• 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.
  • The Politics forum has been nuked. Please do not bring political discussion to the rest of the site, or you will be removed. Thanks.

New Forbes Article: Star Citizen, A $300 Million Game That May Never Be Finished

Will Star Citizen Ever Be Finished & Released? If Yes, What Will Be Its MetaCritic Score?

  • No, it will never be finished nor commercially released

    Votes: 67 26.6%
  • Yes, and it will have a 90+ MetaCritic score

    Votes: 17 6.7%
  • Yes, and it will have a 80-90 MetaCritic score

    Votes: 20 7.9%
  • Yes, and it will have a 70-80 MetaCritic score

    Votes: 23 9.1%
  • Yes, and it will have a 60-70 MetaCritic score

    Votes: 14 5.6%
  • Yes, and it will have a 50-60 MetaCritic score

    Votes: 5 2.0%
  • Yes, and it will have a less than 50 MetaCritic score

    Votes: 6 2.4%
  • Other, it will be released, but will NOT be remotely finished, and quality will be unpredictable

    Votes: 100 39.7%

  • Total voters
    252

Solomeena

Banned
Jan 8, 2018
1,266
1,805
455
You already lost your little smug "dare" all on your own. Features aren't "meaningless" just because you apply some goalpost-moving limitation to try (and fail) to downplay them. It's absolutely hilarious how you argue that in a game about science fiction having fights between starfighters is "meaningless." :messenger_tears_of_joy:

You can do plenty of quests, you can mine, you can explore planets for points of interest like ship derelicts and more, you can participate in racing events, you can fight on foot (both in the persistent universe and in its own self-contained feature, which is a full-fledged multiplayer FPS), you can compete in the leaderboards in the self-contained Arena Commander (both in single and multiplayer), you can drive land vehicles and hoverbikes. There's more, but I've proved my point plenty already.

You can interact with other players, which is what sandbox multiplayer games are all about, both in friendly and hostile ways, and that's an enormous chunk of "things to do" right there. You know, that's how people have been creating "actual stories" in online games since Ultima Online.

Looks like someone's been "proven wrong." Oops. :messenger_smirking:

You have no proven anything, you have the exact same response as the other whales on Star Citizen message boards. Again, visiting empty cities and empty hangers and what not is not a feature. It is a game that is an empty husk of a shell and has nothing for you to do in it.

And as far as players go i hear that you only have 50 players max in any one server, sure sounds like you have lots to do with 49 other people spread across the galaxy. And stop calling this a full fledged multiplayer game, it is anything but a game, it was and continues to be a tech demo, nothing more.
 

Solomeena

Banned
Jan 8, 2018
1,266
1,805
455
So why do you keep coming in this thread then? If this was an official SC thread for backers, i don’t even think you would have the guts to come in and start trash talk. People like you and some other around here are only interested in negatives around SC. You guys “think” you know something about the project, you don’t fucking now nothing, not even 1%. This is not a game you watch on youtube for a half hour and say “this is boring, what a shit show bla bla bla” you can’t even compare it to normal days game. You have to do so much more research before you even want to back it because their is more around this game. To me the community is one of the best gaming communities i met. Everyone is nice, helpful and friendly for new backers. Maybe you need appreciate something like this and that it is different from normal closed development games. People would shit over EA, Ubisoft, CDPR, Rockstar, Sony etc etc all the time if they did the same open development and transparency like CIG does.

You and Abriael_GN Abriael_GN are the ones coming in here to talk trash might i remind you. This is a thread based on a fairly negative article about RSI and Chris Roberts and rightfully so. Please don't act like people can't come in here just because you deem it shouldn't happen. You get to have your opinion just like others get to have theirs. The problem though with your opinion is that it comes tainted with the tons of money you have thrown into this game hoping it turns out to be some great game, i had hoped it would be to back in the beginning when the kickstarter first happened but that isn't the case at all. Chris Roberts has burned through at least a QUARTER OF A BILLION DOLLARS and has not shown anything meaningful in that time at all, you don't find that odd?

You admitted it yourself that you have spent at least $5500 dollars on this thing, no wonder you are so bitter about people judging what is right now a huge clusterfuck of a development.
 
Last edited:

Kamina

Golden Boy
Jun 2, 2013
7,839
6,865
985
35
Austria
I am sure they will release it.
But that “enhancement mania” they currently have will have them push i out incompletely at one point.
 

