Jump to content

CitizenCon Streaming


VoA

Recommended Posts

If you look at the citizencon schedule you can see that the conclusion is named "road to release".

I seriously hope they will announce the first chapter of SQ42.

Also keep in mind that a good part of the dev should be working on Vanduul ships/ lore ....

The thing that I fill the most concerning is the pew pew syndrom : the devs seems to have a vision of gameplay very casual compare to the hardcore fan base : just look at the reverse the verse where they pass their time to ram and backstab each others .... the new ground race with "weapon on" that they are hipping will be just a shitty mess compare to the murray cup ...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, macgivre said:

 

The thing that I fill the most concerning is the pew pew syndrom : the devs seems to have a vision of gameplay very casual compare to the hardcore fan base : just look at the reverse the verse where they pass their time to ram and backstab each others .... the new ground race with "weapon on" that they are hipping will be just a shitty mess compare to the murray cup ...

As much as there is a player base that plans on being very hardcore, a majority of the backer base is of an age where hardcore gaming isn't practical due to age, family, jobs, etc... I totally expect that hardcore players for Star Citizen will be rewarded by the systems in-game, but I don't expect CIG to cater specifically to the hardcore players simply because they're hardcore. I expect the game will be quite balanced, with the populated (safe) system areas giving a fulfilling gameplay experience for the more casual/less hardcore players, while the outlaw/unaligned systems will be the play-place for the more hardcore player base. That said, even with those systems in place, the game is still set to have the AI/NPC count accounting for 90% of the encounters in game, so while there will be PvP, I don't think it will be as widespread as people in the "hardcore pvp" side of the community think it will be. It could be, but I think they're building AC up to be that go-to in-game PvP arena system, while the main world has a much more balanced PvP vs PvE setup. If you look at some of the more successful MMOs to date, they follow this kind of pattern, and I don't see CIG as feeling the need to force PvP. If nothing else, the main game designers want to make sure that unwanted PvP/griefing is as minimized as possible for the full game. (Not commenting on the alpha) :P

Link to comment
Share on other sites

52 minutes ago, Comet said:

What will be your stance if at CitizenCon they don't announce a SQ 42 release date?

Agree with @Chimaera below....

41 minutes ago, Chimaera said:

I don't see CIG giving any release dates for SQ42 until the Crytek lawsuit is over. 

Agree but I do think CIG was (or is - they are pretty confident with the lawsuit but they will listen to the lawyers - especially since one of the Founders = CR's earliest partner - is a Lawyer)........... prepared to give a S42 2019 release date.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, radoorid said:

@Chimaera after watching several vids of YouTubers talking about upcoming cit con. their underlying concern was that CIG  does not have a good pulse on their community.  So I agree with your opinion that they may not have good community managers. 

And the ones that were good have either left or been let go in favor of "Social Media" specialists. Ugh.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Like I said on Discord, if they would have approach the community ahead of time and laid all this out for the community to decide, it would have been fine. People are growing tired of the WTF are you thinking moments from CIG. 

If the second option of: The keynote and closing being free to all and additional content being pay per view, sure you would have had some complaints but not at the level we saw with the initial digital ticket sale fiasco. If they explained things ahead of time I think the majority of the community would have a much greater acceptance of the ideas and played along, but it seems that the folks over at CIG are very, very slow learners. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was a little disappointed when informed of the refund I am due to get from CIG for my Digital Streaming Pass and wasted no time in purchasing a "goodie bag" to help fund the event. I agree that with a little more thought, CIG should have released a special 1 month's subscriber access with added exclusive goodies to coincide with the event and most backers would not have batted an eyelid. Not being a subscriber, I'm of the minority view that most, if not all, video/media content should initially be exclusive to subscribers anyway, but that's an argument for another time.

It seems to me that people lay the blame of the latest "fiasco" at CIG in general when it seems to me that, from Chris's apology, the initial idea to charge for streaming the event was solely his alone. Understandable when he needed to cover the cost of the vision of his grand event (initially in the region of a low six figures!). Now, this strikes me as slightly worrying that there isn't someone there with enough power, and a gauge on public opinion, to stand up to Chris on issues such as this one. Chris is, after all, a game developer first and foremost and therefore really needs to listen to his public relations team (if there is one).

