Author Topic: Wing Commander 6: The Undiscovered Release Date (Star Citizen Thread)  (Read 588990 times)

0 Members and 4 Guests are viewing this topic.

Re: Derek Smart might be taking legal action over Star Citizen
Comparing it to Minecraft is frankly misleading. For one thing, people who bought into Minecraft got the full game available at a cheaper price. Whereas Star Citizen requires you to pony up additional cash for all assets available in game. Their business model is more like Mechwarrior Online with its 300 dollar mechs than Minecraft with its 30 dollar everything. Except of course MWO was free to play. And yeah, allegedly these ships wont be available for purchase post-launch but frankly I doubt the truthfulness of that statement.  If these ships have proven to be a huge source of revenue then are they going to cut themselves off from that? Hell no.

Witcher 3 just won game of the year by the way.  I don't think the word "average" applies to it in any regard.  Nor to Skyrim for that matter.

"Standalone" isn't a term that has anything to do with assets. It's about "does this game require an existing game to run?".  Far Cry Blood Dragon is standalone.  You didn't need Far Cry 3 to run it. Porky's Prefect 10 is standalone, didn't need Enslaved to run it.  On a modding site I would think people would know the meaning of "standalone" given that some of the mods hosted on here specifically advertise themselves as such.

And further I'm not sure that the scope of the game is all that exceptional.  I mean you got a game with a single player campaign, and multiplayer where you can run around and shoot guys, jump in a vehicle, shoot up more guys then land your vehicle hop out and repair it before getting in it again, and that game is called Battlefield 4.  Right.   That describes pretty much most of Star Citizen already.  Now you're going to be able to do trading and there'll be different stations or planets to land on and maybe there's some mining and whatnot but beyond flying a spaceship and shooting guys on foot what can a person do?

Think about the sorts of things that other games have to offer? In Space engineers you can mine, build, design and repair spaceships. In Ultima Online players partook in a variety of roles, built structures and consequently whole towns or civilizations, etcetera.  Some people apparently just worked as blacksmiths, building weapons for other people, etcetera. A whole sort of player-driven economy.  In a game like EVE Online, there are large guilds or groups or whatnot with thousands of players with alliances and economies, etcetera.

What of things can you do in Star Citizen? Can a group of players create their own station and start building weapons to outfit other player's ships? Can you design your own ships? Set yourself up as a repair jockey or station trader or a manufacturing hub? Can you play the game outside of the "driving a starship" role?

Star Citizen sounds like a game with a fair amount of components, lots of assets and a lot of game systems to enable the PU but not a lot of scope. What the player can do in the game is fairly narrow.
Now some other things could be added on later as the game progresses, but then again that's true of every component that is already delaying the game.  Personally I'm not sure why it even has an FPS component.  Boarding actions and "realistic starship combat" are two incompatible ideas.  Unless you have Star Trek transporters (like Pulsar Lost Colony), the only boarding you're likely to be doing are against space stations or perhaps assaulting a ground base that you want to capture intact.

 

Offline 666maslo666

  • 28
  • Artificial Neural Network
Re: Derek Smart might be taking legal action over Star Citizen
Quote
And I sure hope the two games won't share an engine.  That would be very dumb.  A singleplayer sim doesn't need a lot of the **** an MMO sandbox does.  There's absolutely no reason they need to wait for the PU version of the engine.

Why should they waste time making 2 different engines, when PU engine needs to be made anyway? Just so they can release SQ42 sooner, at the cost of releasing PU even later? How would that be better? They would just waste development time for no good reason whatsoever. Squadron 42 is standalone because you play it separately from the PU, thats all. You are reading too much into what Sandy said if you think she meant something deeper than that. It is not standalone when it comes to engine and assets, it shares a ton of that with PU.

Quote
This argument would hold a lot more water if they hadn't said that most of their assets from last year had been redesigned. They obviously thought their models no longer met the standards they were after.

Have you even considered that they actually never thought the models meet the final standards (after all, they were pretty ugly), and planned from the start to iteratively improve them - improving them in multiple incremental passes over time, as the engine gains features and modelers gain experience with the workflow?