Abriael_GN

Member
Feb 26, 2019
2,189
10,091
670
Italy
twinfinite.net
You have no proven anything, you have the exact same response as the other whales on Star Citizen message boards. Again, visiting empty cities and empty hangers and what not is not a feature. It is a game that is an empty husk of a shell and has nothing for you to do in it.

translation of the above: "your list completely proves me wrong, but since I am salty that I've been proven wrong, I will completely disregard it, and replace it with my own list, which has nothing to do with it, but since I've been well and thoroughly schooled, I may as well pretend that I haven't."

What you just did is called a "strawman argument." look it up.

And as far as players go i hear that you only have 50 players max in any one server, sure sounds like you have lots to do with 49 other people spread across the galaxy. And stop calling this a full fledged multiplayer game, it is anything but a game, it was and continues to be a tech demo, nothing more.

There are plenty occasions to meet, fight and collaborate with other players, even with the current *temporary* server limits. But you wouldn't know since you have never tried it. Guess who would?

PS: The Star Marine feature is indeed a full-fledged multiplayer FPS, just as Arena Commander is a full-fledged single and multiplayer ship combat game. Things don't just become untrue just because you say they are without ANY direct knowledge of the subject matter.

You and Abriael_GN Abriael_GN are the ones coming in here to talk trash might i remind you. This is a thread based on a fairly negative article about RSI and Chris Roberts and rightfully so. Please don't act like people can't come in here just because you deem it shouldn't happen. You get to have your opinion just like others get to have theirs. The problem though with your opinion is that it comes tainted with the tons of money you have thrown into this game hoping it turns out to be some great game, i had hoped it would be to back in the beginning when the kickstarter first happened but that isn't the case at all. Chris Roberts has burned through at least a QUARTER OF A BILLION DOLLARS and has not shown anything meaningful in that time at all, you don't find that odd?

You admitted it yourself that you have spent at least $5500 dollars on this thing, no wonder you are so bitter about people judging what is right now a huge clusterfuck of a development.

Wow, looks like you have some rather serious case of selective reading. There are a lot of people in this thread who criticized this article and expressed a positive outlook on Star Citizen.

You've been talking trash since your very first post here, and you have not stopped for a second, so it's funny that you'd accuse others of doing so.

Only someone in bad faith would come here to defend an article attempting to support its points with direct personal attacks at a developer's personal life and family, but looks like Star Citizen haters have fallen quite low.

You keep spamming that CIG has shown "nothing meaningful" and that's the clearest example of absolute denial that I've seen in a while. They've shown plenty of meaningful progress, gameplay, and tech. You keep denying it without having any experience with it, which is hilarious and pathetic at the same time.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
  • LOL
Reactions: kizito and Snake29

Varteras

Member
Dec 5, 2018
753
1,315
380
I have put almost $800 into this project and plan on giving more over time. It has made a lot of progress in the last year and a half. I knew going into it that it would take a long time and I'm fine with that. I've always wanted an open-universe Wing Commander and that's what this is.
 
  • Triggered
Reactions: kizito

M0G

Member
Oct 8, 2014
183
81
400
Worcester, UK
There's only a little bit playable and a ton of stuff half finished, waiting to be implelemented. Also a lot of stuff relatively finished but waiting on key systems to be implemented before they can be implemented. A lot of stuff for instance was probably half finished, awaiting the new flight models before it could be viable for implementation. So my guess is 18 months from now we'll have a sizable part of the campaign playable and that'll give some positive press to the game. Then probably 24-30 months from now we'll see implementation snowball exponentially.

Now I'm happy with that but I totally understand why it's upsetting people. Like somebody else in the thread said that's fine if you enjoy the journey. I do, but some people just want their game that they paid for years ago. There's no point poking fun at people who have sunk thousands into this. I myself did so without even noticing it just by buying the game in the beginning, a couple of smaller ships and then subbing since then. It adds up over time and that doesn't mean you're just wanging obscene amounts of money at it. Naturally some people have but generally it's proportionate to the amount of money they have to dispose of in the first place.
 

Dunki

Member
Oct 24, 2017
8,198
8,815
790
These do nothing for me, pretty but boring... almost reminds me of


Not saying the game will be bad or anything, just that the "hype" videos are not helping
using FFXV as argument is pretty weak since FFXV was a great game despite its problems. Star Citizen does not have any of these problem. It is just that this game is fucking massive
 

Majukun

Member
Jun 19, 2009
12,356
528
1,015
my gripe with the game is that even when (and if) it's finished, i'm not gonna touch the main portion of it (the online open world stuff) because there will be tons of people with cash paid ships around to ruin the experience

also, it will probably have so much microtransactions to feed a small country.
 

Tapioca

Banned
Aug 17, 2017
519
222
270
You're the one who said this.



Let me explain it once more, slowly. The "MMO" persistent universe has been part of the plans since the very beginning of the crowdfunding campaign.. The original Kickstarter page is still available and can be found here.