I just hope that this is an isolated case related to PR and marketing and that there are enough checks and balances in place when it comes to realising Chris's big dreams for future game development. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I fear @LowZone, with the departure of Ben Lesnik, there is no one with enough clout, or balls, to tell Chris what he needs to hear as it relates to the community. The term, community managers, denotes that their role would be to "deal" with issues related to the community and it's perception of the company. I highly doubt however, that the opinions of these folks is considered when making marketing decisions. 

It's sad, considering how open the community is with their opinions, that CIG is having such a difficult time grasping what will and will not piss of the majority of the community. I still say, just tell us what is going on, and we will respond accordingly. Especially with monetary funding.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Juntau said:

I fear @LowZone, with the departure of Ben Lesnik, there is no one with enough clout, or balls, to tell Chris what he needs to hear as it relates to the community.

Just because Ben is working remotely in Maryland doesn't mean he doesn't work at CIG and is still in communication with CR.   My understanding is he has taken over much of what David Ladyman did for JP.

Ben Lesnick

From the Star Citizen Wiki, the fidelity™ encyclopedia
 
 

This article is a stub.

You can help the Star Citizen Wiki by expanding it.

Ben Lesnick Headshot.jpg
 

Ben Lesnick is the Director of Community Engagement and Content Strategy at CIG Los Angeles.[1] He was previous a Community Manager and he is one of Cloud Imperium’s first employees in 2013.[2] He is also the host of different shows for backers, including Wingman’s Hangar, Around the Verse, and Reverse The Verse.< citation needed > Since May 2018, he had worked remotely from his home in Maryland.[3]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

While this may be the case, I find it hard to fathom that he has the same impact or influence. Also, one thing to consider is that WIKI pages are group collaborations of content and therefore not always accurate. I know CIG's official stance is that Ben was going to be working remotely, but do you follow him social media? Never a mention of the project at all.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Juntau said:

While this may be the case, I find it hard to fathom that he has the same impact or influence. Also, one thing to consider is that WIKI pages are group collaborations of content and therefore not always accurate. I know CIG's official stance is that Ben was going to be working remotely, but do you follow him social media? Never a mention of the project at all.

I don't doubt that his workload has been diminished - possibly for some personal reasons (he has taken health leave of absences before) - or family or whatever.   There is more likely this kind of personal reason as to why he is in Maryland.   It could also be something as simple as "he didn't like LA".... I don't think there is any rift whatsoever with Ben and CIG or CR........... heck......... the biggest Wing Commander Fan ever - and CR took him into SC as one of the founding team members...... let him take the lead on many ships....... and much of the lore (FYI - Ben has been and is still the biggest contributor to the Jump Point company articles - and always has been)......

...... I think you are speculating too much ........ and jumping on the bandwagon that CIG has somehow made recent mistakes with PR.   They haven't.   Yes..... the pay to view fiasco was a mess up but CR took full responsibility for it and reversed it.   CIG is doing fine........ people need to chill........ 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

48 minutes ago, VoA said:

I think you are speculating too much ........ and jumping on the bandwagon that CIG has somehow made recent mistakes with PR. 

They have in many situations recently. The tone-deafness is verifiable if you ever get a chance to go to any of the CIG offices and talk to the staff that aren't community staff. CIG leadership is often given the most rose-colored reports from the community team, and the marketing people rarely consult the community guys before dropping something on the community. This isn't a "bandwagon" scenario. Anyone with any sense of critical thinking can see this, but even moreso if you ever get to talk directly to non-community staff. When I took my trip to CIG LA last August and spoke at length with CR and Sandi about some of the community concerns related to a number of issues, they were literally at a loss. It was like they hadn't ever heard of the concerns or issues I was referring to. There's a major disconnect at CIG between the community team's representations to the bosses, and the reality of the community situation, and it's all because the community team management heavily screens the leadership staff from a majority of community issues and concerns...and why a number of community management staff have either quit or taken diminished/different roles. 
If anything, the fact that CR had even an inkling of an idea that pay to view would be a good idea shows how disconnected the leadership at CIG is from the overall community. It's not a red herring, it's a canary in the coal mine. ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think its just a giant shitshow overall because of many factors complicating things:

  • multiples offices coordination
  • family things (bosses wife and brother)
  • crytek law suit and other law things
  • extreme difficulty of ambitious tech solutions
  • insane complexity of the whole software project with so many pieces having to fit
  • overtime/long hours taking toll on peoples
  • massive delays and late on any even worst case envisioned release windows
  • community drama
  • having to find very good peoples for below very good money and keep them
  • having to keep the crowdfunding money stream flowing

That said maybe it has to be this way.