Quote
And something as fundamental as ship customisation is something you want to have pinned down before you start making missions (just like your flight models), not after.  You can't make fun and balanced missions if you don't know what the player and enemy ships are capable of.

You can make WIP missions that are only roughly balanced and then balance them well before shipping. Such detailed balance testing comes late in the development, when all the gameplay is pinned down. Not when the flight model is still evolving.

Quote
Every single space sim I've ever played manages to have weightier fighters than SC does.

You know that in Freespace you can press one button (afterburner), and your ship goes from 0 to almost max speed in a fraction of a second? SC does not have anymore agile fighters than Freespace - Aurora or Hornet already handles well and they weigh exactly as they should. Only bigger ships are too agile, and fixing that requires a simple mass increase, not reworking a whole flight model. I dont know if you have noticed, but in SC all the bigger ships are very underweight, because someone early in development just made up their weights by comparing their lengths, while in reality weight scales with length cubed. This doesnt matter yet because masses of bigger ships will all be changed down the road during balancing anyway.

Quote
So your confidence comes from them making nothing but tech demos in the same amount of time a competent studio takes to make a full game.  Okay then.

A new company, heavily modified game engine AND a full game? Or an established studio reusing a prior game engine? Game like SC is harder to make than Witcher 3 or Elite, so of course it is going to take longer. Around 5 years, Id say. Thats 2017-2018 release. You are just being impatient, IMHO.

I already had a lot of fun flying in AC and Alpha 2.0, almost on par with Elite Dangerous. Now I see no reason to argue about the definition of "game" vs. "tech demo", it does not change the substance at all. By your logic you could call Minecraft Infdev a tech demo and not a game, yet obviously a lot of people enjoyed playing it, just as they do enjoy playing AC/Alpha 2.0 when it does not crash.
« Last Edit: December 14, 2015, 01:55:11 pm by 666maslo666 »
"For once you have tasted flight you will walk the earth with your eyes turned skywards, for there you have been and there you will long to return." - Leonardo da Vinci

Arguing on the internet is like running in the Special Olympics. Even if you win you are still retarded.

 

Offline Unknown Target

  • Get off my lawn!
  • 212
  • Push.Pull?
Re: Derek Smart might be taking legal action over Star Citizen
maslow, how much have you spent on SC so far?

 
Re: Derek Smart might be taking legal action over Star Citizen
Have you even considered that they actually never thought the models meet the final standards (after all, they were pretty ugly), and planned from the start to iteratively improve them - improving them in multiple incremental passes over time, as the engine gains features and modelers gain experience with the workflow?

That theory would make more sense in a project with fixed release dates. When the release dates keep getting pushed back and ships keep getting re-designed it doesn't look planned. 
When do the designs get locked down? When are they finalized? Instead of making a third version of the Freelancer, they could have added two additional ships to the game.

 

Offline The E

  • He's Ebeneezer Goode
  • 213
  • Nothing personal, just tech support.
    • Steam
    • Twitter
Re: Derek Smart might be taking legal action over Star Citizen
Why should they waste time making 2 different engines, when PU engine needs to be made anyway? Just so they can release SQ42 sooner, at the cost of releasing PU even later? How would that be better? They would just waste development time for no good reason whatsoever. Squadron 42 is standalone because you play it separately from the PU, thats all. You are reading too much into what Sandy said if you think she meant something deeper than that. It is not standalone when it comes to engine and assets, it shares a ton of that with PU.

Look at it another way: Since a lot of the tech needed for the PU is also needed for SC proper, developing all that tech and bugfixing it for S42 would not be a waste of time. Given proper development practices (which CIG really does not seem to get), developing S42 and then building on that work to make the PU happen would have been the correct move, or rather a move that would have a set of concrete deliverables attached, with a basic development framework that is well understood by all involved. Developing every piece of SC in parallel, as they are doing now, is pretty stupid, because it leads to this bull**** we're seeing now.

Quote
Have you even considered that they actually never thought the models meet the final standards (after all, they were pretty ugly), and planned from the start to iteratively improve them - improving them in multiple incremental passes over time, as the engine gains features and modelers gain experience with the workflow?

