Star Citizen at $77M

The Roberts Space Industries website reveals that crowdfunding of Star Citizen has now passed the $77 million mark. GameSpot notes this includes a million dollars raised in a five-day period, and it looks like this includes well over $600K collected on Saturday, which seems to be the result of a new a new ship for the game going on sale. Here's word on this $250.00 ship package:
We are offering this pledge ship to help fund Star Citizen’s development. All of these ships will be available for in-game credits in the final universe, and they are not required to start the game. Additionally, all decorative ‘flare’ items will also be available to acquire in the finished game world. The goal is to make additional ships available that give players a different experience rather than a particular advantage when the persistent universe launches.

The Vanguard is being offered for the first time as a limited concept sale. This means that the ship design meets our specifications, but it is not yet ready to display in your Hangar or to fight in Arena Commander. The sale includes Lifetime Insurance on the ship hull and a pair of decorative items for your Hangar. A future patch will add a Vanguard poster and then once the in-game model is finished you will also be given an in-game Vanguard mini ship model! In the future, the ship price will increase and the offer will not include Life Time Insurance or these extras.
View : : :
106 Replies. 6 pages. Viewing page 1.
Newer [  1  2  3  4  5  6  ] Older
106.
 
Re: Into the Black
Apr 2, 2015, 07:59
Re: Into the Black Apr 2, 2015, 07:59
Apr 2, 2015, 07:59
 
theyarecomingforyou wrote on Apr 2, 2015, 03:51:
Chris Roberts will be travelling to the UK and spending the next couple of months there in order to oversee the motion capture shoot.

"you're getting the deal of the century even if you put $100+ dollars into it"

dat christ roberts https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=joKjDdKcOMQ#t=22m19s
105.
 
Re: Into the Black
Apr 2, 2015, 03:51
Re: Into the Black Apr 2, 2015, 03:51
Apr 2, 2015, 03:51
 
Tumbler wrote on Apr 1, 2015, 13:47:
I think NegaDeath has a lot of good points to be honest.

The original pitch was for a Wing commander style campaign in an up to date game engine. To date they've shown almost none of that. What they are showing is bits and pieces of what will be in the persistent universe and showing almost none of the SP experience.
That's deliberate. Chris Roberts will be travelling to the UK and spending the next couple of months there in order to oversee the motion capture shoot. All the details will be kept under wraps until release so as not to spoil the story, though I'm sure we'll see some tidbits. At the moment they're working on the core mechanics and designing all the areas. In other words, they don't have anything to show off and they want to avoid ruining the surprise.

Tumbler wrote on Apr 1, 2015, 13:47:
The G-Safe limiter as it's implemented now sucks because you do black out and red out just doing normal maneuvers. I'd prefer they fixed that so you could fly anyway you choose without ever experiencing higher G's. With G-safe off then you should see red outs and black outs as happen now with it on.
As I said it depends on the speed of the ship and whether you're using boost (which disables G-Safe). Ships like the Hornet and Aurora are quite difficult to black out in; ships like the Mustang Omega, M50 and 350R are quite easy to black out in. If you go around everywhere at max speeds and boosting whilst manoeuvring then you'll black out. Don't forget that at the moment we only have the single-seater ships - blacking out will be extremely unlikely in the bigger ships. That said, the system will inevitably be tweaked before release.

Tumbler wrote on Apr 1, 2015, 13:47:
The only part of Arena commander that applies to what the campaign should be like is the Vandaal swarm mode in SP or Co-Op. Those modes happen to be the most fun for me but only because the Vanduul fly something like what we've come to expect in other games. They don't change course randomly in all directions making it frustrating to chase and fight them as you see in pvp.
You mean to say that online PVP isn't like Wing Commander? I think that statement is a bit redundant. We'll see more as we get towards AC 2.0, where we'll see new missions like escort the Idris. Before that we'll have the FPS and social modules, which will no doubt require a lot of community feedback to polish up. If you've seen some of the presentations they've done you'll see that a huge amount of work has been done on the planetside locations and FPS module.