Ambitious things usually can't be accomplished with low effort, no problems walk in the park approach.

Work hard (CIG) - play hard (SC).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Devil Khan said:

Wow and I thought I was negative. 

Just saying things can't possibly be always nice, clean and happy in the sausage factory where the Star Citizen Sausage gets made.

All the issues are stuff they have to deal with and which can put pressure on peoples. Its not meant in a "SC is going to fail and will never come out and CR is a traitor" way like what DS is doing.

On the contrary part of this means giant respect that CR still seems to manage and hasn't gone totally crazy or become a drug addict or shot himself. I can't imagine the pressures on him but also on others of course as part of that pressure is probably going around everywhere in the company in all directions as it should be.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There are less chances than the last cons that were held. The only one thing isn't even related to any of the cons and that is selling ships and changing policy every so often.

Also I think CR had said many a time it was only the backer (and attendees) funds and sponsorship that pays for the con and not our money.

Every con is a business, even Non profit ones. The greater the risk, the greater the reward or so they say. You don't see the marketing value it is generating. A big fudge up, media will cover it even more. Whether or not it is good or bad, the long term of spreading the world will be good for the most part. Too long and it will die faster. Just long at the player account spikes around  event.

Also Hello my name is Devil Khan and I am an addict.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, Chimaera said:

When I took my trip to CIG LA last August and spoke at length with CR and Sandi about some of the community concerns related to a number of issues, they were literally at a loss. It was like they hadn't ever heard of the concerns or issues I was referring to. ......It's not a red herring, it's a canary in the coal mine. ;)

What were some of the issues you were referring to (beyond schedule and scope creep - since CR has said all along that he would continue to expand the game - to match the funding it has received - and we all know that S42 is impactly (servery for a valid reason) the resources CIG has towards the PU....... and once it comes out those resources will be diverted to the PU.

 

7 hours ago, CyberianK said:

I think its just a giant shitshow overall because of many factors complicating things:

Going over your points here @CyberianK - see below (and no I don't work for CIG - but been accused many times of that as you know --- just tired of the negative "bandwagon" stuff)....

  • multiples offices coordination - this is actually a smart business decision.  Talent is spread out across many cities and contries and you can't just pay everyone to relocate to LA - besides CIG is doing a fine job using Technology to leverage this coordination and have things getting worked on 24/7 (besides holidays)
  • family things (bosses wife and brother) - this is not quanitifable one way or another (personal drama - if any) ---- BUT --- We can all agree that Neither Sandi or Erin are freeloading on their connections to CR - they work VERY hard and are VERY talented additions to CIG.
  • crytek law suit and other law things - this is actually a result of their success and Crytek's failures (virtually going out of business many times over the years).   This is just one reason why we need Tort Reform.
  • extreme difficulty of ambitious tech solutions- this is actually a good thing to recreate a next Gen MMO - I would rather they did this instead of playing it safe and have a game that doesn't set new standards.   64-bit, procedural gen, Object Container Streaming, etc.... have all been a success.   The only thing where I think CIG failed on this would be outsourcing many things early on (like FPS was kinda of a failure early on) - but getting the Crytek Devs to come to CIG's office was a Coup 😎
  • insane complexity of the whole software project with so many pieces having to fit- this is actually being managed well since their solution has been to develop tools to help devs (as oppose to writing new code for everything).   The move from Crytek to Lumberyard was a good move.   CIG's use of modularity and procedural generation have also been stellar.
  • overtime/long hours taking toll on peoples- this is endemic to every major endeavor as you know..... but at least they do honor the December - January holidays.
  • massive delays and late on any even worst case envisioned release windows- this is due to S42 taking up all the priority resources - once it is released (my bet is 2019) you'll see the goals quadruple and more 
  • community drama- this is due to "bandwagon" negativity without the other side (like what I am presenting) having a say...
  • having to find very good peoples for below very good money and keep them- this is again sign of an endeavor that is worthwhile and responsible spending of backer's money (CIG could have easily blown through their reserves otherwise)
  • having to keep the crowdfunding money stream flowing- this is again sign of an endeavor that is successful and I am honestly very happy with this business model.   I  prefer having a wide variety (multiple goals) in the game...... and an expanded scope game that honors the ambition and generosity of the backers (remember pledging is voluntary - and many backers just have an Aurora).
7 hours ago, CyberianK said:

That said maybe it has to be this way.

