[Aesaar]

https://clips.twitch.tv/EndearingTallJayNomNom

They may not know how logging out is supposed to work, but it's still early days.

[Akalabeth Angel]

Does Squadron 42 have a release date yet? A new trailer? Wasn't it supposed to be out in 2016?

Wow, more FUD.  How was SQ42 supposed to release in 2016 if the game didn't start development until they made Lumberyard in partnership with Amazon in December 2016?  Everything before that was just conceptual.  Development's only been going for 8 months and they about to have a huge Jesus Module release.

Because that's the year the original trailer announced, the one that had the guy giving a speech. From what you're saying, pretty dishonest trailer.

[Kobrar44]

So I made a small site for funs. I am lacking any reliable data for 2017 right now, but hey it may be useful somehow. https://kobrar.pythonanywhere.com/

[Scotty]

Does Squadron 42 have a release date yet? A new trailer? Wasn't it supposed to be out in 2016?

Wow, more FUD.  How was SQ42 supposed to release in 2016 if the game didn't start development until they made Lumberyard in partnership with Amazon in December 2016?  Everything before that was just conceptual.  Development's only been going for 8 months and they about to have a huge Jesus Module release.

Because that's the year the original trailer announced, the one that had the guy giving a speech. From what you're saying, pretty dishonest trailer.

Aesaar is trolling.

[BlueFlames]

So I made a small site for funs. I am lacking any reliable data for 2017 right now, but hey it may be useful somehow. https://kobrar.pythonanywhere.com/

I spitballed some figures into your site and got an estimate that they're between six and sixty-one million dollars in the hole already.

I'll bet the faulty assumption is that pledges are the only source of funding.  Star Citizen as a project has adopted the same business model as an Uwe Boll film:  Strategically choose your location so that your project is profitable off of tax incentives alone, and any income provided by suckers customers is icing on the cake.  Chris Roberts hasn't mastered the strategy yet, since CIG has so many offices with so many employees that the company is taking payday loans to make ends meet, while waiting for their tax returns, but inept implementation doesn't mean that's not the strategy.

Also, something something Nazi gold.

[Grizzly]

Wolfenstein 2: The New Colossus does look really fun.

[Aesaar]

I want to hear 666maslo666's take on why this is a good thing.

[Sushi]

I actually tend to agree that 100 super-detailed star systems was ludicrous in the first place, and that the game will likely be better if it doesn't attempt to fulfill that.

Obviously it would have been better to not make such a promise in the first place. And yeah, massively shifting the vision/scope of a crowdfunded game definitely has some problems.

But from a purely pragmatic "given where the game is today" and how to make it a fun / viable / launched game... odds seem better with smaller scope.


Fans claiming that "each planet will be more than a AAA game" is adorably optimistic.

[Colonol Dekker]

If ED charged per system.......

[BlueFlames]

Hey, you could sell JPGs of the jump node access codes needed to get to the systems that haven't been implemented yet!

[666maslo666]

I want to hear 666maslo666's take on why this is a good thing.

Lower number of more detailed systems >> bigger number of less detailed systems.

100 star systems did seem like a very high number to me anyway, and probably pulled out of thin air. So this does not bother me much.

[Luis Dias]

It rather depended on what a "system" would actually be like. At first, I thought it would be a system spaceport with some good looking planets. You'd have to design some different space stations and some nice jpegs if the space ports were at the planets. In that kind of setup, 100 could be "manageable", with some clever modular designs.

With 100 fully formed procedural planets that have to look great, it's madness. Even for Croberts.

[Mikes]

It rather depended on what a "system" would actually be like. At first, I thought it would be a system spaceport with some good looking planets. You'd have to design some different space stations and some nice jpegs if the space ports were at the planets. In that kind of setup, 100 could be "manageable", with some clever modular designs.

With 100 fully formed procedural planets that have to look great, it's madness. Even for Croberts.

