Jump to content


Imperium Member
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Feedback


About Comet

  • Birthday 10/22/1979

Profile Information

  • Gender

Recent Profile Visitors

1,530 profile views
  1. In all honesty I was expecting it. How in the world could they have announced a 2016 release date back in the day is beyond my understanding. Anyone that follows game development suspected as much. If your game vertical slice is unpolished, your entire game is still far from release. As simple as that. Games take time to develop. That's for sure. The 10 years to develop predictions were right. I hope that for some people this gives them a bit of a reality check of the state of the game and why it is important to look at this game development with objectivity. It is true that this is an ambitious game and that they are hopefully creating a game that people will enjoy for years. But also true that they have not been honest regarding how long it would take. A good example is @Voa comment bellow.
  2. Don't know if any of you have been playing Red Dead Redemption 2 but I've been playing it quite a bit and I see a lot of similarities between it and Star Citizen. Specially after watching the CitizenCon panels. For instance, there is what seems to be full persistence in Red Dead. Say you skin an animal and leave the pelt on the ground. You can go back later to grab it. Another good example of similarities I'm finding is in the use of physics. For instance how clothes in RDR2 behave similarly to what was shown in the CitizenCon panel. https://www.ign.com/articles/2018/09/20/79-amazing-little-details-in-red-dead-redemption-2 Ambitious developers are all about detail. The difference between RDR2 and SC is simply that RDR2 is a polished, mostly bug free game, filled with hours upon hours of content, with hundreds of different quests, characters traveling the world doing their daily routines, animals you can hunt, diverse environments to explore and so on and on. While SC WILL BE an equally or more ambitious game that will be polished, filled with quests, environments to explore, things to do and so on and on. Now CIG has shown at what point they consider the core game will be finished. Of course they will continue to expand on it, adding more content and features. RDR2 is expected to have a multiplayer component in the future and more content. Nowadays games as a service is quite normal. Look at Eve or Elite Dangerous as an example. But what I would like to know is what that core game includes. Will it have plenty of interesting content to entertain players like we see in games like RDR2? Or will it be more like an Early Access game like PUBG? If the core game is an early access style experience, that's not what most of us consider to be "the core game". We are looking for the true "core game". The one where AI roams the world with their own agenda. Where there are interesting missions lurking on every corner. Where while you play, you feel immersed in the world because you don't get distracted by bugs. Meanwhile, I will continue to play games where the "core game" is clearly done. Games like RDR2 and even Elite Dangerous. Don't get my comment as criticism. I simply want to play SC at its fullest.
  3. Procedural creation. That's what they are doing and will allow them to achieve their goal during our lifetime. Think of games like Elite and No Man's Sky. CIG has already demonstrated several of their procedural creation tools. How they can for instance create huge cities in minutes. How they can rapidly generate an entire system and so on. Populating those systems is a big challenge for sure. Adding interesting missions, characters and all that. And make it all varied enough and fun to play. But possible. With that said. The technical challenges are huge. And from the looks of it they still have a long way to go.
  4. The backlash towards charging for access to the stream is just a symptom of a growing number of people that are running out of patience. The message was clear. CIG is a company built completely with crowd funding. And sometimes they don't act like it. As was mentioned already by some, CIG would had never been able to raise the amount of money they did if an expected release date was 10 years down the road. Are they aware of that? Community? This is not about community. This is about investors. Does anyone have any doubt that CIG will make an awesome presentation at CitizenCon? I don't. They have always made the greatest trailers. Showed jaw dropping tech demos. That's what marketing is all about. But bringing it all together, making a fun game to play and delivering it in a reasonable timeframe is the challenge. Many of you that follow game development know that there is a huge problem with many early access games. No matter the success and development time they have, many remain unpolished and filled with bugs forever. A great example is looking at PUBG vs Fortnite and now COD Blackout. You play something like Blackout and you see the result of a company that knows how to produce polished games at record pace. Blackout "beta" is a more finished product than PUBG ever was. I don't doubt the talent and capability of CIG to deliver but they still have to prove it. Not in videos or early access builds but by bringing to market a polished game. Conpare Cyberpunk 2077 demo with last year SQ 42 demo and there is no denying that both are impressive. But there was a big difference between one and the other. One showed a polished experience. The other did not. So the question here is. Who believes that CIG will be able to release to stores a finished and polished SQ42 by the end of 2019? Who believes that CIG will announce a 2019 release date? I don't . What we will probably get is a beta of some kind that is meant for one thing and one thing alone. For CIG to appease the investors and gain some additional time.
  5. I hope that as well. But my argument is still the same. - Their word has weight and must count for something. Or else we are just giving people false expectation. - Given the time that has passed and the money raised CIG needs to be more in touch with their investors, delivering more and asking less. Don't you agree? If SQ 42 is near completion as pointed out, they won't have a problem comiting to a 2019 release date. What will be your stance if at CitizenCon they don't announce a SQ 42 release date?