Basically. You're wrong, and there's no "come on dood" that changes that. May as well just admit that you said something ignorant and move on.

Also, the comparison with Spider-man is ridiculous. Spider-man is a great achievement in and of itself, but the difference in scale, persistence, and scope between the two games is massive.



1: it doesn't

2: it's not even in the same galaxy in terms of scale, scope, and features. Comparing apples to escalators does your argument no favors.

1. It does

2. Size doesn't matter if there is no game to play.
 
  • Like
Reactions: kizito

Tapioca

Banned
Aug 17, 2017
519
222
270
Sorry but i talk about PC games and not Console ports. Most PC games like mmo's / dota's / BR shooters etc all never really are done and go through faces.

Dota isn't the same as when it launched, wow isn't the same as when it launched. You can make this article for any of those gams without issue's.

This game is a open game project that will go on forever and ever and evolve forever and forever until the company goes out of business or activily decides to move on to another project.

Metacrits etc also isn't going to work for games like this as a result of this.

It's forbes and console gamers that honestly do not understand the concept of PC games and make random fud articles to get clicks.

Updates for a game does not mean it was never finished. Pub G, WoW, Overwatch, LoL, on and on were all 100% playable finished products when they released. All the developers did was continue to add to their games. Star Citizen is still barely a game.
 

Snake29

Member
Jul 30, 2013
2,112
2,896
635
The Netherlands
my gripe with the game is that even when (and if) it's finished, i'm not gonna touch the main portion of it (the online open world stuff) because there will be tons of people with cash paid ships around to ruin the experience

also, it will probably have so much microtransactions to feed a small country.

Then you can stop playing MMO's in general. Star Citizen universe will massive, people and Org's with large ships (even i have those ships and my Org does have ships for specific roles) will not even bother with starters. Star Citizen will not only be about combat. I am more interested in the science gameplay, exploration (like Prometheus the movie). Sure if you are going for a big expedition party you need security with you, others that can protect the cargo ship, science vessels. You need to think about what you equipment you bring with you on large scale missions like ammo for your ships, spare parts like coolers, shield gens, Avionic stuff, you can repair modules. Most ships have storage or storage rooms for this. Food for the crew, enough fuel, quantum fuel. Vehicles in your hangar bay like the URSA Rover or Cyclone buggies.

Big organised Org will travel more to more dangerous solar systems to build their settlement. With the Pioneer you can do that in the future.

 

V4skunk

Member
Nov 20, 2018
3,417
3,845
485
SC will only fail because CRs ambitions have not been kept in check.
The scale of SC is through the roof and it is worrying to hear CR is so hands on.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Foxbat

KonradLaw

Member
Aug 2, 2015
4,967
637
495
I have no idea if it will work out or not. But I at least hope that if it crashes and burns they manage to release Squadron 42 before it happens. Because that's why I backed the damn thing. Because online worlds and open world space sims still appear on the market, they just aren't as ambitious. But story-driven cinematic games in the genre just don't exist anymore and nobody did this kind of game better than Chris Roberts.
 

Inviusx

Member
Jan 4, 2016
1,850
1,928
540
my gripe with the game is that even when (and if) it's finished, i'm not gonna touch the main portion of it (the online open world stuff) because there will be tons of people with cash paid ships around to ruin the experience

also, it will probably have so much microtransactions to feed a small country.

They've also screwed themselves by valuing ships so high. How can you have a balanced economy when you value ships at $1000+? How many hundreds of hours will the average player have to grind to aquire something like that?
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Halo is Dead

ClanOfNone

Member
Nov 24, 2018
1,244
1,524
535
I hadn't owned a gaming PC in years, but I swore to buy one when Star Citizen was released. About two years ago I got tired of waiting and bought one anyways...
The Wing Commander franchise was a biggie for me growing up, WC2 in particular. At this point I'm just hoping Squadron 42 gets released soon. I have zero interest in the multiplayer aspect of SC, just gimme a badass space opera campaign and I'll be more than happy.
 

thelastword

Banned
Apr 7, 2006
11,732
11,938
2,000
The thing about Star Citizen is that it bit off more than it can/could chew.....I appreciate an ambitious game, but there's something about Star Citizen that's just not coming together.....The premise is one of Peter Molyneux like promise, but what they have relative to gameplay is not all that polished or good......Large/world/universe, you can do anything, fly your ships, land on planets, shoot your weapons........You just can't attempt a game that can literally do it all, because many aspects of Star Citizen the game will suffer, the sound effects, the animations, the actual gunplay/gameplay......You will never have enough manpower to realize this ambition with good quality and polish...