Ambitious things usually can't be accomplished with low effort, no problems walk in the park approach.

Work hard (CIG) - play hard (SC).

Thanks for seeing this side - but also give me a reply on my other responses - since you are obviously fair in your assessment.

7 hours ago, Devil Khan said:

There are less chances than the last cons that were held. The only one thing isn't even related to any of the cons and that is selling ships and changing policy every so often.

Also I think CR had said many a time it was only the backer (and attendees) funds and sponsorship that pays for the con and not our money.

Every con is a business, even Non profit ones....

The problem here (and I agree that CR dropped the ball on this one - thus the OP - is that it broke precedence from previous years :(

3 hours ago, Juntau said:

@VoA I am speculating, as are you. There is no definitive information regarding the topic of this discussion that can be source or substantiated. It's just a discussion.

However - if you do find something from Ben (I don't follow his Twitter) - let us know :)

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@VoA I had a list of things. The things that surprised them were related to issues with community unhappiness with some feature creep, control issues, worries about netcode, issues with the organization system, problems with the store, and a plethora of others. I can't remember the exact list or everything, but what stood out to me was how completely clueless as to the levels of concern within the community. I later confirmed with both current and former CIG staff I have come to know since 2012 that CIG's current community management leadership have decided to insulate the bosses from community worries and gripes to the point that CR and other people seem to have the idea that the enthusiasm for the game is greater now than it was even back at the beginning of crowdfunding.

The biggest one I remember was when I brought up how disheartening the SQ42 delay was, and CR asked me to detail what I meant by that. When I described it and even showed him some of our posts on the forums from that time, his eyes got super-wide and he said he was completely clueless that it had been that negative of an impact on the community. I get the feeling they only really are getting ideas of community unhappiness by how poorly a sale or sales will be. They don't get accurate updates anymore from the CM team.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Chimaera good post and I do think it is good for all management teams of any great Endeavor to hear feedback like this from the community.... however I think there is more cherry-picking done here towards the negative side and as usual little from the positive side..... the people that are happy..... like me as an example are usually in the minority in terms of speaking out as you know because people that have a gripe are typically more motivated to post their concern other than those that are happy.

I also don't think Chris Roberts and some of the higher-ups are as clueless as you think they are about the community's concerns mainly because Chris Roberts himself said & Ben Lesnick confirmed that even with Chris Roberts crazy schedule he does read a lot of the Forum posts on the RSI forms ......now that may have changed over the last year or so with the amount that the project has grown but everything still needs to be look at as a case of being in development and I think most players understand this.

I think another case in point is Chris Roberts reversal on charging to watch The Stream for citizencon..... he realized what the community was saying and he reversed himself.  As I mentioned in a previous post and the reason why I posted this thread to begin with.... is because I thought it did break precedence.... and was really more of a concern for that than anything else for what the community expects from the game development...... and what they're expecting to pay for its access .......but you have to admit that Star Citizen has unparallel Insider access to its development including allowing players to contribute ideas and concerns than any other game in the history of video gaming :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, VoA said:

I also don't think Chris Roberts and some of the higher-ups are as clueless as you think they are about the community's concerns mainly because Chris Roberts himself said & Ben Lesnick confirmed that even with Chris Roberts crazy schedule he does read a lot of the Forum posts on the RSI forms

Not anymore. The way CR put it to me when I asked him about it was something along the lines of, "I used to spend a lot of time reading and answering things on the forums, but it ended up taking a lot of my focus away from things that were far more important, so now I only REALLY check posts if the community team forwards one my way that they think I would like to make a response to." 