Tumbler wrote on Apr 1, 2015, 13:47:
I believe they're planning on rolling out the first part of the SP campaign in the last quarter of this year...but that is an ever moving date. I honestly don't know what to expect from the SP campaign because they've been so quite about it. They could be just holding back so they have a ton of stuff for people to be excited about when they release or they could be hiding the fact that the missions and story and the whole campaign just isn't coming together well.
They're not hiding anything. At the moment they haven't done the motion capture shoot, so they don't have any scenes to share. They also don't want to spoil the surprise. We'll see some information drop over the next 6-8 months but expect most of it to be a surprise. Once it has been released we'll see a lot of community feedback and changes will be incorporated from there. Despite the open nature of the development most people don't want major spoilers of upcoming content. I think the biggest reveal will be some of the actors involved, as based on previous products we can expect major Hollywood talent.

Of course there is grounds for concern but generally everything I've seen is progressing in the right direction.
"The price of freedom is eternal vigilance."
Avatar 22891
104.
 
Re: Into the Black
Apr 1, 2015, 13:47
Re: Into the Black Apr 1, 2015, 13:47
Apr 1, 2015, 13:47
 
I think NegaDeath has a lot of good points to be honest.

The original pitch was for a Wing commander style campaign in an up to date game engine. To date they've shown almost none of that. What they are showing is bits and pieces of what will be in the persistent universe and showing almost none of the SP experience.

The only part of Arena commander that applies to what the campaign should be like is the Vandaal swarm mode in SP or Co-Op. Those modes happen to be the most fun for me but only because the Vanduul fly something like what we've come to expect in other games. They don't change course randomly in all directions making it frustrating to chase and fight them as you see in pvp.

The G-Safe limiter as it's implemented now sucks because you do black out and red out just doing normal maneuvers. I'd prefer they fixed that so you could fly anyway you choose without ever experiencing higher G's. With G-safe off then you should see red outs and black outs as happen now with it on.

I believe they're planning on rolling out the first part of the SP campaign in the last quarter of this year...but that is an ever moving date. I honestly don't know what to expect from the SP campaign because they've been so quite about it. They could be just holding back so they have a ton of stuff for people to be excited about when they release or they could be hiding the fact that the missions and story and the whole campaign just isn't coming together well.

There is no way to know without CIG showing us more. Assuming they stick to the end of this year as the release of the first part of SP campaign you shouldn't have long to wait to see if the SP campaign is what you're hoping it will be or if it's more of this. (AC combat)
103.
 
Re: Star Citizen at $77M
Apr 1, 2015, 07:02
Re: Star Citizen at $77M Apr 1, 2015, 07:02
Apr 1, 2015, 07:02
 
theyarecomingforyou wrote on Apr 1, 2015, 06:25:
jdreyer wrote on Apr 1, 2015, 05:58:
Even though we reached 100 comments in this thread, I'm still claiming Peak Star Citizen. We're in the "bumpy plateau phase" of it, so expect to see some threads above 100, and some below. Eventually interest in SC will peter out altogether.
It still managed 100 posts on a non-story.

Lets give a hand to the feeders Smartass .....i guess
102.
 
Re: Star Citizen at $77M
Apr 1, 2015, 06:25
Re: Star Citizen at $77M Apr 1, 2015, 06:25
Apr 1, 2015, 06:25
 
jdreyer wrote on Apr 1, 2015, 05:58:
Even though we reached 100 comments in this thread, I'm still claiming Peak Star Citizen. We're in the "bumpy plateau phase" of it, so expect to see some threads above 100, and some below. Eventually interest in SC will peter out altogether.
It still managed 100 posts on a non-story.
"The price of freedom is eternal vigilance."
Avatar 22891
101.
 
