was originally hyped to the founders, or what was hyped to us (again) during the FW "reveal".


You misunderstand. PHI made some mistakes with MWO's early development and the sale of founders packs - serious ones.

My post was referencing those mistakes, and saying CIG is making those same mistakes but on a much larger scale.

So no, there's no irony here at all, quite the opposite:

Didn't you people learn anything from MWO?

CIG communicates way better, but this just makes people feel better about the situation, it doesn't get you a game any faster.

If PGI had communicated better people would have been happier, but MWO wouldn't be any different for it.

#105 xEdSteelex

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 140 posts

Posted 24 December 2016 - 12:03 PM

I realize that I opened a can of worms with this topic, even though it was not my intention to bag on PGI or RSI or to compare the two games. I started this thread, because both SC and MWO use Cry Engine and both games have run into similar problems that required the engine to be reworked. I was merely pointing out that RSI believes that switching to Lumberyard will solve most of their remaining problems and will have far better support, so it may be beneficial for MWO to switch since it would take much more work to port MWO to Unreal Engine.

#106 RestosIII

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The 1 Percent
  • The 1 Percent
  • 7,322 posts
  • LocationDelios

Posted 24 December 2016 - 12:05 PM

View PostOldOrgandonor, on 24 December 2016 - 11:41 AM, said:

An entire essay


Posted Image

Do I hope SC works out? Definitely. Do I have high hopes? Oh dear lord no. So... exactly MW:O. Except I can run MW:O without it catching fire and crashing as soon as I load it up, so I can actually play MW:O. That, and none of the mechs cost $2,000.

#107 Wintersdark

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 13,375 posts
  • Google+: Link
  • Twitter: Link
  • LocationCalgary, AB

Posted 24 December 2016 - 12:05 PM

You think PGI overpromised and underdelivered, they didn't pormise anything close to what CIG promises; and at least PGI delivered.

I don't see a persistent universe anywhere, just two horribly simplistic games that are basically MWO....

... After many years of delay and orders of magnitude more funding.


So, no,there's no irony here. Just the certainty that people are making the same mistake they made with MWO, with Star Citizen.

#108 Ratpoison

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Bad Company
  • Bad Company
  • 851 posts

Posted 24 December 2016 - 12:06 PM

View PostWintersdark, on 24 December 2016 - 11:59 AM, said:

You misunderstand. PHI made some mistakes with MWO's early development and the sale of founders packs - serious ones.

My post was referencing those mistakes, and saying CIG is making those same mistakes but on a much larger scale.

So no, there's no irony here at all, quite the opposite:

Didn't you people learn anything from MWO?

CIG communicates way better, but this just makes people feel better about the situation, it doesn't get you a game any faster.

If PGI had communicated better people would have been happier, but MWO wouldn't be any different for it.

Actually it's a bad comparison either way, since MWO was not open to public funding until closed beta, and Star Citizen was funded before development even really started. Chris Roberts has an obligation to be this adamantly open. Russ Bullock does not, and it's a stupid thing to expect of any usual game developer.

#109 Wintersdark

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 13,375 posts
  • Google+: Link
  • Twitter: Link
  • LocationCalgary, AB

Posted 24 December 2016 - 12:07 PM

View PostRestosIII, on 24 December 2016 - 12:05 PM, said:


Posted Image

Do I hope SC works out? Definitely. Do I have high hopes? Oh dear lord no. So... exactly MW:O. Except I can run MW:O without it catching fire and crashing as soon as I load it up, so I can actually play MW:O. That, and none of the mechs cost $2,000.


This, exactly. SC is just MWO magnified by a massively larger budget and more delays (but with great communication, yay!)

I mean, I've read all that PR that was I Clyde's in dudes post, as I follow SC development. But PR is just words until there's a game on the table.

Edited by Wintersdark, 24 December 2016 - 12:11 PM.


#110 RestosIII

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The 1 Percent
  • The 1 Percent
  • 7,322 posts
  • LocationDelios

Posted 24 December 2016 - 12:09 PM

View PostWintersdark, on 24 December 2016 - 12:07 PM, said:

This, exactly. SC is just MWO magnified by a massively longer budget and more delays (but with great communication, yay!)

I mean, I've read all that PR that was I Clyde's in dudes post, as I follow SC development. But PR is just words until there's a game on the table.


Only reason I ever backed SC is because Freelancer is easily one of my favorite games. At this point, I'm just avoiding all SC news and the emails they send me, so I can be (hopefully) pleasantly surprised when the game finally, y'know, releases. That, and so I won't somehow get on the terrifying hype train that has caused people to spend money in the 4-5 digit range.

#111 Unnatural Growth

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Bridesmaid
  • 1,055 posts

Posted 24 December 2016 - 12:10 PM

I learned plenty.