I think many PC gamers backed SC, not so much on the premise of great gameplay but because of it's graphical and technical promise......PC has not had a Crysis like game in years.....And because all the "best graphics threads was being led by predominantly console titles" PC guys doubled down on SC as a title no console game would touch in years and would be PC's most impressive looking game and poster child for said graphical debates.......The truth is, by the time SC releases, the new gen maybe upon us, where console graphics will be on a whole new stratoshpere......I think NMS was able to do something great, even without the graphical oomph of SC, at least they have something that plays well whilst being ambitious and we all know how long it took for them to rectify and improve some mechanics and add more polish......SC's graphics alone is a huge undertaking, to model these ships and the world, to get animation, Ai and sound on an acceptable level or proper gameplay across this vast world is going to be a world of hurt and an endless money and timesink.....

A game need to have limits, you need to curate an experience in order to deliver a focused and quality experience........Trying to be a jack of all trades type of game means that many aspects of the game will suffer.....and a higher and constant increase of time and money won't necessarily solve it.......
 

Snake29

Member
Jul 30, 2013
2,112
2,896
635
The Netherlands
The thing about Star Citizen is that it bit off more than it can/could chew.....I appreciate an ambitious game, but there's something about Star Citizen that's just not coming together.....The premise is one of Peter Molyneux like promise, but what they have relative to gameplay is not all that polished or good......Large/world/universe, you can do anything, fly your ships, land on planets, shoot your weapons........You just can't attempt a game that can literally do it all, because many aspects of Star Citizen the game will suffer, the sound effects, the animations, the actual gunplay/gameplay......You will never have enough manpower to realize this ambition with good quality and polish...

I think many PC gamers backed SC, not so much on the premise of great gameplay but because of it's graphical and technical promise......PC has not had a Crysis like game in years.....And because all the "best graphics threads was being led by predominantly console titles" PC guys doubled down on SC as a title no console game would touch in years and would be PC's most impressive looking game and poster child for said graphical debates.......The truth is, by the time SC releases, the new gen maybe upon us, where console graphics will be on a whole new stratoshpere......I think NMS was able to do something great, even without the graphical oomph of SC, at least they have something that plays well whilst being ambitious and we all know how long it took for them to rectify and improve some mechanics and add more polish......SC's graphics alone is a huge undertaking, to model these ships and the world, to get animation, Ai and sound on an acceptable level or proper gameplay across this vast world is going to be a world of hurt and an endless money and timesink.....

A game need to have limits, you need to curate an experience in order to deliver a focused and quality experience........Trying to be a jack of all trades type of game means that many aspects of the game will suffer.....and a higher and constant increase of time and money won't necessarily solve it.......

This is not true and if you had immersed yourself in SC, you would have known that they are very good at it. I mean you have different team working on different task, like it works in every game devs studio.

Just a few links from last CitizenCon from some tech we see ingame this year, and some already implemented:




Latest Squadron 42 trailer.

Graphics, sound effects, upcoming weather effects, animation, even gunplay atm is amazing. They are over 500 devs, so they have enough manpower. They are working at some of the best tech in the game industries.
 
Last edited:

Snake29

Member
Jul 30, 2013
2,112
2,896
635
The Netherlands
Snake29 Snake29 can you understand that there are minuses with the game as it stands?

Their will always be things in games that are not everything, but if you only trowing some story around without any facts, i will correct you. The thing is, most people around here only talk as if they have experience with SC, but they can't drop the facts.

Just show the facts that they don't have the manpower.. I haven't even seen one example from someone...why? because they do not have them.
 
Last edited:
Sep 29, 2011
4,353
3,015
850
Personally, I've not invested anything in SC and I've never played it, but every time I see a new video or read about what's been added, it blows me away. I truly want it to succeed, because what it's aiming for is so grand in scale. With that said, I still can't help but feel like it's never going to be finished. And by finished, I mean having a balanced set of game mechanics and content. Take Elite Dangerous for example - it's pretty much feature complete "enough" for me, but still doesn't have a great amount of varied content (imo). I'd be okay if SC was getting close to being to that point. Admittedly, I don't follow the project that closely, so maybe it's there or close to being there, but last I heard it wasn't.
 

Secret_Lover

Member
Sep 30, 2018
248
388
330
I don´t mean to call out anyone in particular but I find the language used in defense of this game fairly baffling. The fact that 7 years of development time and a quarter billion dollars later we are still using words like will/could/should/might when referring to something as integral as the core game-play loop is craziness.
 

VertigoOA

Banned
Jan 15, 2018
3,600
4,036
730
Sounds like it’s a playable game right now.

