-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Star Citizen's off-shoot Squadron 42 probably won't make 2017 either
- Thread starter LordOfLore
- Start date
mercenar1e
Member
are you sure? i thought Chris Roberts led the drive to make the cockpits in every ship interactive which sent all the original work back for a redo just this year..
Look at these scamwarez!
In these cases, the developer (and possibly the publisher) put up their own money - at worst, if the games don't come out, they'd be accountable to only their shareholders (and would be punished by those shareholders accordingly). On top of that, the developers behind both of these games have a track record and a pretty solid understanding of the money and resources required to get a game out the door.
In the case of Star Citizen, you've got a development company with no other products under their belt (though I suppose you could consider Wing Commander a 'product', even though it was developed by a different company long before modern AAA development became a thing), and a product being funded in a way that provides very little, if any, accountability - financially or legally. It's not surprising that there are a lot of us out there who feel that the company is bitten off far more than they can chew, and haven't yet learned about setting realistic timelines for AAA development.
Those things don't integrate seamlessly without 1st party help like you seem to think they do.
No, it is.
And if that was the case, this thread should be about how disgustingly low their compensation is.
iHaunter
Member
Integration and development are not the same thing.
mercenar1e
Member
you don't think they have people working on bug fixing and animation issues that this tech may spring up? that's still diverting people away for something that isn't needed in the early alpha stages of the game.
iHaunter
Member
Not as a "Major" resource no, I do not think this is the case. It's all conjecture, we don't know who or what is working on it. All we know is it's being developed by a 3rd party.
Also it was part of a milestone, it's not a random development they through in.
Baron_Calamity
Member
I don't want a refund because I know that would cause this project to fail. Yet, I know it has already failed to a large degree but it isn't like my life would be improved to get the $80 or so I spent. I think I would feel better about losing the money if they weren't so scammy at this point. A little frankness and honesty could go a long way.
Guess what I'm saying is I'm not the best at these types of decisions.
TheLostBigBoss
Banned
"dude" this is normal for an MMO (and SC+SQ42 are two games).
and in 2012 it wasn't even in full production (or production at all, they had to build a team and offices first)
You understand that one of the main criticisms lobbied at Star Citizen is it's constant outsourcing of key components and the amount of people working on the game at once with an extremely inefficient pipeline, right? They have thrown out so much content because of their horrible coordination between subcontractors and their main team(s)
Having bigger teams so far into development is actually not a good thing considering the most they have to show for years of development are specific isolated demos.
This game wasn't a scam to start, but they made the choice to get over 150 million in funding and completely blow away their initial game scheme and bloat Star Citizen into a mess of complex features that interweave and are based in an MMO world (on an engine that was never designed for complex online interactions).
They made the choice to keep funding open and now the consequence of that is a game that is in development hell from the insane stretch goals and feature creep.
I understand literally have money invested in this game, and I'm sure when you have money backed into something it's going to be tough to face the music that the thing isn't going to work out.
But Star Citizen is not going to work out, at least not with it's current design goals and still mangled production pipeline (as of the most recent articles on the games development by former and current employees).
nuclearaddict
Banned
It's for the best! Gotta iron out all those bugs after eventually making a real game someday.
iHaunter
Member
Not a fan of the carrot on a stick marketing myself.
In all honesty I don't like Sandi's marketing style.
bluntspoon
Neo Member
I see this comment over and over again like 3rd party companies are doing it for free. Why dont people see money as a resource?
If they are paying someone to build something then that is money being spent that could be used elsewhere. Why is that so difficult to understand?
iHaunter
Member
How do you know that?
Maybe the company cut a deal to get a lot of eyes/publicity on the product? It's not the first nor the last time it can be done, neither of us know - why bitch about it?
bluntspoon
Neo Member
If you are seriously suggesting they are doing it for free Im out. Have a good one.
iHaunter
Member
I understand that you probably put money into the game but when you get to the point where your defense is:
Well maybe its being outsourced for free?
Then you really gotta take a step back and take a good hard look at the situation.
iHaunter
Member
I never said free, but discounted, it could be expensive, I don't know.
But I can't state something as a fact without having the proper Intel. The money I put in I don't mind losing. Whether it's a success or failure.
Quick, someone send this to "@for_exposure",
Yeah, are you here just to shit on it? Yours aren't any better and you don't get anyone just commenting on them being worthless.
Killroyskbg
Member
Some of these defensive answers are just beyond ridiculous at this point.
sunk cost is a bitch
This.
iHaunter
Member
Literally what?
For the community, the actual news here is that the Squadron 42 mission demo some people were hoping to see at CitizenCon in October will now be shown in December instead, in favour of showing off 3.0, so there isn't a lot to react to. They hadn't even committed to the SQ42 demo for CitizenCon - things have been pretty vague around SQ42 - so having a new commitment to a date is an improvement in that regard. They also said they'll have a roadmap for SQ42, which we didn't have before.