Total spend on MWO = $1400 ( I try not to think about that too much)

Total spend on SC = $300 (which is where I will leave that spend level until the game is "released")


And I'm sorry you can't see the irony in all of this. It's actually pretty damn hilarious.

#112 Ratpoison

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Bad Company
  • Bad Company
  • 851 posts

Posted 24 December 2016 - 12:10 PM

View PostxEdSteelex, on 24 December 2016 - 12:03 PM, said:

I realize that I opened a can of worms with this topic, even though it was not my intention to bag on PGI or RSI or to compare the two games. I started this thread, because both SC and MWO use Cry Engine and both games have run into similar problems that required the engine to be reworked. I was merely pointing out that RSI believes that switching to Lumberyard will solve most of their remaining problems and will have far better support, so it may be beneficial for MWO to switch since it would take much more work to port MWO to Unreal Engine.

Considering MW5 is already in Unreal, it wouldn't be unreasonable to expect a switch to Unreal for MWO in the future as well.

#113 Alan Davion

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Determined
  • The Determined
  • 2,333 posts

Posted 24 December 2016 - 12:12 PM

View PostJohnny Z, on 24 December 2016 - 09:24 AM, said:

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


I was hoping someone would be stupid enough to bring up the budget issue. You stepped in it this time.

Go look up the budget that was slated for Bungie's "Destiny" game a couple years ago.

FIVE HUNDRED MILLION DOLLARS. Probably the most expensive "Triple A" title in recent memory. And you can put real money down on the fact that more than half of that was spent, PURELY, on advertising.

So you're looking at an actual, game development budget of maybe two hundred million at the most. Two-Fifths of the total budget slated for that game.

What's Star Citizen up to now? According to their funding page they're something shy of 140 million.

And guess what sunshine, literally EVERY, SINGLE, FLIPPING PENNY has gone into the game. Including their advertising budget, which CIG does, oh, you know, all on their own.

They don't contract some outside agency to advertise their game.

They do it all on their own, and by word of mouth of their fans.

I honestly think at this point you're just being a troll.

#114 Wintersdark

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 13,375 posts
  • Google+: Link
  • Twitter: Link
  • LocationCalgary, AB

Posted 24 December 2016 - 12:21 PM

View PostOldOrgandonor, on 24 December 2016 - 12:10 PM, said:

I learned plenty.

Total spend on MWO = $1400 ( I try not to think about that too much)

Total spend on SC = $300 (which is where I will leave that spend level until the game is "released")


And I'm sorry you can't see the irony in all of this. It's actually pretty damn hilarious.


How? Explain it to me?

I'm saying what PGI did was terrible, and CIG is doing the same thing on a larger scale, yet folks seem OK with it?

There'd be irony if I felt MWO's story was great and CW's was all terrible, but that's clearly not the case. I'm painfully aware of how badly PGI screwed the founders, and that's the crux of my point.

Now, you personally appear to have learned your lesson somewhat.

Though I'd argue that in most cases, money spent on mechs after release of MWO was 100% purchasing a product, and thus MWO delivered on those dollars fully. Founders got screwed in many cases.

But people buying ships in SC today, ships that can't be played in Arena Commander?

Those people are the ones failing to have learned the MWO Founder lesson.

View PostAlan Davion, on 24 December 2016 - 12:12 PM, said:


I was hoping someone would be stupid enough to bring up the budget issue. You stepped in it this time.

Go look up the budget that was slated for Bungie's "Destiny" game a couple years ago.

FIVE HUNDRED MILLION DOLLARS. Probably the most expensive "Triple A" title in recent memory. And you can put real money down on the fact that more than half of that was spent, PURELY, on advertising.

So you're looking at an actual, game development budget of maybe two hundred million at the most. Two-Fifths of the total budget slated for that game.

What's Star Citizen up to now? According to their funding page they're something shy of 140 million.

And guess what sunshine, literally EVERY, SINGLE, FLIPPING PENNY has gone into the game. Including their advertising budget, which CIG does, oh, you know, all on their own.

They don't contract some outside agency to advertise their game.

They do it all on their own, and by word of mouth of their fans.

I honestly think at this point you're just being a troll.
because someone screwed the pooch even worse doesnt make anything better here.

MWO was started and delivered what they did on 5m.

CIG has delivered basically MWO and a really bare bones shooter (haven't tried the fps because zero interest) on 140m and many more years of development.

Also the source of the funding matters. Bungie only screwed Bungie. SC is working with crowdsourced money.