Then they're really ****ing stupid. Iterative design has its place. Redoing every single asset multiple times, with no clear artist ownership of them? That's really bad management practice. They redid every single asset once already, for PBR. Now they're redoing them again. Why? Is it because they realized that they never managed to set proper budgets for their art assets? Is it because they finally decided that they need a proper art pipeline? It doesn't really matter. What matters is that they're ****ty managers.

Quote
You can make WIP missions that are only roughly balanced and then balance them well before shipping. Such detailed balance testing comes late in the development, when all the gameplay is pinned down. Not when the flight model is still evolving.

The flight model shouldn't be evolving at this point! Do you not get that? 3 years into development, and they've not managed to nail down the one single core mechanic they absolutely must nail? Hate to keep dragging up ED all the time, but they settled on their basic flight mechanics by this point in development. It's not that hard to do, if you're willing to do what game developers have always done and cheat. Roberts' insistence on physical realism is a boondoggle. Stuff like that gif Aesaar posted up there? Shouldn't ever happen. Would never have happened in a normal system (Or, at least, would have never happened outside a few amusing outtakes in a making-of somewhere).

Quote
You know that in Freespace you can press one button (afterburner), and your ship goes from 0 to almost max speed in a fraction of a second? SC does not have anymore agile fighters than Freespace - Aurora or Hornet already handles well and they weigh exactly as they should. Only bigger ships are too agile, and fixing that requires a simple mass increase, not reworking a whole flight model. I dont know if you have noticed, but in SC all the bigger ships are very underweight, because someone early in development just made up their weights by comparing their lengths, while in reality weight scales with length cubed. This doesnt matter yet because masses of bigger ships will all be changed down the road during balancing anyway.

So they chose to go for physical realism, had to cheat to make it work, and then did so badly? Priceless, is what that is.

Quote
A new company, heavily modified game engine AND a full game? Or an established studio reusing a prior game engine? Game like SC is harder to make than Witcher 3 or Elite, so of course it is going to take longer. Around 5 years, Id say. Thats 2017-2018 release. You are just being impatient, IMHO.

Fun fact: Elite's COBRA engine has about the same level of customization that CIG did for CryEngine.
« Last Edit: December 14, 2015, 02:35:09 pm by The E »
If I'm just aching this can't go on
I came from chasing dreams to feel alone
There must be changes, miss to feel strong
I really need lifе to touch me
--Evergrey, Where August Mourns

 

Offline Aesaar

  • 210
Re: Derek Smart might be taking legal action over Star Citizen
Why should they waste time making 2 different engines, when PU engine needs to be made anyway? Just so they can release SQ42 sooner, at the cost of releasing PU even later? How would that be better? They would just waste development time for no good reason whatsoever. Squadron 42 is standalone because you play it separately from the PU, thats all. You are reading too much into what Sandy said if you think she meant something deeper than that. It is not standalone when it comes to engine and assets, it shares a ton of that with PU.
"How would releasing a game help with the perception that they're never going to release a game?"

Take your time figuring that one out.

Actually, let me walk you through it, since you obviously need the help: Nearly all of the things you need to get SQ42 done, you're going to need for the PU as well.  That ranges from core gameplay mechanics (like flight models, ship FPS, and customization), to a few civilian, military, and alien ship models.  So you get that done first.  Then you release act 1 of SQ42 as proof that, hey, we can actually make a fun game!  You perfect that, then you work on the **** you need for the PU, like netcode, economy, quests, star systems.  You start with a relatively modest, small-scale game that you can reliably deliver in a couple of years, then you move on to the big stuff.  If they'd done that, we'd be playing SQ42 by now, because SQ42 isn't that complex a game.  It should have come out long before what we see in 2.0.

Instead they're developing everything at once.  The PU isn't going to come any faster, since SQ42 work isn't wasted either way, but because of unnecessary PU ****, SQ42 is getting delayed just like all their tech demo modules.

Quote
Have you even considered that they actually never thought the models meet the final standards (after all, they were pretty ugly), and planned from the start to iteratively improve them - improving them in multiple incremental passes over time, as the engine gains features and modelers gain experience with the workflow?
For this kind of development, there's no meaningful difference, except that your suggestion makes them look like morons.  And yeah, what The_E said.