To be fair ... as the goal of 100 planets/systems was announced, that's exactly how it was: A "planet" was supposed to be nothing more but a landing zone that you could only reach by "autopilot" i.e. a canned flightpath/animation and a limited "ground facility" with shops and bars to walk around in.

[Deathsnake]

Jep. The old one was nothing more then like Privateer 2. Just with "you can look around while the ship has Autopilot landing" with 3 landing zones.

Now one System had around 4 planets, 9 moons and 30 stations. And in that Speed they can create one they have to say at some Point - it is a release. Five or ten -wayne. But it have to release to get more People in. 2019 could be the date of SC 1.0

[Col. Fishguts]

With 100 fully formed procedural planets that have to look great, it's madness. Even for Croberts.

In the dreamworld of the ****izens, each single one of those 100 systems consists of a complete star system with multiple planets/moons plus accompanying stations/cities. With each planet having more original content than a modern AAA game.
Sounds crazy, but reddit is full of people daydreaming about that.

[BlueFlames]

So it sounds like what you're saying is that the feature creep got in the way of the feature creep.

[StarSlayer]

So it sounds like what you're saying is that the feature creep got in the way of the feature creep.

I think creep is no longer the correct adjective, its about as subtle as an Alfa-Class SSN at flank bell and active sonar on continuous active search.

[Aesaar]

I want to hear 666maslo666's take on why this is a good thing.

Lower number of more detailed systems >> bigger number of less detailed systems.

100 star systems did seem like a very high number to me anyway, and probably pulled out of thin air. So this does not bother me much.

So you're saying you don't mind that CIG lied to you and it's ok if they abandon stretch goals and break kickstarter promises (this isn't the first one, but still).

How the **** can you trust them if they're willing to bull**** you like that? Hell, they're still bull****ting, because that "100 systems at launch" thing is still on the website.  Where's the guarantee than any time CR says "yes that'll be in the game", it isn't a complete lie?

All these unrealistic promises CIG made, you realise any one of them could (and almost certainly will) get axed, yes?  "But they promised" doesn't mean ****.


The other question this begs is why is the community finding out about this now.  What happened to open development?


Also, it amuses me to think of all those Operation Pitchfork guys (the player invasion of Vanduul space) and what mental gymnastics they must be putting themselves through to cope with the fact that Vanduul space probably won't even be in the game.

[Deathsnake]

The News is old with the 10 Systems.
Back in 2016 GamesCom Chris told that already to Jörg Langer, Founder of Gamestar and now Founder of Gamersglobal.de

http://www.gamersglobal.de/preview/star-citizen-2016
I told that several times in the RSI Forum but no one believe it...

“Wir könnten also irgendwann nach Ende 2017 sagen: Wir haben jetzt genug Spiel drin, wir haben vielleicht zehn Sternensysteme fertig, und wir nennen das dann den Release von Star Citizen.” Die weiteren rund 90 Sonnensysteme würden dann nach und nach fertiggestellt, und natürlich auch weitere Inhalte und Features

"We can say sometime after 2017: We have enough game, we have maybe ten starsystems done and we call that Release of Star Citizen. The other about 90 Starsystems will be done after with of Course new Content.

That is a year ago...

[666maslo666]

So you're saying you don't mind that CIG lied to you and it's ok if they abandon stretch goals and break kickstarter promises (this isn't the first one, but still).

You call it a lie, I call it a sensible change of plans. And a change of plans that I like a lot. In fact Star Citizen not having procedural planets originally was one of my problems with the game. That is something that certainly should be in a supposed Best Damn Space Sim Ever. Now that it is remedied, I am certainly OK with a reduced number of systems to compensate.

What I dont share is your fixation on them keeping every promise and every date. It seems like a nitpicking. As long as I get a great game in the end, I dont give a damn if they deliver it 5 years late and with some stretchgoals missing. What they need to do now is to demonstrate overall development progress with a 3.0 release. If they do that, my hype levels shall restore. If not, I shall become buttfrustrated. Things like number of systems and detailed kickstarter promises dont matter much.