Re: Star Citizen at $77M
Apr 1, 2015, 05:58
Re: Star Citizen at $77M Apr 1, 2015, 05:58
Apr 1, 2015, 05:58
 
Even though we reached 100 comments in this thread, I'm still claiming Peak Star Citizen. We're in the "bumpy plateau phase" of it, so expect to see some threads above 100, and some below. Eventually interest in SC will peter out altogether.
If Russia stops fighting, the war ends. If Ukraine stops fighting, Ukraine ends. Slava Ukraini!
Avatar 22024
100.
 
Re: Into the Black
Apr 1, 2015, 05:40
Re: Into the Black Apr 1, 2015, 05:40
Apr 1, 2015, 05:40
 
NegaDeath wrote on Apr 1, 2015, 01:32:
Yeah no still wrong. I backed a Wing Commander successor. That was what was promised during the kickstarter and the very first video showed that. I am not getting that in the remotest sense.
As a huge fan of Wing Commander and Starlancer I love the direction of the game, so again it's your expectations. If you go back and look at gameplay videos of Wing Commander III / IV you'll see that it's terrible by modern standards. Starlancer was the more recent game and Star Citizen is very much in that vein.

NegaDeath wrote on Apr 1, 2015, 01:32:
I turn left, screen goes red. Every single time. Doesn't happen in Elite. Or Wing Commander. Or X-Wing/TIE. You don't see your inconsistency in telling me I'm getting Wing Commander while telling me I can't play it like Wing Commander. I've been ripped off, end of story.
You clearly haven't taken the time to learn the gameplay mechanics, as surprisingly enough most people aren't redding / blacking out all the time. Some ships are more sensitive than others but obviously if you go around at maximum speed / using the thrusters and turning sharply you'll exceed g-force limits - just like a real pilot would. Use the throttle.

Which ship do you have? If it's something like the Mustang Omega, the free one that came with AMD cards, then that ship is extremely sensitive due to the speed and you can't fly it around at maximum speed when turning. In something like the Hornet it's very difficult to red / black out, due to the lower speed and more controlled manoeuvring. Because of the way physics are handled in Star Citizen each ship handles very differently.

NegaDeath wrote on Apr 1, 2015, 01:32:
Here's an example from a guide I looked up that illustrates my point perfectly

"There is one very important step in learning to fly your ship in Star Citizen: FORGET ABSOLUTELY EVERYTHING YOU THINK YOU KNOW ABOUT FLYING AN AIRPLANE OR SHIP IN A VIDEOGAME"

So I'm "getting what was promised" while at the same time the fans admit it plays nothing like his or the industries previous games. One of these things are not like the other.
It's been twenty years since the last Chris Roberts Wing Commander game and fifteen years since Starlancer. Gaming has moved on since then and Star Citizen reflects that. It was pitched as a spiritual successor to Wing Commander and Starlancer, which is exactly what it is. Nowhere was it promised that it would be a direct recreation of the Wing Commander physics - in fact it was CLEARLY stated back in October 2012 that it WOULDN'T be like Wing Commander. Again, your expectations were wrong - the game is what was promised.
"The price of freedom is eternal vigilance."
Avatar 22891
99.
 
Re: Into the Black
Apr 1, 2015, 01:32
99.
Re: Into the Black Apr 1, 2015, 01:32
Apr 1, 2015, 01:32
 
theyarecomingforyou wrote on Mar 31, 2015, 13:21:
You're getting what you backed, you just had expectations that were unreasonable for what was promised.

Yeah no still wrong. I backed a Wing Commander successor. That was what was promised during the kickstarter and the very first video showed that. I am not getting that in the remotest sense. You can't tell me I'm getting what I backed when it plays nothing like it and never will. I turn left, screen goes red. Every single time. Doesn't happen in Elite. Or Wing Commander. Or X-Wing/TIE. You don't see your inconsistency in telling me I'm getting Wing Commander while telling me I can't play it like Wing Commander. I've been ripped off, end of story.