Quote
You can make WIP missions that are only roughly balanced and then balance them well before shipping. Such detailed balance testing comes late in the development, when all the gameplay is pinned down. Not when the flight model is still evolving.
If you haven't figured out your core gameplay, you can storyboard missions.  That's pretty much the extent of what you can do.

Well, unless you're making a movie, in which case you can make nothing but 4 point patrols with 30 minutes of mocap cinematics in between.

But like The_E says, **** like the flight model and ship customization is at the very heart of the game.  They're the most important gameplay systems.  It should be pinned down by now.  It should have been pinned down last year.  They should absolutely be able to give very specific information about how you'll be able to customize your ship, not the same vague bull**** they were giving out 3 years ago.

The_E: they're 4 years into development. It started in December 2011, by CR's own admission.

Quote
You know that in Freespace you can press one button (afterburner), and your ship goes from 0 to almost max speed in a fraction of a second? SC does not have anymore agile fighters than Freespace - Aurora or Hornet already handles well and they weigh exactly as they should. Only bigger ships are too agile, and fixing that requires a simple mass increase, not reworking a whole flight model. I dont know if you have noticed, but in SC all the bigger ships are very underweight, because someone early in development just made up their weights by comparing their lengths, while in reality weight scales with length cubed. This doesnt matter yet because masses of bigger ships will all be changed down the road during balancing anyway.
Key word here being afterburner.  And that's really something.  You're comparing SC ships to Freespace ones, and the only way Freespace ones feel comparable is if you bring up afterburner acceleration.  But yeah, you're right, SC ships feel like they have Freespace afterburners, except in every direction and not just when afterburning.  I'm glad we agree. 

Wow, that groundbreaking "realistic" flight model was really worth it.  I guess it's groundbreaking to make a really complex system so you don't have to cheat, but then end up needing to cheat and the results are worse than if you hadn't bothered at all.

Actually that summarizes a lot of things in SC.  Applies to their animation/headbobbing too.

Quote
A new company, heavily modified game engine AND a full game? Or an established studio reusing a prior game engine? Game like SC is harder to make than Witcher 3 or Elite, so of course it is going to take longer. Around 5 years, Id say. Thats 2017-2018 release. You are just being impatient, IMHO.
Right, those games had premade engines.  Unlike Cryengine.  CIG made that from scratch, right?

"Game like SC is harder to make than Witcher 3 or Elite" Er, why?  I mean, I can see why a game would be harder to make if your management is incompetent, but I don't think that's what you mean.

And CR has been harping on about his past games for the entire development.  You've pointed to them as well.  You don't get to say "I have faith in CR because of his past games" and then "CIG aren't an established studio, so that's why they should be measured by a different standard than everyone else".  Either they know what they're doing or they don't.  Pick one.

5 years is next year, not 2017-2018.  This game started development in December 2011.  If you want to claim development only began after the Kickstarter, then Elite Dangerous started development in December 2012.


But yeah, I guess I'm impatient.  Must have been spoiled by all those games that release within a few months of their projected release dates.  Good thing Chris Roberts is here to show me that real game development is all about missing deadlines, not pinning down core gameplay systems, and selling 400$ jpegs.  This must be what people mean when they talk about how revolutionary SC is.
« Last Edit: December 15, 2015, 05:32:13 am by Aesaar »

 
Re: Derek Smart might be taking legal action over Star Citizen
But seriously, if a tiny indie team with no funding can make this in 5 years, how has Star Citizen not made anything worth playing in 4 with $100 million and +210 people?

Because that tiny modding team used a functional, versatile engine and set out to combine two genres of gameplay in a limited scope, rather than trying to build the FIRST PERSON UNIVERSE in a shoddy tech demo hardcoded to make FPSes look pretty.
The good Christian should beware of mathematicians, and all those who make empty prophecies. The danger already exists that the mathematicians have made a covenant with the devil to darken the spirit and to confine man in the bonds of Hell.

 

Offline Sushi

  • Art Critic
  • 211
Re: Derek Smart might be taking legal action over Star Citizen
But seriously, if a tiny indie team with no funding can make this in 5 years, how has Star Citizen not made anything worth playing in 4 with $100 million and +210 people?