People gave up on Squadron 42 for 2017 a long time ago. They've avoided giving dates on it and just missed removing the 2017 from a background graphic on the end of a long scrolling page on their site, which is now fixed.
The regulars mostly stay out of these threads these days. It's been going on for a long time. I wouldn't take the lack of a "defense force" as a lack of interest in Star Citizen.
Compare the main thread:
Star Citizen Alpha 2.0 --- (who posted)
vs some other ones - still some regulars in this one...
Kotaku's 7 month investigation into Star Citizen's development --- (who posted)
then...
Star Citizen is likely in financial trouble --- (who posted)
so...is Star Citizen ever coming out? --- (who posted)
Star Citizen Gamescom presentation --- (who posted)
Star Citizen's off-shoot Squadron 42 probably won't make 2017 either --- (who posted)
Anyway, we'll see what they have to show for 3.0 on Oct 27th and hopefully they can follow through on showing off the Squadron 42 content in December.
One interesting question is whether 3.0 will make it through all the Evocati/PTU waves through to public release in 2017. I'm leaning toward yes, but probably with some more features cut out and pushed back to a later release.
Edit: I see the article mentioned that too. Here's the last half.
Back to waiting.
Xplatformer
Member
I don't even care anymore.
I've already paid for the game so one day (if I'm alive) I'll be pleasantly surprised.
Until then there are actual games out there I can play.
It's unbelievable the Cyberpunk will probably come out before Squadron 42.
I've already paid for the game so one day (if I'm alive) I'll be pleasantly surprised.
Until then there are actual games out there I can play.
It's unbelievable the Cyberpunk will probably come out before Squadron 42.
Sax Russel
Banned
This is basically my stance now. I used to follow the updates more closely/actively but that just gets depressing after a while.
DoctorDake
Neo Member
Please show me an example of this type of deal ever having happened in the industry.
Lord Panda
The Sea is Always Right
They must be burning through an obscene amount of cash. I'd imagine they wouldn't be able to keep this up for much longer short of another loan or something.
People don't get it.
They didn't start with $161,000,000. They didn't start with the 300+ employees they have now. They started with 8.
And they will end with 0.
mercenar1e
Member
the release of 3.0 will provide them with a few months of funding.. i imagine towards the middle of next year they'll have an internal discussion of pulling a loan or going to a publisher after realizing Squadron 42 will miss 2018 as well.
people believed they had a demo of the single player game during citizencon 2016 lol it was complete horseshit.
Grumplestiltskin
Member
It is baffling how people continue to defend this game's development. If I had invested any amount of money in this I would be absolutely livid at how it has been handled and yet it seems the games most avid defenders are those that have invested substantial sums into the game. Why are you not at all concerned about your money being misused and wasted? It's insane to me.
Edit:
iHaunter your comments in this thread are borderline delusional. This denial and refusal to accept even the most basic truths about game development costs and your insistence on creating excuse after excuse is simply not healthy. You are spouting asinine things in attempt to defend a project on which you presumably spent money that has been spiraling out of control. Seek help.
Edit:
iHaunter your comments in this thread are borderline delusional. This denial and refusal to accept even the most basic truths about game development costs and your insistence on creating excuse after excuse is simply not healthy. You are spouting asinine things in attempt to defend a project on which you presumably spent money that has been spiraling out of control. Seek help.
Curious Puppy
Banned
The only people who still defend this game are cultists. I bought it at $45 and I cant make excuses for it anymore. Everyone saw this coming.
Grumplestiltskin
Member
Nevermind.
This might come as a surprise, but it's actually the opposite - the bigger backers here are generally less involved and are just killing time doing other stuff. I'd say it's pretty laid back overall. People knew what they were getting into.
iHaunter
Member
iHaunter lost me when he implied that 3rd party contractors would be willing to work on this game for free/for a significant discount because reasons.
That goes beyond giving the benefit of the doubt and into downright delusions regarding the actual realities of game development.
That goes beyond giving the benefit of the doubt and into downright delusions regarding the actual realities of game development.
iHaunter
Member
"And they will end with 0."
As if you need more convincing, I have nothing to say to you.
Horse Armour
Member
Are we witnessing someone having a break with reality in this thread? Devs working for 3rd world wages? External developers working for free?!
NotAPancake
Neo Member
As it ends with a broken game and expectations just like No Man's Sky. Hence the number 0.
mercenar1e
Member
I said the same thing last year in the star citizen thread about 3.0 and Squadron 42 but they waved it off accusing me of being a Derek Smart follower lol