Edit: Here's an example from a guide I looked up that illustrates my point perfectly

"There is one very important step in learning to fly your ship in Star Citizen: FORGET ABSOLUTELY EVERYTHING YOU THINK YOU KNOW ABOUT FLYING AN AIRPLANE OR SHIP IN A VIDEOGAME"

So I'm "getting what was promised" while at the same time the fans admit it plays nothing like his or the industries previous games. One of these things are not like the other.

This comment was edited on Apr 1, 2015, 01:39.
Avatar 57352
98.
 
Re: Into the Black
Mar 31, 2015, 22:34
98.
Re: Into the Black Mar 31, 2015, 22:34
Mar 31, 2015, 22:34
 
"On paper" is the thing. The stats are utterly meaningless right now, especially as the developers keep changing things around. Don't make any serious judgements based on them - if you have to pledge for a ship, just go with whatever sounds cool and wait to see what becomes of things. Worst-case you can just trade it in for credit and get something else.

There have been plenty of ships to compare stats to the real thing thus far. I think it's safer to spend based on how much value a ship brings based on stats rather than accepting whatever price cig wants.

If not for the fixed guns on the wing I'd say the avenger takes the top spot but because the 300i wing slots allow a gimbaled gun that seems a tad better for combat. If we can get a tr5 engine on the avenger that might push it to the top spot. The Mustang might be good as well but I haven't had a lot of time with it.

This comment was edited on Apr 1, 2015, 13:36.
97.
 
Re: Into the Black
Mar 31, 2015, 18:45
97.
Re: Into the Black Mar 31, 2015, 18:45
Mar 31, 2015, 18:45
 
Tumbler wrote on Mar 31, 2015, 17:33:
I think it's better to compare it to the Connie which was $225 by itself way back when. The standard connie comes with a second fighter as well and seems to kick the crap out of this thing in stats. I can only assume that the Vanguard will make up for that in armor and shields...possibly speed but the connie seems to have it topped as a heavy fighter.
The Vanguard is a deep-space fighter, meaning that it has redundancy - it was two engines and two power plants, plus it will be more manoeuvrable than the Constellation. It's also mil-spec, meaning it has higher quality components. However, you're right that it's an expensive ship. As for the Constellation, there are various models with the top model costing $350 (the Phoenix). The Redeemer is the more apt comparison, as at $250 it seems like the best ship in its price range - it has two manner turrets and supports 5 crew. That's probably a better choice for most people.

Looking at it again I agree, the Vanguard is overpriced.
"The price of freedom is eternal vigilance."
Avatar 22891
96.
 
Re: Into the Black
Mar 31, 2015, 18:03
96.
Re: Into the Black Mar 31, 2015, 18:03
Mar 31, 2015, 18:03
 
Tumbler wrote on Mar 31, 2015, 17:33:
The connie just destroys this ship on paper

"On paper" is the thing. The stats are utterly meaningless right now, especially as the developers keep changing things around. Don't make any serious judgements based on them - if you have to pledge for a ship, just go with whatever sounds cool and wait to see what becomes of things. Worst-case you can just trade it in for credit and get something else.
95.
 
Re: Into the Black
Mar 31, 2015, 17:44
95.
Re: Into the Black Mar 31, 2015, 17:44
Mar 31, 2015, 17:44
 
Tumbler wrote on Mar 31, 2015, 16:19:
We've had someone here say they have given like $1,200 I believe -- can't remember who.

I've got to be over 1200 by now, I'm definitely over $1,000. (1122.93! dammit, I'm no quite there!) To my credit though I've stopped buying ships. What they are selling for today seems crazy. It feels like they really ramped up prices in 2014 on ships and anything that gets released now just has a big fat extra chunk on the price because that can.

That's fine with me, I am happier with the ships I bought at the price I paid.

