Page 1 of 1

Star Citizen

Posted: Sat Dec 08, 2012 3:20 pm UTC
by Ralith The Third
Two years is too far away.

It's being made by the same guy who made Freelancer. It looks like it will be awesome - and it broke 7 mil crowdfunding.
http://www.robertsspaceindustries.com/ is the main site, with branches to everything else. I believe you can still pledge for benefits.

I'm thinking of starting a clan/alliance/group for when it comes out.

Edit: I went ahead and made the clan. http://www.robertsspaceindustries.com/forums/topic/tungsten-spiral-recruitment-thread/. Combat group. In it for the sake of honing their own skills to perfection. Mature. Not highly commited to anything, necesarily, but interested in self-improvement.

Re: Star Citizen

Posted: Sat Dec 08, 2012 5:06 pm UTC
by eculc
This is true. two years is too much.

I haven't actually seen this before now, but wow looks cool.

Re: Star Citizen

Posted: Mon Dec 10, 2012 1:03 am UTC
by Ralith The Third
So I did what I thought about. Link in main post.

Re: Star Citizen

Posted: Mon Dec 17, 2012 12:04 am UTC
by Woopate
When I first heard about this game, the feature lists basically sounded like my idle musings in the company of friends of the game I'd make if I won the lottery. Every feature as I had it sketched out in my head. On one hand that makes me nervous, for the "too good to be true" factor, on the other it makes me very very excited, and push my hand a little deeper into my wallet to see if I can't squeeze out a hardcore rig by the time it launches.

Re: Star Citizen

Posted: Fri Jan 25, 2013 9:44 pm UTC
by Jofur
Don't get mad please!

I just want to know what will set this apart from Eve.

Re: Star Citizen

Posted: Fri Jan 25, 2013 11:09 pm UTC
by Ralith The Third
Single player option, much more immersive combat, much lighter on the industrial side, better graphics.

Basically it's a merge of Crysis 3 (graphics and game engine), EV:Nova (gameplay focus, moddability), and EvE (Spaceships online ermagerd!)

EvE

Re: Star Citizen

Posted: Mon Jan 28, 2013 2:50 pm UTC
by Jofur
Okay I see. I kind of like the industrial side. I was working on manufacturing to keep fueling the ever growing war machine that is piracy... hehe

Re: Star Citizen

Posted: Fri Aug 30, 2013 12:50 am UTC
by Ralith The Third
Hangar module is out.

SQUEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE!

Re: Star Citizen

Posted: Fri Aug 30, 2013 2:11 am UTC
by Woopate
damnit just as I got to work.

Re: Star Citizen

Posted: Thu Oct 17, 2013 10:12 am UTC
by EdgarJPublius
With the latest update, I went ahead and upgraded my pledge to the 'Advanced Hunter'. I've been eying the Avenger for a while but wasn't quite ready to pledge for an Aurora game package plus a $60 ship, being able to get the Avenger with it's own game package was very welcome.

I even got the Hangar module to work on my relatively ancient computer so I could sit in my Avenger's Cockpit and make pew-pew noises :D

Re: Star Citizen

Posted: Fri Nov 15, 2013 6:43 pm UTC
by allhisdarkmaterials
Hey there. Another future citizen here :)

The ship I REALLY wanted was the Idris class. Holy moly what a piece of hardware! Sadly, I lack the money to spare and the lackluster mentality of shelling out four digits for an online game (at least in one go). But I have a goal. Sadly I am kind of a loner in the online world, as I don't work well in concerted actions (I have the feeling that my hearing is abandoning me for some reason and it takes a great deal of concentration to communicate via headset). BUT I will be available for freelance work, and I would like to consider your outfit a friend.

Fly safe.

Re: Star Citizen

Posted: Sun Dec 29, 2013 4:45 pm UTC
by johnie104
So, this game has 36 Million pledged.... What the actual fuck.

Can anybody explain to me how the pledging works? If you give more money you get a better ship? Isn't that kinda like pay-to-win?

Anyway, besides that, it looks really REALLY cool and with that kind of budget I believe they can actually pull it off.

Re: Star Citizen

Posted: Sun Dec 29, 2013 6:47 pm UTC
by EdgarJPublius
The main thing pledging gets you isn't supposed to be the ship you start the game with, but early access to features like the hangar module and upcoming dog-fighting module. The ships are just a bonus for supporting development.

When the game launches, you won't be able to pay real money for ships, you'll have to use currency you earn in-game to purchase everything. You'll also be able to purchase the in-game currency for real money, but only a capped amount each week/month.

The developers have said that the pledge prices for ships are inflated relative to what they will cost in the in-game currency. If you just want to jump-start your progress in the game, it will likely be cheaper to wait.