As for CR backtracking, given the universal condemnation he received, and the fact that very few people were actually purchasing the tickets/packages, I think there was no way for him NOT to decide to pull back on the tickets. Regarding the rest of what you've said, you seem to misconstrue us having a lot of access to seeing the development process with also having a lot of input and insight into how CIG leadership hears about/learns about what the community is saying. The two are not connected. We have lots of access that CIG decides to give to us. The leadership of CIG has perceptions of the community based off of the filter presented to them by the CM team. There's a huge difference in that, and that itself is evident in the apparent disconnect that quite a few decisions by leadership and marketing have recently made and then had to backtrack on. 

1 hour ago, VoA said:

however I think there is more cherry-picking done here towards the negative side and as usual little from the positive side..... the people that are happy..... like me as an example are usually in the minority in terms of speaking out as you know because people that have a gripe are typically more motivated to post their concern other than those that are happy.

Constructive criticism helps make things better. There's a difference between constructive criticism and pointless bitching. Sadly, with so much pointless bitching, constructive criticism often gets lumped in as a pointless gripe and the CM team chooses to shelter the bosses from it, using the excuse (I got this from Lando, Witkin, and Nolin) 'only a small percentage of the community is actually actively engaged, so we can't really know for certain if complaints are really valid to the whole community'. This is a dangerous attitude to have, especially if "happy players" aren't also using their voices so the CM team is able to identify when an issue is problematic to BOTH the happy and unhappy backers. 

Myself, I'm content to wait, and I'm enjoying other games as I wait. But when something as catastrophically tone-deaf as the "pay to access" CitizenCon was pushed out, then you can tell that CR is not at all aware of the real attitudes and feelings of the community. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To me Star Citizen's biggest failures to date have been when Chris Roberts set timetables for release that were so far away from reality, that it generated way more money than it should.  The closer they say the game is to release, the more people think, "I can wait that long" and pledge to support the game.  The problem is, these people want the game to come out when CR said it would.  And because Star Citizen generated more money than it would have if CR gave a correct time estimate, he expanded the scope even further, delaying the game even more.  Its clear to me that for years this was a vicious cycle that has only (relatively) recently ended.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It stated that SC would be release 2 years from kickstarter :D (End of 2014).

People want a time/date for the beta/release and they keep bugging CR and the various Devs. Realistly 2030 would be better for the full release. 96 basic systems (the rest after release). We still haven't got a full system.

Seriously you should be ashame if you think it's first thing that CIG did a 180 on.  They are not a AAA company, as they have yet to release a game.

The community want  and what they (CIG) think the community want are divided. They are going around to blizcon, dragoncon,pax*, etc and they think they can put a high price of tickets. These are 10s of 1000s and wargamig and blizCon isn't just one game. A whole lot of vendors/sponsors are there as well. Not just 1-3 sponsors.

However it was really bad to actually wanted to charge $20* even though half of that was just 3 items. Which you will already get .  Again it is just what they (Devs × community) vs what Cr thinks vs what trolls think vs what we, the community think.

Personally I'd keep quiet :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 9/12/2018 at 7:34 PM, Chimaera said:

Not anymore. The way CR put it to me when I asked him about it was something along the lines of, "I used to spend a lot of time reading and answering things on the forums, but it ended up taking a lot of my focus away from things that were far more important, so now I only REALLY check posts if the community team forwards one my way that they think I would like to make a response to." 

Not surprised by this at all - since it is heads down - full speed ahead on many of the major technical challenges (see S42 below).   I find it hard to believe he doesn't still read the forums (he's not being truthful to himself I think - or is exaggerating - or even using it as  an excuse to ignore wild speculations that are going on - etc....) === He travels a lot and I am sure he reads the forums still during his travels (maybe though a fraction of what he used to).

On 9/12/2018 at 7:34 PM, Chimaera said:

Regarding the rest of what you've said, you seem to misconstrue us having a lot of access to seeing the development process with also having a lot of input and insight into how CIG leadership hears about/learns about what the community is saying. The two are not connected.

Well - I think everyone can agree - that CIG gives unparralleled look into its development (exponentially more so than any other video game in history).