Most of my funds have gone towards the monthly sub, $10 a month, and lots of physical items. Shirts, models, mouse pads, dog tags, I love all the little knick knacks!


I've got to be over 1200 by now, I'm definitely over $1,000

1000 $ ....sick just sick,,,no matter what excuse you use it's plain sick if you earn so much that you use it on pixels maybe you should go Down in hours and give another person a chance to earn Money to his famely...1000$ ...sick Clown
94.
 
Re: Into the Black
Mar 31, 2015, 17:33
94.
Re: Into the Black Mar 31, 2015, 17:33
Mar 31, 2015, 17:33
 
CIG has stated that ships will get more expensive closer to release. However, most of the ships that have been released recently have been large. When you look at the Vanguard, which is better spec'ed and larger than the Super Hornet, it commands a price tag to match ($250, versus the $180 of the SH). The Herald was cheap at $85, relative to other ships.

I think it's better to compare it to the Connie which was $225 by itself way back when. The standard connie comes with a second fighter as well and seems to kick the crap out of this thing in stats. I can only assume that the Vanguard will make up for that in armor and shields...possibly speed but the connie seems to have it topped as a heavy fighter.

Connie engines, 4x TR5's vs Vanguard 2x TR4's
Connie Thrusters, 8x TR3's vs Vanguard 11x TR2's
Connie guns 4x S4 Gimbals vs Vanguard 4x S2 Fixed
Connie missles 4xS1 & 2xS2 vs Vanguard 2xS2
Connie Turrets 2xS4 vs Vanguard 1xS2

The only questionable area is the P52 merlin vs the S5 Gatling and I'll take the extra fighter over the Gatling. The connie just destroys this ship on paper and costs $225 originally. Check that, it's still $225 today. I think the Vanguard is overpriced and I think that is normal for any new ships that come out. People will pay it so why not but the ships don't seem balanced to the dollar with the new stuff. It seems like you're paying a lot more for less.
93.
 
Re: Into the Black
Mar 31, 2015, 16:33
93.
Re: Into the Black Mar 31, 2015, 16:33
Mar 31, 2015, 16:33
 
Tumbler wrote on Mar 31, 2015, 16:19:
We've had someone here say they have given like $1,200 I believe -- can't remember who.

I've got to be over 1200 by now, I'm definitely over $1,000. (1122.93! dammit, I'm no quite there!) To my credit though I've stopped buying ships. What they are selling for today seems crazy. It feels like they really ramped up prices in 2014 on ships and anything that gets released now just has a big fat extra chunk on the price because that can.
CIG has stated that ships will get more expensive closer to release. However, most of the ships that have been released recently have been large. When you look at the Vanguard, which is better spec'ed and larger than the Super Hornet, it commands a price tag to match ($250, versus the $180 of the SH). The Herald was cheap at $85, relative to other ships.

I'm probably going to upgrade my Super Hornet to the Vanguard and leave it at that, to go along with my Mustang Delta, Mustang Omega and Herald. Well, I'll probably pick up the third starter ship as it's a two-seater and comes with LTI. That said, I intend to pick up some more merchandise and will be buying a ticket for CitizenCon if I can, what with it being in the UK.
"The price of freedom is eternal vigilance."
Avatar 22891
92.
 
Re: Into the Black
Mar 31, 2015, 16:19
92.
Re: Into the Black Mar 31, 2015, 16:19
Mar 31, 2015, 16:19
 
We've had someone here say they have given like $1,200 I believe -- can't remember who.

I've got to be over 1200 by now, I'm definitely over $1,000. (1122.93! dammit, I'm no quite there!) To my credit though I've stopped buying ships. What they are selling for today seems crazy. It feels like they really ramped up prices in 2014 on ships and anything that gets released now just has a big fat extra chunk on the price because that can.

That's fine with me, I am happier with the ships I bought at the price I paid.

Most of my funds have gone towards the monthly sub, $10 a month, and lots of physical items. Shirts, models, mouse pads, dog tags, I love all the little knick knacks!

