Jump to content

What the Hell is the State of the Game


Prospero

Recommended Posts

Hello folks, I've been away from Star Citizen and the community for a while. It helps with the wait. The last time I was around they were just preparing to release Star Marine.

 

What the hell has happened since then? There's so much news, but I don't see all that much in terms of progress. Care to enlighten me? How are we looking for that 2018 timeline they talked about before?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Unfortunately we havent had any major content patches since star marine. Still waiting for 3.0 which is with the evocati right now. I guess we could see that being released to us somewhere at the start of next year? Perhaps in december if we're extremely lucky... but I wouldn't bet on it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Prospero said:

@Donut "Last Legs" I've seen nothing to indicate that they aren't going to release as expected. Do we have an actual release date like 2019? This all sounds quite grim.

Donut is Trolling (read the spoiler)

 

Long story short, development is ongoing. They added procedural planet/city tech, which should enable them to more rapidly develop content. A lot of the background tech (apart from netcode) is nearing what I would call feature complete, whereby they can start pumping out content. Hopefully we'll start to see visual progress soon (the tech has been the big hurdle, and once established will make everything so much easier).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Prospero maybe, we can play 3.0 in 2018. (also 3.1 and 3.2...... that's developed in parallel with 3.0) As danredda said, CIG developed procedural planet/city making tools. So they can make game assets more quickly. we can buy ships or modules with aUECs on 3.0 (not 100% bet). maybe we can play Squadron in last 2018 or 2019.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 11/3/2017 at 2:11 AM, Prospero said:

@Donut "Last Legs" I've seen nothing to indicate that they aren't going to release as expected. Do we have an actual release date like 2019? This all sounds quite grim.

just watch the CitCon vids. you'll see.

On 11/3/2017 at 10:29 AM, Mistmoon said:

maybe, we can play 3.0 in 2018

by holiday livestream at the latest.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, Gremlich said:

by holiday livestream at the latest.

I would say there is a better chance of CIG releasing a half hour of playable demo of SQ42 than seeing 3.0 this year. Six weeks to squash 200+ bugs and add the remaining features before a PTU release phase leaves me feeling doubtful we will see 3.0 go live in 2017. But at least it will be worth the wait!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, Caldon said:

At least they pledged to start giving dates for updates again. Makes it feel like more progress is being made.

What's the point in giving dates if they can't meet them. It will only cause more disappointment. 3.0 was originally scheduled for release at Christmas 2016. It is doubtful they will release it at Christmas this year.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 11/5/2017 at 5:06 AM, Major Dex said:

It is doubtful they will release it at Christmas this year.

considering that no backers, outside of those who have visited the CIG sites, knew the status of the game's progress or about the pioneer, etc at the time of CitCon (you did watch it, yes?), I guess that we'll all be surprised again, eh, if they do drop 3.0 by Xmas 2017. One of the things I've noticed with the new, meaning recent, crop of Imperium backers is the common and persistent naysayer attitude towards CIG's efforts that is clearly influenced by gamer impatience and even the Goon/Derek Smart non-backer mentality prevalent in their statements. The game is a pre-alpha -- which means that it IS NOT A GAME, CIG activities are NOT governed by the traditional and dysfunctional game development process which has given us the recent spate of pretty crappy games that need to be patched AFTER release to be playable (NMS, COD: IW, ME: A, Elite: Dangerous). The new guys need to better educate themselves about video game development in general, then review the history of what CIG is doing - especially the scope of the game. Then they need to manage their expectations. NO company can put a game out like this in 3-5 years - only a company like EA or Bungie - putting out an iteration of an existing game (COD or Halo), can because they leverage their existing engine, library of software modules and an already large workforce.

If you're being negative about how CIG is progressing, keep in mind that they started with 4 people in 2011 to make a video demo of a simpler game on an engine not known for being easy to use (UE4 was not available at the time), then it took them 2 more years to put together the skeleton of their current game company while they were programming some of the base tech and development goals. Now after 3 more years (bringing us to 5 years of development), look what they can give us (in the Keynote from CitCon 2017) which will build on 3.0 which the Evocati currently have. CIG is further along than I imagined, that's why I believe Xmas for the 3.0 ALPHA released to the Player Test Universe (PTU) (that would be to us). As an older backer, I don't care that it's taking as long as it has - Diakatana was a load of crap at 10 years development, but nobody knew it was crap until they published it. At least with CIG we can see that it's not going to be crap when it gets released. Any dates before today's were based on optimism - and CIG is now not giving dates because game development with working  with CE 3.8/AWS Lumberyard is hard. AND, once they get a single system fine-tuned and working, the rest of SC will be "easy" to complete.

CIG is wise not to give dates anymore because gamers, you know, are an impatient, unforgiveable, and to be frank, ignorant lot who generally have no idea about how to make a video game or what it takes to make one which will be a paradigm shift in how to make games. They just want the game NOW.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Gremlich said:

CIG is wise not to give dates anymore because gamers, you know, are an impatient, unforgiveable, and to be frank, ignorant lot who generally have no idea about how to make a video game or what it takes to make one which will be a paradigm shift in how to make games. They just want the game NOW.