It could forever be in development too and I don’t have an issue with this.

People should start changing the way they see these games. They’re living games that will forever be in development.

The scope of the game seems impossible ... I imagine what it costs to create it will also seem just as unlikely.

I’d play it if there was console release ... yesterday
 

LucidFeuer

Banned
Jan 28, 2018
973
394
405
Everything one needs to know about the actual Star Citizen game today:



I'm so thankful to this youtuber for confirming how unfinished and barely standing together Star Citizen is.
Cyberpunk2077 is going to render this experimental demo useless. The ship design were great, as well as the few procedural cities, but besides that Star Citizen is an empty incoherent skeleton that barely stands together.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Inviusx and EviLore

Alexios

Formerly 'Alextended'
Jan 30, 2010
15,512
5,157
1,410
https://twitter.com/Agnates
metacouncil.com
Yeah, because the game is the alpha demos (with like 1% of the planned content, even though the current alphas are already much larger than earlier versions), is the game, totally. Don't switch from "what is available to try today" implication which may be truthful in a sense but clearly trying to twist shit in the most negative manner possible and call it "what Star Citizen is" as if they're calling this v1.0 or v0.9 and just about ready for prime time. Like, if that guy did the video a year or so ago it'd look twice as bad and this video will look twice as bad as what we'll be seeing in a year, how can any video of something unfinished be representative of what the game will be? What Star Citizen is, is in development, it isn't "this". Feel free to be wary of how it might develop, if it will develop, but the rest bs is unnecessary. And what does Cyberpunk have to do with anything, that's more a single player GTA with RPG systems a la Deus Ex (conversations, quests, etc) than like Star Citizen on any level. Comparing them just shows a deep misunderstanding that shouldn't be there not only if you paid attention to the game but even if you had just watched that one video you linked, negative as it may be. Lol? Might as well call Fortnite's first versions all there is ever going to be to it and how it will never ever amount to anything in the grand scheme of things and how this or that unrelated game is the one to watch, when it didn't even have Battle Royale back then, lol, and the rest is history. Same for Shenmue 3 being called a scam but now having none of that shit any more because it's clear it was never a scam as it is nearing release, but clearly it's a far smaller scale project so Star Citizen takes far longer than that, yet even in Shenmue 3's short time frame people called it a scam. It's like people don't understand what "in development" means on purpose. How do I vidya games plox, or whatever. Doubt for it ever getting finished is one thing, presenting what's out there as the end goal or the extent of the several studios' capabilities is pretty damn idiotic.

Punishing developers for daring to show this level of transparency in a crowd funded project that relied on its audience to get going and showing this much insight into how things are shaping up? Fighting that with ignorance and attacks for everything they can ever stand for or some shit is just, totally not what any self respecting gamer should be doing. What the heck really? Like what would be a good alpha method for such a project to you? A game that is as unfinished as this, yet somehow includes all the star systems planned already, so you can say, yeah, okay, I can believe they will continue development of the features because content is (magically) there? Or a game that is polished but represents a tiny amount of both content and features as they only do it one by one (and I guess the rest of the developers just sit on their hands while they wait for their turn rather than work in parallel on many aspects that eventually come together, even if that means a couple more decades of dev time to get to everything eventually, lol) so you can say okay, I see the polish, so I believe them that they will eventually have that in a game of much grander scope? And why's your preference the better way to do things, what's your experience in these things to judge as such? The only thing you can judge as of now is if the current alphas are enough to get you to jump in. Which is clearly a no. Which is perfectly fine. Just as hating on the actual game will be fine then.

Meh, if they didn't even release anything or show how they're doing you'd probably hate them just the same and talk about how a game isn't even being developed, but now we get to see progress whenever a new milestone is reached, from 0, to the hangar, to the small scale stuff, to the persistent universe system previews with all kinds of elements interacting at once to whatever else is coming next like the overhauled flight physics/systems (or is that already out, I forget as I don't try every new version), that's also equally bad! And it would be just as bad to release small polished chunks because then you'd never believe they could do all the rest chunks if all they have to show is such a small chunk, polished as it may be. While showing tons of content and no feature/gameplay improvements would of course be ripe to just talk about how all they have is models and assets and no actual game! So What could possibly please you other than your dream game for $50 or as a gift already installed on your PC? With that attitude every absolute classic game ever would have been a scam to move past and forget it was ever announced in favor of another completely different game, never mind them releasing x amount of years past that amazing judgement call and being everything you could hope for, nope, gotta bash now, gotta vomit all the poison I can while I can. If it doesn't pan out I can be all "I told you so foolz" while if it does I'll forget I ever said anything!
 