91.
 
Re: Into the Black
Mar 31, 2015, 13:22
91.
Re: Into the Black Mar 31, 2015, 13:22
Mar 31, 2015, 13:22
 
jdreyer wrote on Mar 31, 2015, 13:09:
This "fun" concept you speak of, what is it?

:D
Midget hookers in Ewok outfits defecating on small children.
"The price of freedom is eternal vigilance."
Avatar 22891
90.
 
Re: Into the Black
Mar 31, 2015, 13:21
90.
Re: Into the Black Mar 31, 2015, 13:21
Mar 31, 2015, 13:21
 
NegaDeath wrote on Mar 31, 2015, 11:04:
Nope. Just nope. Strafing? I backed a Wing Commander successor not a FPS. There isn't always something to hide behind, nor should I need to. If there is no dogfight there is no space sim.
Wing Commander was a great game for the time but it's not a physically simulated game like Star Citizen, something which was promised from the start. Fans have been very vocal in their demand for 6DoF. Strafing is an important flight mechanic and by not using it you're limiting your experience. Without strafing you can't move in a non-linear manner whilst still tracking / attacking an opponent. Of course if you head in a straight line to an opponent and they do the same you're going to end up with incredibly closing speeds, as you're effectively flying at twice the speed (hence why head-on-collisions are so dangerous on the roads).

If you're not willing to learn the mechanics then I don't have any sympathy.

NegaDeath wrote on Mar 31, 2015, 11:04:
If the core gameplay is this bad after all this time in development then I've wasted my money and Roberts has wasted my good faith. I'm not getting what I backed, all the extra layers added on top won't change that.
I reject the notion that it is bad. When I backed this game I did so based on Chris Roberts' history in the genre and my like of his previous games. Star Citizen has exceeded my very high expectations. I'm sorry that you don't feel the same but, being realistic, it's impossible for everybody to like the game.

You're getting what you backed, you just had expectations that were unreasonable for what was promised. If I promise you a birthday party and you assume that there's going to be a clown and I hire a magician that doesn't change what was originally promised - the problem is your expectations.
"The price of freedom is eternal vigilance."
Avatar 22891
89.
 
Re: Into the Black
Mar 31, 2015, 13:09
89.
Re: Into the Black Mar 31, 2015, 13:09
Mar 31, 2015, 13:09
 
Flatline wrote on Mar 31, 2015, 12:55:
But that would be a boring fucking game so we take liberties with reality to make a fun game.

This "fun" concept you speak of, what is it?

If Russia stops fighting, the war ends. If Ukraine stops fighting, Ukraine ends. Slava Ukraini!
Avatar 22024
88.
 
Re: Star Citizen at $77M
Mar 31, 2015, 13:02
88.
Re: Star Citizen at $77M Mar 31, 2015, 13:02
Mar 31, 2015, 13:02
 
This game is soooo P2W its not even funny :/.
87.
 
Re: Into the Black
Mar 31, 2015, 12:55
87.
Re: Into the Black Mar 31, 2015, 12:55
Mar 31, 2015, 12:55
 
descender wrote on Mar 31, 2015, 11:47:
"If there is no dogfight there is no space sim"

The general public's understanding of "flight in space" is hilariously misinformed.

There will never be a dogfight in space. Ever. Lots of long range ballistics, orbital maneuvers and "jousting" are much more realistic than the limited imagination of "flight mechanics in space".

"Realistically" most of the combat would probably be done a thousand years from now using drones and AI. If a human was involved they'd probably get strapped into a high-G bed, be put to sleep for the duration of the combat since you couldn't like, do anything, and your computer would do the fighting for you. You'd either wake up or you wouldn't.

But that would be a boring fucking game so we take liberties with reality to make a fun game.
106 Replies. 6 pages. Viewing page 1.
Newer [  1  2  3  4  5  6  ] Older