While I am in YOUR boat and don't mind the wait, I am capable of understanding the impatience of people who donated.  Dates were given and commitments were failed. Now, like I just said, I'm in your boat and I can wait. That said, I will not look at my gaming brethren and put them down because they're tired of waiting.  Five years is a lot of time and more time than it takes me to pay off a car.  I suggest, for the better of us all, we let frustration be vented.  It's OK to be bitter from time to time.  After all, this is the internet. 

Also, I agree it's smart if they don't announce any more dates!  We'll see. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, Major Dex said:

What's the point in giving dates if they can't meet them. It will only cause more disappointment. 3.0 was originally scheduled for release at Christmas 2016. It is doubtful they will release it at Christmas this year.

They were going to make it as a system where they promised to release something by a set date, and they just won't tell what it is. That's how I interpreted it anyway.

This means that it gives impatient backers a steady stream of smaller patches rather than a single massive one. On the one, I like it since it will probably reassure the naysayers that there is indeed something going on. On the other, I do love big content bombs, as they keep me exploring a while longer than just a new feature to look at for a few minutes. I guess we'll see if it works out for them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, IronFoxide said:

I am capable of understanding the impatience of people who donated.  Dates were given and commitments were failed.

Anyone who has been a game for the last 20 years knows that game release dates aren't set in stone. I remember working at Gamestop (Babbage's at the time) when people were waiting for Diablo 2. We had this one guy who called us twice a week on Tuesday and Thursday (when the systems updated) to see if the release dates had changed, and would get tweaked whenever there was a delay. This is a fact of gaming that gamers should be well aware of, and it boggles my mind how much  people get riled up about delays in SC, especially when SC has the most open development of any game in creation. We literally can see what's going on, where the delays are, and sometimes even why and how they happen and get fixed. It's not just about being patient or impatient, it's about being capable of accepting reality versus fantasy when it comes to gaming development.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, Chimaera said:

Anyone who has been a game for the last 20 years knows that game release dates aren't set in stone. I remember working at Gamestop (Babbage's at the time) when people were waiting for Diablo 2. We had this one guy who called us twice a week on Tuesday and Thursday (when the systems updated) to see if the release dates had changed, and would get tweaked whenever there was a delay. This is a fact of gaming that gamers should be well aware of, and it boggles my mind how much  people get riled up about delays in SC, especially when SC has the most open development of any game in creation. We literally can see what's going on, where the delays are, and sometimes even why and how they happen and get fixed. It's not just about being patient or impatient, it's about being capable of accepting reality versus fantasy when it comes to gaming development.

Absolutely. And, having been a gamer for the last 20 years, you have seen customers get upset about game delays. I would only like to point out that 'people are people', as the song goes.  Saying gamers should be well aware of... is correct.  Hell yes they should.  Are they, though? IMO anyone who's driven a car for more than 10 years should also be a careful driver.  HAHA.  I just want all sides to get along.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sadly that isn't the case, and there's a great example going on right now outside of Star Citizen.

For at least the last seven years, people have been busting at Blizzard to release a Legacy or Classic version of World of Warcraft. Saturday they announced they will be doing just that and the entire "Legacy" community pretty much flipped their collective shit because they were so psyched...Then they began to nitpick and postulate and talk about what they REALLY wanted. Everything from "True Vanilla" to "Vanilla Content, but current graphics" to "True Vanilla + progression" and then some. Now the once "united" group in their simple demand are literally destroying each other on forums, discords, reddit, and etc... because now that they are getting "what they want", instead of being grateful, they're now trying to demand even more. This isn't a unique trait of the gaming world, but gamers are the most visible offenders.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 11/5/2017 at 2:34 PM, IronFoxide said:

Dates were given and commitments were failed.

That said, I will not look at my gaming brethren and put them down because they're tired of waiting. 

Five years is a lot of time ......... 

I suggest, for the better of us all, we let frustration be vented

Valid points, all. However, for point 1 - optimism got the better of them and I submit that they did not KNOWINGLY seek to mislead us, hence, the use of the term "lie" by any naysayer is a bit much.

Point 2: manage expectations. Like I said, gamers want what they want NOW. Tough, considering that CIG is NOT EA, Bungee, etc... with SC, we aren't getting it now, so we back off the entitlement a tad.

Point 3: yes, and consider the scope of the game against others of the same genre - 5 years isn't enough for SC. (PS, Using a car as a metaphor is specious).

Point 4: write your frustrations down in a notepad, then, let it stew. Awhile. Then read it again and rewrite it if necessary. THEN vent away. I tend to do that when reacting to something I really do not agree with. I want meaningful discourse, not a urinary olympics.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Rather that itemize let me just keep it as short as I can.

It's not rational to devote such defense to a company that is working for you and to also be against the gamers that are your potential friends and mates. The fear of losing the company or the degradation of their product is premature. 

Let's bring people in.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Quote

It's not rational to devote such defense

It is rational, however to expect managed expectations from reasoning and hopefully rational people. I'm not attacking people, I am, however trying to get others who have not been backers for as long as many in Imperium have been to ameliorate their long held beliefs  which have been molded by the existing game development industry. That isn't too much to expect. BTW, CIG doesn't work for us, it works for Chris Roberts and his vision. We aren't investors. If we were, our collective impatience would have given us a POS game that we'd complain about just like any of the other games I cited above.

One other thing, after hearing the same "is it done yet" for the past 2-3 years gets old. People need to really read more of what's available about the project to date and not take terse advice as an attack.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...