  6. @Gremlich one´s word must have some value or else it's hard to finish anything. AAA game development is indeed extremely hard and software development is a reality I know well. But one's credentials means little and you need only look at the awful example that is Derek Smart. I've defended CIG over and over again on the topic of delays. But 6 years have passed and there seems to still be a lot of work to do. Too much given the amount of time that has passed. Even the most complex AAA games don't take decades to develop. When they do, like in the case of Duke Nukem Forever, something is usually wrong. I'm hopeful that in the upcoming CitizenCon they'll have some really good news at least when it comes to SQ42 completion. I really hope the game development is far more advanced then what they have shown us. But I though the same during last CitizenCon when they showed an amazing yet very unpolished SQ42 vertical slice. I don't think anyone wants SQ42 or SC to be a Mass Effect Andromeda or Assasin's Creed Unity fiasco. So it is important to put CIG on the spot instead of giving them the illusion that they have an infinite amount of time to develop a dream game that is never finished and is never playable in a polished form.
  7. I think enough years have past for stunts like this to continue to happen. I still have a hard time to accept how can anyone announce a 2016 release date and require not one, not two, but most likely 3 or more years to deliver. Next CitizenCon CIG will show their "Road to Release" plan. Let's see what comes out of it. But people are getting old waiting for the game (any game) while CIG continues to raise money anyway they can. At this pace we'll be playing Cyberpunk 2077 way before SQ42 or Star Citizen is released.
  8. After all these years there was no excuse to pull out something like this. It was a clear money grab as they also prohibited others from livestreaming the event. You just need to look at the numbers. Taking into consideration streams from previous CitizenCon and that there were no limitations they had hundreds of thousands of people watching. They would have gotten easily $1 Million+. This wasn't just about covering the costs of the event, streaming and so on. Well, the backlash is obvious and Chris has now completely retracted from charging. UPDATE: After sleeping on this, I am going to chalk this one up to experience. We're going to cut back on the live-streaming crew / costs but have both stages streamed for anyone with a Star Citizen user account. Star Citizen Content Creators are welcome to rebroadcast our stream live. If you would like to support the additional costs of streaming all the presentations, you can support the show by purchasing the CitizenCon digital goodies package (Imperators still get this as their October flair) This damage could have easily been avoided and for me it has left a clear mark.
  9. I'm sure any content concerning the sale of ships won't be behind a paywall. And they'll have plenty of cool marketing videos for it. This comes at a very bad time for me as someone who pledged back in 2012. Specially now after seeing what CD Projekt Red was able to pull of with Cyberpunk. A game that is still ways off, started pre production after Star Citizen, but that the dev was able to showcase loads of different systems in a relatively polished form. I expect a lot more from CIG this year. SQ 42 should be far more finished then Cyberpunk. They should have no problem showcasing a big part of the game without any issues by now.
  10. I don't give a damn about their justification. They tried to put it all behind a paywall and got enourmous backlash. Did they ask for the community opinion? No. Dont they have enough data that shows people are interested in watching the presentation? Yes they do. There was no Gamescom presentation this year. So CitizenCon is what everyone is waiting for and they know it. This is the point where enough is enough.
  11. The question if SC is P2W or not won't be answered until we get to a point where we can evaluate how long it takes to "progress" in the game. Having to grind to progress is not fun. And there are plenty of cases where developers greatly limit progression in order to force people to waste real money. We all want a fun to play game that doesn't feel like we're climbing a huge mountain. Sure. Many MMOs have no end goals. No end to the game. They can't have. If they did people would stop playing once they reached the "end". But good MMOs do give players a sense of progress and above all motivations to keep them coming back. They offer an evolving story, new adventures, new goals. Challenges, conflicts and a sense that the universe is changing based on the player actions. And behind anything you do in a good game always is ... A reward. Be it money, items, ships or whatever.
  12. Unbelievable that after years people still think they are entitled to refunds in a crowdfunding project. Crowdfunding is a funding model. It's not a pre-order. So no refunds. This is pretty much stated everywhere. If there were refunds there would be no risk since the money backers are sending to CIG would not be required to build the game. Someone else would be taking the risk. The fact that so many people don't understand this basic principle of any risk investment is just a mirror of people's stupidity and their inability to take responsibility over their actions. Anyway some sources of information : https://support.indiegogo.com/hc/en-us/articles/526876-Refunds-Can-I-get-my-money-back- https://help.kickstarter.com/hc/en-us/articles/115005028834-What-is-a-creator-obligated-to-do-once-their-project-is-funded- https://help.kickstarter.com/hc/en-us/articles/115005028834-What-is-a-creator-obligated-to-do-once-their-project-is-funded- https://www.popularmechanics.com/technology/gadgets/a25741/popslate-crowdfunding-fail-no-refunds/ With that said. I don't care one bit about defending CIG. They have NO RISK.
  13. If it is all about supporting the game development at this stage, CIG just needs to put a donate button in their webpage for people to send them any amount of money they wish. But that doesn't work. Backers want ships. Nothing wrong with that 6 years ago. But now, without a concrete end insight for the game development it will obviously attract more attention. One thing is sure. We all here want Star Citizen to be the great game we all think it will be. But if CIG does not deliver, this type of game packages will be the type of thing that will get them in trouble with the law. I hope they know what they are getting into as this can get the attention of consumer protection agencies. SC alpha is still far from being close to a complete game. And that should be the main focus. Not selling even more packages to raise money when you already raised close to $200 Million beating the development cost of many of the most expensive games to develop.
  • Create New...