They really want to prevent pay-to-win and have put a lot of thought into allowing people to put money into the game without it becoming pay-to-win.

Re: Star Citizen

Posted: Sun Dec 29, 2013 9:28 pm UTC
by Izawwlgood
So, is there a game yet, or just a hanger you can walk around and look at space ships in?

Re: Star Citizen

Posted: Mon Dec 30, 2013 12:49 am UTC
by EdgarJPublius
Just the hangar. The Dogfighting Module was supposed to be released this month, but has been pushed back.

Re: Star Citizen

Posted: Tue Dec 31, 2013 7:32 am UTC
by Woopate
But it's a very nice hangar.

Re: Star Citizen

Posted: Tue Oct 23, 2018 2:10 pm UTC
by Ranbot
*casts resurrect*

Is anyone out there playing Star Citizen? This game totally fell off my radar after the Kickstarter campaign smashed every record. I know there is a playable Alpha (version 3.3) that may be as good as many "final" games. Apparently the studio is continuing to rake in boatloads of crowd funded cash and developing the hell out of this game... Including some unique game play for the genre and slightly scary stuff like projecting players real facial expressions onto their avatar's face in real time. But 5+ years of development and still Alpha?

So, does anyone here play this and can give a report? Thoughts? Is this game going anywhere or is this another studio with too much cash and vision to actually get anything done?

Re: Star Citizen

Posted: Tue Oct 23, 2018 4:04 pm UTC
by EdgarJPublius
I don't like the comparison to DNF for games that haven't been in development 10+ years and haven't had a mid-development developer change. Star Citizen has spent a lot of time in development, but plenty of well received games have spent longer (although, that is becoming less true every year).

That said, the feature and scope creep is real af. When I pledged, all I wanted was a spiritual successor to Wing Commander & Freelancer with modern (as of 2012) graphics. I never signed up for all this other stuff that's been added since. I mean, it all seems pretty cool, but I definitely feel like I would have been happier if the crowdfunding campaign had made like a tenth as much and the game had released as just a space dogfighting game in space.

I jump on every major update to see what's up, mostly just playing the dogfighting arena mode. I'd say the current state is what other devs would have called Beta before the flanderization of that term to mean 'demo'. Although that's not quite accurate since they haven't locked in the final feature list yet. A bunch of game-systems are in place, they work, there's nothing obviously missing from the game-experience despite the fact that more stuff is planned. It's clearly not in a release state though, still plenty of bugs and a need of optimization. If they froze features and content right now, they could probably release a complete seeming game late next year and I would consider that I had gotten more than my money's worth out of it.

Re: Star Citizen

Posted: Tue Oct 23, 2018 6:32 pm UTC
by Ranbot
EdgarJPublius wrote:I don't like the comparison to DNF... That said, the feature and scope creep is real af.

Scope creep was part of DNF's early problems too... but Star Citizen seems further along if they have a playable demo and more cash coming in by selling ships [...and dreams :P ].

EdgarJPublius wrote:When I pledged, all I wanted was a spiritual successor to Wing Commander & Freelancer with modern (as of 2012) graphics. I never signed up for all this other stuff...they haven't locked in the final feature list yet. A bunch of game-systems are in place, they work, there's nothing obviously missing from the game-experience despite the fact that more stuff is planned. It's clearly not in a release state though... If they froze features and content right now, they could probably release a complete seeming game late next year and I would consider that I had gotten more than my money's worth out of it.

I didn't pledge, but I would agree. Get the original vision for the game playable and work on the additional features/content after. Putting real facial expressions on avatars goes in the "awesome idea, but totally unnecessary" category that would annoy me if I had given them money.

Thanks for the update though. I won't be buying into Star Citizen yet.

Re: Star Citizen

Posted: Thu Oct 25, 2018 1:37 am UTC
by Biliboy
I'm on the 'buy when it releases' list myself. What they have for Squadron 42 looks like that wing commander's godson people were hoping for, based on the 'vertical slice' video released last December, and if they can polish that up, and do the same with the online version it'll be the space game I've been wanting for a long time. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BHR1aEdTA4M The voice acting/mocap is being done by some very good Hollywood talent, if nothing else.

That said, I've learned my lesson with other early access games, getting burnt out or just 'done' with a good game before it's feature complete is getting old. Sure I'll be behind other players who know how to play already, but maybe I'll be able to play for longer on the 'good' version.

Re: Star Citizen

Posted: Mon May 13, 2019 3:13 pm UTC
by wumpus
EdgarJPublius wrote:I don't like the comparison to DNF for games that haven't been in development 10+ years and haven't had a mid-development developer change. Star Citizen has spent a lot of time in development, but plenty of well received games have spent longer (although, that is becoming less true every year).