Last edited:

Kittehkraken

Member
Jan 14, 2017
1,482
3,345
480
I remember when so many people wrote off No Man's Sky as a complete failure that the developer could never fix. Yet despite all the arm chair experts claiming it would never happen, No Man's Sky just keeps getting better.

If the Star Citizen developers are committed to developing this project long term, i honestly don't see a problem with that.
 
Last edited:

Tomeru

Member
Aug 20, 2014
2,256
1,063
560
Israel
I dont understand the whole "its playable" arguement. Does this current version has the same amount of content as the games its being compated too atm?
 

Halo is Dead

Member
May 20, 2018
7,361
13,230
810
Everything one needs to know about the actual Star Citizen game today:



I'm so thankful to this youtuber for confirming how unfinished and barely standing together Star Citizen is.
Cyberpunk2077 is going to render this experimental demo useless. The ship design were great, as well as the few procedural cities, but besides that Star Citizen is an empty incoherent skeleton that barely stands together.
this is the most fair assessment of the game I have seen. Still though I’m not impressed by how broken the game looks. They still have so much to add in the game and it still needs some serious patches.
 

Ribi

Member
Oct 24, 2017
728
780
385
I dont understand the whole "its playable" arguement. Does this current version has the same amount of content as the games its being compated too atm?
compared to Sea of Thieves and fallout 76 at launch? Yes
 

ScaryBrandon

Banned
Feb 21, 2014
367
829
685
Then you can stop playing MMO's in general. Star Citizen universe will massive, people and Org's with large ships (even i have those ships and my Org does have ships for specific roles) will not even bother with starters. Star Citizen will not only be about combat. I am more interested in the science gameplay, exploration (like Prometheus the movie). Sure if you are going for a big expedition party you need security with you, others that can protect the cargo ship, science vessels. You need to think about what you equipment you bring with you on large scale missions like ammo for your ships, spare parts like coolers, shield gens, Avionic stuff, you can repair modules. Most ships have storage or storage rooms for this. Food for the crew, enough fuel, quantum fuel. Vehicles in your hangar bay like the URSA Rover or Cyclone buggies.

Big organised Org will travel more to more dangerous solar systems to build their settlement. With the Pioneer you can do that in the future.

Cant believe people in 2019 still believe these things will happen in SC. Science, exploration? I really don't know what to say,
 
  • Like
Reactions: kizito

bitbydeath

Member
Nov 25, 2015
14,646
24,776
1,200
I remember when so many people wrote off No Man's Sky as a complete failure that the developer could never fix. Yet despite all the arm chair experts claiming it would never happen, No Man's Sky just keeps getting better.

If the Star Citizen developers are committed to developing this project long term, i honestly don't see a problem with that.

I don’t think this game will reach the scale of No Man’s Sky. It’s already been seven years and they don’t even have a single galaxy let alone the systems in place to go up against it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: kizito

Stuart360

Member
Sep 9, 2018
9,003
21,189
725
Downloaded the beta yesterday, and boy they have done some work on optimization at least. I was getting 60fps at max settings for probably 70-80% of the time, compared to 5-30fps on the beta from a year or two back lol.
Graphics are stunning as well. I just wish there was a bit more guidance in the beta, with what to do and how to do it. very overwhelming for a new player, but it is only a beta years from being finished so. Same with cointroller support, whichmust be the most weird implementation i have ever seen in any game, but again thats something that probably isn't high on the agenda at the minute.
 

Kittehkraken

Member
Jan 14, 2017
1,482
3,345
480
I don’t think this game will reach the scale of No Man’s Sky. It’s already been seven years and they don’t even have a single galaxy let alone the systems in place to go up against it.

This will depend entirely upon how good the procedural generation system they develop will be. It was no different with No Man's Sky.
 
Last edited:

Snakey125

Member
Jan 5, 2015
208
47
440
Think Derek smart wrote that article lol that's no journalist
Derek is already preaching about it on his twitter like the moron he is. I'm surprised he's relent these days outside of sucking up to Something Awful forums when they use to mock him.
 

Foxbat

Banned
May 30, 2018
703
784
445
The thing about Star Citizen is that it bit off more than it can/could chew.....I appreciate an ambitious game, but there's something about Star Citizen that's just not coming together.....The premise is one of Peter Molyneux like promise, but what they have relative to gameplay is not all that polished or good......Large/world/universe, you can do anything, fly your ships, land on planets, shoot your weapons........You just can't attempt a game that can literally do it all, because many aspects of Star Citizen the game will suffer, the sound effects, the animations, the actual gunplay/gameplay......You will never have enough manpower to realize this ambition with good quality and polish...