As for player input affecting the development - I think you are wrong on this as well.   I personally have seen CIG suggestions to a large number of my threads - mainly the ones that end up being mega threads (with responses from Ben and CR in the thread or a direct position that matches the thread) +++ I there is great response and even the Customer Service people packing Concierge Ticket suggestions onto the Devs.   Some response they say they would like to implement the suggestion but don't have the time / resources to do so know but that they will add it to a task list or even bring it up in a Dev meeting.   Now - I would say that I have also noticed a bias towards Concierge backers vs regular backers (and how much CIG responds to one vs the other) - and that is a bad thing that bothers me.

On 9/12/2018 at 7:34 PM, Chimaera said:

Constructive criticism helps make things better. There's a difference between constructive criticism and pointless bitching.

Agreed - and being an architect - this is a main part of my business (especially dealing with unreasonable neighbors) ------- but what CIG is suffering from - and not doing a good enough PR push on - is how much background (VERY IMPORTANT) tech has been developed == and the fact that the community can't see or recognize how big of a deal it is..... thus it looks like "lack of progress"....... when in reality it is huge progress...... and setting up for easier / smother / faster development of all the players want to see - to evaluate progress - like new star systems.

On 9/12/2018 at 7:34 PM, Chimaera said:

Myself, I'm content to wait, and I'm enjoying other games as I wait. 

I think more people are more content - like you and I than again what is really portrayed out there right now.   Again it is the squeaky wheel....... and the click bait YouTubers...... etc.... that create many of the issues that are blown way out of proportion.

As for playing other games while you wait........ I think that is a HUGE mistake by many backers now.   I have had the same - wait and see attitude...... there are too many bugs...... no point in progressing because its just alpha....... thoughts myself.......... but any Backer that hasn't seriously gotten into Alpha 3.2+ is making a HUGE mistake.   The game is fully playable and stable now (with bugs being fully manageable and even fixable or work around in game) - where those that are playing now will have  a big advantage vs those that are waiting for later.   ++++ There's more content in 3.2 than in most MMOs now (new releases not ones that have been around for years) &&& with 3.3 and Hurston it will explode exponentially with more content / places to go / explore / learn tricks / find the best spots to put outposts - like super-nodes / etc....

On 9/13/2018 at 7:12 AM, Boildown said:

To me Star Citizen's biggest failures to date have been when Chris Roberts set timetables for release that were so far away from reality, that it generated way more money than it should.  The closer they say the game is to release, the more people think, "I can wait that long" and pledge to support the game.  The problem is, these people want the game to come out when CR said it would.  And because Star Citizen generated more money than it would have if CR gave a correct time estimate, he expanded the scope even further, delaying the game even more.  Its clear to me that for years this was a vicious cycle that has only (relatively) recently ended.

Were you see a "failure" in this - I see it as something that makes me very happy.   I want to see the scope increase...... I want to see it truly be an next gen MMO..... I want to see more ships / more goals for the game............. I plan on playing SC exclusively for 10+ years and it would suck if they took the easy road out and dropped their quality standards or R&D.

On 9/13/2018 at 8:39 AM, Devil Khan said:

It stated that SC would be release 2 years from kickstarter :D (End of 2014).

As per above...... Alpha 3.2+ is a real game that is far better (even it is current Alpha state) than most new MMOs on full launch (again not vs the MMOs that have been around for while - a number of years - but new MMOs).

++++++++++

As mentioned above........ there are many technical hurdles that have been surmounted so we will likely see and explosion in development SOON(tm) ;) ..... and I expect a 2019 release of S42 :)

98evbrrettl11.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

~S~

 

Through out this thread I was amazed at the intelligent conversations of pros and cons as to what has and is happening at CIG, very informative thankyou all for the great read.     P.S.   CR should read this!!!  

 

Voa:   The Con Stream was something that was a morning shower thought that should have gone down the drain, but it didn't and the result was every predictable. As for your insight on the PR department is as close as it gets, from what I have read, both RSI, here and other sites for the last 4 days.    CR did not have any idea as to what the response was for the Con pay-pre-view until it was away to late.   I do agree with your response to Chimaera on the constructive criticism: spot on.

SQ42 has always been what I wanted and will continue to wait for.    With the PU Core programing affecting both games, SQ42 will have to wait until SQ42 Core needed will have to wait.   When that will be and what they need who knows, as long as they don't add anymore to the SQ42 Game Core.

Again Excellent Read

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...