DNF wasn't given far more money from the customers to create the game than could possibly be justified for the original release. It long ago reached the point where it made more sense to build and sell spacecraft "to eventually play" in Star Citizen than they could ever realize by simply releasing the game.

I'd go so far to say that Star Citizen has shown a failure mode of kickstarter and they need to be able to put hard limits on any funds that exceed stretch goals (presumably releasing only that amount of money to the developer and holding the rest in reserve until shipment, and prorating the release/reserve amounts among all backers (at the end of the kickstart). I've looked at the kickstarter FAQ and it doesn't appear to address this (I don't think it has happened any other time than Star Citizen, so they probably shouldn't bother).

Re: Star Citizen

Posted: Thu May 16, 2019 4:58 pm UTC
by rmsgrey
wumpus wrote:
EdgarJPublius wrote:I don't like the comparison to DNF for games that haven't been in development 10+ years and haven't had a mid-development developer change. Star Citizen has spent a lot of time in development, but plenty of well received games have spent longer (although, that is becoming less true every year).


DNF wasn't given far more money from the customers to create the game than could possibly be justified for the original release. It long ago reached the point where it made more sense to build and sell spacecraft "to eventually play" in Star Citizen than they could ever realize by simply releasing the game.

I'd go so far to say that Star Citizen has shown a failure mode of kickstarter and they need to be able to put hard limits on any funds that exceed stretch goals (presumably releasing only that amount of money to the developer and holding the rest in reserve until shipment, and prorating the release/reserve amounts among all backers (at the end of the kickstart). I've looked at the kickstarter FAQ and it doesn't appear to address this (I don't think it has happened any other time than Star Citizen, so they probably shouldn't bother).


First question: why is it a failure of Kickstarter if a project manages to raise far more money than it asks for? If people believe that the project is worth donating money to, or that it's worth buying the promise of a given reward, then where's the failure?

Second question: how does your proposed "solution" help anything? There have been projects where the stretch goal thresholds and rewards have later been acknowledged by the creator to have been misjudged, and the project only delivered due to the excess funding over the stretch goals. It's not uncommon for creators to lowball their funding target on the grounds that it's better to guarantee getting enough funding to have a good chance or get close to completion, and then find some way to top up later - if you're only going to release the exact amount asked for, then creators will be trying to guess the exact amount they'll raise, not just a reasonable minimum amount they need. And what'll happen within a month of a rules change capping the immediate payout of funding is that projects will start launching with a trillion dollar stretch goal of "email a cat meme to all backers" (or something similar) just so that they can claim all the funds immediately.

You could instead say you pay out to the highest achieved stretch goal, in which case you'll get projects with many pointless stretch goals simply to capture as much of the funding as possible.

And any scheme that ties released funding to achieved stretch goals would also require a change to the Kickstarter platform to properly integrate support for stretch goals. At the moment, stretch goals aren't part of Kickstarter's model - they're something that (practically all) individual creators include.

Re: Star Citizen

Posted: Fri May 17, 2019 5:51 pm UTC
by SecondTalon
rmsgrey wrote:
wumpus wrote:I'd go so far to say that Star Citizen has shown a failure mode of kickstarter and they need to be able to put hard limits on any funds that exceed stretch goals (presumably releasing only that amount of money to the developer and holding the rest in reserve until shipment, and prorating the release/reserve amounts among all backers (at the end of the kickstart). I've looked at the kickstarter FAQ and it doesn't appear to address this (I don't think it has happened any other time than Star Citizen, so they probably shouldn't bother).


First question: why is it a failure of Kickstarter if a project manages to raise far more money than it asks for? If people believe that the project is worth donating money to, or that it's worth buying the promise of a given reward, then where's the failure?


I believe what wumpus is saying is "Star Citizen represents a previously unknown Kickstarter Failure Model - that is, the game is funded, active development is still continuing, but there is no foreseeable release date nor is there any way for Kickstarter to force any sort of accountability on the part of the developers."

The last login on the Kickstarter page was in 2018, over a year ago I believe. This may violate the terms of Kickstarter's usage regarding regular updates, then again this also barely represents a significant portion of the development time.

I do not know how much of Star Citizen is playable. Quickly looking at the subreddit, there does seem to be a theme of "Game was promised to have X amount playable by Y date. While it's hard to measure, X/10 to X/50 was playable by Y date, with X now being promised for Y+Z date, where Z is at least one year from the current date"

I mean, even some of the pushed back release dates had it coming out by 2016. It's 2019 and the goals intended for 2015 haven't been met yet.

This is a failure model that has not previously been discussed - the failure of feature creep.

