"The Road To Release" was my most anticipated panel, and ended up being the most cringe inducing.

[VoA]

8 minutes ago, Boildown said:

I think you need to log on and play some Planetside 2 so you know what you're talking about.  Its free to play, so you're not risking anything but 17.5 GB of hard drive space and some time.

per @Chimaera

 

1 minute ago, Chimaera said:

Thing about MMOs these days is that many companies fudge what "MMO" actually means. 

Historically Massive means "many players that play the game" - not how many per shard or server...........

Besides technically SC still wins this if you count the amount of entities in the "verse" with the 10 to 1 NPC ratio and subsumption

[macgivre]

@VoA 

SC has and will have many advantages ... but not the ability to provide a massive fight of 400 ground troopers with tanks, gunships and norias of fighters unloading their rockets on the ennemy positions 😍

 

Planetside is ugly, the map is small, but the fights are so damn epic and dynamic ....

 

With performance improvement on SC we may have greater player count per shard ... but at this is quite a simulation, the dynamic of the fight may not be the same 😊

 

[Dabclipers]

Comparing Star Citizen in it's current state to any game that has been fully realized and released seems counterproductive.  Right now I don't think the Star Citizen Alpha's serve as anything more than testbeds to try out features for the game.  The amount of glitches and unfinished nature means that I struggle to play for more than a few hours before getting bored.  That doesn't mean SC is going to be bad, it just means that currently it's not representative of the final game.

Planetside 2 is an entirely different beast, and with SC being capped at 50 person per server currently it's like any other server based multiplayer game.  I wouldn't call BFV an MMO, nor would I call Minecraft one.  In it's current state, I don't think SC meets the definition for what an MMO is anyways, so it's really not worth arguing about that.

[Boildown]

I agree with Dabclippers there.  I'm not really sure why VoA was pursuing this argument, I had to double check that it wasn't Devil Kahn posting in disguise.  Will Star Citizen be the better MMO, someday?  Hells yes, otherwise I wouldn't have spent all this money.  Is it even an MMO at all, today?  Not a chance.  Lets move back to the original discussion of this thread.

 

I do think Chris Roberts has a good plan in place, finally, to get to the release of the game.  Of course we want it out sooner.  But now its evident to me that they've largely defeated the feature creep monster and know what they have to do to finish the game.  I didn't cringe too bad at the presentation, just re-watched and basically the cringy parts were because of poorly designed slides that needed to be advanced one step further than they wanted to show the right info. But I don't really care if CIG has poor powerpoint skills.

I think Star Citizen is at the point now where an established game studio would announce that they're working on the game, and maybe release a short hype video.  Maybe we're at the point where the game isn't perpetually 3 years away, finally (although the full 110 systems and all the other stretch goals are probably still 3 years away).

[VoA]

7 hours ago, macgivre said:

@VoA 

SC has and will have many advantages ... but not the ability to provide a massive fight of 400 ground troopers with tanks, gunships and norias of fighters unloading their rockets on the ennemy positions 😍

 

Planetside is ugly, the map is small, but the fights are so damn epic and dynamic ....

 

With performance improvement on SC we may have greater player count per shard ... but at this is quite a simulation, the dynamic of the fight may not be the same 😊

 

You know the answer to this - Fidelity - doesn't allow for thousands within the same instance - but that doesn't mean the game isn't "massive"....... as a matter of fact...... lesser fidelity...... = old tech = less impressive (more blips doesn't mean a game that can combine more - is better....... ) - especially with bad graphics and less immersion

7 hours ago, Dabclipers said:

Comparing Star Citizen in it's current state to any game that has been fully realized and released seems counterproductive.  ...

Planetside 2 is an entirely different beast, and with SC being capped at 50 person per server currently it's like any other server based multiplayer game. ....

What is left out of the argument is Server Meshing....... since the SC Galaxy Server will share data from one server to the next and with OCS and reduced LOD's over distances you won't really know if you are in a "different server" - as it is defined now in Alpha.

6 hours ago, Boildown said:

 I'm not really sure why VoA was pursuing this argument,

Because the evaluation is way off base per my post to @Dabclipers above

[Comet]

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.