Serious answer? Because the "scope of the game" to "time and money required" curve is exponential, not linear. :) SC's biggest asset AND curse is its breathtaking overambition in literally every aspect of its development. The fact that it's going way over time and budget is a natural and unsurprising consequence of it's scope.

Wow, that groundbreaking "realistic" flight model was really worth it.  I guess it's groundbreaking to make a really complex system so you don't have to cheat, but then end up needing to cheat and the results are worse than if you hadn't bothered at all.

Chris Roberts isn't the first to make that particular mistake, and he won't be the last. Unfortunately all to often between hubris and the "sunk cost" fallacy, the "crappy but non-cheaty" thing ends up staying even when it shouldn't. Somewhat ironically, Derek Smart is another legendary offender in this category.


 

Offline Unknown Target

  • Get off my lawn!
  • 212
  • Push.Pull?
Re: Derek Smart might be taking legal action over Star Citizen
They should really have hired some industrial designers, or somebody who understands how physical objects work. From the very beginning, SC has been criticised for chunky ship design (a hallmark of Roberts' work if I do say so myself),  and it's kind of obvious that they don't really know how to design a ship  that really relates to the real world in any way. Couple that with a flight model that relies on actual physics to make the ships work well...how did they not think that they'd have to have a real understanding of physics to make it work?

Game artists in general don't typically know how to make real world things. Just interesting they didn't see the potential problem beforehand - maybe because they're so detached from the real world (in terms of mechanics) that they didn't even forsee the problem.

 
Re: Derek Smart might be taking legal action over Star Citizen
They should really have hired some industrial designers, or somebody who understands how physical objects work. From the very beginning, SC has been criticised for chunky ship design (a hallmark of Roberts' work if I do say so myself),  and it's kind of obvious that they don't really know how to design a ship  that really relates to the real world in any way. Couple that with a flight model that relies on actual physics to make the ships work well...how did they not think that they'd have to have a real understanding of physics to make it work?

Game artists in general don't typically know how to make real world things. Just interesting they didn't see the potential problem beforehand - maybe because they're so detached from the real world (in terms of mechanics) that they didn't even forsee the problem.

To be fair, they did:
http://ryanchurch.com/
https://www.robertsspaceindustries.com/comm-link/transmission/12783-Introducing-The-RSI-Constellation-Mk3

Ryan Church did study industrial design and has worked extensively in both game and film. I've seen some his tutorial videos from gnomon workshop.

But he ultimately probably has Chris or some other person "signing off" on his concepts so his creative control is likely somewhat limited.

Incidentally, I doubt this guy is cheap

EDIT - I wonder if one of the big problems is that Rob Irving left. I mean he's the lead gameplay designer. Ditched the project to go make a Descent sequel. Having your lead gameplay designer leave the project can never be good for the production
« Last Edit: December 14, 2015, 04:10:10 pm by Akalabeth Angel »

 

Offline Mongoose

  • Rikki-Tikki-Tavi
  • Global Moderator
  • 212
  • This brain for rent.
    • Minecraft
    • Steam
    • Something
Re: Derek Smart might be taking legal action over Star Citizen
Comparing it to Minecraft is frankly misleading. For one thing, people who bought into Minecraft got the full game available at a cheaper price. Whereas Star Citizen requires you to pony up additional cash for all assets available in game. Their business model is more like Mechwarrior Online with its 300 dollar mechs than Minecraft with its 30 dollar everything. Except of course MWO was free to play. And yeah, allegedly these ships wont be available for purchase post-launch but frankly I doubt the truthfulness of that statement.  If these ships have proven to be a huge source of revenue then are they going to cut themselves off from that? Hell no.
The other reason that the Minecraft analogy breaks down is that even as far back as Infdef, and at the VERY least as far back as Alpha, Minecraft was essentially already a complete game.  The majority of its core mechanics were already settled, and indeed much of it plays similarly to the game today.  You had a bunch of block types you could build with, you had an (for all intents and purposes) infinite procedurally-generated world to roam around in, you had friendly and hostile mobs to interact with, you had the ability to craft items, it was all there.  Compared to that, SC has...what exactly?

 
Re: Derek Smart might be taking legal action over Star Citizen
Comparing it to Minecraft is frankly misleading. For one thing, people who bought into Minecraft got the full game available at a cheaper price. Whereas Star Citizen requires you to pony up additional cash for all assets available in game. Their business model is more like Mechwarrior Online with its 300 dollar mechs than Minecraft with its 30 dollar everything. Except of course MWO was free to play. And yeah, allegedly these ships wont be available for purchase post-launch but frankly I doubt the truthfulness of that statement.  If these ships have proven to be a huge source of revenue then are they going to cut themselves off from that? Hell no.
The other reason that the Minecraft analogy breaks down is that even as far back as Infdef, and at the VERY least as far back as Alpha, Minecraft was essentially already a complete game.  The majority of its core mechanics were already settled, and indeed much of it plays similarly to the game today.  You had a bunch of block types you could build with, you had an (for all intents and purposes) infinite procedurally-generated world to roam around in, you had friendly and hostile mobs to interact with, you had the ability to craft items, it was all there.  Compared to that, SC has...what exactly?

Well, it was a "game" in the minecraft sense of being a "game". Some might argue that minecraft isn't even a game just a sandbox to fart around in.  The actual "end game" with the Nether and the end was added later.
But you're correct in saying that most of the mechanics were already established. Crafting is much the same as is resource collection and basic rules of the world with regards to monsters and so forth. Some additional things have changed like enchanting and the addition of more mechanics.

Hell even the graphics are pretty much the same. Got it one! They just changed the damn gravel.

But yeah, if Minecraft were Star Citizen well, then the initial "game" would be you running around hitting other players with wooden swords.  But some people will have paid an extra 50 dollars for a bow, and some others paid an extra 300 dollars for leather armour and an iron sword. And some real nutters will have ponied up 900 cash for diamond gear, which is not yet in the game but will be soon. But there'd be no crafting, no terrain generation, maybe just a pre-generated house where you could place 30-dollar plant pots before you stepped out and hit another guy with a stick.

 

Offline 666maslo666

  • 28
  • Artificial Neural Network
Re: Derek Smart might be taking legal action over Star Citizen
The_E: they're 4 years into development. It started in December 2011, by CR's own admission.

According to this logic, Elite: Dangerous is in development from 2001. Thats where the studio first announced they have some people working on Elite 4, lol.

There is a difference between "development" when just a handful of people are working on a nice trailer, and proper development of an AAA game with dozens of devs working on the game full time. SC may have been technically in development from 2011, but proper development did not start until somewhere in 2013, when actual studios with dozens of people working full time on the game were established. That is around 2 and a half years ago. As I said, while Star Citizen is a bit late, you are also being impatient. 2017-2018 is a deadline when if based Chris does not deliver, I will begin to seriously doubt his ability to do so. But not before, it is too soon to judge.

Quote
maslow, how much have you spent on SC so far?

53 dollars.
"For once you have tasted flight you will walk the earth with your eyes turned skywards, for there you have been and there you will long to return." - Leonardo da Vinci

Arguing on the internet is like running in the Special Olympics. Even if you win you are still retarded.

 

Offline Kszyhu

  • 27
Re: Derek Smart might be taking legal action over Star Citizen

 

Offline The E

  • He's Ebeneezer Goode
  • 213
  • Nothing personal, just tech support.
    • Steam
    • Twitter
Re: Derek Smart might be taking legal action over Star Citizen
Oh god that's hilarious.

So according to that, they've been working on the game for 3 years.

More choice quotes:
"A substantive part of the planned gameplay is now available".
"[...] we feel the results, such as unparalleled immersion and fidelity, are already speaking for themselves!"

Such fidelity.



Such immersion.
If I'm just aching this can't go on
I came from chasing dreams to feel alone
There must be changes, miss to feel strong
I really need lifе to touch me
--Evergrey, Where August Mourns

  

Offline Aesaar

  • 210
Re: Derek Smart might be taking legal action over Star Citizen
The_E: they're 4 years into development. It started in December 2011, by CR's own admission.

According to this logic, Elite: Dangerous is in development from 2001. Thats where the studio first announced they have some people working on Elite 4, lol.

There is a difference between "development" when just a handful of people are working on a nice trailer, and proper development of an AAA game with dozens of devs working on the game full time. SC may have been technically in development from 2011, but proper development did not start until somewhere in 2013, when actual studios with dozens of people working full time on the game were established. That is around 2 and a half years ago. As I said, while Star Citizen is a bit late, you are also being impatient. 2017-2018 is a deadline when if based Chris does not deliver, I will begin to seriously doubt his ability to do so. But not before, it is too soon to judge.
So you're ok with saying E:D started 'real' development in 2012?  Because they've got much, much more to show for 3 years of work than SC does.

Also, 'real' development started 2.5 years ago now?  lol.  You people just can't stop moving the goalposts, can you?  You know, if you constantly need to make revisions like that to make this game's development seem reasonable, you've already lost.

And no, I'm not being impatient.  I expect a game sold as a Nov. 2014 release to be released within a year of that date.  You can point to "increased scope" all you want, but that doesn't apply to SQ42 (as much as you'd like it to).  Hell, the scope of SQ42 is actually smaller than it was, since they cut drop-in drop-out co-op.

I'm sorry you're so devoted to this cult that you think holding a developer accountable for their own statements is being impatient.  It's very sad.

But yeah, I guess I'm impatient.  Must have been spoiled by all those games that release within a few months of their projected release dates.  Good thing Chris Roberts is here to show me that real game development is all about missing deadlines, not pinning down core gameplay systems, and selling 400$ jpegs.  This must be what people mean when they talk about how revolutionary SC is.
« Last Edit: December 16, 2015, 08:24:40 am by Aesaar »

 

Offline 666maslo666

  • 28
  • Artificial Neural Network
Re: Derek Smart might be taking legal action over Star Citizen
So you're ok with saying E:D started 'real' development in 2012?

Yeah, it is plausible.

Because they've got much, much more to show for 3 years of work than SC does.

Nah. Elite is a much simpler game than SC. For one thing, you are glued to your seat. And all of the aspects of E:D are quite simplistic. This is not just my opinion, it is the prevailing opinion of the playerbase. The common saying to describe E:D is "mile wide, inch deep".

https://www.reddit.com/r/EliteDangerous/comments/3v0j18/ed_needs_more_depth_not_breadth/

E:D is not a bad game at all, but lets just say that I would be very disappointed if Star Citizen was released but resembled something like Elite: Dangerous. If I had to choose between a simple SC that is already released, and complex SC that takes its time to develop, I choose the latter. People did not pledge >$100 million to get yet another ordinary space sim. And if there is one thing money cannot buy easily, it is faster development. Nine women wont make a kid in one month.
« Last Edit: December 16, 2015, 11:35:08 am by 666maslo666 »
"For once you have tasted flight you will walk the earth with your eyes turned skywards, for there you have been and there you will long to return." - Leonardo da Vinci

Arguing on the internet is like running in the Special Olympics. Even if you win you are still retarded.

 

Offline 666maslo666

  • 28
  • Artificial Neural Network
Re: Derek Smart might be taking legal action over Star Citizen
Holiday livestream starts in 3 hours.

twitch.tv/starcitizen
"For once you have tasted flight you will walk the earth with your eyes turned skywards, for there you have been and there you will long to return." - Leonardo da Vinci

Arguing on the internet is like running in the Special Olympics. Even if you win you are still retarded.

 

Offline General Battuta

  • Poe's Law In Action
  • 214
  • i wonder when my postcount will exceed my iq
Re: Derek Smart might be taking legal action over Star Citizen
ED has all its systems in place to create depth. It's a stable (and hopefully profitable) system to build on.

SC's design methodology is to iterate over and over on every level, with high-end changes rendering low-end content worthless. It's like building a pyramid on quicksand.

Having worked in both types of dev environments, one a very big-budget project, I know which one works better. Even if SC ends up succeeding, it will be a lesser success than it could've been with a well managed dev cycle.

 

Offline Kszyhu

  • 27
Re: Derek Smart might be taking legal action over Star Citizen
Is there a point in arguing about differences in depth, when SC 2.0 is nothing more than a tech demo of localized physics grids and large world with some placeholder missions? There is no guarantee that Star Citizen won't be as shallow, or even more so, than E:D, even with more development time and bigger budget.