Maybe we should call it the George R.R. Martin failstate - Song of Ice and Fire, the three novel series getting ready for novels 6 and 7 (and maybe 8). Then again, Martin did crank those out between 1991 (the start of Game of Thrones, published 1996) and 2005 (publishing of Feast for Crows). That 14 year gap in there being because... reasons, I guess.

Re: Star Citizen

Posted: Fri May 17, 2019 9:36 pm UTC
by rmsgrey
SecondTalon wrote:Maybe we should call it the George R.R. Martin failstate - Song of Ice and Fire, the three novel series getting ready for novels 6 and 7 (and maybe 8). Then again, Martin did crank those out between 1991 (the start of Game of Thrones, published 1996) and 2005 (publishing of Feast for Crows). That 14 year gap in there being because... reasons, I guess.


I feel like Wheel of Time is still a better model - a 14-book trilogy, where book 12 ended up being published posthumously as books 12-14...

Re: Star Citizen

Posted: Sat May 18, 2019 5:15 am UTC
by SecondTalon
See, I can't find anything that tells me how much of what they intended for Star Citizen is currently live and playable. Is it basically done and there's just some polish left, like taking Stations away from the same default model and giving them unique ones, naming planetary systems better than AAA198 and giving better NPC mission dialog? Then it's Wheel of Time.

Are there only cargo runs and pirate fighting, no PvP, only a handful of stations and so on, more of a playable proof of concept? Then it's not even Ice and Fire.

Re: Star Citizen

Posted: Sat May 18, 2019 2:20 pm UTC
by rmsgrey
SecondTalon wrote:See, I can't find anything that tells me how much of what they intended for Star Citizen is currently live and playable. Is it basically done and there's just some polish left, like taking Stations away from the same default model and giving them unique ones, naming planetary systems better than AAA198 and giving better NPC mission dialog? Then it's Wheel of Time.

Are there only cargo runs and pirate fighting, no PvP, only a handful of stations and so on, more of a playable proof of concept? Then it's not even Ice and Fire.


Well, yes, Wheel of Time as it is now isn't a great model, but Wheel of Time around the time of release of book 6 or 7 - at a point where the plot of the series was hopelessly lost in a maze of meandering bypaths, and the rate of publication was dropping - seems like a pretty good fit.

Re: Star Citizen

Posted: Sat May 18, 2019 9:29 pm UTC
by EdgarJPublius
SecondTalon wrote:See, I can't find anything that tells me how much of what they intended for Star Citizen is currently live and playable.


Well, let me go down the kickstarter promises real quick

  • A rich universe focused on epic space adventure, trading and dogfighting in first person.
    -"Rich universe" is subjective, but there are numerous star-systems in game and a heckuvalot of lore. 'Adventure, Trading and Dogfighting' are all in there though.
  • Single Player – Offline or Online(Drop in / Drop out co-op play)
    -The Single Player campaign hasn't arrived yet, but I think you can play the dogfighting mode against AI offline.
  • Persistent Universe (hosted by US)
    -That's in there.
  • Mod-able multiplayer (hosted by YOU)
    -Nowhere to be seen. I had forgotten 'modability' was a big talking point during the kickstarter
  • No Subscriptions
    -True
  • No Pay to Win
    -Debatable
  • A huge universe to explore, trade and adventure in
    -More or less
  • Constantly expanding and evolving universe
    -That's one way to put it...
  • Micro updates rule!
    -There are a bunch of those...
  • Squadron 42 - A Wing Commander style single player mode, playable OFFLINE if you want
    - Not yet
  • Actions of the players impact the universe and become part of its history and lore
    -I believe some stuff inspired by players has made it into the lore
  • Fully dynamic economy driven by player actions
    -The in-game economy is dynamic, but I'm not sure how player-driven it is currently
  • The cost of society
    -I'm not actually sure why this is a selling point, but those game systems are in the current build
  • Space is empty but you’re never really alone
    -Not sure, I think some of these game systems are usable
  • Bigger ships offer bigger multi-player action
    -That's in there
  • Full rigid body simulation of all spaceships
    -Yep
  • Intelligent Flight Control System (IFCS)
    -Yep
  • Dynamic Ship Maneuverability
    -Yep
  • Ship Components matter!
    -Yep
  • Everything you would imagine would move or articulate on a spaceship or a device – does!
    -Pretty much
  • Joystick, gamepad, mouse, keyboard are all supported.
    -They made a big improvement on this recently
  • Advanced peripheral support
    -Yep
  • Virtual Reality is here!
    -No it isn't! Actually, this used to work, then it didn't for a long time, now it kinda does again, but I think you need to use a third party software tool to make it work

By my count, looks like ~75% fulfilled +/-5% or so. Though of course, all of what does exist is in a pretty rough state, in need of bug-fixes and optimization.