#115 Wintersdark

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 13,375 posts
  • Google+: Link
  • Twitter: Link
  • LocationCalgary, AB

Posted 24 December 2016 - 12:26 PM

View PostRatpoison, on 24 December 2016 - 12:10 PM, said:

Considering MW5 is already in Unreal, it wouldn't be unreasonable to expect a switch to Unreal for MWO in the future as well.
And given PGI has already stated a desire to switch engines in the future, this makes MW5 clearly a very good way to do it with minimal downtime.

Engine switches even on a simple version to version change typically take around 6 months (consider Kerbal Space Program as an example, going up a version in Unity)

But building MW5 in a new engine allows them to do the work for both at the same time, and porting MWO after MW5 is complete would be trivial if that was their goal all along. It'd make WAY more sense than trying to port MWO to a separate and totally different engine (PGI's CryEngine being a very old and very heavily modified CryEngine, and PGI having already stated switching to CE3 would be about as much work as switching to a different engine entirely)

#116 Ratpoison

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Bad Company
  • Bad Company
  • 851 posts

Posted 24 December 2016 - 12:28 PM

View PostWintersdark, on 24 December 2016 - 12:07 PM, said:

This, exactly. SC is just MWO magnified by a massively larger budget and more delays (but with great communication, yay!)

I mean, I've read all that PR that was I Clyde's in dudes post, as I follow SC development. But PR is just words until there's a game on the table.

I think the fact that people are comparing the two is actually pretty telling of how overblown people's expectations were for this game. Battletech fans all imagined their own perfect fantasy game where all their favorite things exist, and then they grew bitter and cried foul when it didn't deliver that fantasy. It was obvious from the start that MWO was going to be purely focused on the multiplayer gameplay from previous titles, yet people still expected all sorts of single player content and world building fluff. Community warfare has always been an incredibly difficult thing to balance in other games, and it should have been obvious that it would be a long, bumpy road to making that work at all. I certainly thought those things were obvious, but maybe that's why I'm not disappointed.

#117 Unnatural Growth

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Bridesmaid
  • 1,055 posts

Posted 24 December 2016 - 12:31 PM

Winter,

The "irony" here isn't really being shoveled forward by you (ok, maybe some tiny bit of it- even less so since you've expanded on your opinion- which I tend to agree with). But by a couple of forum trolls that have said how great MWO is and how SC will never be delivered, won't be completed, or ever be able to compete with a game as great as MWO. It's just priceless.

I guess the irony to me is that the "white knights" of MWO are trash talking a very early alpha of SC that already has more to do, interact with than MWO has with it's "Live Released" game.

And they didn't just lie to the original founders. Remember the "Launch Party", remember the CW presentation?


Edited by OldOrgandonor, 24 December 2016 - 12:44 PM.


#118 Bombast

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Legendary Founder
  • Legendary Founder
  • 7,709 posts

Posted 24 December 2016 - 12:34 PM

View PostWintersdark, on 24 December 2016 - 12:21 PM, said:

MWO was started and delivered what they did on 5m.

CIG has delivered basically MWO and a really bare bones shooter (haven't tried the fps because zero interest) on 140m and many more years of development.

Also the source of the funding matters. Bungie only screwed Bungie. SC is working with crowdsourced money.


Yah... I never got the 'Their budget is actually really small' argument. It's true - Considering they're building a company from the ground up, their not swimming in Scrooge McDuck money.

But remember - They said they could build Star Citizen, along with all of it's additional goals, with only 65 million dollars. They have received 74 million dollars from their fanbase with no specific goals in mind. They have more then doubled what they said they needed to deliver this game.

And yet the crowd funding continues. They've gotten more money perpetually and aimlessly squirting out space ships then they did kickstarting the damn thing. At this point, no one should be able to argue 'Limited budgets' anymore.

#119 Kangarad

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • FP Veteran - Beta 2
  • FP Veteran - Beta 2
  • 573 posts
  • LocationIn the Mechlab, adding more Double Heatsinks.

Posted 24 December 2016 - 12:35 PM

TBH. not sure if this "engine Change" is something massive. Or if this realy is the death of the "cry engine".

Afterall SC allready had a majority of the CE developers hired and a deal with AWS for servers. the only thing that changes is the name wich I'd wager is for publicity reasons.

Anyone here thinking that SC's own engine that they developed is the AMAZON one for copyright reasons?

#120 Ratpoison

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Bad Company
  • Bad Company
  • 851 posts

Posted 24 December 2016 - 12:36 PM

View PostKangarad, on 24 December 2016 - 12:35 PM, said:

TBH. not sure if this "engine Change" is something massive. Or if this realy is the death of the "cry engine".

Afterall SC allready had a majority of the CE developers hired and a deal with AWS for servers. the only thing that changes is the name wich I'd wager is for publicity reasons.

Anyone here thinking that SC's own engine that they developed is the AMAZON one for copyright reasons?

lol no





18 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 18 guests, 0 anonymous users