I think many PC gamers backed SC, not so much on the premise of great gameplay but because of it's graphical and technical promise......PC has not had a Crysis like game in years.....And because all the "best graphics threads was being led by predominantly console titles" PC guys doubled down on SC as a title no console game would touch in years and would be PC's most impressive looking game and poster child for said graphical debates.......The truth is, by the time SC releases, the new gen maybe upon us, where console graphics will be on a whole new stratoshpere......I think NMS was able to do something great, even without the graphical oomph of SC, at least they have something that plays well whilst being ambitious and we all know how long it took for them to rectify and improve some mechanics and add more polish......SC's graphics alone is a huge undertaking, to model these ships and the world, to get animation, Ai and sound on an acceptable level or proper gameplay across this vast world is going to be a world of hurt and an endless money and timesink.....

A game need to have limits, you need to curate an experience in order to deliver a focused and quality experience........Trying to be a jack of all trades type of game means that many aspects of the game will suffer.....and a higher and constant increase of time and money won't necessarily solve it.......

As much as it pains and surprises me to say it... TLW is on point. Very accurately so. Couldn't have said it better myself.
 

Foxbat

Banned
May 30, 2018
703
784
445
compared to Sea of Thieves and fallout 76 at launch? Yes

Both those examples weren't in development as long as SC is or will be. Both those games have a better gameplay loop compared to SC which doesn't really have one at all. SC allows it's players to create their own gameplay loop though. The thing is, is that both the examples you mentioned can do that as well... While also having a fully fleshed out loop provided by the devs, if you so choose to play that way.

You shouldn't compare SC to anything even remotely comparable... SC will lose every time.
 

Halo is Dead

Member
May 20, 2018
7,361
13,230
810
The thing about Star Citizen is that it bit off more than it can/could chew.....I appreciate an ambitious game, but there's something about Star Citizen that's just not coming together.....The premise is one of Peter Molyneux like promise, but what they have relative to gameplay is not all that polished or good......Large/world/universe, you can do anything, fly your ships, land on planets, shoot your weapons........You just can't attempt a game that can literally do it all, because many aspects of Star Citizen the game will suffer, the sound effects, the animations, the actual gunplay/gameplay......You will never have enough manpower to realize this ambition with good quality and polish...

I think many PC gamers backed SC, not so much on the premise of great gameplay but because of it's graphical and technical promise......PC has not had a Crysis like game in years.....And because all the "best graphics threads was being led by predominantly console titles" PC guys doubled down on SC as a title no console game would touch in years and would be PC's most impressive looking game and poster child for said graphical debates.......The truth is, by the time SC releases, the new gen maybe upon us, where console graphics will be on a whole new stratoshpere......I think NMS was able to do something great, even without the graphical oomph of SC, at least they have something that plays well whilst being ambitious and we all know how long it took for them to rectify and improve some mechanics and add more polish......SC's graphics alone is a huge undertaking, to model these ships and the world, to get animation, Ai and sound on an acceptable level or proper gameplay across this vast world is going to be a world of hurt and an endless money and timesink.....

A game need to have limits, you need to curate an experience in order to deliver a focused and quality experience........Trying to be a jack of all trades type of game means that many aspects of the game will suffer.....and a higher and constant increase of time and money won't necessarily solve it.......
Very well said. This is what I have been trying to say for years. Hard decisions need to be made, things need to be cut or they will forever have a laundry list of things they want to implement in the while still having the challenge to polish all of it. It’s just not a realistic design philosophy and he suckerd all of the backers into the pipe dream of an endless game where you can do anything. At least No man’s Sky knew this reality.
 
Last edited:

Foxbat

Banned
May 30, 2018
703
784
445
Very well said. This is what I have been trying to say for years. Hard decisions need to be made, things need to be cut or they will forever have a laundry list of things they want to implement in the while still having the challenge to polish all of it. It’s just not a realistic design philosophy and he suckerd all of the backers into the pipe dream of an endless game where you can do anything. At least No man’s Sky knew this reality.

Agreed. NMS's problem was that they lied about that reality. They deserved the flak they got for it.

SC deserves the flak for failing to realize that reality overall.

When the gaming community at large stood up and demanded better from NMS.... They got it. Same could be said with MS regarding the XB1 launch policies. The people defending SC are doing it no favors.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Halo is Dead

Tomeru

Member
Aug 20, 2014
2,256
1,063
560
Israel
compared to Sea of Thieves and fallout 76 at launch? Yes

Nice incomplete answer. Why cant I ever get a detailed answer about this? Everywhere. I'll need totry out this free week I guess. Imcoming over from ED, mind you.
 

Foxbat

Banned
May 30, 2018
703
784
445
Nice incomplete answer. Why cant I ever get a detailed answer about this? Everywhere. I'll need totry out this free week I guess. Imcoming over from ED, mind you.

SC is a work in progress. In ED you've got an immense galaxy to explore. You can buy a ship, modify and outfit it how you want, and go fly it. You can choose between several paths when it comes to what you wish to accomplish such as fighting, cargo hauling, explore, mining, etc... You can also land on certain world's and drive around in your buggy.

If ED had space legs, allowing you to walk around your ship, as well as detailed cities and world's including fps combat, then you'd ha e the basic gist of what SC hopes to become one day.

But as SC currently stands... You have only bits and fragmented pieces of that. There's only a couple of planets to land on, a moon or two, and an astroid. At least from what I've read.

Take my info with a grain of salt, as I haven't played SC in quite some time, but I think an apt comparison could be summed up like this...

Sometimes ED feels a mile wide but an inch deep. SC is a two inch deep puddle.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Tomeru

Ribi

Member
Oct 24, 2017
728
780
385
Both those examples weren't in development as long as SC is or will be. Both those games have a better gameplay loop compared to SC which doesn't really have one at all. SC allows it's players to create their own gameplay loop though. The thing is, is that both the examples you mentioned can do that as well... While also having a fully fleshed out loop provided by the devs, if you so choose to play that way.

You shouldn't compare SC to anything even remotely comparable... SC will lose every time.
dont lie to yourself SoT gameplay loop at launch was the exact same as SC, nonexistent. And I too would spend 7 years buliding a game if I had to hire 200+people over the span of that time and create a company and modify and entire engine.

also the small loop you consider SoT to have.. explain it to me real fast and I'll show you the parallels.
 
Last edited:

StreetsofBeige

Gold Member
Oct 26, 2018
18,923
26,390
820
dont lie to yourself SoT gameplay loop at launch was the exact same as SC, nonexistent. And I too would spend 7 years buliding a game if I had to hire 200+people over the span of that time and create a company and modify and entire engine.

also the small loop you consider SoT to have.. explain it to me real fast and I'll show you the parallels.
SoT was definitely lean on content at launch. Every web site said so. But it is fully functional with MP gaming.

In it's current form of beta downloads, how fully functional is SC? Not asking to be an ass, just wondering. Every time someone brings up SC, it's lots of cool videos of spaceship demos and such, but where's the core gameplay?

It's supposed to be a huge game of space flight, dog-fighting, exploration, on-foot roaming around and FPS shooter.

Are any of these close to being fully functional it can be it's own game? And then add the other gameplay later?
 

Foxbat

Banned
May 30, 2018
703
784
445
dont lie to yourself SoT gameplay loop at launch was the exact same as SC, nonexistent. And I too would spend 7 years buliding a game if I had to hire 200+people over the span of that time and create a company and modify and entire engine.

also the small loop you consider SoT to have.. explain it to me real fast and I'll show you the parallels.

The gameplay loop for SoT at launch was still more than there is for SC. It was extremely short on content though. Rare has since added a ton of content, and expanded the gameplay loop since. Meanwhile, SC remains in an Alpha state with no release date in sight, much less a fleshed out gameplay loop.

Over the last 6 plus years, Rare has accomplished far more in SoT than Roberts has with SC.... Despite the budget. Think about that for a second. SoT > SC.

Like I said. You'd be wise to not compare SC to other games. SC will lose the comparison virtually every time.
 
Last edited:

Ribi

Member
Oct 24, 2017
728
780
385
The gameplay loop for SoT at launch was still more than there is for SC. It was extremely short on content though. Rare has since added a ton of content, and expanded the gameplay loop since. Meanwhile, SC remains in an Alpha state with no release date in sight, much less a fleshed out gameplay loop.

Over the last 6 plus years, Rare has accomplished far more in SoT than Roberts has with SC.... Despite the budget. Think about that for a second. SoT > SC.

Like I said. You'd be wise to not compare SC to other games. SC will lose the comparison virtually every time.
answer my question please and dont tiptoe around it
 

Foxbat

Banned
May 30, 2018
703
784
445
answer my question please and dont tiptoe around it

Show the parallels. Why should I have to explain SoT's gameplay loop to you? Do you not know? Have you not played it? I never asked for your "parallels" to begin with. I'm aware of what both games consist of. I don't need you to explain it to me.

You almost (and I stress almost) had a point between SC and SoT.... Until you realize that Rare has added new content, and is a fully released game with fully fledged features.... While SC is still in Alpha. :messenger_tears_of_joy: